---

The New Zealand (“NZ”) Blood Service at present does not separate blood or blood products depending on vaccination status and many people, quite rightly, have concerns about potentially receiving blood from vaccinated donors.  The right to choose what goes into our bodies has come to a head in the case of four-month-old baby Will.

Sam and Cole Savage-Reeves want to ensure their baby, Will, who needs open heart surgery has unvaccinated blood during the operation. But shockingly, the surgeon and NZ Blood Service won’t allow them the human right of the freedom to choose or refuse what goes in their baby’s body.

The clip above is taken from a 23-minute video ‘Freedom to Choose Clean Blood’ which you can watch on Rumble HERE.

There are many potential reasons for concern about blood from vaccinated people because there are many unknowns, said New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (“NZDSOS”).  NZ Blood has said that there is no evidence that blood from vaccinated individuals is harmful.  It is very important to understand that an “absence of evidence” is not the same as “evidence of absence.”  NZ Blood can say there is “no evidence” but is that because no one has looked?

The onus must be on NZ Blood, and the doctors prescribing and administering blood and blood products, to provide the evidence that the blood is safe – both short and long-term.

As lawyer Sue Grey said on her way into court yesterday: “This family want the best for their baby … This family actually want better for the baby than what the government is offering … They want safe blood for their baby.  They don’t want their baby to be contaminated with something that could cause more harm than the poor baby is already facing.”  You can watch a detailed brief from Grey after the court case yesterday HERE.

Liz Gunn of FreeNZ Media spoke outside the courthouse: “Doctors must listen to what the parents want … This case is about Will’s life … it’s about the lives of your children and grandchildren.”

Liz spoke of the significance of baby Will’s case and what it means for New Zealand at the post-court statement this morning. pic.twitter.com/CMRaSQzAZa

— FreeNZ (@_FreeNZ) November 30, 2022

The clip in the tweet above was taken from a 17-minute press conference held outside the courthouse immediately after the court had concluded for the day.  You can watch the video on Rumble HERE.

Unfounded Prejudice Is Gripping the Nation, Misleading Government Publicity Is To Blame

By Dr. Guy Hatchard

I am not sure how much more I can add to the debate about the case of baby Will, except to say that the situation has turned nasty. Here are two sincere parents who have already been traumatised by the heart condition of their four-month-old which necessitates an operation. They would like unvaccinated blood to be used and they arranged for matching donors. 

But the surgeon and the NZ health system have refused this easy option. Instead, they decided to go for the jugular. They are seeking custody of the child to enforce the use of blood from the public blood bank. They are refusing to admit that studies finding the persistence of spike protein indicate any risk. An extreme position. It is of note, as we have previously written, that even pro-vaccine advocates overseas are admitting the existence of novel blood clots, (whilst arguing implausibly that their causes are unknown). 

For two years now, vaccine advocates have been asking for separation between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. Expressing a deep, yet unfounded, fear of the unvaccinated. Even seeking to avoid breathing the same air. This has been encouraged by government publicity. Now they want the unvaccinated to exclusively and compulsorily receive vaccinated blood transfusions. 

Both national dailies have decided to demonise the parents, abandoning all semblance of humane compassion. There can’t be any greater condemnation of the effect of vaccination. Apparently, it makes people angry and uncaring. 

At a time when the parents deserve understanding and support, all semblance of recognition of the provision of medical choice in the NZ Bill of Rights has been abandoned. Medical choice is off the table and it is open season for vicious attacks on the unvaccinated.

The uneducated hysteria involved is frankly frightening. Instead of listening to government-inspired rants, read the studies published in international journals. There is a gulf widening between government messaging and the content of Covid science journal publishing. mRNA vaccination poses definable and significant risks for health. These are not small. To people keeping up with the science, they are very concerning.

Baby Will has a heart condition. It is admitted by our government that heart inflammation – myopericarditis – is a risk of vaccination. It is admitted that some studies indicate the persistence of spike protein in the blood. So why on earth would the government insist there is no risk? This is further evidence of a bunker mentality and a hint of madness.

Concerns that NZ Blood Service Must Address

By NZDSOS

If there is no evidence that satisfactorily reassures potential recipients of the safety of the blood, then the precautionary principle should apply and blood from unvaccinated donors should be provided.  History is littered with examples of products and procedures that were initially thought to be safe that later turned out not to be.

Questions and Concerns to NZ Blood:

1. The Pfizer injection uses new technology and there are many unknowns with its use. The original clinical trial is ongoing until 2023 and the injection still only has provisional consent in NZ suggesting that Medsafe is not satisfied it has all the information it needs to grant full consent. This is the original consent. This is the renewal of consent.

