There are no studies using robust data systems that definitively demonstrate the Covid vaccines do not cause death as a rare adverse event.
1. The raw numbers are high.
Figure 1. Red lines: All VAERS death reports. Left, averaged up to 2020. Right, all Covid vaccine death reports till mid June, 2021. Pink line: Extrapolated data till end 2021 year for death reports following Covid vaccination, based on first half year data. Blue line: number of doses given.
At present, 5,888 deaths in America have been reported following vaccination through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, VAERS, for Covid vaccinations.
VAERS is a passive reporting system limited by reporting bias. Therefore, no claims of causation of death after vaccination can be made (URL).
It is a bit difficult to be biased about reporting death when one is in a coffin. Also, filing a fake report report is illegal and punishable by fine and imprisonment (URL).
However, over-reporting may cause bias. The FDA made it a requirement that all post-vaccine deaths are reported even if there is no indication the vaccine could be involved in the death.
The US Center for Disease Control (CDC) is altering its practices of data logging and testing for “Covid19” in order to make it seem the experimental gene-therapy “vaccines” are effective at preventing the alleged disease.
They made no secret of this, announcing the policy changes on their website in late April/early May, (though naturally without admitting the fairly obvious motivation behind the change).
The trick is in their reporting of what they call “breakthrough infections” – that is people who are fully “vaccinated” against Sars-Cov-2 infection, but get infected anyway.
Essentially, Covid19 has long been shown – to those willing to pay attention – to be an entirely created pandemic narrative built on two key factors:
Inflated Case-count. The incredibly broad definition of “Covid case”, used all over the world, lists anyone who receives a positive test as a “Covid19 case”, even if they never experienced any symptoms.
Albert Benavides has a Bitchute channel called WelcomeTheEagle88. Each week he does a deep dive into the data released by the CDC into VAERS. He records and stores everything, and has even found that the CDC removes records of deaths some weeks that were there in previous weeks.
Follow the link below, then tick the ‘agree’ box at the bottom of the page which brings you to the search box. Type ‘Comirnaty ‘ which will take you to the page showing covid-19 info: click on ‘Adverse Drug Reactions’. If you then click on the arrow next to each class of info an itemized list will open up. Some of these are extremely long. Listed below are those for ‘Psychiatric Disorders’ and ‘Cardiac’ related FYI.
After all, you can’t report what you’ve been careful not to study (just as with vaccine safety).
From “COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects: Is the System Working?” in MedPage Today:
QUOTE: Marshall: Now when it comes to the COVID vaccines, we’re seeing all three of those [data collection systems] being employed, correct?
Kesselheim: Well, so far with the COVID vaccine, you know —
Marshall: You hesitated there. So I’m assuming that’s probably a no?
Kesselheim: Well, I mean, I think that there are a lot of ways that the post-market surveillance of the COVID vaccine could be going better. I think that we are seeing a lot of spontaneous reporting. And we are seeing a lot of local institutions keeping track of people who receive vaccines and sort of mini registries in a sense. So far in the U.S. we’ve only had vaccines available through Emergency Use Authorizations.
We haven’t yet had those kinds of formal post-approval studies that have been developed and designed for these trials. So we haven’t really seen that yet.
And the other major issue is, right now a lot of vaccines are being given outside of healthcare systems, through public, state government supported vaccine delivery websites and the goal here being to get as many vaccines as quickly as possible into people as quickly as possible.
