We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Nastassja Catmull-Gillespie please sign in and let everyone know.

Supporting evidence to debunked misconceptions as published by the Nz Herald in support of the MoH

Nastassja Catmull-Gillespie made this Official Information request to Ministry of Health

This request has an unknown status. We're waiting for Nastassja Catmull-Gillespie to read recent responses and update the status.

From: Nastassja Catmull-Gillespie

Dear Ministry of Health

I’d like to request evidence surrounding several of the claims made in an NZ herald article dated 24/09/2021 titled; 10 of the biggest vaccine myths debunked.

Firstly, I would like to request studies proving women’s fertility is not effected from the vaccine.
Pfizers Comirnaty vaccine was first administered in New Zealand on 03/02/2021 with the initial roll out for the elderly population, this did not include women pre menopausal. Where are studies providing clarification that fertility is not in fact effected several months post vaccine?

Secondly, where is the supporting data around safety in children?
Pfizer undertook a study of 2,260 aged 12-15 years old. They examined only 1,308 of those children two months post vaccine for adverse effects.
Admitting safety for children aged 12-15 on only 2,260 children seems extremely premature.
Where is the data showing there have been thousands more children trialled before the roll out of 12-15 years olds in New Zealand?

On that note the comment was made that children can be effected by the “long tail of covid” - what exactly is that and how has that research been established?
As was publicly noted during the beginning of the pandemic, children did not seem so susceptible to the alpha strain hence the lack of evidence surrounding this.
The Delta variant was only identified in the community of New Zealand on August 17th with some 200 odd children been infected by this strain.
How have you come to the conclusion that children may be effected by the long tail when in fact it has only been 5 weeks since it was first detected in New Zealand - is your evidence only based on the latest 5 weeks?
If your claim is based on overseas finding - where is that information? And how long have those countries been researching this claim?

Thirdly on the note of natural remedies. There have in fact been hundreds of studies around this overseas where by vitamin C, D and zinc were all found to be effective in helping one build their immunity to lessen the severity should they contract covid.
Why are we not looking at research coming from countries that have battled this virus far more intensely and researched it extensively?
Regarding natural immunity - does the Ministry of Health advise those who have contracted and recovered from covid 19 that their bodies natural immunity has developed no antibodies to prevent future infection?

In Japan, they opening and vastly administering ivermectin to patients suffering covid 19 symptoms - why has New Zealand taken this off our shelves and banned importation of the product?
If the research is coming in from overseas as it been effective, why are we not seeing it used here?
Would this not help to lessen the burden on the healthcare system if this medication can be administered from the patients home?

I’d also like to see research supporting the safe and effective use of remdesivir thay Ashley Bloomfield identified as “one of the best known treatments” for covid on 15/09/2021 in the NZ Hearld.
Remdesivir was the first drug approved for treating covid 19 but studies have since shown acute kidney injury and renal replacement have been frequently reported as side effects in fact compared to the likes of hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, sarilumab, or tocilizumab (which have all proven effective in testing patients with covid 19) remdesivir was associated with an increased reporting of kidney disorders.
Can you please provide the research which shows clearly that this drug has been tested safely and effectively on patients with no side effects mentioned above which would in fact prove to be a huge burden on the public health system.

Fourthly regarding altering DNA and thus subsequently causing cancer; MIT and Harvard University are currently undertaking research into this common misconception that mRNA vaccines do not alter DNA. to date they have found that The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna “vaccines” are RNA injections, these transfect their RNA into the cytoplasm of our cells.  Through a process called reverse-transcription, injected RNA integrates into our DNA.
As well as two leading Universities in the medical field, Bill Gates himself publicly stated that mRNA injections for coronavirus can alter our genetic code or DNA.
Where exactly is our evidence coming from that debunk MIT, Harvard and Bill Gates research and diagnosis?

Fifth, Pfizer have stated themselves they will not have completed their trials for Comirnaty until 2023.
A publication printed refers to the ongoing trials as “Study to Describe the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals” and it’s estimated completion date is May 2023.
Please can you provide evidence to other medications and/or vaccines that were released and administered to the public before their trial completion date?

