From Newsgroup: nz.general

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html

Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html

Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

So what on earth are you suggesting we do?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 2025-07-09, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html

Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

All created in a large part by the Covid-19 response. It is such a shame.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 11 Jul 2025 01:40:04 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-09, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html

Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

All created in a large part by the Covid-19 response. It is such a shame.

It has developed over the years, but the most significant developments
have been the Jenner vaccine for smallpox in 1796 - since then major
vaccines have been for polio and measles and Tetanus and Hepatitis
Rubella and many others - but more recently Covid and Shingles . For
more information see:

https://www.immunize.org/vaccines/vaccine-timeline/

Not all vaccines are for ailments as infectious as influenza or covid
and their variants.

The objections to the need for isolation prior to a specific vaccine
being available for Covid - and the experience with influenza -
particularly around 1918 to 1921 - led to medically assessed and
government imposed restrictions on movement. There were very few
objections as the need was seen to be great - the mis-information and dis-information campaigns were regrettably largely politically
motivated and funded - perhaps New Zealand was particularly affected
because our medical / political response had been so outstandingly
successful; the opposition was not on scientific or medical terms, but unreasoning desire to attack the then government for political
reasons. Sadly the "anti vaccination" stance taken by some far-right
zealots has led to many of those catching Covid more than once, and
for some resulted in "long Covid" infection; placing additional strain
on already stretched medical services.

Regrettably use of deliberately misleading internet-based political
messaging has increased. The use of carefully directed propaganda
using the services of Cambridge Analytica by the Trump organisation
before his first term - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal

Since then we have seen an increase in politically based "Social
Media" based campaigns - often linked to well financed organisations
based around the "political action groups" that get around disclosure
of politically based donations. Many of those that attended the
"protests" at parliament were ''useful idiots," but many also were
political activists keen to attack the government.

We are seeing just such campaigns continuing to try to blame current
problems on the previous government - the need the distraction from
mistakes such as the decimation of our construction industry, the
mistakes over the ferries, vaping, the move to contract public health
to private health firms, the priority given to tax cuts for landlords,
the profiteering by the dairy industry and supermarkets, the cutting
of many benefits and wages in real terms - including reducing the
minimum wage and benefits in real terms, lack of recruitment for
schools and hospitals, and not achieving promises for police
recruitment. All three government parties have Ministers with
connections to the Atlas Network, who run rings around poor CLuxon,
who has to run overseas where Foreign Affairs tell him all he has to
do is smile and shake hands . . . .

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 18:36:06 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On 11 Jul 2025 01:40:04 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-09, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html >>>
Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

All created in a large part by the Covid-19 response. It is such a shame.

It has developed over the years, but the most significant developments
have been the Jenner vaccine for smallpox in 1796 - since then major
vaccines have been for polio and measles and Tetanus and Hepatitis
Rubella and many others - but more recently Covid and Shingles . For
more information see:

https://www.immunize.org/vaccines/vaccine-timeline/

Not all vaccines are for ailments as infectious as influenza or covid
and their variants.

The objections to the need for isolation prior to a specific vaccine
being available for Covid - and the experience with influenza -
particularly around 1918 to 1921 - led to medically assessed and
government imposed restrictions on movement. There were very few
objections as the need was seen to be great - the mis-information and >dis-information campaigns were regrettably largely politically
motivated and funded - perhaps New Zealand was particularly affected
because our medical / political response had been so outstandingly >successful; the opposition was not on scientific or medical terms, but >unreasoning desire to attack the then government for political
reasons. Sadly the "anti vaccination" stance taken by some far-right
zealots has led to many of those catching Covid more than once, and
for some resulted in "long Covid" infection; placing additional strain
on already stretched medical services.

Regrettably use of deliberately misleading internet-based political
messaging has increased. The use of carefully directed propaganda
using the services of Cambridge Analytica by the Trump organisation
before his first term - see >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal

Since then we have seen an increase in politically based "Social
Media" based campaigns - often linked to well financed organisations
based around the "political action groups" that get around disclosure
of politically based donations. Many of those that attended the
"protests" at parliament were ''useful idiots," but many also were
political activists keen to attack the government.