2. The vaccine mRNA has been modified in several ways (use of pseudouridine in place of uridine, poly-A tail, is guanine-rich).  These modifications mean that the vaccine-induced spike protein is not the same (in amount, location, structure, duration of production or persistence) as the ‘naturally occurring’ spike protein from infection.  It is not clear how long the mRNA will persist or how long the vaccine-induced spike protein will persist, but both have been shown to remain in the body and blood far longer than the original blanket reassurances. It is possible that both these substances may be present in donated blood.

3. The Medsafe data sheet says “5.2 Pharmacokinetic properties Not applicable.” Does this mean that it is not clear or not important exactly what happens to the vaccine mRNA and lipid nanoparticles (or the resultant spike protein) once they are injected into the human body, with regards to biodistribution, metabolism and excretion?  It is not clear how NZ Blood can state: “Any COVID-19 vaccine in the blood is broken down soon after the injection.” ​​​​​​​  This is a flat-out lie if ‘soon’ is still defined as within 48 hours as originally suggested. 

4. The lipid nanoparticles are also a significant part of the vaccine and it has been demonstrated in animal studies that they are widely distributed in the body.  They can be highly inflammatory and, as their ingredients are still proprietary, it is not clear what short- and long-term effects they could induce. 

5. The spike protein has been shown to be toxic in its own right, with adverse effects on cells lining the blood vessels and cells in the heart muscle among others. A recipient of blood from a vaccinated donor could potentially be exposed to spike protein and it is absolutely possible that this may cause harm to these organs.  This study shows that the spike protein can persist in vaccinated individuals.

6. Spike protein can cause clotting both at a micro and macro level which could potentially be harmful.  Has it been proven that blood from vaccinated donors does not cause or contribute to abnormal clotting? What about the bizarre structures being found by funeral directors in the blood vessels of the suddenly dead following vaccination? 

7. Myocarditis is a recognised adverse effect of Pfizer Comirnaty vaccination, presumably due either to direct damage from the spike protein or possibly due to an autoimmune phenomenon.  Has it been demonstrated that there is ZERO risk of myocarditis from coming into contact with blood of vaccinated donors?  It is emerging that subclinical (i.e hidden) heart inflammation is thousands of times more common than is quoted by “experts”. Recent studies from Thailand and Switzerland (which suggest that every vaccinated person gets a degree of heart damage!) should force an immediate stop of the shots and examination of donated blood. Even CDC data shows a 140x increased risk of clinical myocarditis in teenage boys aged 12-15 in the week following their 2nd dose.  There has been another sudden death just last weekend of a 14-year-old Kings College boy, following myocarditis from the “vaccine”. Another 14-year-old Dunedin boy and a 13-year-old girl from Auckland, both active and sporty, have collapsed and died in the last several months. 

8. It is possible that mRNA is persistent in individuals for some weeks/months after vaccination which means that a person could be exposed to the components and/or products of the vaccine from the donated blood and any potential adverse effects they may cause.

9. What is the risk of autoimmunity?  Medsafe requested that Pfizer address this issue in condition 5 of the original provisional consent. Is it possible that blood from vaccinated donors contains odd or unusual proteins that may set up an autoimmune reaction in recipients?

10. There have been concerns raised about the manufacturing standards of the Pfizer product.  Has it actually been made to satisfactory standards?  This article and associated video detail a litany of problems with the manufacturing processes such that it appears impossible to say exactly what has been injected into people and what adverse effects may occur.  Receiving blood from someone who has been injected may be a lottery.  Many of these conscientious blood donors will be none the wiser as they were not informed of the many unknowns and uncertainties. 

According to the HDC Code of Rights New Zealanders should be respected when dealing with health professionals.  Their questions should be answered and their concerns taken seriously.

Read the full article HERE.

Doctors Are Not Trained in Vaccines

In the case of Baby Will, the surgeon told Liz Gunn that he didn’t believe there was any problem with the blood of vaccinated people and that’s why he was not allowing the surgery to go ahead according to the wishes of Will’s parents.  However, can the surgeon truly claim to know the biodistribution of vaccine contents or what Covid injections do to the human body unless he has done specific research on the subject?

In a recent interview with Children’s Health Defense, Dr. Russell Blaylock began his presentation on vaccine-induced spike proteins and neurodegeneration by saying:

“[The medical profession] really doesn’t understand this injection.  They don’t understand what it does to the neurological apparatus of the brain and spinal cord.”

And Canadian Dr. Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist, confirmed doctors’ lack of knowledge about vaccines in an interview with NZ’s Freedom TV, see video below.

“In Canada … specifically in Ontario … the average number of lectures that somebody who gets an MD, so that’s a medical doctor, so that’s somebody who would be training to become a physician … they average between 5 and 12 50-minute lectures [in immunology] in the first year of their program … within that, they might get 15 minutes of coverage on vaccines.  So, the reality is, the average physician has only the most superficial understanding,” Dr. Bridle said.

Click on the image below to watch the video on Odysee.