Official Ministry of Health statistics show that the COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly becoming one of the vaccinated.
Should the people of New Zealand be demanding a full refund from Pfizer of the hundreds of millions spent on buying its faulty mRNA product?
Recent data shows the number of COVID-19 hospitalisation cases are primarily made up of those who are fully vaccinated. With traditional vaccines, it is the opposite – hospitalisation rates are much higher in those who are unvaccinated.
An important point to consider first is how does the government determine vaccination percentage rates for each region?
According to the MOH, population numbers of each region are determined by ‘HSU estimates’, the ‘Health Service User’ estimates. Vaccination rates are not based on actual population statistics, but on the number of people who interacted with the DHB in the previous year, as explained recently by MidCentral Health, when they were caught out claiming a 100% vaccination rate.
The Auckland region has a population of 1.7 million people and its DHBs a 97% vaccination rate. If only 1 million of those interacted with the DHBs in the previous 12 months, does this mean that the vaccination rate for Auckland is 97% of 1 million, rather than 97% of 1.7 million?
That is an exreme example, but the methodolgy in determining regional vaccination rates raises questions about accuracy of vaccination rate calculation and whether that percentage is smaller than what we are being told. If it is smaller, then it makes the claim ‘pandemic of the vaccinated’ even more valid because the number of unvaccinated is likely to be higher than what is being portrayed by the government and legacy mainstream media.
Comparing the Pfizer mRNA medication with traditional vaccines, well, there is no comparison.
For the period 25 January to 16 February 2022, 86% of hospitalised COVID-19 cases were vaccinated.
In the 2019 measels outbreak, only 6.4% of hospitalised cases were vaccinated.
Of the hospitalised cases for pertussis in 2018, 49% were unvaccinated.
There have been no polio hospitalisation cases in New Zealand since 1961 when the vaccine for that disease was introduced.
Apart from the issue of hospitalisations, the Pfizer mRNA medication does not prevent transmission or infection. The most ‘vaccinated’ countries are seeing an explosion in infections – Israel is one often-cited example, but the evidence is showing the more vaxxed a country is, the more problems it has with COVID.
The New Zealand taxpayer has paid Pfizer a vast amount of money for a product which does not prevent transmission, or infection, and which does the opposite of what traditional vaccines do in terms of reducing the hospitalisation rate. The product is not fit for purpose.
Pfizer also has immunity from paying compensation to those suffering injury or death from its product, nor has it any liability for side-effects that will only become apparent in the population in the long-term.
well reported and the govt cannot deny the figures as they produced them!!!
when will the general public wake up to the lies they are being told and that the vax makes them more susceptible to the virus. They have been sold a used car with a blown engine but were told its a good runner.
This is more proof that the MSM have been paid off to ignore the truth. They are finished, just a propaganda machine for the government.
Stuff is the worst news site on the planet, its all soyboys and kike feminist commies who were handsomely bribed by horse face when this shit started.
So true. They all have to go. We have had enough.
I think the graph is somewhat misleading. The base numbers are always going to be higher in a highly vaccinated population. To provide comparison you’d have to look at the total number of infections and the proportion of those who are hospitalised in each category. This would be a fairer comparison.
However, in some ways this is not really the key issue. The key issues are
1. The vaccination doesn’t prevent transmission so badging it as if it’s some silver bullet is misleading
But 2 – the most important thing of all – barely anyone is being impacted in terms of hospitalisations anyway.
Further, I’d like to bet that those in hospital tested positive on arrival with some other condition or caught it in hospital. So, the “true” COVID hospitalisations are likely to be well south of the number quoted. This means that the original premise of locking down etc – to avoid stress on the health system is a complete load of nonsense.
Agree with your opening comment and there is data published by other states such as the UK for example which shows case rates / hospitalisation rates per 100,000 vaxxed and unvaxxed. These kind of statistics are less biased and still show a greater rate of Covid-19 in the vaccinated. There may remain other biases within the data such as age as Covid-19 is a significantly age stratified disease and this is probably the most significant factor in severity of the disease. But there are other significant comorbidities such as obesity, vitamin D deficiency and many other significant health issues inherent in the population which need to be considered.