We are seeing just such campaigns continuing to try to blame current
problems on the previous government - the need the distraction from
mistakes such as the decimation of our construction industry, the
mistakes over the ferries, vaping, the move to contract public health
to private health firms, the priority given to tax cuts for landlords,
the profiteering by the dairy industry and supermarkets, the cutting
of many benefits and wages in real terms - including reducing the
minimum wage and benefits in real terms, lack of recruitment for
schools and hospitals, and not achieving promises for police
recruitment. All three government parties have Ministers with
connections to the Atlas Network, who run rings around poor CLuxon,
who has to run overseas where Foreign Affairs tell him all he has to
do is smile and shake hands . . . .

Well Rich yet again you see a post about general effectiveness of past
vaccines as a validation of Labours response to Covid19.

In reality there is still no vaccine for Covid19 - no matter what
variant is considered. It is only big Pharma that claims there is in
fact a vaccine. I think most of us would accept that for Covid 19
there is no vaccine available in the traditional definition of
vaccines compared to polio in particular. What is available is a
medical intervention that allows a temporary boost to our immune
systems to deal with Covid19. There is no vaccine that stops the
spread of the disease as the polio vaccine did..

The rest of your post is dedicated to pro-Labour rhetoric, justifying
measures taken against a backdrop of previous pandemics where the
disease was far more serious in its ability to kill, combined with
vaccines that almost eliminated the illness as a threat to public
health.
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 20:08:18 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 18:36:06 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On 11 Jul 2025 01:40:04 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-09, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html >>>>
Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>> by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

All created in a large part by the Covid-19 response. It is such a shame.

It has developed over the years, but the most significant developments
have been the Jenner vaccine for smallpox in 1796 - since then major >>vaccines have been for polio and measles and Tetanus and Hepatitis
Rubella and many others - but more recently Covid and Shingles . For
more information see:

https://www.immunize.org/vaccines/vaccine-timeline/

Not all vaccines are for ailments as infectious as influenza or covid
and their variants.

The objections to the need for isolation prior to a specific vaccine
being available for Covid - and the experience with influenza - >>particularly around 1918 to 1921 - led to medically assessed and
government imposed restrictions on movement. There were very few
objections as the need was seen to be great - the mis-information and >>dis-information campaigns were regrettably largely politically
motivated and funded - perhaps New Zealand was particularly affected >>because our medical / political response had been so outstandingly >>successful; the opposition was not on scientific or medical terms, but >>unreasoning desire to attack the then government for political
reasons. Sadly the "anti vaccination" stance taken by some far-right >>zealots has led to many of those catching Covid more than once, and
for some resulted in "long Covid" infection; placing additional strain
on already stretched medical services.

Regrettably use of deliberately misleading internet-based political >>messaging has increased. The use of carefully directed propaganda
using the services of Cambridge Analytica by the Trump organisation
before his first term - see >>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal

Since then we have seen an increase in politically based "Social
Media" based campaigns - often linked to well financed organisations
based around the "political action groups" that get around disclosure
of politically based donations. Many of those that attended the
"protests" at parliament were ''useful idiots," but many also were >>political activists keen to attack the government.

We are seeing just such campaigns continuing to try to blame current >>problems on the previous government - the need the distraction from >>mistakes such as the decimation of our construction industry, the
mistakes over the ferries, vaping, the move to contract public health
to private health firms, the priority given to tax cuts for landlords,
the profiteering by the dairy industry and supermarkets, the cutting
of many benefits and wages in real terms - including reducing the
minimum wage and benefits in real terms, lack of recruitment for
schools and hospitals, and not achieving promises for police
recruitment. All three government parties have Ministers with
connections to the Atlas Network, who run rings around poor CLuxon,
who has to run overseas where Foreign Affairs tell him all he has to
do is smile and shake hands . . . .

Well Rich yet again you see a post about general effectiveness of past >vaccines as a validation of Labours response to Covid19.

In reality there is still no vaccine for Covid19 - no matter what
variant is considered.

There is considerable variability in the effectiveness of vaccines
between different ailments - some are very effective, both for nearly
every person and for longevity. We know that the vaccine for Tetanus
needs regular renewal. We also know that the vaccine for influenza
covers different strains and does not always cover variants that may
arrive in New Zealand after one year's vaccine has been developed. It
seems that Covid is if anything more variable than influenza - there
are a number of similarities; and that Covid variants can emerge more
quickly - still for most people a vaccine will reduce the risk of
infection considerably for a reasonable period, but you are correct it
is not absolutely effective for all humans for a long time

It is only big Pharma that claims there is in
fact a vaccine. I think most of us would accept that for Covid 19
there is no vaccine available in the traditional definition of
vaccines compared to polio in particular. What is available is a
medical intervention that allows a temporary boost to our immune
systems to deal with Covid19. There is no vaccine that stops the
spread of the disease as the polio vaccine did..

