Guest Post -New Zealand’s pandemic science is cracking up

This article is shared from the Spectator. There has been a stunning admission by Pfizer recently, which totally invalidates NZ’s covid response. The worse thing is that the NZ Government knew all along..

https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/10/new-zealands-pandemic-science-is-cracking-up/ by Jodie Bruning

For the best part of a year, Kiwis were urged to get vaccinated to protect their families. However, this week’s concession that Pfizer never tested the vaccine to confirm whether the vaccine prevented transmission, has rocked the European Parliament.

Pfizer executive Janine Small admitted that the company didn’t have data on whether the mRNA gene technology prevented transmission of infection. In a tweet, a Member of the European Parliament said ‘this is scandalous’.

And no, the clinical trial data never included prevention of transmission of infection as an endpoint.

This is one more step for public understanding regarding how information and science has been ‘managed’ during 2020-22 in order to shepherd the public to accept a novel technology; a high-risk biological entity.

It appears that the New Zealand government knew all along. The traffic light system used during the pandemic ‘was never designed to dampen down transmission, it was only designed to nudge people towards vaccination’.

Modelling that claimed traffic light systems would reduce transmission of infection, was based on assumptions rather than hard data.

Most of us looking at the trial endpoints and the science have known this. But the public didn’t.

This paper has not yet undergone external peer review Estimates of effects on changing Alert Levels for the August 2021 outbreak

The mRNA technology was made broadly available to the general New Zealand public in the second half of 2021. Most Kiwis thought that vaccination would protect prevent, or demonstrably limit the passing on of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

By October 2020 it was clear that risk of hospitalisation and death from infection was stratified to the elderly and to those with multiple health conditions. Eminent epidemiologist Professor John Ioannidis published a paper that clearly stated that risk ranged widely – with ‘over 1,000-fold variability between children and elderly nursing home residents.’

Despite this, healthy people were compelled, through force of law, to accept the injection or suffer a range of extreme financial and social punishments. The mandate rationale was about protecting others.

New Zealand businesses were advised:

‘Studies show that about 95 per cent of people who have received both doses of the vaccine are protected against getting COVID-19 symptoms. This means that once you are fully vaccinated, you are far less likely to fall seriously ill and less likely to transmit the virus to friends, whānau or workmates.’

The 95 per cent claim was based on vaccine efficacy 7 days after the second dose. There was no data on prevention of transmission, which might include healthy asymptomatic populations.

Our Ministry of Health, advises Kiwis that the vaccine will ‘help prevent you from getting infected’ – but there’s still no data confirming this. The clinical trials never included seroprevalence tests and seroprevalence data seemed outside of the remit of the New Zealand government.

The mRNA technology was never a traditional vaccine. It contained instructions to reproduce an antigen, the inflammatory spike protein in the body. Immediately after release significant adverse events were reported. It was not sterile, and papers were constantly published demonstrating waning, breakthrough events, and high viral loads in vaccinated populations.

The only problem is, the New Zealand government’s primary ‘evidence’ for policy came from the clinical trial data and regulatory reporting. Raw data often hides unfavourable content. For example, there was four-times the cardiac arrests leading to death in the vaccinated group. In addition, adverse events are famously under-reported.

In government policy papers we see heavy regulatory reliance and cherry-picking of studies to justify policy. There’s a failure to address the fact that healthy groups weren’t at risk of hospitalisation and death – instead they were at risk of higher vaccine-related events.

The Ministry of Health Chief Science Advisor Ian Towns’ justification for childhood (5-11-year-old) vaccination relied on outdated science to identify numbers needed to treat, and primarily focused on industry-friendly data to consider vaccine-related harm. Town’s December 2021 paper could have widely reviewed the literature. It could have looked at absolute risk, but it didn’t.

Government evidence weighted towards protected data supplied by the Pfizer corporation. The approval was primarily based on the data from Study C4591001 which confirmed symptom suppression at two weeks. This continued, throughout the pandemic, to be ground zero for reasoning for approval of the novel gene therapy.

Nowhere at all – was the approval based on the prevention of transmission of infection.

Many of us have attempted to find out through Official Information Act requests, where the work was being undertaken to survey the scientific literature to understand the state of science.