Also deaths “with Covid” vs “of Covid” and deaths within two weeks of vaccination being considered “unvaxxed” are very important statistics which seem to be fudging the data.
The whole dam truck load, is a bunch of .B.S.
How has cindy’s net worth gone from 800 K to 24 million in 2 years
if the answer is what i suspect it is that is the reason the nightmare won;t stop
ask yourself why ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are banned. request of pfizer?
Yep, Pfizer owns her. Look how its even been made illegal to use RATs until they’ve pushed as many boosters into NZ’s population as possible.
Simple Israeli man listens to broadcast of deaths after vaccination, wonders why his government is silent.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/3oW081ain3aO/
The only reliable data from MOH are the counts for partially and fully vaccinated. Best estimate for country population (31 Dec 2021) is from Ministry of Statistics: https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/national-population-estimates-at-31-december-2021-infoshare-tables whose estimate is 5,127,200. Correction factor to MOH numbers is 4,209,057 / 5,127,200 = 0.82.
Thus best estimate of full and partial vaccination rate in NZ = 94.8 * 0.82 = 78%.
Should be “best estimate of full vaccination rate” is 78%.
Let’s compute efficacy assuming vaccination rate is 78%, but 86% of hospitalized are vaccinated.
Among 100 vaccinated, let x be the chances of being hospitalized. Among 100 unvaccinated, let y be the chances of being hospitalized. In a population with 78 vaccinated and 22 unvaccinated the number hospitalized is 78 * x + 22 * y. But vaccinated hospitalized are 86% so 78 * x / (78 * x + 22 * y) = 0.86. Thus x = 1.73 * y.
The chances of being hospitalized, if vaccinated is 73% higher than being unvaccinated.
There’s an indemnity agreement which grants an extraordinary waiver of liability to Pfizer, and the other manufacturers of “vaccine candidates”.
But such contract would be nullified and voided by fraud, like, oh, I don’t know…
Maybe if Pfizer hid the fact that more people died in their “treatment group” than their “control group”? And then they tainted their control group?
Maybe if they claimed a treatment to be a “vaccine” when it does not, in fact, provide reliable or durable protection against infection?
Maybe if their treatment contains ingredients that are manufactured and sold only for experimental use?
Maybe if they willingly and knowingly sold quantities of their treatment far in excess of what would be reasonable for an “experimental” treatment intended for only a small percentage of the population?
Maybe if it creates an initial window of increased susceptibility to infection and disease, which is significant given the fleeting duration in which any efficacy can be claimed? Maybe if that data was hidden in their published studies?
Maybe if the FDA release (eventually) shows that they knew all along that the risks exceed the benefits?
Maybe if it comes out that the “emergency use authorisation” and “provisional approval” relied on “conspiracy” (to use the word properly) to suppress the use of cheaper, safer, more effective, and readily available treatments?
Maybe if they funded media (and politicians? regulators? public health “experts”?) which over-exaggerated the risks of the disease, and contributed to mass panic and mass hysteria?
Yes there is a current law suit in the USA against Pfizer considering the fudging of the clinical trial data. If this law suit is upheld then that may indeed prove fraud in which case contracts based on trial data are surely null and void.
New Zealand law firms who are patriots need to look into this asap, if there are any prominent Lawyers who are not shit scared of the Covid-19 narrative and are actually willing to look at the real science, there are some but not many.
I get the feeling that every prominent person over the age of 50 is shit scared of dying from Covid-19 and are quite happy to let kids get vaxxed with a risk of myocarditis when they have no risk from Covid-19, these people are cowards.
Unfortunately we do not have any knowledge of the Pfizer contract as these are being withheld from the public by the government. Is it even legal for a government to withhold a contract signed on behalf of the people of New Zealand?
Some prominent Lawyer will know but they are too shit scared of speaking out.
Just wait until the lied to and deceived general public come to realize that not only has the experimental gene therapy not protected them from getting and transmitting covid but, by damaging their natural immune systems, has actually given them vaccine induced acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). There is going to be a lot of angry and disappointed people out there.
By the time this arises in 2 or 3 years, JA will have her post at the UN, and her NZ Order of Merit.