I am not clear on the process - whether it boosts immunity or attacks
certain variants of Covid for a limited period, but they are called
vaccines - I think at one stage there were three different
manufactured versions available from different manufacturers. Absolute
immunity may well not be possible for Covid, but precautions are still desirable, particularly for the elderly, and most sensible people will
treat Covid like Tetanus - keep vaccines up to date and try to avoid
actions or being places where there is a high risk of infection.

The rest of your post is dedicated to pro-Labour rhetoric, justifying >measures taken against a backdrop of previous pandemics where the
disease was far more serious in its ability to kill, combined with
vaccines that almost eliminated the illness as a threat to public
health.

We have had a lot of contagious diseases, but Covid was an example of
a virus where reducing exposure (which New Zealand and Taiwan did at
least initially) turned out to be a very good strategy at least until
a vaccine was developed, and remained a good strategy when there were
known cases in a community. New Zealand was lucky that we appear to
have had good advice about the way in which the disease developed in a community in advice from China - their lock down was significantly
harsher than in New Zealand; I know a New Zealanders who was in Wuhan
when that city was locked down - they were far more rigorous than New
Zealand was. One of the lessons of the many contagious diseases is
that a single response will not always be the best (or worst) for each
new exposure - but New Zealand is recognised for both a world-leading
result in saving lives as well as a world-leading result in economic
recover - the two to a certain extent went together . . .

Ask yourself - would we have had as good a result had Judith Collins
been elected instead of Jacinda Ardern? I don't know that we can have
a definitive answer to that . . .
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 2025-07-11, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 11 Jul 2025 01:40:04 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-09, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html >>>
Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

All created in a large part by the Covid-19 response. It is such a shame.

It is response I was referring to, to the vaccine (or not).

As those who wanted to discuss all matters pertaining to Covid19 and the responses to it we censorsed.

This has resulted in trust being eroded in the medical proession and those
vac hesistant folks have become even more so.

It has developed over the years, but the most significant developments
have been the Jenner vaccine for smallpox in 1796 - since then major
vaccines have been for polio and measles and Tetanus and Hepatitis
Rubella and many others - but more recently Covid and Shingles . For
more information see:

https://www.immunize.org/vaccines/vaccine-timeline/

Not all vaccines are for ailments as infectious as influenza or covid
and their variants.

The objections to the need for isolation prior to a specific vaccine
being available for Covid - and the experience with influenza -
particularly around 1918 to 1921 - led to medically assessed and
government imposed restrictions on movement. There were very few
objections as the need was seen to be great - the mis-information and dis-information campaigns were regrettably largely politically
motivated and funded - perhaps New Zealand was particularly affected
because our medical / political response had been so outstandingly successful; the opposition was not on scientific or medical terms, but unreasoning desire to attack the then government for political
reasons. Sadly the "anti vaccination" stance taken by some far-right
zealots has led to many of those catching Covid more than once, and
for some resulted in "long Covid" infection; placing additional strain
on already stretched medical services.

Regrettably use of deliberately misleading internet-based political
messaging has increased. The use of carefully directed propaganda
using the services of Cambridge Analytica by the Trump organisation
before his first term - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal

Since then we have seen an increase in politically based "Social
Media" based campaigns - often linked to well financed organisations
based around the "political action groups" that get around disclosure
of politically based donations. Many of those that attended the
"protests" at parliament were ''useful idiots," but many also were
political activists keen to attack the government.

We are seeing just such campaigns continuing to try to blame current
problems on the previous government - the need the distraction from
mistakes such as the decimation of our construction industry, the
mistakes over the ferries, vaping, the move to contract public health
to private health firms, the priority given to tax cuts for landlords,
the profiteering by the dairy industry and supermarkets, the cutting
of many benefits and wages in real terms - including reducing the
minimum wage and benefits in real terms, lack of recruitment for
schools and hospitals, and not achieving promises for police
recruitment. All three government parties have Ministers with
connections to the Atlas Network, who run rings around poor CLuxon,
who has to run overseas where Foreign Affairs tell him all he has to
do is smile and shake hands . . . .

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 12 Jul 2025 04:06:38 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-11, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 11 Jul 2025 01:40:04 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-09, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/09/well/us-measles-record-outbreaks.html >>>>
Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>> by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

All created in a large part by the Covid-19 response. It is such a shame.

