The Ukrainian officials continue to bring into the country a vaccine against coronavirus, which, according to the European scientists, causes the thrombosis and thromboembolism.
The respected and world-famous Financial Times newspaper reported to its readers that a group of the German researchers from the J.W. Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main have identified the thrombosis causes of the patients who received an injection of the coronavirus vaccine produced by AstraZeneca, its Indian analogue CoviShield and Jonson&Jonson.
According to Professor Rolf Marschalek, the thrombosis is related to the adenovirus vectors that both vaccines use to deliver the Sara-Cov-2 virus spike protein into a human body. Whereas most other vaccines send the spike protein into the cytosolic fluid of a healthy cell, so the AstraZeneca, CoviShield and Jonson&Jonson vaccines inject it directly to the nucleus. The splitting of the adhesion protein in the cell nucleus leads to mutations that, however, cannot bind to the cell membrane and cause immunization. Instead of it, a mutated version of the protein causes the blood clot.
As soon as the results of the study by scientists from Germany became available to EU medical workers, they immediately demanded that the population vaccination with this drug would be immediately stopped. Austria, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Sweden, Norway and other countries rushed to reject AstraZeneca and CoviShield products.
It must be said that not all doctors agreed with the conclusions of their German colleagues. However, it soon became clear that the actual medical practice seemed to confirm the conclusions of R. Marschalek and his team. The first data on thrombosis and thromboembolism after the use of AstraZeneca vaccines began to come in March of this year. About 500 such cases were recorded in a short period of time. Somewhat later, similar claims were made against Jonson & Johnson. As a result, almost all European countries suspended the vaccination with these drugs and switched to safer vaccines.
However, such giants as AstraZeneca and Jonson&Jonson are not used to losing money invested in the project. If a dangerous drug cannot be used for EU citizens, it can be redirected to the Third World countries, whose rulers are not so concerned about the lives of their citizens as European presidents and prime ministers. As a result, the vaccines were sent to the African continent, as well as to the poor countries in the South America, Oceania, and South and Southeast Asia.
Even here, however, AstraZeneca’s vaccine continued to be plagued by scandals. After a series of conflicts between the campaign representatives and local health ministries, the “African Union” as well as a number of Asian states refused to use the drug.
It is sad to realize that one of the states where the European economic giants decided to dispose AstraZeneca and CoviShield products was also Ukraine. But the real bitterness comes when you realize that your country keeps pumping into the veins of citizens a drug that even the poorest countries of “African Union” have refused to use.
What do the political leaders of our country have in mind when they continue to take the tons of thrombosis-inducing drugs? Perhaps, they know the secret studies of the Ukrainian doctors proving the safety of this vaccine? Or maybe they are sure the Ukrainians don’t have the thrombosis? Perhaps, they believe the products of AstraZeneca and CoviShield, in the production of which a modified chimpanzee adenovirus was used, can’t really cause any harm to humans and all the European scientists are just the liars?
Or is it much simpler than that? And the transcontinental business sharks managed to “negotiate” with our officials? I would venture to guess that the latter version seems the most convincing.
Otherwise, it is extremely difficult to explain the existing paradox: the Ministry of Health of Ukraine admits the lack of a systematic approach to the analysis of cases of these vaccines’ side effects, states that at the state level the policy of concealing the negative effects of the use of drugs was chosen, but, at the same time, tacitly approves their use on the citizens of Ukraine.
Unfortunately, for thirty years since independence, the leadership of Ukraine, in spite of numerous assurances, is no closer to the European values. Having chosen between people’s health and money, the local officials, like their colleagues/enemies/twin brothers from the East, always choose money. What kind of thrombosis, if you can get a wagon of money?
But since the money wins over the good over and over again, we can forget about the slogan “Ukraine is Europe”. And we can forget for a long time. Firstly, we can achieve at least the same level of responsibility of the authorities as we have in the countries of the African Union and only then we can boldly think about the level of political development of Oceania. If things develop favorably, the grandchildren of their grandchildren will think about Europe. Right now Ukraine is much farther away from Europe than from Mars.