Stay up to date...

QUESTION ON NOTICE

Question:

8. Has any safety testing been carried out in either humans or animals to determine the side effects of receiving 5 mRNA vaccines? 9. How is it that any deaths with a positive covid test is classed as a Covid death regardless of cause while any death after a vaccine isn’t classed as a vaccine death? Given the vaccine is still only provisionally approved shouldn’t all deaths with 6-8 weeks of receiving a vaccine be treated as a vaccine death until proven otherwise? 10. What are the criteria for a death to be linked to a vaccine? 11. Health advice says the benefits outweigh the risks on having 3 jabs as a 16+ year old person who is otherwise healthy? Where are the trials/numbers that support this statement and how can the TGA/ATAGI say this when longitudinal, carcinogenic, genotoxicity and numerous other tests were not carried out? 12. Severe adverse injuries were only counted by Pfizer in their Covid-19 trial up to 1 month after 2nd jab leading to the number of vaccine injuries being understated. “Limitations of our study include that Pfizer’s SAE table did not include SAEs occurring past 1 month after dose 2. This reporting threshold may have led to an undercounting of serious AE’ in the Pfizer study” – Why does the TGA believe this is acceptable Quality Assurance when Professor Skerritt said on the Today show in early 2021 that serious injuries could occur up to 8 weeks after the vaccine? 13. What is the adverse injury run rate that the TGA considers acceptable for a safe vaccine/drug? What are the benchmarks for proving it was safe? 14. I note that the 6-month data from the Pfizer trials 20 people died in the inoculation group while 15 died in the placebo group. 5,241 had related adverse events in the vaccination group against 1,311 in the placebo group – 300% more, 262 had severe adverse events (interferes significantly with normal function) in the vaccination group v 150 in the placebo group – 75% more and 127 had a serious adverse event (hospitalisation or visit to ER) v 116 in the placebo group which is 10% more – so where exactly does the TGA and other health authorities come up with the statement that the vaccine was actually proven to be safe and effective?

Answer:

Question Number: 155
PDR Number: SQ22-000524
Date Submitted: 21/11/2022
Department or Body: Department of Health

Question 8 As previously stated in SQ22-000146, animal toxicity studies were conducted on the mRNA vaccines and reviewed in detail by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) before approval for human use. After up to four doses of the vaccines were administered there was no evidence of damage to the immune system or other organ systems. A recent UK study of the safety and efficacy of a fifth COVID-19 vaccine dose (available at: https://academic.oup.com/rheumatology/article/61/12/e360/6618544) showed that the fifth dose was safe and well tolerated, and increased neutralising antibodies in immunocompromised individuals. While ongoing safety continues to be closely monitored by the TGA, there is no credible evidence to suggest that subsequent booster doses carry any more risk than the primary dose series (first and second dose). Question 9 Response previously provided in SQ22-000108. Question 10 Response previously provided in SQ21-001136. Question 11 Prevention of severe illness from COVID-19 remains the primary goal of Australia’s ongoing COVID-19 vaccination program. Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) advises that booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines maintain optimal protection against infection with SARS CoV-2 as protection against SARS CoV-2 wanes over time. In making its recommendations and to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks, ATAGI draws on and considers information from a range of credible sources in relation to COVID-19 and vaccines.

All ATAGI statements include links to the best available medical evidence used to inform ATAGI’s booster advice:
• ATAGI statement about the need for additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines | Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care (the department), available at: www.health.gov.au/news/atagi-statement-about-the-need-for-additional-doses-ofcovid-19-vaccines#_blank.
• www.health.gov.au/news/atagi-recommendations-for-use-of-pfizer-covid-19-vaccineas-a-booster-dose-in-adolescents-aged-16-17-years.
• www.health.gov.au/news/atagi-statement-on-the-omicron-variant-and-the-timing-ofcovid-19-booster-vaccination.

Question 12 This assertion is incorrect. Safety data for the Pfizer BNT162b2 (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine has been collected well beyond one month after dose two. Details of the clinical trial data used to inform the decision to provisionally approve the Pfizer BNT162b2 (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine are detailed in the Australian Public Assessment Report published on the TGA website, available at: www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/auspar-bnt162b2-mrna210125.pdf. In addition to the clinical trial data evaluated by the TGA, conditions of provisional registration for all new COVID-19 vaccines in Australia include submission of monthly safety summary reports for the first six months, and thereafter at the TGA specified interval, and six-monthly periodic safety update reports. These reports include summaries of global post-market safety data as summary of interval and cumulative data. In addition, the first people vaccinated in trials of the mRNA vaccines were vaccinated two ½ year ago, and the rollout commenced two years ago. There have been a number of longer-term real-world efficacy and safety studies now published covering very large groups of immunised people.

Question 13 Decisions to register a vaccine on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG), and keep that product on the ARTG, are based on whether the overall benefit of the medicine is considered to outweigh the potential risks of its use. This acceptable rate of side effects for a product will depend on considerations such as the nature of the condition the product is used to prevent or treat, its effectiveness in preventing or treating the condition, the severity of the side effects, and whether the side effects can be minimised or avoided. Therefore, there is no predetermined rate of adverse effects that is used as a benchmark for determining the safety of vaccines.

Question 14 Response previously provided in SQ22-000015.

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn

LATEST QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

Senator RENNICK: Okay-last question. I had a conversation with Gavin Morris a couple of years ago about the way the ABC reports the increase in temperature from 1910. The ABC, like many other media organisations, reports the homogenised data without actually explaining the difference between the homogenised data and the raw data. Gavin Morris stressed that they reported the raw data. That is incorrect; the ABC reports the homogenised data. So I’ll ask this question again: why won’t the ABC distinguish between the raw data and the homogenised data, which is a different dataset to the actual observations recorded by the bureau? Mr Anderson: I don’t know the answer to that. I will need to take that on notice and provide a response to you. Senator RENNICK: Okay. I would like to point out that Gavin Morris did say last time that they reported the raw data and that they distinguished between raw and homogenised. I’ll stress this again, the ABC doesn’t, but I think in terms of full transparency they should.

Senator RENNICK: Do we have any costings for storage? How much will it cost, in terms of storage, to get to our 2030 target? Mr Duggan: A lot of this is, of course, private provisions. In fact, you’d hope that the vast majority of it was. Government has policies that would assist thatSenator RENNICK: That is fine, but we’re told every day that renewables are cheaper. I want that quote substantiated by proper costings, whether it’s funded publicly or privately, because it’s going to end up either out of the taxpayer’s pocket or on their energy bill. So I’m looking for costings just on storage. I want it on other issues as well, such as transmission, but I’m asking: do you have costings on that storage? Ms Brunoro: We’ll take that on notice. The difficulty with answering that question with any kind of precision is that, in terms of deep storage, it will relate to a number of technologies-it’s the same for deep and shallow. It will ultimately depend on the precise mix of those, but we can do things at a high level with respect to the nature of the type of storage that fits within that and provide some estimates to you. Senator RENNICK: So you don’t have definite figures at the moment? Mr Duggan: What we can do for you-and we’ll have to take this on notice-is look at the existing pipeline of projects that are underway and what the private proponents have told us about the cost of those things. We can add to that: through Rewiring the Nation or other policies that are helping to assist that, we can break down the government contribution to that. But we just don’t have all that detail in front of us. Senator RENNICK: I want government and private, because, ultimately, it going to cost the consumer through taxes or energy bills. But is that fair to say that that’s not completed yet? Mr Duggan: We will take that on notice and we’ll endeavour to do our best to come back to you.

Senator RENNICK: Thanks very much. Yet again, in terms of the overall modelling, have you got a breakout of how many turbines you need, how many solar panels you need to get to 82 per cent renewables? Ms Brunoro: Again, the Integrated System Plan does provide an indication of the type of the level of renewable energy, so just bear with us a second. Mr Peisley: Sorry, I don’t think we do have that figure in front of us. We’re happy to take it on notice and get it to you. Ms Brunoro: But if it gives you a sense of it, it’s nine times the amount of the existing variable renewable energy that currently is-well, as of when the last Integrated System Plan came out, it was operating in the NEM at that point. So that gives you the quantum ofSenator RENNICK: So nine times what? Ms Brunoro: Nine times. Senator RENNICK: Yes, but what? Ms Brunoro: The variable renewable energy that is currently in the National Electricity Market. Senator RENNICK: So what’s the cost of that? Ms Brunoro: Again, Senator, it depends on the mix of technologies that you’re going to deploy. There are some figures that we can pull out for you around what they roughly think around different-solar versus wind for instance. We can actually seek to provideSenator RENNICK: So can you give me some definite costings on that? Not now, but on notice?

1. According to the December 2020 update, Australia emitted 499 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent to a 5 per cent decrease on 2019. Australia’s grasslands are estimated to be 440 million hectares and native forest 147 million hectares, a total of approximately 587 hectares. It is estimated forest and grasslands absorb between 0.5 and 2 tonnes of carbon per hectare. Assuming an average of 1 tonne of CO2 absorbed by these landscapes then isn’t Australia already at net zero? 2. Can the CSIRO provide a comprehensive roadmap of the work required for Australia to meet a 43% reduction in CO2 by 2030? This roadmap should set out the length of transmission lines, the number of transmission towers, the number of solar panels (for a given wattage), the number of wind turbines (for a given wattage), the number of batteries (for a given storage), the amount of lithium, copper, cobalt, nickel, concrete, and steel etc. needed to build the aforesaid generators and storage. It will need to include the amount of land needed for solar, wind, transmission, and storage products and the biodiversity offsets. Could the amount of CO2 required to build, recycle, or dispose of the aforementioned items also be included. Likewise, could the cost of building, recycling, and disposing of the aforementioned items also be clearly outlined. Biodiversity impacts such as increased tyre wear due to heavier batteries in cars, increased breaking distance on roadkill, impact on bats and birds from transmission lines and wind turbines, and removal of native flora and fauna due to land use should also be clearly outlined. 3. If the CSIRO cannot provide, can it state which department is responsible for maintaining and tracking the roadmap and refer the question onto them? 4. Could the change in Earth’s temperature as a result of Australia undertaking the 43% reduction in CO2 measures please be stated in order to ensure appropriate benchmarking and accountability if targets are not met? 5. Could the CSIRO confirm if every country uses the same methods to calculate CO2 emission and reductions? If not, why not? What guarantees are there under the Net Zero that Australia won’t be disadvantaged as a result of signing up to the Net Zero pledge?

1. Can the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water provide a comprehensive roadmap of the work required for Australia to meet a 43% reduction in CO2 by 2030. This roadmap should set out the length of transmission lines, the number of transmission towers, the number of solar panels (for a give wattage), the number of wind turbines (for a given wattage), the number of batteries (for a given storage), the amount of lithium, copper, cobalt, nickel, concrete, and steel etc. needed to build the aforesaid generators and storage. It will need to include the amount of land needed for solar, wind, transmission and storage products, and the biodiversity offsets. Could the amount of CO2 required to build, recycle, or dispose of the aforementioned items also be included? Likewise, could the cost of building, recycling, and disposing of the aforementioned items also be clearly outlined? Biodiversity impacts such as increased tyre wear due to heavier batteries in cars, increased breaking distance on roadkill, impact on bats and birds from transmission lines and wind turbines, and removal of native flora and fauna due to land use should also be clearly outlined. 2. If the Department cannot provide, can it state which department is responsible for maintaining and tracking the roadmap and refer the question onto them?

THE ISSUES

Click on an interest area to read articles and learn more about the work I am doing in Parliament.

Taxation, Finance & Economy

READ MORE

Education & Family

READ MORE

Energy

READ MORE

Environment

READ MORE

Health, Aged Care & Seniors

READ MORE

Primary Industries

READ MORE

Immigration & Foreign Affairs

READ MORE

Infrastructure, Manufacturing, Transport & Tourism

READ MORE

Defence

READ MORE

Federation Reform

READ MORE

I may get kicked off social media soon for speaking too much truth so please join my mailing list so we can always stay in touch...

Thank you,

Gerard