But we’ve been dismissed and ignored when we’ve tried to understand safety and efficacy by age and health status. The government never did this work.

A massive complex legislative process designed to keep the public placated, but excluded from any consultation, ensured vaccine mandate legislation was unimpeded.

Covid legislation was overseen by the Minister for COVID-19 Response. Until June 2022, the Minister was the Hon Chris Hipkins.

Mandates legislation were predominantly made as Orders. Orders were made under section 11 of the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020 in accordance with section 9 of that Act. Production was prolific. Orders are secondary legislation, outside of Parliamentary consideration, and outside democratic scrutiny, with all the power of primary legislation.

In October 2021, the public were given a brief chance to comment on an amendment to the COVID-19 Response Act. As myself and colleagues from Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility, (a charity with a twenty-year history of drawing attention to science, technology, and regulation), noted in our submission, by October it was evident that the vaccine waned and that breakthrough infections were common.

In an oral presentation to New Zealand Members of Parliament, before the mandates rolled out, we implored MPs including Dr Liz Craig not to take stricter measures around vaccination.

Chris Hipkins was in charge of the COVID-19 Public Health Response Amendment Bill (No 2). However, because vaccines weren’t a focus of the Bill, the 14,000 members of the public who submitted were largely out of scope.

When the public were submitting in October, Hipkins was overseeing the production of parallel legislation. The COVID-19 Public Health Response (Vaccinations) Order 2021 only mentioned vaccines 102 times. By the time the separate Amendment Bill was passed on November 20, this other Order referred to vaccines 299 times.

While public comment ended on October 11, on October 25, Chris Hipkins extended mandates to:

‘Workers over the age of 12 years who carry out work at or for an affected education service (including as a volunteer or an unpaid worker)’ including home-based education and care service.’

The power for this came from new iterations of the parallel Orders.

Then, on Saturday November 23, Hipkins’ next job, the COVID-19 Response (Vaccinations) Legislation Bill 2021, was rushed through Parliament in one day. There were no impact statements in the Bills Digest. The terms vaccine/vaccination were mentioned 155 times. (Counting the amount of times a term is referenced can draw attention to the weight of an issue in discourse or rhetoric).

The Amendment Bill had received Royal Assent three days prior.

Once this Bill was passed – the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act was updated to incorporate these changes. Therefore, while the November 20 version of the Act, (after public consultation) vaccines weren’t mentioned at all – by the November 26 version, vaccines were well bedded in.

The public had been largely excluded from any policy process or discussion which involved vaccination policy.

The November 26 version was the legislative instrument that locked in the requirement for a vaccination certificate to be presented for access to premises, resources, and activities.

The unvaccinated missed out on trips to national parks, hairdressers, church, and sports. They couldn’t get their drivers licence, sit down for a coffee, or attend the gym. They were outcast.

Twelve-year-olds couldn’t swim, or play rugby or tennis or badminton if they weren’t injected.

Over this period – it was the Minister for COVID-19 Response, the Hon Chris Hipkins, who decided that this legislation should be produced and released.

However, we are yet to see any material that demonstrates the methods by which the risk was weighted. How did he decide on legislation which necessitated such unprecedented, hard-line measures? It is an open question.

The Hon Chris Hipkins, as standard practice, boots all Official Information Act Requests to the current Minister for COVID-19 Response, Ayesha Verrall.

I’ve complained to the Ombudsman, only to find that the Hon Chris Hipkins is exempt from the Official Information Act requests relating to COVID-19 because he switched portfolios. The Minister for Police doesn’t have to answer questions from when he was Minister for COVID-19.

Data modelling created the justification for the roll-out of pandemic technology. However, this relied on values established earlier on in the pandemic, before Omicron was the predominant strain. The public never knew that while children and young people contract and pass on the infection more quickly, this group was not only at low risk of hospitalisation and death from Covid – but that post-infection this group produced a natural immunity buffer. This group would make it harder for future variants to gain hold.

For the second half of 2021, the public knowledge and advice to under 40-year-olds concerning the risk of pericarditis/myocarditis was effectively suppressed. Myocarditis risk was well established by November 2021.