It is response I was referring to, to the vaccine (or not).

I had taken your reference to the vaccine as the direction you wanted
to discuss, hence my comments below.

When we first heard of Covid, we knew little about other than that it
was highly contagious and life-threatening. We now know that the
government had only known of the issue for a very limited time through
China and World Health, and the other significant issue was that there
was no current vaccine that could protect against infection. Tourists
overseas were contacted where possible and advised to return to New
Zealand urgently - as I have said a friend was at time in Wuhan and
was not able to get to the airport for the flight that New Zealand had
arranged - he was not able to return to New Zealand for quite a few
months. Another friend was in India and was able to return on the
Monday afternoon just before the announcement of border restrictions
etc.

As those who wanted to discuss all matters pertaining to Covid19 and the >responses to it we censorsed.

I am not aware of any censorship, although from time to time posters
to nz.general do try to dream up "rules" by which they believe they
can limit discussion. What censorship are you referring to, Gordon?

This has resulted in trust being eroded in the medical proession and those >vac hesistant folks have become even more so.

I am not aware of the restrictions you refer to. There were different
views from a range of people and while there were concerns expressed
by the Medical profession over statements by some statements from
members of the profession who made comments outside their area of
competence, experience or professional knowledge - their actions where
taken were taken independently of government. Then there were
"Doctors" of unrelated academic areas - at least one of whom recorded
a series of "anti-vaccination" video messages, without explaining that
he had no medical expertise whatsoever - and his mathematics were also
poor, leading to erroneous conclusions.

It has developed over the years, but the most significant developments
have been the Jenner vaccine for smallpox in 1796 - since then major
vaccines have been for polio and measles and Tetanus and Hepatitis
Rubella and many others - but more recently Covid and Shingles . For
more information see:

https://www.immunize.org/vaccines/vaccine-timeline/

Not all vaccines are for ailments as infectious as influenza or covid
and their variants.

The objections to the need for isolation prior to a specific vaccine
being available for Covid - and the experience with influenza -
particularly around 1918 to 1921 - led to medically assessed and
government imposed restrictions on movement. There were very few
objections as the need was seen to be great - the mis-information and
dis-information campaigns were regrettably largely politically
motivated and funded - perhaps New Zealand was particularly affected
because our medical / political response had been so outstandingly
successful; the opposition was not on scientific or medical terms, but
unreasoning desire to attack the then government for political
reasons. Sadly the "anti vaccination" stance taken by some far-right
zealots has led to many of those catching Covid more than once, and
for some resulted in "long Covid" infection; placing additional strain
on already stretched medical services.

Regrettably use of deliberately misleading internet-based political
messaging has increased. The use of carefully directed propaganda
using the services of Cambridge Analytica by the Trump organisation
before his first term - see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal

Since then we have seen an increase in politically based "Social
Media" based campaigns - often linked to well financed organisations
based around the "political action groups" that get around disclosure
of politically based donations. Many of those that attended the
"protests" at parliament were ''useful idiots," but many also were
political activists keen to attack the government.

We are seeing just such campaigns continuing to try to blame current
problems on the previous government - the need the distraction from
mistakes such as the decimation of our construction industry, the
mistakes over the ferries, vaping, the move to contract public health
to private health firms, the priority given to tax cuts for landlords,
the profiteering by the dairy industry and supermarkets, the cutting
of many benefits and wages in real terms - including reducing the
minimum wage and benefits in real terms, lack of recruitment for
schools and hospitals, and not achieving promises for police
recruitment. All three government parties have Ministers with
connections to the Atlas Network, who run rings around poor CLuxon,
who has to run overseas where Foreign Affairs tell him all he has to
do is smile and shake hands . . . .

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended
by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve.
And that is polite...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of
avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of
avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing
ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of
avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing
ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence
supporting your statement?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of
avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing
ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

The Government did not do this. Medsafe did strongly recommend
against this:

https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/safety/Alerts/ivermectin-covid19.htm

and a GP faced disciplinary hearings for doing so:

https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360627514/doctor-faces-discipline-promoting-ivermectin-covid
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 12:53:08 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing
ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

The Government did not do this. Medsafe did strongly recommend
against this:

https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/safety/Alerts/ivermectin-covid19.htm

and a GP faced disciplinary hearings for doing so:

https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360627514/doctor-faces-discipline-promoting-ivermectin-covid

Thanks Crash - both good articles. The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical
decision; it has not been challenged or changed since. As far as I am
aware no political party has pushed for any change either, even though
some are more ready to listen to and empathise with those that believe
in such ''treatments'' - from memory Ivermectin was first recommended
by Donald Trump in relation to Covid infections . . .

