GENE THERAPY ‘ PFIZER’- ASTRAZENICA- THE NZ NEW GENE THERAPY BILL 2024…

Pfizer adheres to NZ Regulations for Medicines, this includes ‘Gene Therapy’. NZ is focusing on its Gene Technology Regulations to facilitate Research *Development * Manufacture of New Therapies. Pfizer compliancy is bound by NZ Regulations for the Pharmaceutical Industry that covers all aspects of Medicines, including emerging fields eg:- Gene Therapy. With NZ Govt updating its Regulations to make it easier for the Medical Professions, Scientists to develop Gene Therapies including Gene Technology.

NZ Govt moving from a Restrictive System to one that facilitates Research and Access to Treatments. Pfizer’s role is well known as being focused on Gene Therapy Research and Development internationally. Pfizer trials on Gene Therapy would need Medsafe approval for local trials in NZ. Late 2024 early 2025 NZ Govt began over-hauling its Gene Therapy Regulations to replace the 30yr Hazardous Substance and New Organism (HSNO) Act

The new Gene Technology Bill is modeled on Australia’s Gene Technology Act. A new Regulator will be established with the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) to oversee the field. This will allow for Fast Tracking of Gene Therapies. Hence Pfizer’s most prominent activity to Gene Technology in NZ has been to supply MrNA COVID 19 Jabs, which have received Provisional Approval by MedSafe…(MedSafe is NZs Medicines Regulator)

Alexion is an AstraZeneca subsidiary that acquired a portfolio of pre-clinical Gene Therapies from Pfizer in a Global deal. NZ Researchers are currently conducting clinical trials on Gene Therapies. NZs growing involvement in this field (even prior to the latest Legislative changes). NZs  Worlds First Trials – the Clinical Research Center using CRISPA in NZ. The Malaghan Institute of Medical Research running NZs first CART-Cell Trial- Genetically modifying a patients Immune Cells

Auckland University led Trials on Gene Therapies. Research collaboration in NZ Clinical Research Centers- Universities- Hospitals are already collaborating to accelerate Genetic Research and Advanced treatments using Gene Therapies for companies like Pfizer a Path to Gene Therapies in NZ. Gene Therapies include modification of Plants etc., This is backed majorly by the National and ACT Party. Reported to be a permissive approach to Gene Modification of Risks & Benefits.

Gene Technology involves Plants * Animals  * Humans * Micro-organisms = DNA. Also described as Genetic Engineering or Genetic Modification. GMOs  are organisms that have undergone the process or inherited modification of Genes. Gene Technology from a Technical perspective can involve *Modification * Removal & Multiplication * Relocation of a Gene within an organism- or the Transfer of a Gene from one Species to another

The Genetic Modification of Crops to increase production is reported to improve resistance to environmental conditions (Adaption to Climate Change referring to the Agricultural Industry)  The Gene Technology 1996- 2024 Approach- Gene Technology releasing GMOs into the Environment is heavily restricted under Law- although heavily restricted its still possible with Regulations approval

The primary barrier of using Gene Technology and GMOs in the Hazardous Substances & New Organisms Act 1996. Amendments were made in 2000 to incorporate recommendations made by the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification which meant very little changed as far as the Law is concerned. The Law at this present time before new legislation kicks in is:-

A GMO may not be imported * manufactured * developed * field tested or released into the environment other than in accordance with an approval. The  current ACT does not provide a wholesale ban on the release of GMOs outside a Lab setting in NZ. Although it does make it subject to EPA approval. The using GMOs inside Labs  are strictly regulated. GMOs can only be implemented into a developed or tested within a containments facility (A Controlled Lab) approved by the Ministry Of Primary Industries (MPI)

Operated in accordance with MPI and EPA Standards and other legal barriers such as approval from authorities in NZ. The Bio-Security Act 1993 prohibits Importation * Release * Propagation of GMOs that are not approved for Important by the current legislation (HSNO ACT). This is enforced at the Border by MPI

Between the HSNO Act and other Environmental Legislations this has been an area of tension in NZ, as a result Court decisions and some Local Authorities consider they have the power under the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991 to regulate the use and release GMOs through Policy Statements and Plans. There are Bio-Security hurdles as to the use of Gene Technologies, therapeutic products that are GMOs which are regulated by Medsafe under the Medicine Act 1981. The Human Tissues Act 2008 which contains general prohibition on Trading in Human Tissue * Cells * Blood * Bone Marrow and other Body Parts

