Admission by Health New Zealand that they recommend the COVID vaccines and flatly refuse to look at their own data or make their own data public for researchers to review.
I read your posts often, and appreciate your work.
I'm wondering if you have any data/info about side effects for the JNJ covid injection and its booster, which was available for a short time. My understanding is that It wasn't mrna based.
By now they must've sustained brain damage with all their 'boosters':
Early Onset Dementia
Turbo Alzheimers'
You know how when the Captain of a ship starts making decisions that unduly put the ship and it's crew and passengers in harms way and the second in command is legally obliged to remove the Captain from service?
Thank you Steve for being on their case. These frauds need to be brought to light. Long story short, I'll never get another vaccine ever. Like a good boy I reported every five years for my shingles shot, without being prompted by anyone. Those days are over. I also never got the so called Covid shot. It started with healthy scepticism to a full blown hell no!
Let's look at some key facts surrounding Barry Young's whistleblowing actions. The individuals to whom Barry provided the data—senior officials at New Zealand's Ministry of Health—did not appear to follow the correct processes when alerted to an extremely serious concern about public health risks from the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Under the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022 (PDA), such alerts should trigger an internal investigation or escalation, yet Young's reports received no meaningful action or follow-up. This raises questions about accountability in government health agencies.
Barry undoubtedly had the right to act as a whistleblower. As a data analyst at Health New Zealand (Te Whatu Ora), he identified patterns in vaccine safety data that, in his view, indicated alarmingly high post-vaccination death rates—particularly more deaths in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated. His supporters argue this was a moral and legal imperative under the PDA, which protects disclosures of "serious wrongdoing" like risks to public safety, provided they are made in good faith to appropriate authorities.
Skepticism on COVID-19 Causation and Testing
A core belief here is that not a single person died from the so-called COVID-19 virus itself; instead, excess deaths were solely caused by government policies, including lockdowns, mandates, and the vaccine program. This perspective aligns with researchers like Mark Bailey, MB ChB, PGDipMSM, MHealSc—a microbiologist, medical industry expert, and health researcher with two decades in medical practice and clinical trials. Bailey's work, including his essay "A Farewell to Virology" (available at drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert), challenges the foundational science of virology, arguing that viruses have not been properly isolated and that the pandemic narrative lacked empirical evidence. Until a qualified expert engages Bailey in a live interview and substantively proves him wrong, this view holds that authorities lied about everything: there was no robust science behind the measures, only fear-driven policies.
Determining if someone has "COVID-19" relies on PCR tests, which many critics deem unreliable. Reports, such as those highlighted on GB News, suggest up to 86% false positives due to high cycle thresholds amplifying non-specific genetic material. The remaining positives, skeptics argue, merely detect RNA fragments that match what authorities call a virus—but which could be innocuous cell debris incapable of causing illness. In this framework, thousands of excess deaths annually post-vaccination stem not from any virus, but solely from government policies like rushed rollouts and suppression of dissent.
Vaccine Side Effects and Data Implications
In New Zealand alone, there are around 1,000 reported cases of heart damage linked to the vaccines, but with underreporting estimated at 95%, this extrapolates to approximately 20,000 instances of myocarditis or pericarditis. Pfizer's own documentation lists over eight and a half pages of potential side effects, while thousands of peer-reviewed studies—along with FDA analyses—highlight risks ranging from cardiovascular issues to neurological disorders. Barry Young's leaked, anonymized data from late 2023 purportedly showed these patterns, with disproportionate deaths in the vaccinated cohort, reinforcing claims that the program's harms outweighed any benefits.
Barry Young's Legal Battle Under the PDA
Barry Young, a former data analyst at New Zealand's Health New Zealand (Te Whatu Ora), leaked what he described as anonymized COVID-19 vaccine safety data in late 2023, claiming it showed alarmingly high death rates post-vaccination. He was arrested and charged under the Crimes Act 1961 for unauthorized disclosure of official information, facing potential imprisonment. Young and his supporters maintain that his actions constituted a protected disclosure under New Zealand's whistleblower legislation, specifically the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022 (PDA). However, as of December 10, 2025, the question of compliance remains unresolved, pending a court ruling scheduled for the following day.
The PDA, which replaced the 2000 Act, encourages disclosures of "serious wrongdoing" (e.g., risks to public health or safety) by protecting employees from retaliation, provided they follow specified procedures. A disclosure qualifies as "protected" if the discloser has reasonable grounds to believe it reveals serious wrongdoing, it is made to an appropriate authority (e.g., employer, supervisor, or regulator) in good faith, and the discloser reasonably believes no adequate internal investigation will occur.
Young's compliance claims include internal reporting: he first raised concerns with a senior Ministry of Health official in compliance with PDA procedures, but received no action or investigation. On November 30, 2023, he made a documented protected disclosure under the PDA, alleging systemic risks from the vaccine rollout. After internal channels failed, he shared the data publicly (via media and online), arguing it met PDA criteria for external disclosure to prevent harm.