When considering the safety profile of the Covid 19 vaccines, you can broadly divide concerns into two camps. Short term safety….what are the potential safety risks in the hours, days, and up to six week post vaccine? Long term safety….what are the potential safety risks in the months and years post vaccine? Social media platforms abound with joyous posts stating “I had the vaccine and nothing more than a sore arm”. While I’m happy for these people that they have not experienced the severe illness, blood clots, strokes, heart attacks and neurological disorders which have been experienced by some in the days following their Covid 19 vaccine…I nevertheless wonder what may unfold for these happy folk in the years to come. Some brave and vocal scientists have raised the specter of slowly developing Auto Immune disease as a possible consequence of Covid 19 vaccination. Why? These vaccines (each in their own way) prime our immune system to recognise and then destruct the proteins found in the Sars Cov II spike. If the vaccine “works” our immune system is primed to seek and destroy these proteins….All well and good until you look a little closer and realise that these same primed antibodies are then also potentially primed to attack 28 different human tissues. Kind of like scud missiles with incorrect destination coordinates entered. In January 2021 researchers explored whether this “auto attack” (called auto immune disease) was just a theoretical risk, or something that we should be concerned about with Covid 19 vaccines. They placed cells from 55 different human tissue types – each tissue type into separate wells, then exposed each well to the Spike antibody. THE SPIKE ANTIBODY ATTACKED 28 DIFFERENT HUMAN TISSUES ranging from mild to severe attack. Directly quoting the study….”This extensive immune cross-reactivity between SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and different antigen groups may play a role in the multi-system disease process of COVID-19, influence the severity of the disease, PRECIPITATE THE ONSET OF AUTO IMMUNITY in susceptible subgroups, and potentially exacerbate autoimmunity in subjects that have pre-existing autoimmune diseases. There have been more than 7,000 peer-reviewed studies published on molecular mimicry and autoimmune diseases and over 50 recognized cross-reactive relationships between specific viral pathogens and human tissue proteins. Several articles have remarked on the phenomena of molecular mimicry between SARS-CoV-2 and human proteins, and have postulated a connection between this mimicry and multi-organ disorders beyond the respiratory tract The reasoning is that immune response against the viral antigens following infection or vaccination can cross-react with human tissue antigens that share sequence homology with the virus, RESULTING IN AUTO IMMUNE REACTIVITY POSSIBLY FOLLOWED BY OUTRIGHT AUTO IMMUNE DISEASE. It’s sobering to realise that the New Zealand Government knows all about this risk….even as they urge you to line up for your vaccine.They are concerned enough about this risk to include it as one of the 58 “conditions” in the Conditional approval of the Pfizer vaccine in New Zealand.They have mandated Pfizer to supply them with additional information on this risk, to maintain their conditional consent.Just one small hitch. Pfizer don’t have to cough up their data until the end of July.All going well millions of New Zealanders will already have been vaccinated by then.
COVID-19 has reignited the vaccine debate world wide as significant portions of the population express their unwillingness or hesitancy to take the experimental vaccine. A vaccine that was developed in record time with rolled back regulations, limited oversight, as well as a limited scope in the safety trials. The vaccine manufacturers conducting the trials and carefully screened potential volunteers. Carefully selecting candidates to help them ensure a passing grade for government regulators and then mass distribution. In this interview, Spiro is joined by Dr. James Lyons-Weiler who recently co-authored a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children. A study the CDC has refused to perform despite four different congressional bills which would have obligated them to conduct. All four bills failed. The fact that all four bills failed may not come as a surprise, considering Big Pharma is the largest lobby in DC. But the key findings of the study, may indeed surprise you. The study was independently conducted, peer reviewed and publicly funded. Show Notes: https://www.activistpost.com/2020/12/…
Thanks to the flyingcuttlefish blog for this link. The clip is taken from the Joe Rogan Experience with Dr. Mark Gordon & Andrew Marr. A short watch, basically we have evidence from an MD about how difficult it is – in spite of real data /evidence provided – to convince the medical establishment of the effectiveness of certain protocols hitherto used. They cling to them in spite of proof they are problematic, because to abandon them would be admitting they were wrong. And so the MD cites the well known example of handwashing where the person who lowered the death rate of newborns astronomically by introducing handwashing in the 1700s to Doctors who went from carving up cadavers to examining pregnant women. It can take a generation he says for them to admit they were wrong. These people we trust with our lives. Of course there is now the added dissuasion from Big Pharma, the Rockefellers and the like to dampen the changes even further. Worth a listen. EWR
By H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, M. Sava, S. Gupta, D. Chong, D. White, J. Nowicki, P. Anderson
Key Findings For Data Through July 12th
According to the CDC, 101 children age 0 to 14 have died from influenza, while 31 children have died from COVID-19.
No evidence exists to support the theory that children pose a threat to educational professionals in a school or classroom setting, but there is a great deal of evidence to support the safety of in-person education.