Australia’s Hybrid Approach is likely to be adopted in NZ. RMA Restrictions removed and the HSNO Act amended. NZ Regulators will utilize overseas regulations as to its activities. Automatic authorization will be granted for Human Medicine – Regulations for the New Gene Technology is expected to be in place by the end of 2025.. The NZ Omnibus Bill seeks to use Gene Technology in NZ by establishing a new Regulatory regime (Gene Technology Bill 2024)

AstraZeneca- Pfizer $1 Billion Gene Therapy deal with Astrenica’s subsidiary Alexion- a portfolio of pre-clinical Gene Therapy and Technologies from Pfizers deal. Alexions Global Pre-clinical Research is conducted globally. Eg 2019 collaboration with NZ Pharma focusing on discovery, research up to pre clinical stage trials. The Global Pre-clinical Candidate in 2024 is called ZP1000468 developed by Alexion and NZ Pharma prepared for Clinical Trials.

Watch for the partnership announcements as to future collaboration that could lead to new clinical trials in NZ. Alexion has had interactions with NZ Pharmaceutical Regulatory body Pharmac for its approved medicines. 2019 Alexion announced collaboration with Danish BioTech company..NZ to lead certain therapies. NOTE:- Local Clinical Trial Websites.. Research Networks * PCRN * Momentum Clinical Research * Clinical Trials NZ

NZ Gene Therapy Law aims to create opportunities for companies like Pfizer by modernizing regulations similar to Australian Gene Technology Regime. However there are Risk when it comes to Gene Therapies. And Australia does refer to those risks and the consequence involved. Concerns about integrating Vectors. Leading to severe health problems. Long term follow-ups are crucial. There are many uncertainties. Risks and Uncertainties

WakeUpNZ.. RESARCHER: Cassie

...

Health Blog Posts View all Categories

THE VIRUS FAILS THE TEST

I personally believe the pandemic is a well pre-planned orchestrated global imperial force to reset the world economy, to replace the free-market economy with a multistakeholder Capitalist corporate economy. Think Free-market equalling freedom. Think multistakeholder corporation think e’ all your freedoms are at stake’

The insistence that COVIS19 injections are extremely safe and effective is a massive blatant lie. This lie will cause many, many deaths, more deaths than they allow us to have knowledge of. Where is the evidence base may you ask, try data in and data out- assumptions, predictions, mixed data modelling and biases…follow the money, always follow the money. What are the rewards immense power to control whole populations of people and status and massive wealth.
What is that saying “The emperor truly has no clothes”, however the acceleration to replace the global economy to re-engineer societies behaviour far outweighs any truth

One must surely as if this is a digital theoretical abstraction made on a computer from a genomic database. Data in and Data out is published as COVID19 actually 100% exists

#1 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: The Virus Has Never Been Isolated According to Koch’s Postulates or River’s Postulates that all the evidence below stems from the facts from the so called experts:-
Koch’s postulates are:
1. The micro-organism must be identified in all individuals affected by the disease, but not in healthy individuals.
2. The micro-organism can be isolated from the diseased individual and grown in culture.
3. When introduced into a healthy individual, the cultured microorganism must cause disease.
4. The microorganism must then be re-isolated from the experimental host, and found to be identical to the original microorganism.
River’s postulates were proposed by Thomas M. River in 1973 to establish the role of a specific virus as the cause of a specific disease. They are modifications of Koch’s postulates.

They are as follows:
1. The viral agent must be found either in the host’s (animal or plant) body fluids at the time of disease or in cells showing lesions specific to that disease.
2. The host material with the viral agent used to inoculate the healthy host (test organism) must be free of any other microorganism.
3. The viral agent obtained from the infected host must produce the specific disease in a suitable healthy host, and/or provide evidence of infection by inducing the formation of antibodies specific to that agent.
4. Similar material (viral particle) from the newly infected host (test organism) must be isolated and capable of transmitting the specific disease to other healthy hosts.
Whichever set of postulates is used, SARS-CoV-2 fails the test.

...