The problem with virus infections is that there may not be a single
path to fighting infection - some seem to be able to ignore a lot of precautions and still not be caught, others take all obvious
precautions and it gets through to them anyway.

The following article identified the danger of disproportionate
criticism of infection even when reasonable precautions had been
taken:

https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2020/10/22/covid-19-and-the-swiss-cheese-system.html
and https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2020/09/15/bridging-the-gap-disinformation.html




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 2025-07-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing
ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

The Government did not do this. Medsafe did strongly recommend
against this:

https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/safety/Alerts/ivermectin-covid19.htm

But did they have some "help" in this reccomendation? After all med safe is part of the Government.

and a GP faced disciplinary hearings for doing so:

https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360627514/doctor-faces-discipline-promoting-ivermectin-covid

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 16 Jul 2025 02:52:58 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

On 2025-07-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

The Government did not do this. Medsafe did strongly recommend
against this:

https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/safety/Alerts/ivermectin-covid19.htm

But did they have some "help" in this reccomendation? After all med safe is >part of the Government.

I suspect the "help" came from the silly publicity given to Donald
Trump espousing its use. Doubtless if Trump had recommended using
diesel fuel as a preventative for Covid they would have issued a
recommendation against that as well. I have not heard of any
suggestion from any of ACT, NZ First or National that they believe
that Doctors should be able to prescribe ivermectin - see the link
below.

and a GP faced disciplinary hearings for doing so:
https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360627514/doctor-faces-discipline-promoting-ivermectin-covid

While Doctors were and are prohibited from prescribing or promoting
the use of Ivermectin in relation to Covid, that does not necessarily
prevent its use by some of the more rabid "anti-vax" protestors in
relation to Covid - but I am not aware of anyone actually using it -
what is your view, Gordon?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing
ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence
supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical
decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105
15th July 2025 2:59pm

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very
suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my
doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence
supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical
decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105
15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In
particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer
was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid,
surely that would have been identified and the decision at least
questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very
suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my
doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that
medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by
the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent.
Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or
decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors
with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial
differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about
it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .





--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence
supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical
decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105
15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In
particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer
was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid,
surely that would have been identified and the decision at least
questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very
suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my
doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that
medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by
the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent.
Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors
with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial
differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about
it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ.
They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price
for being wrong.

Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote: >>>>>>

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence
supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical
decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105
15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In
particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer
was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid,
surely that would have been identified and the decision at least
questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my
doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by
the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent.
Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors
with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about
it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ.
They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price
for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would
lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different
from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support -
they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right
they should report it just as much as they should report something
that is wrong. They are not however there to support private
organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising
income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies
that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as
they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote: >>>>>>>

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended >>>>>>>>>by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>>>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In
particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer
was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid,
surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any >>>>of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent.
Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about
it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ.
They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price
for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would
lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different
from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support -
they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right
they should report it just as much as they should report something
that is wrong. They are not however there to support private
organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising
income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies
that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as
they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.

RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any intelligent person to see.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote: >>>>>>>>

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve. >>>>>>>>>And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In
particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid,
surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any >>>>>of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent.
Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ.
They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price
for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would
lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different
from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support -
they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right
they should report it just as much as they should report something
that is wrong. They are not however there to support private
organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising
income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies
that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as
they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.

RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any intelligent >person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote: >>>>>>>>>

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any >>>>>>of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different
from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support -
they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>they should report it just as much as they should report something
that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising
income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as
they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.

RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any intelligent >>person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 01:24:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . .

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any >>>>>>>of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>>>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different >>>>from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support -
they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>>they should report it just as much as they should report something
that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising >>>>income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as >>>>they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.

RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any intelligent >>>person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.