Sixth, regarding accountability.
As stated in the data fact sheets of Comirnaty on the Medsafe website, it clearly identified that no trials were undertaken in patients that were taking other medications at the time of receiving their vaccine in the trials.
Should a patient have the vaccine with no consultation from their GP (as this is not required in New Zealand with pop up centres spotted around the country and converted buses now prowling the streets) and that patient is to suffer a reaction and/or mhabe their medication interact with the ingredients, who is then liable for the deterioration of that persons health and/or possible death?
And please explain what been liable entails in the event of adverse reactions and/or death?

Lastly, the claim that the vaccine does not just reduce symptoms - can you please explain the data coming out of Israel and the Seychelles where by these countries had a vast majority of their population vaccinated and only months later saw not only drastically rising covid cases in the community but just under 50% of hospital admissions and ICU patients who were in fact fully immunised.
Can you please identify why the vaccine is not preventing people ending up in Intensive care and hospital beds?
Can you please clarify too the transmission rate from fully vaccinated individuals as there have been many, many contradictory articles recently - are you stating now that those who are vaccinated will in fact not spread the virus thus meaning they in fact do not require masks, social distancing or abiding by level 3 and 4 rules?

I would appreciate researched and certified information to all points I have raised above to support the claims coming from the NZ Herald as they support and publish the Government and Ministry of Health’s findings and requirements through promotion of the push for 90% of our population.

Yours faithfully,

N. Catmull-Gillespie

Link to this

From: OIA Requests


Attachment image001.png
7K Download


Kia ora Nastassja,

 

Thank you for your request for official information received on 25
September 2021 for:

 

“I’d like to request evidence surrounding several of the claims made in an
NZ herald article dated 24/09/2021 titled; 10 of the biggest vaccine myths
debunked.

 

Firstly, I would like to request studies proving women’s fertility is not
effected from the vaccine.

Pfizers Comirnaty vaccine was first administered in New Zealand on
03/02/2021 with the initial roll out for the elderly population, this did
not include women pre menopausal. Where are studies providing
clarification that fertility is not in fact effected several months post
vaccine?

 

Secondly, where is the supporting data around safety in children?

Pfizer undertook a study of 2,260 aged 12-15 years old. They examined only
1,308 of those children two months post vaccine for adverse effects.

Admitting safety for children aged 12-15 on only 2,260 children seems
extremely premature.

Where is the data showing there have been thousands more children trialled
before the roll out of 12-15 years olds in New Zealand?

 

On that note the comment was made that children can be effected by the
“long tail of covid” - what exactly is that and how has that research been
established?

As was publicly noted during the beginning of the pandemic, children did
not seem so susceptible to the alpha strain hence the lack of evidence
surrounding this.

The Delta variant was only identified in the community of New Zealand on
August 17th with some 200 odd children been infected by this strain.

How have you come to the conclusion that children may be effected by the
long tail when in fact it has only been 5 weeks since it was first
detected in New Zealand - is your evidence only based on the latest 5
weeks? 

If your claim is based on overseas finding - where is that information?
And how long have those countries been researching this claim?

 

Thirdly on the note of natural remedies. There have in fact been hundreds
of studies around this overseas where by vitamin C, D and zinc were all
found to be effective in helping one build their immunity to lessen the
severity should they contract covid.

Why are we not looking at research coming from countries that have battled
this virus far more intensely  and researched it extensively?

Regarding natural immunity - does the Ministry of Health advise those who
have contracted and recovered from covid 19 that their bodies natural
immunity has developed no antibodies to prevent future infection?

 

In Japan, they opening and vastly administering ivermectin to patients
suffering covid 19 symptoms - why has New Zealand taken this off our
shelves and banned importation of the product?

If the research is coming in from overseas as it been effective, why are
we not seeing it used here?

Would this not help to lessen the burden on the healthcare system if this
medication can be administered from the patients home?

 

I’d also like to see research supporting the safe and effective use of
remdesivir thay Ashley Bloomfield identified as “one of the best known
treatments” for covid on 15/09/2021 in the NZ Hearld.

Remdesivir was the first drug approved for treating covid 19 but studies
have since shown acute kidney injury and renal replacement have been
frequently reported as side effects in fact compared to the likes of
hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, sarilumab, or tocilizumab (which have
all proven effective in testing patients with covid 19) remdesivir was
associated with an increased reporting of kidney disorders.

Can you please provide the research which shows clearly that this drug has
been tested safely and effectively on patients with no side effects
mentioned above which would in fact prove to be a huge burden on the
public health system.

