Dear Ministry of Health,

In a 19 Nov 2021 position statement - https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/... - The Ministry of Health indicated that the risk of COVID-19 infection/transmission is more dependent on prevalence of disease in the community, and less dependent of any person's inoculation status, and further notes, "there is currently no evidence that the application of an alternative pathway based solely on vaccination status, or the routine incorporation of unvaccinated asymptomatic individuals into a high-risk pathway is justified", and states (in bold), that "asymptomatic infection is the issue, not the vaccination status of the patient."

Regarding "My Vaccine Pass",

What is the purpose of this "Vaccine Pass" system? How is this "Vaccine Pass" system expected to benefit public health? How can this "Vaccine Pass" system benefit public health, by doing the exact opposite of the recent position paper's recommendations, and doing it on a much larger scale?

What evidence-based cost/benefit analysis supports the use of this "Vaccine Pass" system for such claimed purposes? What evidence-based risk/benefit analysis supports the use of this "Vaccine Pass" system for such claimed purposes? If evidence-based cost/benefit analyses and evidence-based risk/benefit analyses do not support the implementation of this system for such claimed purposes, then why is this system being implemented?

If COVID-19 inoculations are effective, then what public health benefit can be served by this system?

If COVID-19 inoculations are not effective, then what public benefit purpose can be served by this system?

What balance of evidence, both for and against, supports any classification and/or segregation of any kind between inoculated and uninoculated persons?

As noted explicitly - https://covid19.govt.nz/covid-19-vaccine... - and consistently repeated via press briefings and media outlets, The Ministry of Health claims that, "When everyone is vaccinated, this helps to end the pandemic."

Does The Ministry of Health hold any information indicating that the current COVID-19 inoculations are "neutralising vaccines" or "sterilising vaccines", in the sense that they effectively prevent infection and transmission of SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19? nb, this is not to be confused with inoculations stimulating the production of "neutralising antibodies".

Does The Ministry of Health hold any information indicating that the current COVID-19 inoculations are "leaky vaccines", in the sense that they do not effectively prevent infection and transmission of SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19?

Is The Ministry of Health aware of the body of published research substantiating the concerns that "leaky vaccines" select for both more vaccine-evasive viral mutations and more pathogenic viral mutations? If not, why is The Ministry of Health not aware of such research?

To the extent that "leaky vaccines" allow infection, allow transmission, tend to facilitate asymptomatic disease transmission, and select for both more vaccine-evasive viral mutations and more pathogenic viral mutations, what body of evidence, both for and against, has The Ministry of Health relied on to conclude that these products with no long-term safety or efficacy data can or should be used, for the stated goal to "end the pandemic"?

What balance of evidence, both for and against, does The Ministry of Health rely on to primarily/exclusively favour "leaky vaccines", rather than prevention and early treatment protocols, such as those published by FLCCC - https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19... - which appear to be both safer and more effective than any COVID-19 inoculations. If it is not the role of The Ministry of Health to research and advocate for the safest and most effective prevention and treatment protocols, in the midst of a pandemic, whose job is it?

Is The Ministry of Health opposed to treatment protocols such as those published by FLCCC? Is The Ministry of Health aware of such treatments being discouraged in any way?

Thank you,
ASE