According to the CDC, 131,332 Americans have died from pneumonia and 121,374 from COVID-19 as of July 11th, 2020.
Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.
The CDC has instructed hospitals, medical examiners, coroners and physicians to collect and report COVID-19 data by significantly different standards than all other infectious diseases and causes of death.
These new and unnecessary guidelines were instituted by the CDC in private, and without open discussion among qualified professionals that are free from conflicts of interest.
These new and unnecessary guidelines were additionally instituted despite the existence of effective rules for data collection and reporting, successfully used by all hospitals, medical examiners, coroners, and physicians for more than 17 years.
As a result, elected officials have enacted many questionable policies that have injured our country’s economy, our country’s educational system, our country’s mental and emotional health, and the American citizen’s personal expression of Constitutionally-protected rights to participate in our own governance.
This paper will present significant evidence to support the position that if the CDC simply employed their 2003 industry standard for data collection and reporting, which has been successfully used nationwide for 17 years; the total fatalities attributed to COVID-19 would be reduced by an estimated 90.2%, and questions would be non-existent regarding schools reopening and whether or not Americans should be allowed to work.
Thanks to Journeyman Pictures YT Channel, we have here 6 in depth interviews with health professionals including MDs. If you’re already up to speed you may want to go straight to no 6 and the two Doctors who got quickly pulled from publication following their discussion of the anomalies with testing, treatment and other things around the covid-19 virus. These are the issues mainstream (lamestream) should be speaking about but are they? Of course not. They are the long arm of the corporatocracy. They wouldn’t speak out of turn. Listen to the health professionals speak. I prefer not to ignore these voices that are bravely swimming upstream. Listen also to the much censored Dr Judy Mikovits who also has much truth to offer that mainstream will never tell you. EWR
Episode 1: Dealing with Coronavirus, a fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. Watch previous episodes of Perspectives on the Pandemic here:
We cannot imagine how mass surveillance is about to change the lives of everyone in the developed world. This video is an eye opener to help visualize the future and how to protect ourselves from the most invasive technologies ever created and used against society. Additional information and resources at: freedomtaker.com takebackyourpower.net https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MfiN…https://bc-freedom.com/2017/03/12/for… If you have any links to useful resources on mass surveillance and Smart Meters send them and I will post them after verifying. Go to About / messages on this page.
The data, when properly analyzed, using the CDC’s own study protocol, show a strong, statistically significant relationship between the timing of the first MMR vaccine and autism, specifically in African American males. In addition, a relationship also exists in the timing of the MMR vaccine and those individuals who were diagnosed with autism without mental retardation.
These relationships call into question the conclusion of the original Destefano et al. 2004 paper which dismissed a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism.
Re-analysis of CDC Data Suggests Need for Further Investigation on MMR Vaccine and Autism, according to Article in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
Tucson, Ariz. As early as 2001, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had data showing an increased rate of autism diagnoses in black male schoolchildren in Atlanta who received their first measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination before 36 months of age, compared with those who received it later, writes Brian Hooker, Ph.D., in the winter issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. The relationship loses its statistical significance if the analysis is restricted to children with a Georgia birth certificate, which decreases the sample size by about 40 percent.
Dr. Hooker reanalyzed the same data set, using the same methodology of conditional logistic regression. Children lacking a Georgia birth certificate were not excluded; race was ascertained from school records. Dr. Hooker noted that school data had this information on all children.
The rate of autism diagnoses has increased alarmingly in the U.S., and is about 25 percent higher in black children, Dr. Hooker observes. Boys are far more likely than girls to receive this diagnosis.
The original publication concerning the data downplayed the association, and no follow-up was conducted. Dr. Hooker’s interest was sparked, he reports, by communication with a CDC whistleblower, a senior scientist, who had retained some of the original analyses.
Dr. Hooker noted that the CDC deviated from its original data analysis plan, possibly because of unwanted results.
By stratifying data for African-American males by birth year, Dr. Hooker also found a statistically significant higher risk of an autism diagnosis in children who had received the first MMR vaccine 1 year earlier, only in children born in 1990 or later. Thimerosal exposure increased in the early 1990s, and it was not removed from most pediatric vaccines until 2001-2004. Dr. Hooker suggests the possibility that there may be some interaction between increased mercury exposure and early MMR vaccination. Further study would be needed to explore this possibility.
