New Zealand’s Vaccine Policy Faces Serious Doubts

On October 15th, after Pfizer executive Janine Small admitted that the company didn’t have data on whether the mRNA gene technology prevented transmission of infection, a New Zealand insider source published an article expressing his thoughts on the vaccine policy and opposition, but also hoped to cause the public to reflect on the policy.

The article argues that New Zealand’s health department when advising the public to get vaccinated said the COVID vaccine would ‘help prevent you from getting infected, but on the contrary, there is still no data confirming this. Their primary ‘evidence’ for policy came from the clinical trial data and regulatory reporting. Raw data often hides unfavorable content. For example, there are four-times more cardiac arrests leading to death in the vaccinated group, in contrast to the unvaccinated group. However, these vaccine adverse events are either hidden or underestimated.

Meanwhile, New Zealand’s data before October 2020 clearly showed that the risk of hospitalization and death from infection stratified to the elderly and people with multiple health conditions. The famous epidemiologist, Professor John Ioannidis also published an article stating that infection risk ranged widely between children and elderly nursing home residents more than 1,000 times. However, when the New Zealand government passed the so-called Public Health Response Act, healthy people were compelled, through the vaccine mandate, to accept vaccines. The public is largely excluded from any policy process or discussion involving vaccination policy. The article argues that basic health should not be used by politics to trample human rights or even harm people’s health.