Informed consent was impossible, as doctors who recommended that healthy patients not get the vaccine were reported on, and had their medical licence suspended.

In New Zealand in December, with the traffic system in place, young people were urged to just ‘get the jab done’.

In October 2022, doctors remain under gag orders. In California, it is illegal for doctors to disagree with the current government opinion on Covid. Medical councils in New Zealand and Australia have come down hard on doctors who dissent from the central government position.

In addition, even though Pfizer acknowledged that immunosuppressed groups with multiple health conditions might be at risk of vaccine failure – from the earliest months of 2020, the New Zealand government effectively prohibited the use of early treatments. Early treatments were designed to prevent the cascade of symptoms that the elderly and multimorbid were most at risk of. The recommended drugs had a long history of safe use. The government never transparently reviewed their position. Early treatments in New Zealand are rudimentary in comparison to those recommended by international groups of medical doctors.

Meanwhile, bad news on boosters and their relatively short period of efficacy continues to be released.

A pandemic is a dynamic, living thing. Weekly and monthly, risk changes as variants mutate, as the gene therapy technology became both more outdated and more widely studied, as researchers and scientists gained greater clarity on who was most at risk, and why they are at risk.

We have in front of us, a chilling precedent for future pandemic event responses. The global pandemic response was predicated on global injection of a novel therapy, based on data supplied by the manufacturer, who has subsequently quadrupled their revenue in 2021 and 2022. It was based on advice from the World Health Organisation, who is deeply reliant on funding from individuals and companies involved in vaccine manufacturing.

Right now, the public can submit to the ‘Ethical Guidance for a Pandemic’ consultation. The proposed guidance fails to look at the fails – the mangling of science, and the privileging of private industry data. The document refers to Covid hundreds of times, but fails to acknowledge want went wrong.

The guidance document ups the ante on technological surveillance, and policies that steer towards compliance for vaccination. It continues the government ideological failure to link diet-driven disease with pandemic risk and fails to address the inequities that drive chronic and immunological health risk.

It profoundly ignores the fact that the generally healthy should not be subject to policies that restrict human rights and potentially harm health.

The scandal may be perpetuated in future, if science continues to be shaped and shepherded for narrow ends, while broader obligations to protect overall health are downplayed and dismissed.

Jodie Bruning is a New Zealand based sociologist and is a trustee of Physicians & Scientists for Global Responsibility (PSGR.org.nz). Papers and writing can be found at Brownstone Institute, TalkingRisk.NZ and at JRBruning.Substack.com and at Talking Risk on Rumble.

Guest post -Stop the methane madness!

Shared from the TRFC

https://www.tfrc.org.nz/post/stop-the-methane-madness

It’s time to call out the Climate Fraud on all of this methane madness being ram-raided through by Labour. For a long time, there has been cross-party support for the Net Carbon Zero by 2050 agenda, and it’s time a true opposition party stepped up and fronted this debate against Labour, Greens, National, ACT and Māori party. Our newly formed Freedoms New Zealand umbrella party is up for the task.

The new tax on livestock is now making us a worldwide laughingstock. Jacinda, the ever-faithful protégé of Helen Clark, rolled out their agricultural emissions tax yesterday, which has been 20 years in the making since Helen first introduced the concept of a “fart tax” in the 2000s. We all laughed at the time, thinking the idea was beyond ridiculous, believing we would not be this stupid as a nation. Since then, we’ve been fed a steady stream of climate change cornflakes for over 20 years by our propaganda perpetrators and politicians. After all, the law of propaganda is “repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.” Now, what once seemed inconceivable (fart tax), is believable to much of the public.

I’ve talked with experts in the climate change field, as this heralded climate crisis just hasn’t sat right with me. In 2019 Jacinda said she absolutely believed climate change was the “biggest challenge of our time” and the “nuclear moment” for this generation. In our research here are a few things I’ve found out.

New Zealand produces 0.17% (that’s less than 1/4) of 1% of world emissions.

