Doctor’s RCI Submission Blasts NZ’s Covid Response: ‘Never Again’

Submission to Part 2 of the New Zealand Government’s Royal Commission of Enquiry into the NZ Covid response

For the attention of:

Mr Grant Illingworth KC
Mr Anthony Hill
Ms Judy Kavanagh

Dear Commissioners,

In April 2019 I retired from medical practice. I had been a GP in New Zealand since 1978.

In December of that year, the first rumours of a corona virus appearing in China began to permeate the NZ media.

In the weeks, months and years that followed, the resultant inversion and absolute perversion of the ethical and moral framework of medicine and healthcare could never have been imagined by anyone of sound mind, or anyone who had a modicum of wisdom.

Until it happened.

To put this in perspective, the retreat from reality which medical practice and healthcare adopted was no less extreme that that of the legal profession deciding that the Magna Carta was irrelevant. Or the engineering profession deciding that Euclid’s system of measurement and its derivates were irrelevant. Medicine turned its back on more than 2500 years of patient centered compassion – and everything, I mean everything, that had been the basis of medical practice was upended.

THE NEW ZEALAND RESPONSE

What was the New Zealand ‘response’ to Covid? In short, everything was ‘wrong’. For example:

1. Quarantining healthy people was wrong
2. Using the PCR test as a diagnostic tool was scientifically and ethically wrong.
3. Quoted case fatality rates (including ex the WHO) were wrong. They were intentionally malicious.
4. The notion that the infection could be transmitted by asymptomatic individuals was nonsense.
5. Locking down society with all the socio-economic impacts of that was unforgivably wrong.
6. The devastating impact of lockdowns and educational interruption on children and young people was wrong.
7. The stated impact and disruption of hospitals and health services was not just wrong, but a blatant lie.
8. Social distancing had no basis in any form of science: indeed it was adopted on a whim
9. Masks offer no benefit against airborne respiratory disease. Indeed the use of a mask predisposes an individual to greater risk of respiratory infection and functional compromise.
10. One of the most immoral statements to have ever come from any form of medical authority was to state that natural immunity was inferior to ‘vaccine’ immunity.
11. The introduction of an inadequately tested, untried ‘vaccine’ into the population with a relentless (and yet totally unfounded) assertion that it was ‘safe and effective’.

The Pfizer vaccine (as used in NZ) was rolled out in Europe (the UK) and the USA in December 2020. By the end of February 2021 there had been reports of more than 1200 deaths temporally associated with injection of that ‘vaccine’ and Pfizer alone had compiled a listing of nine foolscap pages of adverse effects – which Pfizer and the FDA had attempted to keep from public scrutiny for no less than 75 years – until a Florida judge ordered the data be be released. The New Zealand government and the Ministry of Health and its staff would have been well aware of these facts, but it did not give pause to reflect and reconsider its official response to Covid.

VACCINES

In this respect it is worth remembering that in the lead-up to the Covid ‘pandemic’ and the introduction of the so-called ‘vaccines’ the CDC (Centre for Disease Control) in the USA had, in recent times, changed the definition of the word ‘vaccination’ as follows:

a. Pre 2015: Injection of a killed or weakened infectious organism in order to PREVENT the disease.

b. Feb 2015: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce IMMUNITY to a disease.

c. Sept 2021: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce PROTECTION from a disease

The latter definition (adopted just prior to the roll-out of the mRNA Covid vaccines) makes clear that there was no expectation that the product would prevent infection with Covid. Nor that it would prevent transmission of the infection – which was the basis on which vaccine mandates were enforced on the population, in New Zealand and around the world.

And for governments (including New Zealand) to mandate an untested, untried product which was not even expected to prevent transmission of the infection is – by any metric – blatantly unconscionable, unforgivable, and, surely, criminal.

