Scientists argue that the results are “strange” for Russian …

It was published in early February in the scientific journal The scalpel It reported that Sputnik had a 91.6 percent efficacy. This means that there are 91.6 percent fewer illnesses in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated control group. Good result, because it can be compared with the effectiveness of Pfizer and Moderne vaccines and even better than the effectiveness of AstraZeneca. Most importantly, the research results were approved by independent experts.

Although there is a lot of criticism now. Not on the effect of the vaccine itself, but on the strange results of the research. again in The scalpel Nine scholars from the Netherlands, France and the United States jointly wrote an open letter questioning the available data. According to the scientists, the research results are “full of apparent errors and numerical inconsistencies”.

According to the study, the vaccine will be equally effective for all ages, as up to 14,000 people were included in the study but then, for some unknown reason, they did not participate in the vaccine tests themselves and the study objectives were suddenly modified during a study without further explanation. The scientists wrote: “That is why we ask Russian researchers once again to publish their data.” But this is currently not falling on record at the Institute of Aesthetic in Moscow, which developed the vaccine.

Vaccine maker Denis Logonov avoids the criticism. “The efficacy and safety of the Sputnik vaccine has been confirmed in several studies,” he wrote in his response. Although he admits that there are some “normal typos” in the research. “Our vaccine is now registered in 51 countries,” Logonov says. “This proves that our research fully complies with all international standards.”