With the current inquest into the death of a young man from vaccine-induced myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) due to finish this week, New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (NZDSOS) questions if the Ministry of Health (MOH) has been too haphazard with their process of informed consent?
Full text of NZDSOS press release today:
NZDSOS questions what was known and when about the ability of the Pfizer vaccine to cause myocarditis. Were consumers being advised of the risks and if so, what can be done if informed consent was inadequate?
According to the Medsafe website, a monitoring communication was issued to the health workforce in June 2021 advising that myocarditis was a potential risk from this vaccine and that health professionals should report any possible case of this to CARM.
However, in July 2021 Medsafe issued an alert communication advising health professionals they had concluded myocarditis was a rare (fewer than 1 in a million overall) side effect from the vaccine.
Yet again in 20 December 2021 Medsafe issued a reminder alert communication about myocarditis and pericarditis following vaccination following the death of the young man in question. It was described as rare though this definition had changed from 1 case to 30 cases per million doses. (Currently, myocarditis/pericarditis is listed on Medsafe Safety Report 44 as 81.8/million [908/11.1]) Vaccinators were advised everyone should be informed about the risk of myocarditis, the symptoms to be concerned about and to seek urgent medical advice if symptoms occurred. It was recommended a written pamphlet be given at the time of vaccination.
An NZDSOS spokesperson said a number of people who have communicated their experiences with these exact symptoms, “have reported not being taken seriously and
being diagnosed with anxiety”.
“We question if patients were told of the risk of myocarditis prior to the death of this young man since health practitioners were advised in July 2021 that it was a risk” said the spokesperson.
Doctors were specifically advised in an April 2021 Guidance Statement from the Medical Council of New Zealand (MCNZ) to discuss the benefits of Covid-19 vaccination with patients. “There was no mention of discussing risks, uncertainties or alternatives. In fact, doctors were threatened with disciplinary action if they provided any ill-defined ‘anti-vaccination messaging’ which could potentially include discussing risks. Due to this fact alone, many consumers may not have been fully informed” said the spokesperson.
It was a pharmacist that gave the young man whose inquest is being held, his vaccine. The pharmacy guidance issued in May 2021 recommended that pharmacists discuss the risks as well as the benefits of vaccination which is an improvement on the guidance doctors and dentists received. Was it read, was it followed and were other pressures put on pharmacists to vaccinate as many people as possible and not discourage vaccination by disclosing risks?
Would disclosure of risks have made any difference though, as even if people were informed, were they actually in a position to consent freely or to decline consent if their jobs and/or social lives were at stake? Would the young man in question have sought help earlier if he had been warned about the symptoms of myocarditis?
“NZDSOS questions the position of those who did not freely consent or those who were not given sufficient information and have suffered adverse effects,” said the spokesperson.
Dr Duncan Webb, former dean of law, University of Canterbury, now Chief Government Whip, in 2016 was asked about this very issue in an interview on Radio New Zealand’s Afternoons programme.
Dr Webb stated, “One of the critical questions is what risks are disclosed. It is 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 and it hasn’t been effectively disclosed, then obviously that is grounds for complaint. There certainly are plenty of instances that the Health and Disability Commission has looked at where informed consent hasn’t been given because the risks haven’t been fully and
fairly explained.”
It appears a significant number of New Zealanders would have grounds for a complaint to the Health and Disability Commission. Who will be held accountable for prohibiting doctors from fulfilling their obligations? Who will be held accountable for the vast majority of New Zealanders not being fully informed?
For the full article see here.
If you are concerned about myocarditis and have the following symptoms, please seek urgent medical attention.
- New-onset chest pain (or an increase in severity of existing chest pain), discomfort or heaviness
- Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
- An abnormal heartbeat or a racing fluttering feeling or a feeling of skipped heartbeats
- Dizziness, feeling lightheaded or fainting with the symptoms above.
There was ABSOLUTELY NO informed consent with these vaccines. NONE.
They are STILL in trial, there is NO along term safety data, NO carcinogenicity study, NO immunogenicity information , NO long term studies for children, babies, immune compromised, pregnant and lactating mothers, and NO studies regarding multiple dose OR use of multiple doses or even single dose in conjunction with the flu vaccine. I heard about myocarditis mid last year as soon as Dr Peter McCullough and Dr Robert Malone started talking about it because I was not accepting everything our MOH was saying as my BS radar had well and truly gone off. So our MOH KNEW damn well it was a risk ESPECIALLY for young men. They said nothing formally to the public until December 2021 – long after many people had been vaccinated. Dr McCullough is a CARDIOLOGIST. He said the long term outcome for people who have had myocarditis is NOT GOOD.
SO! Our government and MOH should be taken to court over this and made accountable, both as an organisation AND for those people who PERSONALLY oversaw this debacle of lies. The fact you shut up and threatened doctors seeking information so they could give their patients informed consent is UNACCEPTABLE and UNFORGIVABLE. You WILL made accountable one way or another.
But not to worry, Anon it’s all under control now. The new Omicron batch has been fully tested on 8 mice. Unfortunately, 3 of them were blind, 2 were deaf, 2 were on crutches and 1 in a wheelchair. But we are assured this will not effect the testing in any way.
The reality is that nobody who received the jab was properly informed of potential risks.
Nobody was told that there was no long term safety data available for this new ‘MRNA technology’.
Nobody was told the the 95% efficacy was simply a misleading marketing claim of ‘Relative Risk Reduction’, when the ‘Absolute Risk Reduction’ was only 0.84%.
Nobody was told the definition of vaccination was changed to accommodate what is in fact an experimental gene therapy.
Nobody was told that the jab was and still is in clinical trials.
The legal implications for all the unethical organisations that bullied, blackmailed, coerced and unlawfully mandated compliance for this dangerous ineffective drug are truly mind-boggling.
Well done, Docs, some excellent questions in there. Even with a satisfactory explanation as to side-effects where does that leave us with coercion.? It is all well and good knowing the risks, but having no option to decline without penalty, knowing ones life may now be in jeopardy, is surely a criminal act by the perpetrators of this madness.
Yes, who is accountable the question of the day. To whom do we pass the guilty buck.? But I think we can all confidently assume we won’t see them for dust, as they head to the hills at breakneck speed to cash up their ilgotten gains. Ka Ching..!
According to Satanist Jabsinda, a 12 year old can give “informed consent”. Many would have forgotten the curse of a Whāngārei father.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KGHH3Y8PyOM
Informed consent claim is a scam.
Yes, here it begins, right on schedule. The inevitable finger pointing, ass covering, and denials.
A full year of “safe and effective, safe and effective, safe and effective”
A full year of “we are your single source of truth”
A full year of “protect yourself and your whanau”
A full year of “controversial Doctor (insert name) is being investigated for spreading Covid misinformation”.
A full year of “this isn’t about freedom or the Bill of rights…”
Now comes the inevitable fake professions of innocence. It wasn’t us, it was those evil pharmacists!
Calling this government shameless is akin to calling Hitler a little grumpy.
????
???????????????????????? Well said