Dr. Hooker concludes that failure to follow-up on these observations represents a huge lost opportunity to understand possible reasons for the enormous increase in this devastating neurological disability.
Brian HookerMy paper was published recently: http://www.jpands.org/vol23no4/hooker.pdf. It was originally retracted from the journal Translational Neurodegeneration in 2014 based on false allegations of an unreported conflict of interest. The original retraction provided no true scientific rationale to remove my paper.
Facial recognition street lights are designed to be covert
ST Engineering has even gone so far as to rename it’s covert facial recognition program: ST Countenance.
ST Countenance identifies people from a distance, without being intrusive. Covert and scalable, the system has the capability to be integrated with CCTV systems, reducing awareness that it is in operation.
RALEIGH, North Carolina (WTVD) — You could be just about anywhere and data on your cell phone can be scooped up by law enforcement without your ever knowing. It happens all the time. The device that makes it possible is called a “cell site simulator.” That’s the generic name; Stingray is the most common brand name. Initially developed for military use, Stingrays have made their way into local police and sheriff’s departments around the country. Months ago, the I-Team sent open records requests to every law enforcement agency in our viewing area and learned that three agencies close to home have been using cell site simulators: the Wake County Sheriff’s Department, Durham Police Department, and Raleigh Police Department. A spokesperson for RPD told the I-Team they stopped using theirs when the software needed to be upgraded. The ACLU’s Mike Meno has been watching Stingrays spread into local law enforcement for years. “Like a lot of militarized technology and surveillance technology, this is something that was developed overseas and it was developed for one use, but then it comes back home and is used against our own citizens. It’s used here in the States. And the government will say, ‘We need to keep this confidential,’ but we have constitutional rights. We’re supposed to have checks and balances,” he said. http://abc11.com/1968769/
“It is astounding that no−one has done any research on the effects of sub−lethal doses of 1080 episodic exposures on developing human and non−human brains, given the fact, that 1080 is a known brain or central nervous system toxin!” Dr Peter Scanlon
The article from mainstream in 2009 mentioned in the headline, rolls out the usual statements of ‘the benefits outweigh the risks’ or ‘there’s little evidence 1080 could harm pregnant women’, without producing a shred of data to prove these claims to the public. That could be because there really aren’t any according to the late Dr Peter Scanlon who asked the pertinent questions on 1080 research, or rather the lack thereof, quote:
“Where are the cancer causing or carcinogenicity studies? … there aren’t any;
Where are the reproductive studies, particularly focusing on female eggs? … there aren’t any;
Where are the developmental studies, early exposure to brain, immune system? … there aren’t any;
Where are the long term chronic exposure studies looking at mitochondrial DNA content and mutation rates? there aren’t any.
There’s a lot of doubts about this substance, it’s dangerous.”
Hear Dr Scanlon speak on the need for regulatory bodies to look at those age groups that are most vulnerable to chemical environmental exposure which can affect them in those growing periods. The periods he says when there are critical windows of much harm being done in the womb, foetuses, embryos, newborns and how exposure here in this early time of life, can lead to great harm & susceptibility to disease years or decades later. Watch the GrafBoys’ video below. Dr Scanlon speaks in the first half of the video.
So the midwives’ precautionary warnings to their patients were well founded.
Further read Dr Scanlon’s letter of submission cautioning about the potential risks from 1080 to the unborn (my emphases added) and also the risks to food & water:
Dr Peter Scanlon,
2 Bremworth Ave,
Dear Select Committee members,
I would suggest that you request scientifically referenced answers to some important questions in relation to the human safety of aerial 1080 (or sodium monofluoracetate/SMFA) drops in New Zealand or invoke the precautionary principle until such information is provided. With respect to potential human health risks the ERMA process was inadequate and often based on outdated and simplistic 19th and mid− 20th century level science involving animal studies that will not predict human risk, particularly in the most vulnerable populations. Any 19th or earlier century scientist could tell you what dose of 1080 would likely kill or be acutely toxic to human or non− human creatures. However no one can tell me or you for that matter, what sub−lethal dose will not have long−term negative health effects on the developing brain, immune, dental, endocrine and reproductive systems in embryos, newborns and young children using late 20th and early 21st century methods to access harm, especially changes to gene expression that may lead to disease later in life.