 

Fourthly regarding altering DNA and thus subsequently causing cancer; MIT
and Harvard University are currently undertaking research into this common
misconception that mRNA vaccines do not alter DNA. to date they have found
that The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna “vaccines” are RNA injections, these
transfect their RNA into the cytoplasm of our cells.  Through a process
called reverse-transcription, injected RNA integrates into our DNA.

As well as two leading Universities in the medical field, Bill Gates
himself publicly stated that mRNA injections for coronavirus can alter our
genetic code or DNA.

Where exactly is our evidence coming from that debunk MIT, Harvard and
Bill Gates research and diagnosis?

 

Fifth, Pfizer have stated themselves they will not have completed their
trials for Comirnaty until 2023.

A publication printed refers to the ongoing trials as “Study to Describe
the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine
Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals” and it’s estimated
completion date is May 2023.

Please can you provide evidence to other medications and/or vaccines that
were released and administered to the public before their trial completion
date?

 

Sixth, regarding accountability.

As stated in the data fact sheets of Comirnaty on the Medsafe website, it
clearly identified that no trials were undertaken in patients that were
taking other medications at the time of receiving their vaccine in the
trials.

Should a patient have the vaccine with no consultation from their GP (as
this is not required in New Zealand with pop up centres spotted around the
country and converted buses now prowling the streets) and that patient is
to suffer a reaction and/or mhabe their medication interact with the
ingredients, who is then liable for the deterioration of that persons
health and/or possible death?

And please explain what been liable entails in the event of adverse
reactions and/or death?

 

Lastly, the claim that the vaccine does not just reduce symptoms - can you
please explain the data coming out of Israel and the Seychelles where by
these countries had a vast majority of their population vaccinated and
only months later saw not only drastically rising covid cases in the
community but just under 50% of hospital admissions and ICU patients who
were in fact fully immunised.

Can you please identify why the vaccine is not preventing people ending up
in Intensive care and hospital beds?

Can you please clarify too the  transmission rate from fully vaccinated
individuals as there have been many, many contradictory articles recently
- are you stating now that those who are vaccinated will in fact not
spread the virus thus meaning they in fact do not require masks, social
distancing or abiding by level 3 and 4 rules?

 

I would appreciate researched and certified  information to all points I
have raised above to support the claims coming from the NZ Herald as they
support and publish the Government and Ministry of Health’s findings and
requirements through promotion of the push for 90% of our population.”

 

The Ministry's reference number for your request is: H202113274.

 

As required under the Official Information Act 1982, the Ministry will
endeavour to respond to your request no later than 22 October 2021, being
20 working days after the day your request was received.

 

Due to the COVID-19 global pandemic response, the Ministry is experiencing
significantly higher volumes of queries and requests for information. If
we are unable to respond to your request within this time frame, we will
notify you of an extension of that time frame.

 

If you have any queries related to this request, please do not hesitate to
get in touch.

 

Ngâ mihi

 

OIA Services

Government Services

Office of the Director-General

Ministry of Health

E: [1][email address]

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Link to this

From: OIA Requests


Attachment image003.jpg
5K Download


Kia ora Nastassja,

 

Thank you for your request for official information, received on 25
September 2021 requesting:

 

“evidence surrounding several of the claims made in an NZ herald article
dated 24/09/2021 titled; 10 of the biggest vaccine myths debunked.

Firstly, I would like to request studies proving women’s fertility is not
effected from the vaccine.
Pfizers Comirnaty vaccine was first administered in New Zealand on
03/02/2021 with the initial roll out for the elderly population, this did
not include women pre menopausal. Where are studies providing
clarification that fertility is not in fact effected several months post
vaccine?

Secondly, where is the supporting data around safety in children?
Pfizer undertook a study of 2,260 aged 12-15 years old. They examined only
1,308 of those children two months post vaccine for adverse effects.
Admitting safety for children aged 12-15 on only 2,260 children seems
extremely premature.
Where is the data showing there have been thousands more children trialled
before the roll out of 12-15 years olds in New Zealand?

On that note the comment was made that children can be effected by the
“long tail of covid” - what exactly is that and how has that research been
established?
As was publicly noted during the beginning of the pandemic, children did
not seem so susceptible to the alpha strain hence the lack of evidence
surrounding this.
The Delta variant was only identified in the community of New Zealand on
August 17th with some 200 odd children been infected by this strain.
How have you come to the conclusion that children may be effected by the
long tail when in fact it has only been 5 weeks since it was first
detected in New Zealand - is your evidence only based on the latest 5
weeks?
If your claim is based on overseas finding - where is that information?
And how long have those countries been researching this claim?