Rubbish - your response merely points out that you were not able to
provide any evidence of the bias that you claim exists. If you think
that Radio New Zealand or TV1 are biased, you are free to make a
complaint, which would be investigated. In the meantime, you appear to
have made a claim of bias that you cannot support with any example .
. .
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 01:24:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . . >>>>>>>>>>>>

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you >>>>>>>>>>>>deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any >>>>>>>>of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>>>>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf

Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different >>>>>from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support - >>>>>they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>>>they should report it just as much as they should report something >>>>>that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising >>>>>income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as >>>>>they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.

RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any intelligent >>>>person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.

Rubbish - your response merely points out that you were not able to
provide any evidence of the bias that you claim exists. If you think
that Radio New Zealand or TV1 are biased, you are free to make a
complaint, which would be investigated. In the meantime, you appear to
have made a claim of bias that you cannot support with any example .
. .

You are a cretin. As previously proven.
I expressed an opinion as you so often do, but apparently I am not permitted to
do that, are you by any chance a left wing supporter, looks like it eh?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 04:03:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 01:24:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . . >>>>>>>>>>>>>

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you >>>>>>>>>>>>>deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>>>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any >>>>>>>>>of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>>>>>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf >>>>>>>>
Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>>>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>>>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>>>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>>>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>>>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different >>>>>>from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support - >>>>>>they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>>>>they should report it just as much as they should report something >>>>>>that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>>>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising >>>>>>income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>>>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as >>>>>>they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>>>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise.

RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any intelligent
person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.

Rubbish - your response merely points out that you were not able to
provide any evidence of the bias that you claim exists. If you think
that Radio New Zealand or TV1 are biased, you are free to make a
complaint, which would be investigated. In the meantime, you appear to
have made a claim of bias that you cannot support with any example .
. .

You are a cretin. As previously proven.
I expressed an opinion as you so often do, but apparently I am not permitted to
do that, are you by any chance a left wing supporter, looks like it eh?

So provide an example of unfair reporting or bias by either RNZ or
TVNZ . . . . .
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 04:03:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 01:24:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>>>><Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) >>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid?

Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>>>>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by >>>>>>>>>the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf >>>>>>>>>
Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>>>>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>>>>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>>>>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>>>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>>>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>>>>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>>>>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different >>>>>>>from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support - >>>>>>>they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>>>>>they should report it just as much as they should report something >>>>>>>that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>>>>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising >>>>>>>income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>>>>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as >>>>>>>they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>>>>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise. >>>>>>RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any >>>>>>intelligent

person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.

Rubbish - your response merely points out that you were not able to >>>provide any evidence of the bias that you claim exists. If you think
that Radio New Zealand or TV1 are biased, you are free to make a >>>complaint, which would be investigated. In the meantime, you appear to >>>have made a claim of bias that you cannot support with any example .
. .

You are a cretin. As previously proven.
I expressed an opinion as you so often do, but apparently I am not permitted >>to
do that, are you by any chance a left wing supporter, looks like it eh?

So provide an example of unfair reporting or bias by either RNZ or
TVNZ . . . . .

As above. You can attempt to show they are unbiased if you really want to but my opinion is balanced and reasonable, is yours?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:25:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 04:03:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 01:24:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>>>>><Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>>>15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>>>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer >>>>>>>>>>was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>>>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>>>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>>>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for by
the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>>>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>>>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf >>>>>>>>>>
Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include >>>>>>>>>>information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors >>>>>>>>>>with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>>>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about >>>>>>>>>>it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>>>>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>>>>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>>>>>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>>>>>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different >>>>>>>>from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support - >>>>>>>>they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>>>>>>they should report it just as much as they should report something >>>>>>>>that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>>>>>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising >>>>>>>>income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>>>>>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as >>>>>>>>they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>>>>>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise. >>>>>>>RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any >>>>>>>intelligent

person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.

Rubbish - your response merely points out that you were not able to >>>>provide any evidence of the bias that you claim exists. If you think >>>>that Radio New Zealand or TV1 are biased, you are free to make a >>>>complaint, which would be investigated. In the meantime, you appear to >>>>have made a claim of bias that you cannot support with any example .
. .

You are a cretin. As previously proven.
I expressed an opinion as you so often do, but apparently I am not permitted
to
do that, are you by any chance a left wing supporter, looks like it eh?

So provide an example of unfair reporting or bias by either RNZ or
TVNZ . . . . .

As above. You can attempt to show they are unbiased if you really want to but >my opinion is balanced and reasonable, is yours?