Early developmental exposures may lead to life−long problems and some may be analogous to the “leaky home” phenomena, where problems only manifest with time, hence long−term developmental studies are needed to exclude this possibility. I alerted ERMA of the 2007 International Conference on Fetal Programming and Developmental Toxicity which produced a very important statement (The Faroes Statement) for regulatory bodies to incorporate specific testing for early life environmental chemical exposures for risk assessment which was ignored. Could you please provide an impartial answer to a question posed by Independent MP Gordon Copeland in 2008 ” Does 1080 pose a risk to the health of unborn children?”
A concerned Māori woman contacted me and presented to the Waitangi Tribunal evidence for the Whanganui Inquiry last year her concerns that 1080 may have been implicated in causing a cluster of miscarriages, stillbirths and congenital malformations to the children of pregnant Māori women following aerial drops and raised the question of bowel cancer in some adult Māori being possibly linked to environmental 1080 exposures through contaminated food and water sources.
The current scientific gaps which the ERMA 2007 reassessment failed to address and assumptions based on outdated or poorly studied science for human risk considerations cannot exclude the possibility of 1080 having such adverse health effects in Whanganui or other NZ rural communities. The current medical system cannot easily investigate such concerns. In following an ERMA directive, recent NZ studies have found maximal levels of 1080 in puha & watercress to contain, respectively 15 and 63 parts per billion, and on the basis of these figures it has been calculated that a 70kg person would have to eat 9.3 tonnes of affected puha & 22 tonnes of affected watercress to have a 50% chance of dying from 1080 poisoning. Sadly that gives absolutely no safety reassurances for the many pregnant women or those with chronic medical conditions such as kidney, heart or liver disease, who enjoy such kai, or the common practice of Maori parents who mix mashed puha or watercress with pumpkin or kumara for the feeding of their infants. Non−toxic, low dose 1080 will not pose a risk for healthy adults but the current environmental food & water risks are in the ballpark levels that could especially harm our youngest & most vulnerable children. What 1080 amount will not affect their growing bodies, especially their developing brains? What level may cause a miscarriage? It is astounding that no−one has done any research on the effects of sub−lethal doses of 1080 episodic exposures on developing human and non−human brains, given the fact, that 1080 is a known brain or central nervous system toxin! And the brain function is intimately connected with immune and endocrine function. One Pirongia mother has raised this issue of developmental delay and other health issues in her children from possible low level water contamination during pregnancy in a well written ERMA submission. The studies for which the Ministry of Health based their provisional maximal acceptable levels of 1080 for drinking water ( 3.5 parts per billion) did not include neurotoxicity data, nor does Natalia Forunda’s University of Otago’s 2007 PhD
recommended level of 0.6 ( zero point six) parts per billion. I believe if developmental data, including fetal & young infant brain data were included, given the extreme vulnerability of this age group, that a much lower Maximal Acceptable Value for drinking water would be mandated. The limits of reported testing for 1080 is 0.1 ( zero point one) part per billion, so if one looked at the most vulnerable human groups, unborn and young children, levels under this, which the current test would record as zero, could still pose a human health risk. No aerial drops should occur near drinking water until this risk has been excluded and long−term neuro−developmental (i.e. behavior & brain function), immune, metabolic and reproductive outcomes for early life exposures have been scientifically accessed.
The finding of naturally occurring levels of SMFA being present in drinking tea at higher levels than the provisional maximal acceptable values for potable water, hence implying safety, is irrelevant for early unborn exposures. Some recent studies have linked tea− consumption during pregnancy to increased risks of brain tumours, leukaemia, dental fluorosis in the child as well as an increased risk of pre−eclampsia in the mother. Laboratory eel studies have shown 1080 levels of 17.4 parts per billion for those eels that consumed contaminated possum muscle and 30.6 parts per billion that ate contaminated possum gut. 1080 is slowly metabolized in eels. Are eels contaminating the food chain?
