Ok, so the headline is a little cheeky as Voices for Freedom wasn’t around in 2016 but the sentiment remains: Informed consent is critical when it comes to consumers accessing relevant, unbiased information in order to make educated decisions about their health.

The following audio clip, recorded in 2016, features a RNZ host posing the following questions to Dr. Duncan Webb, former Dean of Law at Canterbury University and now current Labour MP:

“If informed consent for a medical procedure requires that you are fully-informed about risks, but the person informing you has a knowledge-deficit about those risks, how legal or lawful is that consent?

If you are not fully informed, how can you make an informed decision?

If you then experience one of those non-disclosed risks and become disabled, who is held to account? The person who presumably you trusted knew about the risks, or those who did not inform and keep that person up to date with information required to allow them to do their job and protect you from harm?”

To which Duncan Webb responded:

“One of the critical questions is what risks are disclosed? It’s not always feasible to disclose every possible risk. You can only disclose, in general terms, what the nature of those risks are. Now, if one of the risks does eventuate it hasn’t been effectively disclosed then obviously that is grounds for complaint and certainly there are plenty of instances that the Health and Disability Commissioner has looked at where informed consent hasn’t been given because the risks haven’t been fully and fairly explained.”

Fast-forward five years to the beginning of the mass-vax-rollout to the general public of NZ and this topic is more pertinent than ever.

The NZ public has been consistently subjected to an onslaught of lopsided “facts”, claims, stories, and outright propaganda about these jabs for the better part of a year and a half.

‘The Pfizer vaccine is 95% effective!’
‘The Covid vaccine is safe and effective.’
‘Take the vaccine and protect the vulnerable / your whanau / the children / your community.’
‘The side-effects are mild – a sore arm or mild flu-like symptoms.’
‘Do it to keep everyone SAFE.’
‘It’s a pandemic of the unvaccinated.’…

Any questions about emerging science or data revealing potential issues with vaccine safety or negative effects were quickly shouted-down as dangerous ‘misinformation / disinformation’ lunacy, whether they came from professionals in science and medicine, groups like Voices for Freedom, or individuals in the general public.

Any doubts, whether or not well-founded, have not been allowed to exist. At all. Ever.

Back in early 2021, when we still had our Facebook page, we routinely shared articles and research that highlighted new scientific findings in the Covid-19 vaccine space.

We shone the spotlight on the news coming out of Israel in April 2021 regarding the bizarre heart-related issues being experienced by vaccine recipients, specifically young males under 30.

 

Israel was one to watch as they were ahead of the game, so to speak, with their nation of Pfizer guinea-pigs coerced to receive the jabs on a mass scale ahead of much of the rest of the world.

If WE could read those Reuters Israeli news reports here at VFF, so too could our government officials. And yet there was silence. No alarm bells in the media or from the Ministry of Health (MoH). Our PM’s ‘abundance of caution’ approach clearly didn’t extend to investigating the potential for their ‘safe and effective’ vaccine to cause life-limiting damage to the hearts of New Zealanders.

The subject was either ignored or downplayed and the vax rollout continued full-steam ahead like a hope-train running on the fuel of misplaced faith, half-truths, desperation, fairy-tale thinking, and one helluva tight Pfizer contract.

Many months passed and with them a growing number of people suffering from new cardiac conditions (amongst others). We heard from people with pericarditis, myocarditis, tachycardia, strokes, heart attacks, and family members young and old who died suddenly and unexpectedly post-jab. One fit and healthy young man faced the prospect of a heart transplant due to severe scarring of his heart after the vax. Anything but the mild condition were are now encouraged to believe.

The sweeping of these cases under the carpet-of-inconvenient-facts continued for eight long months. But, now there were people dying with an obvious link to the vaccine and there was nowhere left to hide.

So, Bloomfield and friends were forced to pen an overdue letter – An ‘Urgent update on COVID-19 Vaccine-associated Myocarditis and Pericarditis’.

 

The letter was a bombshell in terms of a public admission for the need to disclose these serious risks to consumers BEFORE administering the Covid vax.

Pity we had been deplatformed, ridiculed, abused, and repeatedly publicly admonished for trying to do just that for months.

If patients weren’t made aware of the symptoms to watch out for with these heart conditions, how could they understand the seriousness of the situation and the need to seek urgent help?

It wasn’t rocket science.

But, it begs the questions:

👉🏽 Given that the responsibility for informing the medical professionals and laypeople tasked with administering the vaccine fell on the MoH, why did they delay issuing such crucial warnings for so long?
👉🏽 If the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis has not been effectively disclosed, and the authorities KNEW about the existence of the risk, is this then grounds for complaint against a negligent MoH and should the Government then face liability for compensation and damages?
👉🏽 Where was Duncan Webb on this topic for the past 1.5 years?

It’s probably fairly clear where we sit on this matter.

Any MoH admission of potential harm from the jab would have affected vaccine uptake and that could never have been allowed. The MoH and Government are responsible for the harming of scores of New Zealanders who believed the lies, took the vaccine in good faith, and now live with significant, ongoing health issues as a result.

Whilst it may not be feasible to disclose every possible risk, you’d want to hope – for the health and safety of the NZ public – that the most serious risks from this product would be prioritised and sought to be better understood.

Any government that CARED for the people of their country would have, at the very least, paused the rollout whilst a thorough investigation was carried out.

Truth is, despite the platitudes of ‘kindness’ from our Dear Leader, we are not dealing with a government who gives a toss about our wellbeing and the sooner the snoozing masses wake up to this fact the better.

Alia