Your opinion is not an example of unfair reporting or bias by either
RNZ or TVNZ.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:25:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 04:03:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 01:24:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 23:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 06:00:04 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 22:52:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 18:29:14 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 19:56:03 +1200, Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>>>><Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:18:07 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>

On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:57:16 +1200, Rich80105 >>>>>>>>>>>>>><Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 21:41:12 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mis-information and dis-information regarding vaccinations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>recommended

by public health experts continue to be a threat . . . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You are full of shit as always, which is all the response you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>deserve.
And that is polite...

Your unsupported statement does not address the serious issue of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>avoidable deaths, Willy Nilly.

So why did the Ardern government forbid doctors from prescribing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>ivermectin as a preventive and/or treatment for covid? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bill.

As far as I am aware they did not - do you have any evidence >>>>>>>>>>>>>supporting your statement?

You said it.

"The medsafe website makes it clear
that not permitting it to be prescribed for Covid was a medical >>>>>>>>>>>>decision; it has not been challenged or changed since." - Rich80105
15th July 2025 2:59pm

Yes the thread had quite a few additional posts by then. In >>>>>>>>>>>particular, that decision has not been challenged - if a manufacturer
was able to prove that it did help with a defense against Covid, >>>>>>>>>>>surely that would have been identified and the decision at least >>>>>>>>>>>questioned . . .

What is medsafe if not an appendage of the government? I am very >>>>>>>>>>>>suspicious of politicians and their bureaucrats, and I do not want >>>>>>>>>>>>any
of them getting involved in what should only be between me and my >>>>>>>>>>>>doctor. I trust my doctor. I do not trust them.

Bill.

Pharmac and Medsafe cover two different aspects of making sure that >>>>>>>>>>>medicines used in New Zealand are sage, and that medicines paid for >>>>>>>>>>>by
the government have maximum beneficial effect for the amount spent. >>>>>>>>>>>Are you aware of any problems arising through Medsafe procedures or >>>>>>>>>>>decisions, Bill? There is quite a bit of information here: >>>>>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz

A search for Ivermectin leads to for example to here: >>>>>>>>>>>https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/Stromectoltab.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>
Many GPs do use websites available to them, and that may well include
information provided by medsafe. We do have a large number of doctors
with experience in other jurisdictions - if there are substantial >>>>>>>>>>>differences in relation to safety I am sure we would have heard about
it well before now.

But I am interested in why you do not trust medsafe . . .

I don't trust Medsafe for the same reason I don't trust RNZ or TVNZ. >>>>>>>>>>They are run by self-serving government bureaucrats who pay no price >>>>>>>>>>for being wrong.

Bill.

That is crap. If they get it wrong people get ill or die. Think about >>>>>>>>>thalidomide (which was rejected by NZ Medical researchers). They would >>>>>>>>>lose their reputation and possibly their jobs. Is that any different >>>>>>>>>from any other job in our medical system?

RNZ and TVNZ do not exist to provide the government with support - >>>>>>>>>they are there to serve the public; if government gets something right >>>>>>>>>they should report it just as much as they should report something >>>>>>>>>that is wrong. They are not however there to support private >>>>>>>>>organisations either - although TVNZ does require some advertising >>>>>>>>>income to survive. They can and should report problems with companies >>>>>>>>>that advertise with them on exactly the same fair reporting basis as >>>>>>>>>they report on companies that do not advertise with them - much though >>>>>>>>>government and opposition parties may at times claim otherwise. >>>>>>>>RNZ and TVNZ do not report fairly, their bias is clear for any >>>>>>>>intelligent

person to see.

I am not surprised that you did not give an example . . .

Which only invalidates your post.

Rubbish - your response merely points out that you were not able to >>>>>provide any evidence of the bias that you claim exists. If you think >>>>>that Radio New Zealand or TV1 are biased, you are free to make a >>>>>complaint, which would be investigated. In the meantime, you appear to >>>>>have made a claim of bias that you cannot support with any example . >>>>>. .

You are a cretin. As previously proven.
I expressed an opinion as you so often do, but apparently I am not >>>>permitted
to
do that, are you by any chance a left wing supporter, looks like it eh?

So provide an example of unfair reporting or bias by either RNZ or
TVNZ . . . . .

As above. You can attempt to show they are unbiased if you really want to but
my opinion is balanced and reasonable, is yours?

Your opinion is not an example of unfair reporting or bias by either
RNZ or TVNZ.

I didn't suggest it was. Your comprehension ability is seriously declining.
I am as entitled to my opinions as you are despite your attempts to argue the contrary.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2