Conflicts of interest, Ghostwriting, epistemic invasions, precautionary principle and a risky risk analysis of modified MNAs

Abstract

The Multi, Inter and Transdisciplinary were present in the immediate response to the Pandemic Declaration COVID19, with limitations. There was a predominance of certain disciplinary areas, leaving aside and even suppressing or censoring others. The scientific-technological context, with opposing positions: disruptive technologies (which mark an agenda, accompanied by a homogeneous narrative while contradictory, with obvious examples of conflicts of interest, and cases of ghostwriting) vs. An independent science that, except exceptions, uses scarce data and unconventional forums (social networks, blogs, other web platforms) to try to clarify and question the hegemonic narrative. In this context, the so -called “epistemic invasions” (Epistemic TresPassing) appear as a risk at the same time that the opportunity to give a valid response and contribute to the generation of inter and transdiclinary knowledge. As an example of the contextualized above, we perform a risk analysis of the new modified MRNA vaccines (NV), from the disciplinary fields of biology and the legal. From the biology approach, various categories were identified to be analyzed from the molecular, cellular, biotechnology and biosecity subdisciplines. From the legal, we observe that the authorization and mass implementation of these NV without evaluating possible damage, without adopting preventive measures, without properly evaluating its effectiveness and without weighing other types of therapies despite the uncertainty and absence of scientific information about their risks and impacts may imply an unlawful investment of the precautionary principle. In conclusion and after the corresponding risk assessment we postulate that the mass implementation of these NV must be carried out according to the precautionary principle: in the absence of certainty or scientific information on possible damage consequences, preventive measures must be taken and inform the population in a transparent way and effective, above all, possible damage or risk of damage.