Already this spring, in the midst of the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, experts said that the disease would affect seven out of ten inhabitants of the Earth.
Then, according to them, population immunity will form and the disease will add to the list of ordinary seasonal SARS.
As soon as scientists established the exact mechanism of action of the coronavirus, vaccine development began in dozens of countries.
And this work has become not just a matter of prestige: in the absence of a vaccine and strict restrictive measures, the number of infected is growing rapidly, and population immunity is not being developed as quickly as we would like.
A striking example is the situation in Sweden.
Having chosen the mildest pandemic countermeasure scenario, the Swedes received a massive mortality rate in nursing homes, while only 12% of the country's inhabitants developed immunity.
The shares of Western pharmaceutical companies have been skyrocketing all summer.
The pool of signed contracts allowed the pharmaceutical giants to rub their hands.
Only now time passed (and still goes on), and so far they have not been able to develop a vaccine.
Both AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson were forced to suspend development due to identified side effects.
Meanwhile, the first Sputnik V vaccine, developed by the Gamaleya National Research Center, was registered in Russia on August 11.
This news immediately triggered an outbreak of information war.
By this time, Donald Trump had already promised his citizens a vaccine produced in the United States for several months.
The reaction of the West can be described by the well-known saying: "The first vaccine cannot be produced in Russia, because it can never be produced in Russia."
Meanwhile, other vaccine developments have been and are under way in Russia.
Yesterday Vladimir Putin announced that the Ministry of Health has registered the drug EpiVacCorona, a vaccine developed by the Vector Scientific Center of Virology.
Registration was made on October 13th.
Well, another good news shared by the President is the development of the third vaccine.
The Chumakov Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences is in the second stage of testing its drug, which will be completed in December this year.
It is important to say here that all three vaccines do not copy each other, but differ both in composition and in the mechanism of action.
The coronavirus pandemic, by far the biggest economic and health challenge, has given us a clear reason to be proud.
It should not be forgotten that, as soon as the need arose for the development of a vaccine, countries with developed economies abandoned broad scientific cooperation.
Whether it's about money or geopolitics, Russian science could only rely on its own resources.
As a result, while Western pharma was inflating another bubble on the stock exchange, promising the rapid development of its drug, the Russian company formed a pool of contracts for an already developed drug.
In many countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom, the public considers the government's work to combat the pandemic ineffective.
And if the development of Western companies drags on even more, a logical question will arise: why did the Americans or the British not receive the Russian vaccine when it was already possible to do it?
Why did I decide to write a column on the coronavirus vaccine?
Because I got myself this vaccine.
Why did I make this decision?
Because we have no choice, by and large.
When I shared this decision with my acquaintances, many of them told me that they knew people who took part in the voluntary vaccination.
Some supposedly protected themselves from the disease, others seemed to get sick anyway.
There are always a lot of rumors around new drugs (albeit so long-awaited).
The uncertainty that will persist until a significant amount of time has passed for testing and monitoring patients will always generate criticism based on banal distrust.
Why did I decide to make myself this vaccine?
Because I realized that my work does not allow me to sit at home all the time and completely switch to remote mode.
There are children and mom around me.
I communicate with my employees every day and must think about the safety of everyone around me.
When I was on my way to get vaccinated, I called my friend Margarita Simonyan.
I often call her when I make such serious decisions.
The fact is that I know that if I haven't finished reading something, Margot certainly did it.
She always gives very helpful feedback.
Margot told me that the most outspoken critics of our vaccine are the people who receive grants from Western institutions.
And this is normal, because their position is lobbying in favor of their own market.
And, despite the fact that these people are Russians, they are carriers of the Western mentality.
The Americans or the same Chinese will never acknowledge the success of Russian developments out loud.
They themselves need to conquer the world market for coronavirus vaccines, because this is a huge additional investment in their economy.
Nobody is going to let us into this market, no matter how first and successful we are.
So Margot's words became another confirmation that I correctly understand the state of affairs: politics both in the West and in China go before people.
In the end, we ended the conversation - and within an hour I made myself the first vaccine.
I don’t regret for a second.
Health to you, dear friends!
And do not forget one more important thing: no one yet knows what the consequences of the coronavirus are.
And Denis Protsenko confirmed this fact to me during an interview that I took from him on the RTVI TV channel.
Doctors are already talking about the pathology in men, affecting their ability to have children.
There is information that people who have recovered from COVID-19 receive irreversible lung damage.
We will receive accurate data on the consequences of the disease and the effect of the vaccine in a few years.
But, choosing between the risk of getting sick and the opportunity to stay healthy, I definitely choose the latter.
What I wish for you too.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.