Danko: Pellegrini Took Advantage of SAV Situation to Adopt Opposite Stance

Bratislava, 3 September (TASR) – The coalition's Slovak National Party (SNS) has acknowledged the statements made by President Peter Pellegrini regarding Government Proxy for Investigation into COVID-19 Pandemic Management Peter Kotlar, SNS chair Andrej Danko stated on Wednesday. Danko responded this way to Pellegrini’s remarks after the head of state met with Martin Venhart, chair of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAV), concerning the analysis of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. According to Danko, the President once again used the situation to take an opposing stance and expressed his opinion in a context where it was not expected. „The Slovak National Party does not discredit the SAV. We have taken note of their assessment, but in terms of the vaccine topic, we consider it important to hold a professional debate about which vaccines help people and which may harm them,” Danko stated. Danko emphasised that from 2020 to 2023, “certain developments” occurred that require explanations. He suggested that the President should direct questions about investigations into pandemic-era events to the Interior Minister and the Health Minister instead. Earlier on Wednesday, President Pellegrini noted he has not yet seen any analysis from Kotlar regarding his role as Government Proxy. After his meeting with Venhart, Pellegrini recommended that the government officially address the SAV report on the results of the vaccine analysis as soon as possible. The head of the SAV assured the President that scientists prepared the report in line with the government’s and Prime Minister Robert Fico’s (Smer-SD) request, using the most advanced scientific methods and without any political pressure. The SAV conducted the analysis following statements made by Government Proxy Kotlar, who had claimed, among other things, that the vaccines contained high levels of DNA — a claim the scientific analysis disproved. In this context, the SAV noted that the risks highlighted by Kotlar were not substantiated, and that his statements and conclusions about excessive DNA content were based on flawed procedures and/or misinterpreted results. The academy labelled these claims as incorrect and misleading. mf/mcs