Thirdly on the note of natural remedies. There have in fact been hundreds
of studies around this overseas where by vitamin C, D and zinc were all
found to be effective in helping one build their immunity to lessen the
severity should they contract covid.
Why are we not looking at research coming from countries that have battled
this virus far more intensely and researched it extensively?
Regarding natural immunity - does the Ministry of Health advise those who
have contracted and recovered from covid 19 that their bodies natural
immunity has developed no antibodies to prevent future infection?

In Japan, they opening and vastly administering ivermectin to patients
suffering covid 19 symptoms - why has New Zealand taken this off our
shelves and banned importation of the product?
If the research is coming in from overseas as it been effective, why are
we not seeing it used here?
Would this not help to lessen the burden on the healthcare system if this
medication can be administered from the patients home?

I’d also like to see research supporting the safe and effective use of
remdesivir thay Ashley Bloomfield identified as “one of the best known
treatments” for covid on 15/09/2021 in the NZ Hearld.
Remdesivir was the first drug approved for treating covid 19 but studies
have since shown acute kidney injury and renal replacement have been
frequently reported as side effects in fact compared to the likes of
hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, sarilumab, or tocilizumab (which have
all proven effective in testing patients with covid 19) remdesivir was
associated with an increased reporting of kidney disorders.
Can you please provide the research which shows clearly that this drug has
been tested safely and effectively on patients with no side effects
mentioned above which would in fact prove to be a huge burden on the
public health system.

Fourthly regarding altering DNA and thus subsequently causing cancer; MIT
and Harvard University are currently undertaking research into this common
misconception that mRNA vaccines do not alter DNA. to date they have found
that The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna “vaccines” are RNA injections, these
transfect their RNA into the cytoplasm of our cells. Through a process
called reverse-transcription, injected RNA integrates into our DNA.
As well as two leading Universities in the medical field, Bill Gates
himself publicly stated that mRNA injections for coronavirus can alter our
genetic code or DNA.
Where exactly is our evidence coming from that debunk MIT, Harvard and
Bill Gates research and diagnosis?

Fifth, Pfizer have stated themselves they will not have completed their
trials for Comirnaty until 2023.
A publication printed refers to the ongoing trials as “Study to Describe
the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine
Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals” and it’s estimated
completion date is May 2023.
Please can you provide evidence to other medications and/or vaccines that
were released and administered to the public before their trial completion
date?

Sixth, regarding accountability.
As stated in the data fact sheets of Comirnaty on the Medsafe website, it
clearly identified that no trials were undertaken in patients that were
taking other medications at the time of receiving their vaccine in the
trials.
Should a patient have the vaccine with no consultation from their GP (as
this is not required in New Zealand with pop up centres spotted around the
country and converted buses now prowling the streets) and that patient is
to suffer a reaction and/or mhabe their medication interact with the
ingredients, who is then liable for the deterioration of that persons
health and/or possible death?
And please explain what been liable entails in the event of adverse
reactions and/or death?

Lastly, the claim that the vaccine does not just reduce symptoms - can you
please explain the data coming out of Israel and the Seychelles where by
these countries had a vast majority of their population vaccinated and
only months later saw not only drastically rising covid cases in the
community but just under 50% of hospital admissions and ICU patients who
were in fact fully immunised.
Can you please identify why the vaccine is not preventing people ending up
in Intensive care and hospital beds?
Can you please clarify too the transmission rate from fully vaccinated
individuals as there have been many, many contradictory articles recently
- are you stating now that those who are vaccinated will in fact not
spread the virus thus meaning they in fact do not require masks, social
distancing or abiding by level 3 and 4 rules?

I would appreciate researched and certified information to all points I
have raised above to support the claims coming from the NZ Herald as they
support and publish the Government and Ministry of Health’s findings and
requirements through promotion of the push for 90% of our population.”

 

The Ministry of Health has decided to extend the period of time available
to respond to your request under section 15A of the Official Information
Act 1982 (the Act) as further consultation is required.

 

You can now expect a response to your request on, or before, 16 November
2021.