FLAWED SCIENCE

I believe it’s important for non medical people to understand that the entire premise of mRNA injections is fraught. In simple terms mRNA is a protein which, when injected into the body will immediately be recognised by that body’s immune system as being foreign. And over millions of years immune systems have developed elegant and sophisticated methods to recognise and promptly destroy such foreign proteins. Part (but only part) of this sophistication is now understood by molecular biologists and it was determined that by replacing one of the four bases in an mRNA product with a surrogate it would be possible to ‘disguise’ that foreign protein (mRNA) so that the immune system would not recognise it. In doing so, not only does that allow the foreign mRNA to enter the cell (and execute its function – of stimulating the production of spike protein in the case of Covid vaccines) but because it bypasses and disables the immune surveillance system, it effectively makes the cell vulnerable to other infections and similarly impairs the body’s response to the recognition of aberrant cell behaviour – such as in the development of cancer.

As a medical scientist, to me, it is quite astonishing that the Nobel prize in Medicine in 2023 was awarded to Kariko & Wiseman the scientists who devised this method of disabling the natural immune system. I fear that we are only just at the beginning of the potentially devastating long term results of this research into the undermining of the immune system.

THE FUTURE FOR NEW ZEALAND

In my view it would be a not unreasonable stance for the Commission to propose that future ‘pandemics’ be managed along the lines that ‘pandemic preparedness’ had been carefully hammered out over decades throughout the twentieth century. In other words, in a diametrically opposite manner in which the New Zealand government (and governments of most of the world – at the behest of the World Health Organisation) had dictated that Covid should be managed.

In essence the traditional response to pandemics which had been decided, and agreed to internationally over many, many years was as follows:

1. Quarantine the sick.
2. Protect the vulnerable.
3. Allow the infection (virus) to propogate through the healthy population to allow the development of natural herd immunity.
4. Never vaccinate into an epidemic or pandemic because (by dint of evolution) that is bound to lead to the development of new variants of the pathogen, against which your ‘vaccine’ will likely be ineffective.

In large part this approach mirrors that proposed in 2020 in the Great Barrington Declaration as proposed by Drs Sunetra Gupta (of Oxford), Jay Bhattacharya (of Stanford) and Martin Kulldorff (of Harvard). All of which was summarily dismissed by the political and media establishment of the western world.

POLITICS

As part of my submission to the Royal Commission of Inquiry Part 2 it seems remarkable that, apart from one individual, no other Members of the New Zealand parliament between 2020 and 2025 have spoken out against the vaccine mandates or even the wisdom or otherwise of the New Zealand Covid response. There can be no doubt that many, many members of the New Zealand parliament have been made aware of the impact that that response has afflicted on so many members of the New Zealand public. Be that in terms of their health, and the effect that the inadequately tested and untried genetic injections have had upon our population, or the impact of lockdowns and the devastating results for our economic and social environment.

But, in my view, it is telling that the Members of the New Zealand parliament (and, I believe, their staff) were never mandated to receive the Covid ‘vaccinations’. After all, next to a nurse, or a doctor, or a teacher one would have thought that the very existence of an MP would be based upon regular, daily contact with many of his or her constituents. So their propensity to spread a ‘virus such as Covid’ would have been just as high as many of those to whom they had offered no choice. Perhaps those MPs were more aware of the potential for harm in these injections than they ever disclosed to the public?

THE RECKONING

Regarding Covid, this very week Senator Malcolm Roberts in Australia spoke to the Australian parliament in which he stated:

“It has become clear that people in this country, and globally, have been steam rolled. It is also clear that it has been co-ordinated globally. And integrated not just over six months, not just over two and a half years, but that it has been planned over decades. The changes to legislation were done so that they could control doctors and other people. But people are awaking and it’s thanks to people like Dr Altman and all the presenters here today (people like Senator Babet, Craig Kelly). We know, and we knew, that this is all bullshit and that we have been ‘had’. But we’re going to hound you down, the people who are guilty, we are going to hound you down and hold you accountable and we will expose your global agenda so that the people of Australia can be free in the future because I love my kids and I’m looking forward to my grandkids and we’re going to save this country”.

(20) illuminatibot on X: “”We will expose your global agenda.” Australian senator, Malcolm Roberts: The so-called “pandemic” was planned and globally co-ordinated, decades in advance https://t.co/YC5RMG8tJv” / X

Thank you for your time and consideration. I can only finish by repeating the words “NEVER AGAIN”.

Yours faithfully,

Dr Steve Taylor, MB, ChB (Glasgow 1975)