Focus on Corvelva Analysis - Adventitious Viruses
We understand that the analyzes we publish are so technical, it is often complicated for us to get to understand all the aspects in detail, but we have the complete picture and are supported daily by a high-level technical team. From today we will take small pieces, single elements, and we will explain them to you in a more practical way.
First, Corvelva doesn't do research! The Corvelva Association asked three questions about vaccine products (different from the vaccine concept):
- Are vaccines on the market safe?
- Are commercially available vaccines effective?
- Do the vaccines on the market comply with the technical data sheets and / or regulations in force?
Let's take just one of our analyzes: "Adventitious viruses and rubella in the Priorix Tetra batch A71CB256A"
What does this report tell us among many things?
- Rubella is absent or in negligible quantities.
- Adventitious viruses can have serious health problems.
- WHO regulations are clear, there must be no unwanted viruses.
In the vaccine we 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, HERV has been specifically associated with tumor aggressiveness and patient outcomes in cancer activity and expression. (1) There are many sutudes, some recent, which they try to provide a new approach to improve the safety of the vaccine (2) and they do it precisely by placing the eradication of viral contaminants such as the Avian leukosis virus as a basis. Mind you, we don't want to bore you with dozens of articles and publications but the possibility of viral contamination, mainly derived from cell substrates or other contaminations, is known to the scientific community.
Speaking instead of "rules", in the document "Environmental Monitoring of Clean Rooms in Vaccine Manufacturing Facilities" we learn that: "For vaccines administered parenterally, the possibility of injecting even minimal quantities of viruses, mycoplasma or unwanted bacteria is considered unacceptable . "(2) Do we repeat more clearly? Zero unwanted viruses in vaccines.
Going back to this report and only this report, pretending that Corvelva has not performed other analyzes on this vaccine, are the three questions above now answered?
✔ Is the Priorix Tetra safe? NO.
✔ Is Priorix Tetra effective? NO regarding Rubella.
✔ Does the Priorix Tetra comply with the technical data sheets and / or regulations in force? NO for technical data sheets and NO for WHO directives.
Now friends, do we realize that the Ministry has told us that these results are not valid because they are not published in a scientific journal? And it is clear, we are about to publish in a magazine but the bibliography that we report there already exists, and we have put just a taste because this article wants to be simple, there are hundreds of publications both on the viral contaminations already found in other vaccines (3) that the danger of many endogenous viruses. Do we realize that the same regulatory bodies and supranational bodies that dictate the guidelines for the production of vaccines attest both to the possibility of viral presences and that consider them unacceptable?
Do we realize that we have produced several reports confirming and deepening every aspect?