There is no climate emergency, there is not even a climate concern. The history of the Earth’s climate and basic physics prove that, beyond all reasonable doubt. Many thousands of scientists agree wholeheartedly with this assessment. Claims of a “97% scientific consensus” that there is a climate emergency is a lie.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), PM Jacinda Ardern and Climate Change Minister James Shaw were sent 18 months ago the latest peer-reviewed scientific papers that prove, consistent with the scientific method, that there is no climate emergency, and that the claims of warming due to human activities are grossly exaggerated.

The National party is no better – it has gone along with this nonsense, and just a few weeks ago, Christopher Luxon stated that National was still committed to Net Carbon Zero by 2050.

Net Carbon Zero by 2050 is simply technically not feasible, and to even attempt it seriously, there would be environmental devastation, and the country and its citizens would be bankrupted.

Freedoms NZ can say this, because it, and its component parties, are the only political movement or party in New Zealand that follows and defends the scientific method, at the core of which is the freedom to question, and have free and open debate.

I personally believe that decarbonising the planet will be way more damaging than any so-called effects of climate change. But I do believe in environmental responsibility.

The gases that are under attack, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), do not control the temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere. In fact, these gases are key to the maintenance of life on Earth. CO2 is not a pollutant – it is the main plant food. It is, along with water and oxygen, the basis of life. Without CO2, all plants and phytoplankton would die, and as a consequence, so would all the animals and fish.

Under all realistic scenarios, it is impossible for human activities to double the CH4 and N2O concentrations in the atmosphere, at least for many hundreds of years. But if we did double these concentrations, what would the effect be? The maximum temperature increase from a doubling of methane, including all water vapour feedback effects, is 0.06 degrees Celsius. The maximum temperature increase from a doubling of nitrous oxide, including all water feedback effects, is 0.08 degrees Celsius.

There is so much that I could elaborate on here, but I don’t want to bore you with all the science. When Freedoms NZ rolls out our climate policy, you will see all of the detailed science behind our solutions.

In the meantime, ACT party is clearly no better than the Greens, Labour and National. Not only can it not understand basic science or common sense, it advocates the genetic mutation of grasses, animals and gut bacteria to reduce a gas that is part of the natural life cycle.

In contrast to the establishment parties, Freedoms NZ embraces life, and the processes that maintain life and the natural environment on Earth, and true environmentalism.

We also wholeheartedly support farmers, and the production of nutritious and absolutely essential meat and dairy products.

Unlike Federated Farmers, Beef + Lamb and DairyNZ, we will never betray farmers. We will not tax them for breeding and raising essential farm animals. We will never tax them for cutting down wilding pines. We will stop any more essential farmland from being planted in ‘carbon sink’ tree monocultures.

Hundreds of thousands of Kiwi land is consistently being brought by foreign owners and converted to carbon farming. As a nation, we are having to prop up the rest of the world in their flawed carbon credit conquests. This has tied up tens of thousands of prime NZ farmland for 30 years where this land cannot be touched. In order for all these political parties to reach their 2050 goal of net zero carbon, reports say an additional 770,000 ha of Kiwi land needs to be planted in new pines. New Zealand will go from being a nation of potholes and road cones to being a population of pines. What a rort these carbon credits are, with the one-percenters amongst us creaming the cash.

It is rich for Federated Farmers (the organisation, not the poor betrayed membership) to now complain about methane taxes. Just weeks ago, Federated Farmers and Beef + Lamb came out in support of the Government’s disastrous intent to attack methane.

To repeat, there is absolutely no climate emergency, methane and nitrous oxide from agriculture pose absolutely no threat at all and are natural components of life on Earth, and Freedoms NZ will fully protect our farmers, other producers and our farmland. Through that, we will protect the interests of, in fact, the very existence of, “small town New Zealand”.

Freedoms NZ will be expanding on this climate fraud at our public event in Auckland on 24 October.

We will then be releasing a comprehensive policy regarding the climate issue, and our precarious electricity generation situation, with comprehensive scientific information in support. We also have direct personal contact with the very best climate scientists in the world – the real ones.

Soon after that, we will be in a position to challenge Ardern, Shaw, Luxon and Seymour to full public debate. A full public debate on CO2, CH4, N2O and Net Carbon Zero by 2050. We can’t wait.

