New catch phrase: “wilful blindness”

It’s hard to say sorry - and even harder to admit that you’ve been played. But how long can our health authorities rationally ignore warnings about mRNA technology?

Dec 19, 2024

New Zealand and its international mentor, the Switzerland based World Health Organisation, continue to push mRNA injections in spite of a wave of warnings of harm.

COVID-19 vaccines are still offered free for everyone in New Zealand, aged 5 and over, and even to some infants from 6 months of age.

Medsafe admits that it no longer publishes its COVID-19 vaccine safety reports, but says that it continues to monitor reports of adverse reactions. (Medsafe is a business unit of the Ministry of Health and is the authority responsible for the regulation of therapeutic products in New Zealand.)

New Zealand is, it seems, tied to the apron strings of the WHO, which continues to show deliberate blindness to what British cardiologist Aseem Malhotra calls accumulating evidence of harm from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. (Search the WHO website for “COVID-19 vaccines adverse effects” and the response is “Unfortunately we don't have any results matching your criteria.”)

Malhotra has written an open letter to the UK’s General Medical Council, saying that there is overwhelming evidence calling for the suspension of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

He comments that major barriers to engaging in meaningful scientific dialogue are born of fear and wilful blindness.

(Wilful blindness is described as a situation where someone tries to escape liability by intentionally overlooking the obvious, otherwise known as the ostrich instruction.)

Malhotra initially supported the use of the COVID-19 vaccine for high risk and older people and personally took two doses himself when the vaccine was rolled out, believing that it would protect his patients. Now he says the data is clear that the vaccines cause greater harm than benefit.

“It is my strong opinion that the political system, the medical establishment, and the legacy media continue to be wilfully blind to what is, in my view, the most horrific medical product to be injected into hundreds of millions of people globally.” - Aseem Malhotra

We’re assured that all vaccines used in New Zealand have been tested for safety and effectiveness but there are compelling calls, from doctors and academics around the world, for a suspension of the genetically engineered products

The HOPE accord is a petition which recommends the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccine products: “A growing body of evidence suggests that the widespread rollout of the novel Covid-19 mRNA vaccine products is contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths.”

The HOPE Accord has 64,168 supporters, including 1900 medical doctors, 5703 other healthcare professionals and 2022 scientists and academics.

The accord also calls for a comprehensive re-evaluation of the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products and urges immediate recognition and support for the vaccine-injured.

Last month, a coalition of hundreds of international politicians, leading medical experts, and professionals sent a notice of extreme concern to the heads of state of 10 European nations—Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

They called for immediate suspension of the use of modified mRNA vaccines citing serious health risks.

The letter was prepared by North Group, which was set up to raise awareness about the potential harms posed by modified mRNA therapeutics.

And a new peer-reviewed study calls for a moratorium on mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Published by the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, the study analysed COVID-19 vaccine and booster data from Pfizer and BioNTech. The authors concluded that “at minimum” health officials should institute a moratorium on the shots.

The authors call for an immediate halt of all RNA-based biologicals until these concerns are scientifically addressed and convincingly dispelled.

Australia’s Professor Ian Brighthope, a medical expert, is vehemently opposed to that country’s plans for mRNA manufacture.

“The construction of mRNA factories in Australia, including the Sydney and Monash University facilities, is, in my view, a monument to madness—a symbol of a society that has lost its way. By embracing a technology with the potential to pollute life itself, we risk not only our own future but the future of the planet. It is imperative that this madness be stopped, and that we reclaim our sovereignty, our environment, and our humanity from the forces of greed and recklessness.”

In the meantime, in ostrich fashion, the WHO doesn’t enter into the mRNA debate. It is focussing its attention elsewhere - on getting 194 countries to agree to its package of amendments to International Health Regulations and finalising its controversial WHO Pandemic Agreement. It gives more attention to gender inequities than it does to reviewing mRNA technology.

But there is change in the air. The overused and derogatory terms 'conspiracy theorist’ and ‘anti-vaxxer’ are now losing traction as weapons to denigrate those who raise concerns about the mRNA vaccines and the current rush to manufacture mRNA products.

We’re a long way down the track from where we were when we obediently tuned in to Jacinda Ardern’s single source of truth but the New Zealand government, it seems, is still entrenched in the WHO camp.

And we have the dubious honour, with the USA, of being one of only two countries in the world that allow pharmaceutical advertising.

Indeed, New Zealand should be taking a step back from the WHO, which has never admitted that the ‘safe and effective’ message had holes in it - and has failed, conspicuously, to apologise for any of its advice that led the way during the pandemic.

A petition, launched by Greg Rzesniowiecki, called for the NZ government to reject the WHO’s controversial International Health Regulations amendments and pandemic treaty agreement, until Phase 2 of the COVID-19 Royal Commission has released its findings.

The petition didn’t get traction.

The response from the NZ Government’s Petition Committee says, “We think that it would not be in New Zealand’s best interests to put on hold the consideration of the International Health Regulations amendments or negotiations about a pandemic treaty. We do not want to see New Zealand sidelined in these discussions.”

So, far from taking a precautionary step back from the WHO, New Zealand is enabling its bid for greater international power.

New Bill

Science writer Guy Hatchard alerts us that the Gene Technology Bill introduced to Parliament this week includes the following provisions:

Mandatory medical activity authorisations: for a human medicine that is or contains gene technology that has been approved by at least two recognised overseas gene technology regulators.

Emergency authorisations: when there is an actual or imminent threat to the health and safety of people or to the environment, for example, threat from a disease outbreak, or an industrial spillage. The Minister responsible for the Gene Technology Act (the Minister) will have the power to grant an emergency authorisation.

Hatchard asserts that these clauses bypass the medical choice provisions of the NZ Bill of Rights, violate the conclusions of Phase 1 of the Royal Commission on the pandemic and pre-empt the findings of Phase 2 of the Commission, which has yet to examine the safety of COVID vaccines, produced via gene editing.

“It empowers the Minister to make health decisions affecting all Kiwis on the say-so of foreign gene regulators of his choice”, Hatchard writes.

And PSGR (Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility New Zealand) has written to Members of Parliament requesting that they put the Gene Technology Bill on hold pending a European Commission outcome.

There is hope that there is enough pull to draw the ostrich’s head out of the sand.

Submissions close on February 17, 2025.

The Health Committee is calling for submissions on the Gene Technology Bill - New Zealand Parliament