Fallout from the pandemic response of 2020-2023 continues to . . . fall out.
New Zealand’s “Royal Commission has been tasked with investigating the nation’s COVID-19 response,” wrote Frank Bergman a few weeks ago. “However, the body is facing intense criticism for ignoring key scientific data and creating a narrative that unquestioningly supports government policies and the ‘safety’ of mRNA ‘vaccines.’”
The southern hemisphere nation-state, when headed by quasi-repudiated former Prime Minister Jacinda Adern (pictured above), proved to be an enthusiastic enforcer of lockdowns and vaccination-by-novel-therapeutics. And has experienced an ominous post-pandemic rise in excess deaths (higher rates of mortality than is statistically expected). Still, the government does not seem eager to question public health practices.
The Commission received extensive briefings from groups like Voices for Freedom and New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out on Science (NZDSOS).
The briefings included peer-reviewed studies and official data.
Yet, the Commission has been accused of selectively referencing discredited claims to further its agenda.
In addition, the Commission was found to have ignored studies and data that highlighted the dangers associated with the mRNA shots.
Frank Bergman, “New Zealand Government Caught Covering Up Data Exposing Covid ‘Vaccine’ Deaths,” Slay News (July 28, 2025).
Officials stubbornly refuse to entertain alternative views or even data from other countries:
One of the most alarming aspects of the Commission’s handling of evidence is its refusal to consider the significant findings of international studies.
Most notably, the panel ignored a bombshell Japanese analysis of 21 million health records.
This study showed a disturbing rise in unexpected all-cause deaths following Covid mRNA injections.
The data shows that deaths spiked significantly after mRNA “booster” doses, with many occurring 90 to 120 days post-vaccination.
This timeline directly challenges the Commission’s stance that deaths need to occur shortly after vaccination to be linked causally.
Yet, this critical data was brushed aside during public hearings, further fueling the perception that the Commission is more interested in defending the status quo than genuinely investigating public health concerns.
Ibid.
The article goes on to mention the New Zealand government’s hostility to whistleblowers, Barry Young in particular. His story has been circulating again on social media this past week, so if you aren’t familiar with this controversy, brace yourself. He claims that his work as the sole healthcare database manager in New Zealand allowed him to notice (and expose) “a staggering 10 million deaths around the world” because of “vaccines”:
New Zealand’s case against Mr. Young — a database designer for a corporation under government contract, Te Whatu Ora — is dubious. He says he saw a pattern of results contrary to what the government was telling citizens and patients, and thus disclosed that information. The case against him is this: he is alleged also to have disclosed private information, too. That is what Sean Plunket, above, is so much exercised about.
While Te Whatu Ora claims that 12,000 individuals’ data was exposed, their statements are cautious, noting that the data “appears anonymised” but that there is a “small chance” some individuals could be identified.
The story is well-covered, if a tad one-sided in the media . . . in New Zealand. Happy Googling. (We recommend DuckDuckGo or Freespoke.)