Guest post -70% of NZ’s covid deaths were boosted (a third jab)

Shared from the BFD https://thebfd.co.nz/2022/09/21/70-of-nzs-covid-deaths-were-boosted/

Jacinda Ardern famously stated that if you were vaccinated and boosted, “You won’t get sick, and you won’t die.” She also said that Covid was a disease of the unvaccinated and the virus was literally hunting them down. But the latest figures from the Ministry of Health show that neither of those statements was even remotely true, and that 70 per cent of all Covid deaths are people who were boosted.

Just a reminder, in case you’ve forgotten Ardern’s lies:

Cam Slater on Twitter: “#ledbydonkeys” / Twitter

“Safe and effective,” she said, again and again. I wonder how many of those dead thought about what she said as they lay dying.

I wonder if it is called a booster because it boosts your chances of dying.

What angers me is that none of this should have been a surprise to anyone had our politicians and our media even bothered to watch and report what is happening around the world.

New Zealand has been a laggard right the way through this whole episode. Now we are playing catch-up and the future does not look at all positive.

Undertakers are experiencing a rush of business with Australians dying in abnormally high numbers in a ‘worrying’ trend doctors can’t explain.

Martin Masson, who is managing director of Tribute Funeral Services in the western Melbourne suburb of Ravenhall, said there is no shortage of work for him and others in the industry as official figures confirm Aussies are dying at a higher rate in 2022.

“We’ve been consistently busy now since the first of this year,” Mr Masson told Daily Mail Australia.

“We have certainly seen an increase in the need for our services as have done a lot of other directors.”

Mr Masson believed more working age Australians are dying but doesn’t have specific statistics to back this.

“We certainly have seen a distinct shift back to people in their 60s, 50s and even late or mid 40s and even younger,” he said.

Daily Mail

Gee, what did we do differently for the past two years? Could it be…? Maybe the ‘experts’ will know?

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) confirms Australians have been dying at rate higher than normal this year.

When mortality rates climb above historical averages, without being explicable by having an ageing population, they are termed ‘excess deaths’.

“There has been excess mortality recorded in 2022 across all months, with both the number of deaths and the rate of death generally higher than historical averages,” an ABS spokesperson told Daily Mail Australia.

“In May, there were 16,124 deaths, which is 13.5 per cent higher than the average of deaths we would normally see occurring in May (14,202).”

Covid was a substantial proportion of those deaths with 862 deaths “directly attributable to the virus in May”.

However, there were also more than the expected number of deaths from dementia, diabetes and ischaemic heart diseases.

Daily Mail

It’s like they are all putting their fingers in their ears and screaming lalalala…no idea what is causing this.

Peak doctors’ body the Australian Medical Association (AMA) told Daily Mail Australia it was ‘worrying’ that deaths are climbing and it reflected what is being seen overseas.

“We have seen the ABS statistics that mirror a worrying trend in other countries like the UK,” AMA President Professor Steve Robson said.

Britain has seen a 10 per cent increase above what would be the expected number of deaths since April.

The main causes have been cited as circulatory diseases and diabetes.

Prof Robson said it was unclear what was driving the excess deaths in Australia.

“There needs to be some research into why this is happening,” he said.

Daily Mail

You’d think they’d realise that the ONLY thing different from previous years was the mass injection of people with what is increasingly looking like a dreadful and often fatal unproven medicine.

It’s like these dolts have forgotten what Occam’s Razor is.

New Zealanders will start to realise this soon too. It’s coming, as sure as night follows day. By the middle of next year we too will have excess deaths increasing alarmingly.

Then the blame game will start. It will be brutal and it will be harsh. Labour will get pasted and National should too. I’m especially looking at Chris “Get Boosted” Bishop. I’ve saved all his tweets and next year I will remind him that he is just as culpable for the carnage that vaccines have caused.

No wonder ‘experts’ are quietly resigning and shuffling off to retirement. Politicians are far more shameless and infected with astonishing narcissism: they won’t quit, they’ll have to be dragged from office.

We absolutely must have a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Labour Government’s $60 billion Covid response and action. Only then can we begin to understand how 92% of the population lost their minds and allowed the other 8% to be treated like they were worse than child rapists.