Will NIWA provide 1080 contaminant monitoring for local consumers of 1080 levels in eels after aerial drops and also measure other possible contaminants such as heavy metals, pesticide residues and toxins in them, that may have negative additive human health effects?
The ERMA scientific advisors decided that no studies were needed to be done to see if 1080 causes cancer on the basis that 1080 did not cause DNA mutations using traditional types of screening tests which are now being questioned in the cancer literature for their usefulness in predicting cancer risk given the rapid advances in the past few years in studying non−mutagenic causes of cancer. For instance, one of the energy−producing enzymes that 1080 inactivates, aconitase, has recently be found to have a role in regulating and protecting mitochondrial DNA from mutating. 1080 affects the sausage shaped cellular structures called mitochondria. Human cells contain 2 sources of DNA, namely nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. The possible effect of 1080 causing mitochondrial DNA mutations has simply not been accessed. Another enzyme that 1080 interferes with also has been linked with a certain type of cancer. Also, sub−lethal effects of 1080 impairing energy production needs to researched as defects in mitochondrial functioning has been recently found to play an important role in the initiation and/or progression of various types of cancer, including colorectal cancer Having recently met the daughter of one of the early 1080 aerial operation users and discovered her father died ” too early” with Bowel Cancer− the lack of any carcinogenicity studies in light of recent developments is simply inexcusable. Furthermore, damage to mitochondrial DNA has recently been shown to be involved in causing common diseases besides cancer such as heart disease, obesity & degenerative brain disorders, including dementia. Long−term studies on those working with this chemical or any individual with chronic medical conditions such as kidney impairment, diabetes, liver disease or heart disease that consumes possible 1080 contaminated foods should be accessed for progressive mitochondrial toxicity and for effects on mitochondrial DNA.
The 1080 chronic intoxication study of an occupationally exposed rabbiter −exposed over 10 years, was published in the NZ Medical Journal in 1977, and was ignored by ERMA mainly because the Christchurch doctors who trustingly sent a urine specimen to a certain Forest Research Institute scientist to measure the 1080 contained in it, who gave them a 1080 measurement in writing, later denied that he had in fact measured 1080. The more recent Sept 2009 NZ Medical Journal research on 1080 assessment of occupational exposures by Beasley and colleagues failed to even acknowledge or learn from this former paper yet they did admit how little they know about 1080 interactions with the human body. It was the similar structural toxicity appearances in the liver and kidney cells from the rabbiter’s specimen’s to morphological or structural states in 1080 experimental animals that lead Parkin and colleagues, to consider 1080 as the most likely cause of toxicity. They used electron microscopy performed on kidney biopsies taken from the rabbiter which showed changes that most likely represented degenerating mitochondria, hence the need to look for evidence of mitochondrial pathology such as tissue biopsies, or look for changes in mitochondrial DNA levels using techniques as have been used for monitoring HIV drug−induced mitochondrial toxicity, or check for mitochondrial DNA mutations and not just focus on 1080 level measurements. The reason New Zealand Medical Officers of Health report no concerns with 1080 is that they have failed to do the appropriate diagnostic investigations just mentioned, and the following adage applies to them−”If you don’t know what to look for, then you probably won’t find it”. 30 yrs later we still have no decent chronic toxicity human data or really understand the human kinetics of this chemical in healthy adults, let alone those with any concurrent chronic illnesses and most significantly Beasley and colleagues failed to do any measures of mitochondrial toxicity from this mitochondrial interfering toxin, hence we are none the wiser about its safety.
Given the “scientific ignorance” of those who proclaim human safety when doing aerial drops near water supplies in the West Coast, Whanganui, Coromandel, Levin, Hutt Valley and other regions of New Zealand and the real lack of safety data, especially for NZ’s most vulnerable human populations, our unborn, young and old and those with chronic illnesses, one really must question whether it is ethical to use such a poorly studied chemical from a human health risk perspective. The native flora and fauna are replaceable. TB ridden cows are replaceable but the future health of our children and our most vulnerable is not.
” I nga wa o mua” − The past informs the present.
