Covid Inquiry: Safety and ToR
How we can include safety and much more in the Expanded Terms of Reference
Note: At the end of this post is an important petition to sign on the Covid Inquiry.
For background information read my previous post.
During this post, I will be referring to the following topics listed in the expanded ToR:
Vaccine procurement and efficacy
Whether the decisions made, and steps taken, were justified
How New Zealand's pandemic preparedness compared to other countries
Shane Jones (NZ First) suggested that we look at the words used in the expanded terms and whether or not illness, people dying are adequately covered off. See here. Therefore, I think NZ First has the expectation that these topics will be covered.
1. Vaccine procurement and efficacy
Suggested addition: 'vaccine procurement and efficacy and safety
As Gary Moller has said in his excellent post, the second point on the form should read, 'vaccine procurement and efficacy and safety'.
It makes no sense not to include 'safety' when so much of our pandemic response evolved around the vaccine and as there is significant evidence that indicate vaccine harm. See here for a long list of references.
Safety should be specifically stated within the ToR. If the powers that be have the evidence to prove to us that it is safe, as they keep telling us, why are they reluctant to include it?
2. Whether the decisions made, and steps taken, were justified
This is my favourite one. NZ First were smart to get this included in their actual coalition agreement. Therefore, this will be included. Many if not most of our concerns can fall under this umbrella.
For every decision made, every step taken, the question has to be asked WAS IT JUSTIFIED.
For example, this topic WOULD include the justification for mass vaccination, the mRNA vaccine, vaccine mandates, vaccine passports, their claiming the vaccine was safe and effective, censorship, ignoring and censoring early treatment options, withholding data including comparisons between the vaccinated and unvaccinated, not looking specifically for vaccine injury, not doing autopsies that looked specifically for vaccine injury in unexpected deaths, lockdowns, social distancing, masks, their ignoring highly qualified doctors and scientists etc. on vaccine harms, excess deaths including studies done by Prof. John Gibson and the list goes on and on and on.
Here are some specific examples.
Vaccinating the Nation / Coercion and Mandates
What justification was there for vaccinating the Nation? The vaccine was experimental, had no long-term safety data, and had known harms. Is evidence of harm emerging as excess deaths and excess hospital admissions? Omicron was not a risk to the vast majority of New Zealanders. What was the justification for using mandates and coercion?
Informed Consent/Vaccine Safety
Is it justifiable to ignore the plethora of safety signals associated with the jab? And what was the justification of not informing the public about these?
Early Treatment Options
What was the justification for withholding or ignoring early treatment options such as vitamin d, Ivermectin and so on that demonstrated in many studies and real-life situations their high level of effectiveness and safety? What was the justification of using the expensive new drugs when there were much cheaper, safer, and more effective options? See here.
Bradford Hill Criteria
What was the justification for not using the Bradford Hill criteria in identifying possible vaccine injury and deaths? See here and here.
Autopsies
What was the justification for limiting autopsies and not performing autopsies/thorough investigations on all those who died unexpectedly or suddenly? See here and here.
Concerned Doctors /Scientists etc.
Never before in the history of mankind did we have such a great opportunity for front line doctors across the world to share ideas, their skills, their experience on what was working and what was not. How was it justifiable to silence/ignore these people? Did the narrow band of ‘experts’ the NZ government relied on have conflicts of interest and insufficient knowledge/credentials?
Pregnancy
Was it justifiable to claim the vaccine was safe during pregnancy? Pregnant women were excluded from COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. Pfizer's own data did not show that it was safe. See here and here.
False Claims
How is it justifiable for authorities to make claims when there is no supporting or insufficient evidence? For instance, the vaccine stops person to person transmission of the virus, the ingredients are quickly broken down by the body, it does not cause autoimmune disease, it protects against long Covid, it cannot affect or combine with human DNA and so on.
Health Outcomes: Vaccinated v Unvaccinated
To prove the vaccines were helpful has the government compared vaccinated and unvaccinated outcomes? If not, why not? How do you justify not doing this and not releasing data? Read the Conclusion in this article by the NZ Medical Professionals’ Society.
For many more examples
Look through the Covid 19 timeline. Was each decision and step taken justified?
Read through the People’s Terms of Reference. See below.
Read through the excellent list of questions in Gary Moller’s post.
Note: The topic The extent of disruption to New Zealanders' health, education, and business as a result of the Government's policies could also encompass vaccine safety.
3. How New Zealand's pandemic preparedness compared to other countries
Suggested additions (in bold): How New Zealand's pandemic preparedness and policies compared to other countries or places
As many countries, including NZ were in lockstep, how much influence did the WHO, the WEF, Big Pharma and their captured regulatory authorities etc. have on our policies?
There is little point in comparing NZ pandemic policies to those countries that used similar policies, except for confirmation re similar outcomes, like excess deaths.
This topic should be expanded to include ‘and policies’ and 'or places' to include places/districts/provinces/states that used protocols that included Ivermectin and other repurposed drugs. Places that treated the disease. Places that had low vaccination rates. See here and here.
We need to examine places that had the best outcomes.
The Inquiry Commissioners
The broadness of the expanded ToR topics can cover the entire Covid Response.
However, commissioners with conflicts of interest could easily manipulate the inquiry and be extremely selective in what they cover and what they find.
Therefore, the current commissioners NEED to be replaced. See here.
Dr Cindy de Villiers and The Covid Inquiry:
Listen to Dr Cindy de Villiers excellent 5 minute speech on the Royal Commission of Inquiry. If you haven’t already listened to it, I suggest you do. Listen here (her speech starts at around the 38/39 minute mark). It’s a good summary of what is needed to get a solid inquiry.
NZDSOS Feedback to the Covid19 Inquiry Terms of Reference
Their article, Engaging With the NZ Covid-19 Inquiry: Make Your Voice Count includes a good example of a 3500 word ToR submission.
From the article (Bold mine):
Feedback can be provided on the expanded terms listed. These terms can be interpreted broadly to include injection harms, the division of New Zealand, the breakdown and loss of trust in health care and the lawfulness or otherwise of the covid response. There is unfortunately a limit of 3500 characters. Here is the feedback that NZDSOS has provided. This can be used as an example or the basis for your own feedback. For the biggest impact, please keep feedback respectful.
In their feedback, NZDSOS not only comment on the expanded terms and what they should include, but they also make it clear in their introduction the following:
Conduct a thorough investigation, ensuring transparency by broadcasting proceedings openly in an adversarial-style commission with essential witnesses compelled to testify under oath in public. It is imperative for the PM to direct the Gov Gen to amend the current RCI and include the People’s Terms.
The People’s Terms
All Kiwis should demand that an independent, full-scale, wide-ranging public inquiry into NZ's Covid response be undertaken. Without one, there will be nothing to stop future government abuse of your fundamental human rights again.
Listen to Claire Deeks and Alia Bland on Reality Check Radio talk about the The People’s Terms…
Listen to Rodney for 5 minutes. He tells us to sign the petition and why.
Sign the Petition for a Proper Inquiry.
You can sign here.
What Next
The next article is on the other submission: Sharing Your Story.