 

You have the right, under section 28 of the Act, to ask the Ombudsman to
review my decision to extend the time available to respond to your
request.

 

Ngâ mihi 

 

OIA Services

Government Services

Office of the Director-General

Ministry of Health

E: [1][email address]

 

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Link to this

From: OIA Requests


Attachment image003.jpg
5K Download


Tçnâ koe Nastassja

 

 

Thank you for your request under the Official Information Act 1982 (the
Act) to the Ministry of Health (the Ministry) on 25 September 2021 for
evidence surrounding several claims in a New Zealand herald article dated
24 September 2021 titled 10 of the biggest vaccine myths debunked. Please
find a response to each part of your request below.

 

“Firstly, I would like to request studies proving women’s fertility is not
effected from the vaccine.  Pfizers Comirnaty vaccine was first
administered in New Zealand on 03/02/2021 with the initial roll out for
the elderly population, this did not include women pre menopausal. Where
are studies providing clarification that fertility is not in fact effected
several months post vaccine?

 

Pfizer has provided Reproductive Toxicology Studies. The Ministry has
previously responded to a similar request from FYI.org.nz and they are
publicly available here:
[1]https://fyi.org.nz/request/16106/respons...

Secondly, where is the supporting data around safety in children?
Pfizer undertook a study of 2,260 aged 12-15 years old. They examined only
1,308 of those children two months post vaccine for adverse effects.
Admitting safety for children aged 12-15 on only 2,260 children seems
extremely premature. Where is the data showing there have been thousands
more children trialled before the roll out of 12-15 years olds in New
Zealand?

The Ministry does not hold any data relating to this part of your request.
Therefore, this part of your request is refused under section 18(e) of the
Act as the information requested does not exist.

On that note the comment was made that children can be effected by the
“long tail of covid” - what exactly is that and how has that research been
established?
As was publicly noted during the beginning of the pandemic, children did
not seem so susceptible to the alpha strain hence the lack of evidence
surrounding this.
The Delta variant was only identified in the community of New Zealand on
August 17th with some 200 odd children been infected by this strain.
How have you come to the conclusion that children may be effected by the
long tail when in fact it has only been 5 weeks since it was first
detected in New Zealand - is your evidence only based on the latest 5
weeks?
If your claim is based on overseas finding - where is that information?
And how long have those countries been researching this claim?

Although most people with COVID-19 recover completely and return to normal
health, some people experience a diverse range of symptoms. For example,
fatigue, shortness of breath and brain fog and beyond the time of
‘recovery’ from the acute phase of COVID-19 illness. These symptoms can
have a significant impact on their life. The ‘long tail of COVID’ known as
‘long COVID’, refers to signs and symptoms that continue or develop after
acute COVID-19 after4 weeks from the initial infection.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently developed a clinical case
definition for long COVID, this is available here:
[2]https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/hand...

The comment that long COVID can affect children is based on international
research. There is a range of international research showing that long
COVID can affect children, though some studies suggest that it tends to be
less common and less severe than in adults. UK data shows that
approximately 25% of those between 35 and69-year olds reported at least
one lingering symptom five weeks after a positive diagnosis, compared to
9.8% in children aged between 2 and11 years and 13% between 12 and16 year
old. These studies are also available at:
[3]www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01935-7?utm_source=twt_nat&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nature.
In addition, patient support groups have noted that many children
experience long-term consequences of COVID-19. Less is known about long
COVID in children compared to adults, because fewer studies have focused
on children.

One of the first studies about long COVID in children was done in Italy,
based on data between March 2020 and October 2020. This is publicly
available here: [4]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article....
This study reported that 42.6% of children surveyed had one or more
symptoms over 60 days of post infection. The conversation describes some
recent research from the UK and compares it with Australia and
Switzerland. This is available here:
[5]https://theconversation.com/covid-long-l...

You can also find out more about long COVID on the Ministry website at:
[6]www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-19-health-advice-public/long-covid
and the National Institute for Health Innovation
[7]www.nihi.auckland.ac.nz/long-covid.

 

Thirdly on the note of natural remedies. There have in fact been hundreds
of studies around this overseas where by vitamin C, D and zinc were all
found to be effective in helping one build their immunity to lessen the
severity should they contract covid.
Why are we not looking at research coming from countries that have battled
this virus far more intensely and researched it extensively?
Regarding natural immunity - does the Ministry of Health advise those who
have contracted and recovered from covid 19 that their bodies natural
immunity has developed no antibodies to prevent future infection?