Young's legal team has filed a personal grievance claim in the Employment Relations Authority, asserting retaliation (e.g., job loss and charges) violated PDA protections, and seeking to void related orders under section 23 of the Act. Supporters, including unions like the Number 8 Workers Union, describe his actions as "by the book."
The Ongoing Dispute and Implications
Prosecutors argue Young's release breached privacy (initially claiming 12,000 affected individuals, later reduced to six via public records) and lacked "reasonable grounds" for PDA protection, as he is not a medical expert. Critics, including legal analyses, contend this interpretation undermines the PDA's intent to protect non-experts spotting wrongdoing. If the court denies protected status, Young faces trial; if granted, charges may collapse.
A voir dire hearing in Wellington District Court on December 11, 2025, will directly assess whether Young had "reasonable grounds" under the PDA, potentially deciding his whistleblower status. This could set a precedent for whistleblower protections in New Zealand, especially for public health data disclosures.
In summary, Young asserts full compliance, supported by evidence of internal steps and PDA invocation, but authorities dispute it. The final determination rests with the court tomorrow. Regardless of the outcome, Young's case highlights tensions between transparency, public health policy, and institutional accountability—echoing broader debates on vaccine safety and the pandemic response.
'DEADLY MEDICINES AND ORGANISED CRIME: HOW BIG PHARMA HAS CORRUPTED HEALTHCARE'
"The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don't sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs. Blatant lies that—in all the cases I have studied—have continued after the statements were proven wrong."
Peter Gøtzsche, co-founder of Cochrane and former director of the Nordic Cochrane Centre
Barry has been in district court today, resumes tomorrow at 10.00am. Judge trying to decide if Barry is covered by the nz whistleblower act. He needs a lot of spiritual help from those who are able to send his way who are unable to attend in person. They have banned actual attendance inside the court but people are able to stand outside on the pavement. Doesn’t appear to be transparent to me.
Has Big Pharma captured them too?
I read your posts often, and appreciate your work.
I'm wondering if you have any data/info about side effects for the JNJ covid injection and its booster, which was available for a short time. My understanding is that It wasn't mrna based.
This is the OIA that Health NZ replied to with a dataset that Scoops McGoo examined. It outlined the harm illustrated by their own data.
https://x.com/aim2bgreat/status/1760459929075495293?s=46&t=LbFLWnOaun9y7jy6iKQwuA
The original OIA: https://fyi.org.nz/request/25021-number-of-covid19-vax-deaths-by-age-band-location-and-month
Trouble is they are still pushing the jab big time here in NZ. 👿
The people responsible are criminally insane. They need to be put away.
But everyone knows that jabs are "safe and effective." Righttttttttttt
By now they must've sustained brain damage with all their 'boosters':
Early Onset Dementia
Turbo Alzheimers'
You know how when the Captain of a ship starts making decisions that unduly put the ship and it's crew and passengers in harms way and the second in command is legally obliged to remove the Captain from service?
Yeah, we're at that point in this story.
Thank you Steve for being on their case. These frauds need to be brought to light. Long story short, I'll never get another vaccine ever. Like a good boy I reported every five years for my shingles shot, without being prompted by anyone. Those days are over. I also never got the so called Covid shot. It started with healthy scepticism to a full blown hell no!
Sounds just like our own FDA CDC refusing to look at the VARES data
Time for a Maori war dance and uprising to free their land from the white colonizers.
Criminals all.
Support BARRY YOUNG!
This criminal negligence caused death and maiming.
Will the head of the snake, the midsection, or even the tail, see justice?
Examining Barry Young's Case and Broader Concerns
Let's look at some key facts surrounding Barry Young's whistleblowing actions. The individuals to whom Barry provided the data—senior officials at New Zealand's Ministry of Health—did not appear to follow the correct processes when alerted to an extremely serious concern about public health risks from the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Under the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022 (PDA), such alerts should trigger an internal investigation or escalation, yet Young's reports received no meaningful action or follow-up. This raises questions about accountability in government health agencies.
Barry undoubtedly had the right to act as a whistleblower. As a data analyst at Health New Zealand (Te Whatu Ora), he identified patterns in vaccine safety data that, in his view, indicated alarmingly high post-vaccination death rates—particularly more deaths in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated. His supporters argue this was a moral and legal imperative under the PDA, which protects disclosures of "serious wrongdoing" like risks to public safety, provided they are made in good faith to appropriate authorities.
Skepticism on COVID-19 Causation and Testing
A core belief here is that not a single person died from the so-called COVID-19 virus itself; instead, excess deaths were solely caused by government policies, including lockdowns, mandates, and the vaccine program. This perspective aligns with researchers like Mark Bailey, MB ChB, PGDipMSM, MHealSc—a microbiologist, medical industry expert, and health researcher with two decades in medical practice and clinical trials. Bailey's work, including his essay "A Farewell to Virology" (available at drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert), challenges the foundational science of virology, arguing that viruses have not been properly isolated and that the pandemic narrative lacked empirical evidence. Until a qualified expert engages Bailey in a live interview and substantively proves him wrong, this view holds that authorities lied about everything: there was no robust science behind the measures, only fear-driven policies.
