We know the analyses we publish are so technical, it is often complicated for us to understand in detail all the aspects, but we have a complete view and we are daily supported by a high level technical team.
From now on we will focus on small parts, individual elements, and try to explain them in a more practical way.
First of all, Corvelva doesn't do research! Corvelva Association has has wondered about three questions on vaccine products (different from the vaccine concept):
- Are the vaccines in use safe?
- Are the vaccines on the market effective?
- Do the vaccines on the market comply with the current technical and/or regulatory data sheets?
Let's just take a look on one of our analyses: "Let's just take a look on one of our analyses"
Prendiamo una sola delle nostre analisi: "Adventitious viruses and rubella in Priorix Tetra -lot A71CB256A".
What does this report say among other things?
- Rubella is absent or in negligible quantities.
- Adventitious viruses can cause serious health problems.
- WHO regulations are clear, there must be no side viruses.
In the vaccine we have identified 4 viruses, Human endogenous retrovirus K, Equine infectious anemia virus, Avian leukosis virus and HERV-H/env62.
Abnormal activation of endogenous human retroviruses has been associated with several diseases such as cancer, autoimmunity and neurological disorders.
In particular, in cancer activity and expression, HERV has been specifically associated with tumour aggressiveness and patient outcomes.
(1) There are many studies, some of them recent, attempting to provide a new approach to improve vaccine safety (2) by specifically taking as their basis the removal of the viral contaminants such as the Avian leukosis virus. Note that we do not wish to get you bored with dozens of articles and publications, but the possibility of viral contamination, derived mainly from cellular substrates or other contaminations, is well known to the scientific community. But speaking of "rules", in the document "Environmental Monitoring of Clean Rooms in Vaccine Manufacturing Facilities" we read that: "For vaccines administered by parenteral route, the possibility of injecting even the smallest quantities of side viruses, mycoplasma or bacteria is considered unacceptable”.
(2) let’s say it even more clearly
No side viruses in vaccines.
Back to our topic, this report only, lets pretend Corvelva did not commission any other tests on this vaccine, do the three above questions have now an answer?
- Is Priorix Tetra safe? NO.
- Is the Priorix Tetra effective? NO as far as Rubella is concerned.
- Does the Priorix Tetra comply with the applicable data sheets and/or regulations? NO for data sheets and NO for WHO guidelines.
Now dear friends, can you believe the Ministry stated that these results are not valid because they are not published in any scientific journal? By the way let's be clear about it, we are going to publish our researches in a journal, but the bibliography that we are reporting already exists, and we have only given a taste because this article wants to be simple, there are hundreds of publications on both viral contamination already found in other vaccines (3) and the risk posed by many endogenous viruses.
Are you realizing our analyses have been confirming and deepening all the aspects?