 

In Japan, they opening and vastly administering ivermectin to patients
suffering covid 19 symptoms - why has New Zealand taken this off our
shelves and banned importation of the product?
If the research is coming in from overseas as it been effective, why are
we not seeing it used here?
Would this not help to lessen the burden on the healthcare system if this
medication can be administered from the patients home?

 

The Ministry monitors the evidence and international guidance on
treatments for COVID-19 and have a Therapeutics Technical Advisory Group
who provide expert advice on COVID-19 treatment. At this time, the body of
evidence has been reviewed and reflected in international guidance and
Vitamin C, Vitamin D and zinc shows that they are not recommended for the
prevention or treatment of COVID-19. Ivermectin is also not recommended
for the treatment of COVID-19.  The COVID-19 Science news page has a
summary on therapeutic treatments, published previously which includes
discussion of Vitamin C, Vitamin D and zinc and some of the earlier data
on ivermectin. This information is available here:
[8]www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-19-resources-and-tools/covid-19-science-news. 

In considering treatments for COVID-19, the Ministry is monitoring
relevant treatments for hospital care but also potential treatments that
could be used in the community to prevent hospitalisation and preventive
treatments. We have learned a lot about how to treat COVID-19 since the
start of the pandemic, and this has been vital in making sure that anyone
who does get COVID-19 has the best possible chances of recovery. While we
are constantly monitoring the evidence for therapeutics, basic public
health measures and COVID-19 vaccination remain the most important tools
for reducing the impact of COVID-19 on individuals and their community.

 

Ivermectin products have not been “taken off our shelves” and their
importation has not been banned. For more information, please refer to the
Alert communication published on the Medsafe website at:
[9]www.medsafe.govt.nz/safety/Alerts/ivermectin-covid19.htm.

 

For Ivermectin to be approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19
New Zealand legislation requires that a sponsor submits a medicine
application with appropriate safety and efficacy data to Medsafe, for
evaluation and approval before it can be supplied here. To date this has
not occurred. 

 

The WHO recommends not to use ivermectin to treat patients with COVID-19
outside of clinical trials at:
[10]www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-therapeutics-2021.2 and
that the Ministry has no plans to promote its use for treatment of
COVID-19. 

 

I’d also like to see research supporting the safe and effective use of
remdesivir thay Ashley Bloomfield identified as “one of the best known
treatments” for covid on 15/09/2021 in the NZ Hearld.
Remdesivir was the first drug approved for treating covid 19 but studies
have since shown acute kidney injury and renal replacement have been
frequently reported as side effects in fact compared to the likes of
hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, sarilumab, or tocilizumab (which have
all proven effective in testing patients with covid 19) remdesivir was
associated with an increased reporting of kidney disorders.
Can you please provide the research which shows clearly that this drug has
been tested safely and effectively on patients with no side effects
mentioned above which would in fact prove to be a huge burden on the
public health system.

 

Fourthly regarding altering DNA and thus subsequently causing cancer; MIT
and Harvard University are currently undertaking research into this common
misconception that mRNA vaccines do not alter DNA. to date they have found
that The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna “vaccines” are RNA injections, these
transfect their RNA into the cytoplasm of our cells. Through a process
called reverse-transcription, injected RNA integrates into our DNA.
As well as two leading Universities in the medical field, Bill Gates
himself publicly stated that mRNA injections for coronavirus can alter our
genetic code or DNA.
Where exactly is our evidence coming from that debunk MIT, Harvard and
Bill Gates research and diagnosis?

The mRNA Pfizer Vaccine does not alter the DNA, there is no reverse
transcriptase enzyme to allow for the RNA to be translated to DNA and
therefore cannot be integrated into our genetic code.

Please refer to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
website at: [11]www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html for
more information.

These parts of your request appear to be a request for an opinion. While
the Act enables people to request official information from the Ministry,
it only applies to information it holds. There is no obligation to create
information in order to respond to requests, nor is the Ministry obliged
to provide an opinion. The Act does not support requests in which a
requester quotes information or asserts and opinion and then seeks some
form of comment on it, couched as a request for official information.
These parts of your request are therefore refused under section 18(g)(i)
of the Act on the grounds that the information requested does not exist.