Determining if someone has "COVID-19" relies on PCR tests, which many critics deem unreliable. Reports, such as those highlighted on GB News, suggest up to 86% false positives due to high cycle thresholds amplifying non-specific genetic material. The remaining positives, skeptics argue, merely detect RNA fragments that match what authorities call a virus—but which could be innocuous cell debris incapable of causing illness. In this framework, thousands of excess deaths annually post-vaccination stem not from any virus, but solely from government policies like rushed rollouts and suppression of dissent.
Vaccine Side Effects and Data Implications
In New Zealand alone, there are around 1,000 reported cases of heart damage linked to the vaccines, but with underreporting estimated at 95%, this extrapolates to approximately 20,000 instances of myocarditis or pericarditis. Pfizer's own documentation lists over eight and a half pages of potential side effects, while thousands of peer-reviewed studies—along with FDA analyses—highlight risks ranging from cardiovascular issues to neurological disorders. Barry Young's leaked, anonymized data from late 2023 purportedly showed these patterns, with disproportionate deaths in the vaccinated cohort, reinforcing claims that the program's harms outweighed any benefits.
Barry Young's Legal Battle Under the PDA
Barry Young, a former data analyst at New Zealand's Health New Zealand (Te Whatu Ora), leaked what he described as anonymized COVID-19 vaccine safety data in late 2023, claiming it showed alarmingly high death rates post-vaccination. He was arrested and charged under the Crimes Act 1961 for unauthorized disclosure of official information, facing potential imprisonment. Young and his supporters maintain that his actions constituted a protected disclosure under New Zealand's whistleblower legislation, specifically the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022 (PDA). However, as of December 10, 2025, the question of compliance remains unresolved, pending a court ruling scheduled for the following day.
The PDA, which replaced the 2000 Act, encourages disclosures of "serious wrongdoing" (e.g., risks to public health or safety) by protecting employees from retaliation, provided they follow specified procedures. A disclosure qualifies as "protected" if the discloser has reasonable grounds to believe it reveals serious wrongdoing, it is made to an appropriate authority (e.g., employer, supervisor, or regulator) in good faith, and the discloser reasonably believes no adequate internal investigation will occur.
Young's compliance claims include internal reporting: he first raised concerns with a senior Ministry of Health official in compliance with PDA procedures, but received no action or investigation. On November 30, 2023, he made a documented protected disclosure under the PDA, alleging systemic risks from the vaccine rollout. After internal channels failed, he shared the data publicly (via media and online), arguing it met PDA criteria for external disclosure to prevent harm.
Young's legal team has filed a personal grievance claim in the Employment Relations Authority, asserting retaliation (e.g., job loss and charges) violated PDA protections, and seeking to void related orders under section 23 of the Act. Supporters, including unions like the Number 8 Workers Union, describe his actions as "by the book."
The Ongoing Dispute and Implications
Prosecutors argue Young's release breached privacy (initially claiming 12,000 affected individuals, later reduced to six via public records) and lacked "reasonable grounds" for PDA protection, as he is not a medical expert. Critics, including legal analyses, contend this interpretation undermines the PDA's intent to protect non-experts spotting wrongdoing. If the court denies protected status, Young faces trial; if granted, charges may collapse.
A voir dire hearing in Wellington District Court on December 11, 2025, will directly assess whether Young had "reasonable grounds" under the PDA, potentially deciding his whistleblower status. This could set a precedent for whistleblower protections in New Zealand, especially for public health data disclosures.
In summary, Young asserts full compliance, supported by evidence of internal steps and PDA invocation, but authorities dispute it. The final determination rests with the court tomorrow. Regardless of the outcome, Young's case highlights tensions between transparency, public health policy, and institutional accountability—echoing broader debates on vaccine safety and the pandemic response.
As Peter Gotzsche said in his book:
'DEADLY MEDICINES AND ORGANISED CRIME: HOW BIG PHARMA HAS CORRUPTED HEALTHCARE'
"The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don't sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs. Blatant lies that—in all the cases I have studied—have continued after the statements were proven wrong."
Peter Gøtzsche, co-founder of Cochrane and former director of the Nordic Cochrane Centre
Regarding Barry Young. It is the duty of a people who know that their government is in the state of tyranny, must act to protect the nation.
These clowns dressed as politicians, our paid by pharmaceutical.
Barry Young deserves a medal. Thank you Barry Young
Barry has been in district court today, resumes tomorrow at 10.00am. Judge trying to decide if Barry is covered by the nz whistleblower act. He needs a lot of spiritual help from those who are able to send his way who are unable to attend in person. They have banned actual attendance inside the court but people are able to stand outside on the pavement. Doesn’t appear to be transparent to me.