Guest Post -are we going to let them get away with it?

Shared from the The BFD –Are We Going to Let Them Get Away with It? | The BFD

It’s a bit like New Age “channeling”, where everyone is the reincarnation of an Egyptian priestess or Salem witch. If social media were to be believed, everyone’s ancestors in Europe in the 1930s were resisters who sheltered Jews from the Nazis. It’s a wonder the Gestapo ever found anyone to round up.

But that’s the way of it: victory has many friends, failure is an orphan. While Hitler’s goons were blitzkrieging Europe, they had plenty of collaborators; once they were on the run, suddenly everyone was a resister. (It’s often conveniently forgotten, too, that one of the most-quoted anti-Nazis, Martin Niemoller, was initially an enthusiastic Nazi supporter — until they famously came for him.)

We’re seeing the same frantic re-writing of history as the Covid Reich collapses. Suddenly, everyone wants to forget how they advocated for the unvaccinated to be driven out of society. Jacinda Ardern has the front to pontificate, “we all just need to respect people’s individual decisions”. Yes, the same Jacinda Ardern who happily agreed that she was creating a two-tier society for the unvaccinated.

When they’re not turning on a dime and expecting no one to notice, they’re busily blaming everyone else for what they did.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre made the most incredible comment early this month during a press briefing, after a US government report found American primary school students’ test scores had dropped dramatically since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic in early 2020, wiping out, in effect, more than 20 years of steady improvement in reading and maths.

This was just one of the many negative outcomes we at The BFD were reporting that were predicted to happen, from the earliest days of lockdowns. School closures were demanded and cheered on by left-wing teachers’ unions. It’s a policy still being floated by New Zealand’s Chris Hipkins.

Jean-Pierre blamed Republicans for keeping schools closed too long – a policy followed around the world, including Australia, where schools remained shut for at least a year in some states.

Opening schools, she said, “was the work of Democrats, despite Republicans”, as if determined to win the prize for the greatest furphy in the history of the briefing room.

Don’t expect “fact-checkers” to call her out on that bare-faced lie.

As a quick internet search shows, some Republicans, sane people, and Donald Trump in particular, who as president had no power over schools, were castigated by Democrats and so-called public health experts as akin to murderers for arguing as early as July 2020 that all schools should open immediately.

Jean-Pierre’s comment came a week after Democrat New York Governor Kathy Hochul conceded shutting schools, something her Democrat predecessor Andrew Cuomo did repeatedly throughout 2020 and last year, was a disaster.

Flappy-armed frightbat Siouxsie Wiles has gone from demanding to keep Level 4 rules (which included staying home from school) in place, to pontificating that “it’s important that schools stay open as much as possible during the pandemic… students from disadvantaged homes can fall behind when schools are closed and struggle to catch up again, harming their long term prospects.”

Expect to see a lot of these obvious lies in the near future, as the proponents of lockdowns u-turn faster than a Hamilton man hearing the pregnancy test results.

The proponents of shutting everything down, China-style, have gone very quiet, or tried to blame their opponents for the policies they championed with vehemence for almost two years.

Even Anthony Fauci, who perhaps had more influence in pushing authoritarian health policies than any other individual, is washing his hands of them. “I think we need to make sure that your listeners understand I didn’t shut down anything,” he told Fox News last month.

Does this clown think none of us know how to use the internet?

“When it became clear that we had community spread in the country, with a few cases of community spread … I recommended to the president that we shut the country down,” Fauci said in October 2020.

This all matters, because it’s getting to the point that not even the Podia of Truth will be able to deny that lockdowns were the most destructive government policies since WWII. They not only didn’t work, but they’ve also made things horribly worse for years to come.

Even renowned US public health expert Leana Wen, one of the doyens of authoritarian health restrictions in the US, who demanded the unvaccinated be forced to stay in their homes, has done an about-face.

“Masking has harmed our son’s language development,” she said a recent column in The Washington Post, foreshadowing the death of mask mandates even as Covid cases soar in the northern winter.

The Australian

Like Nazi collaborators, they can’t be allowed to get away with pretending they never did it.