” Foresight should be sought as hindsight is dearly bought”
Dr Peter Scanlon (Accident & Medical Practitioner)
M.B.ChB.. B.H B., P.G.DipCEM.. B.Sc.. F. AMPA
Here is an article from 2007, and the drops continue, in spite of the clear scientific evidence it is not beneficial to our ecosystem.
“We have audited Department of Conservation scientific research and produced an 88-page monograph reviewing more than 100 scientific papers.
The results are startling and belie most of the department’s claims.
First, there is no credible scientific evidence showing that any species of native bird benefits from the dropping of tonnes of 1080 into our forest ecosystems
Second, considerable evidence exists that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm”Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe
Scientists, Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe: “Poison facts belie the claims”
There is now a familiar litany of scientifically insupportable claims about what great things aerial 1080, a universal poison, is doing for our forest ecosystems. The people of New Zealand have a right to know the truth about what the scientific evidence shows.
We have audited Department of Conservation scientific research and produced an 88-page monograph reviewing more than 100 scientific papers.
The results are startling and belie most of the department’s claims.
First, there is no credible scientific evidence showing that any species of native bird benefits from the dropping of tonnes of 1080 into our forest ecosystems, as claimed by the department and Kevin Hackwell. There is certainly no evidence of net ecosystem benefit.
We have repeatedly challenged DoC and Mr Hackwell, a representative of the Forest and Bird Society, to come forward with the hard scientific evidence for their “dead forest” claims. They have not.
Second, considerable evidence exists that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm, as one would expect, given that 1080 is toxic to all animals. It kills large numbers of native species of birds, invertebrates and bats.
Moreover, most native species are completely unstudied. In addition considerable evidence shows there are chronic and sublethal effects to vertebrate endocrine and reproductive systems, possibly including those of humans.
Considerable evidence demonstrates that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm. Photos: Upper (Tomtit in hand) by Clyde Graf Lower (multiple dead birds) by Jim Hilton:
Dead birds found over a few acres, after 270,000 hectare aerial 1080 poison drop, Kahurangi National Park, 2014. This was the first year of DoC’s “Battle for our Birds” drops.
Third, DoC claims that one can drop food laced with 1080, a universal poison (World Health Organisation classification “1A extremely hazardous”) indiscriminately into a semi-tropical forest ecosystem and only negatively affect one or two target “pest” species. That is counterintuitive and scientifically improbable.
Fourth, as far as we can determine no other country in the world is doing (or has ever done) anything remotely similar – mass poisoning of a semi-tropical ecosystem on the scale that the department is now doing to ours.
Fifth, and perhaps most disturbing, is that what the department-sponsored research shows has been habitually misrepresented – entirely unjustifiable assertions regarding 1080’s benefits and lack of harm.
Statements like those of Mr Hackwell that the forests will be “dead” without poisoning them with 1080, and from John McLennan (Landcare Research) and Al Morrison (then Director General of DoC) that 1080 is existentially necessary to Kiwis is pure demagoguery and scientific nonsense.
What is at risk by continuation of this extraordinary practice – and it is unique in the world – is the ecological integrity of our forest ecosystems, our reputation as an environmentally sane and responsible country, and our existence as a society in which reason and rationality can triumph over bureaucratic prerogative and budgetary gain.
Since Galileo Galilee first discovered the moons of Jupiter in the 17th century, the way to resolve this kind of disagreement has been to do the experiment and examine the evidence, and that is precisely what we urge everyone to do.
Don’t believe DoC. Don’t believe Mr Hackwell. Don’t believe us – believe the evidence. To that end we will provide a copy of our report and the source scientific research papers to all who would like to read them.
* Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe are retired scientists.
See also our 1080 pagesfor info & links, &/or search ‘categories’ drop down box for further related articles (at left of any page).
Share & help spread the word on all the untruths we have been told,
Please Note re commenting:
Your comments are welcome, however if you are a fan of 1080 & wish to highlight DoC’s data then mainstream media is the place to go. This site is reserved for providing independent research & unfortunately I do not have the time to monitor long discussions. As well, I decline to publish information that is freely available on DoC’s own website. People can go there and peruse that for themselves.