Fifth, Pfizer have stated themselves they will not have completed their
trials for Comirnaty until 2023.
A publication printed refers to the ongoing trials as “Study to Describe
the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine
Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals” and it’s estimated
completion date is May 2023.
Please can you provide evidence to other medications and/or vaccines that
were released and administered to the public before their trial completion
date?

 

This part of your request is for a significant amount of information. The
Ministry considered refining your request to be for only correspondence
from organisations, however, after further consultation, this would still
involve substantial collation and research. The Ministry have considered
whether levying a charge or extending the time to compile the information
would enable the Ministry to respond, however, as each piece of
correspondence would have to be individually reviewed, The Ministry does
not believe it is in the public interest to do so. Therefore, your request
is refused under section 18(f) of the Act.

Sixth, regarding accountability.
As stated in the data fact sheets of Comirnaty on the Medsafe website, it
clearly identified that no trials were undertaken in patients that were
taking other medications at the time of receiving their vaccine in the
trials.
Should a patient have the vaccine with no consultation from their GP (as
this is not required in New Zealand with pop up centres spotted around the
country and converted buses now prowling the streets) and that patient is
to suffer a reaction and/or mhabe their medication interact with the
ingredients, who is then liable for the deterioration of that persons
health and/or possible death?
And please explain what been liable entails in the event of adverse
reactions and/or death?

 

As New Zealand operates a no-fault accident compensation system, there is
no requirement to indemnify employers and/or healthcare providers. The
Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) provides assistance and cover in
these situations:
[12]www.covid.immune.org.nz/faq/will-acc-provide-cover-covid-19-vaccination-injuries.

Lastly, the claim that the vaccine does not just reduce symptoms - can you
please explain the data coming out of Israel and the Seychelles where by
these countries had a vast majority of their population vaccinated and
only months later saw not only drastically rising covid cases in the
community but just under 50% of hospital admissions and ICU patients who
were in fact fully immunised.
Can you please identify why the vaccine is not preventing people ending up
in Intensive care and hospital beds?

Can you please clarify too the transmission rate from fully vaccinated
individuals as there have been many, many contradictory articles recently
- are you stating now that those who are vaccinated will in fact not
spread the virus thus meaning they in fact do not require masks, social
distancing or abiding by level 3 and 4 rules?

 

This information is publicly available here:
[13]www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-19-data-and-statistics/covid-19-case-demographics. 

As no vaccine is 100% effective against preventing infection, some people
who are vaccinated will still get infected and can pass on the virus to
others. Therefore measures such as masking, using basic hygiene such as
hand-washing, and practising physical distancing are still recommended for
vaccinated individuals. Earlier studies carried out by researchers showed
that two doses of the Pfizer vaccine substantially reduced transmission of
the virus. Further updates are available here:
[14]www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/science_updates_7_may_2021.pdf.

Emerging data on the Delta variant suggest that the Pfizer vaccine reduces
onwards transmission by around 40-63% as described in
[15]www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.28.21264260v2 and
[16]www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.14.21264959v1, depending on
vaccination status of the contact. It is important to note that the
reduction in transmission by the COVID-19 vaccine is in addition to
individual protection against infection. This means that vaccination
significantly reduces the chance of becoming infected and substantially
decreases the likelihood of transmitting the virus if a vaccinated person
becomes infected.

Under section 28(3) of the Act, you have the right to ask the Ombudsman to
review any decisions made under this request. The Ombudsman may be
contacted by email at: [17][email address] or by calling 0800
802 602.

 

 

Ngâ mihi

 

OIA Services

Government Services

Office of the Director-General

Ministry of Health

E: [18][email address]

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. https://fyi.org.nz/request/16106/respons...
2. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/hand...
3. http://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-02...
4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article...
5. https://theconversation.com/covid-long-l...
6. http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/disea...
7. http://www.nihi.auckland.ac.nz/long-covid
8. http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/disea...
9. http://www.medsafe.govt.nz/safety/Alerts...
10. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/...
11. http://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov...
12. http://www.covid.immune.org.nz/faq/will-...
13. http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/disea...
14. https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/...
15. http://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2...
16. http://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2...
17. mailto:[email address]
18. mailto:[email address]

Link to this

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Nastassja Catmull-Gillespie please sign in and let everyone know.

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Ministry of Health only: