Review, Assessment, and Internal Handling of Concerns Raised by Barry Young Regarding COVID-19 Vaccination Data

Official Information Act 1982 Request

To: Ministry of Health / Health New Zealand – Te Whatu Ora

Cc: Minister of Health; Director-General of Health

Re: Review, Assessment, and Internal Handling of Concerns Raised by Barry Young Regarding COVID-19 Vaccination Data

Pursuant to the Official Information Act 1982, I request the following information concerning concerns, data analysis, communications, and decision-making associated with information reportedly identified and raised by Barry Young in relation to COVID-19 vaccination outcome data.

This request is directed toward understanding:
– what information was raised internally;
– how it was assessed;
– whether concerns were reviewed;
– and what steps were taken by officials once concerns were identified.

Requested Information

1. Internal Notifications and Escalations
Please provide copies of:
a) Any internal reports, memoranda, summaries, emails, risk assessments, or briefing documents referring to:
– Barry Young;
– concerns raised by him;
– mortality or adverse outcome analysis associated with COVID-19 vaccination data;
– excess mortality analysis;
– or requests for further review of vaccination outcome data.

b) Any communications between Health New Zealand, the Ministry of Health, Ministers, Crown Law, Medsafe, ESR, Stats NZ, or any external advisory body discussing:
– the significance of the concerns raised;
– whether the data warranted investigation;
– or whether public disclosure risks were discussed.

2. Assessment of the Underlying Data
Please provide:
a) Any epidemiological, statistical, or analytical review undertaken in response to the concerns raised by Barry Young.

b) Any internal determination regarding:
– whether the data was considered credible, inaccurate, incomplete, misleading, or requiring further investigation;
– and the reasons supporting that determination.

c) Any documents identifying whether officials concluded:
– no causal relationship existed;
– insufficient evidence existed;
– or that further inquiry was necessary.

3. Decision-Making and Accountability
Please identify:
a) The individuals, offices, or advisory groups responsible for deciding:
– whether the concerns raised would be formally investigated;
– whether external experts would be consulted;
– and whether any findings would be publicly addressed.

b) Any policy, legal advice, or operational guidance relied upon when determining that the underlying claims or data analysis would not form part of wider public review or inquiry processes.

4. Public Interest and Risk Considerations
Please provide:
a) Any documents discussing reputational, political, social, or public confidence considerations associated with:
– publication of vaccination outcome data;
– mortality analysis;
– or public discussion of adverse-event concerns.

b) Any documents discussing whether release of such information could:
– affect public confidence in vaccination programmes;
– create political risk;
– or affect public compliance with health directives.

5. Expert Review
Please provide:
a) Any documents discussing whether Barry Young was regarded internally as:
– qualified,
– technically competent,
– or capable of conducting data analysis relevant to epidemiological review.

b) Any criteria or policy relied upon in determining whether concerns raised by non-medical personnel, data analysts, contractors, or whistleblowers would be formally assessed.

Format Requested

I request the information in electronic form where possible.

If any part of this request is refused under the Official Information Act, please:
– identify the specific statutory grounds relied upon;
– explain the public interest considerations undertaken;
– and release any reasonably severable portions of the requested material.

Please also confirm:
– what searches were undertaken;
– which departments or offices were consulted;
– and whether any relevant information has been deleted, archived, withheld, or transferred.

Mrs Tracy lynch