THE THEORECTICAL VIRUS HAS NEVER BEEN ISOLATED

SARS-Cov-2 the Theoretical Virus has never been isolated.
The Spanish Health Journal ‘Salud’ published in November 2020 an interesting article entitled ‘Frauds and falsehoods in the medical field’ exposing the lack of evidence not only from the SARS-COVID-2 but also other historic coronaviruses

Jon Rappoport has concluded a great deal of investigative study exposing the exact same scam blueprint that was played out in 1980’s, with none other than Fauci in charge, when scientists asserted their was a new virus called HIV and it was causing AIDS. Other fake pandemics such as the 1976 swine flu pandemic.
“The genetic sequences used in PCRs to detect suspected SARS-CoV-2 and to diagnose cases of illness and death attributed to Covid-19 are present in dozens of sequences of the human genome itself and in those of about a hundred microbes.

And that includes the initiators or primers, the most extensive fragments taken at random from their supposed “genome” and even the so-called “target genes” allegedly specific to the “new coronavirus”. The test is worthless and all “positive” results obtained so far should be scientifically invalidated and communicated to those affected; and if they are deceased, to their relatives. Stephen Bustin, one of the world’s leading experts on PCR, in fact says that under certain conditions anyone can test positive!

In other words what I am reading from this is “you cannot have specific tests for a virus without knowing the components of the virus you are trying to detect. I am no doctor but that’s what I see this as.

The article I refer to states that the components cannot be known without having previously isolated/ purified with the virus. If I am wrong I stand to be corrected by evidence based information by a reliable source of information. It is questionable can the virus ever be isolated? From what I have researched so far is that none of the seven human coronaviruses have actually been isolated, that a large number of fragments of their supposed genomes are found in different areas of the human genome and in genomes of bacteria and archaea.

Explaining archaea from some researched information ‘How do humans use archaea?
“The detected archaea are probably involved in nitrogen turnover on skin, and are capable of lowering the skin pH, supporting the suppression of pathogens,” said Moissl-Eichinger. “Bacteria with the same capacities are already used as skin probiotics, potentially improving skin moisture and reducing body odours

...

THEY LIE, THE ADVERSE EFFECTS FROM COVID-19 HUMAN EXPERIMENTS – WRITTEN EVIDENCE TO UK PARLIAMENT

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/36788/html/
Supplementary Written Evidence Submitted by Gillian Jamieson
(CLL0114)

Covid vaccines, treatments, mental health and the future

I am extremely concerned about the fact that the novel gene-based Covid vaccines are resulting in deaths, sometimes of quite young people, or causing miscarriages, blindness, neurological symptoms and so on, but that few MPs mention this and Government adverts tell us that vaccines are safe even for pregnant women. It seems that the risk/benefit equation does not add up, especially then the average age of death from Covid is 82.5 years. These are vaccines still in clinical trials and authorised for emergency use only. There should be enough important data on excess deaths to show that there is and has been no emergency.

A distressing example of harm is the death of a healthy young baby at 5 months after being breast fed by a mother vaccinated against Covid. This appears in a US Vaers report.

In fact there is no informed consent. My experience is that the NHS sends out a leaflet saying vaccines are safe and you are invited to a vaccine centre without prior notification of the vaccine to be used, and without your doctor present helping you to decide. In Scotland the patient information leaflet was given to my neighbour, but only when the needle was poised to enter the arm. Few people seem to realise that the vaccine is still in clinical trials.

I have many other concerns about harms caused by Government actions. I will list them under various headings. I see that the Hart Group (Health Advisory and Recovery Team) has addressed some of the issues I mention in this bulletin https://www.hartgroup.org/6-may-2021/ and I will refer to this.

Vaccine deaths and adverse effects
The daily rate of vaccine deaths is now higher than Covid deaths. Death figures in the UK for the 2 main vaccines at the links below are 1227 plus 149 miscarriages, the latter figure showing a steep rise.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/983472/COVID-19_mRNA_Pfizer-_BioNTech_vaccine_analysis_print.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/983475/COVID-19_vaccine_AstraZeneca_analysis_print.pdf

It is estimated that a maximum of 10% of adverse events are reported via the Yellow Card, which means actual deaths will be about 12,270 and miscarriages about 1490, at a minimum. On the other hand very few of the Covid deaths are likely to have been caused by Covid. They are only designated as “with Covid” based on a highly inaccurate and inappropriate test. Thus vaccine deaths are likely to be vastly higher than actual Covid deaths at present. We are told that vaccines are preventing deaths. We do not know this. The decline in “Covid deaths” could be attributed to changing the Ct value of the PCR test or just because the virus is disappearing or because of pre-acquired natural immunity via T-cells etc.

The facts are that these vaccines were approved for emergency use only. There is now no emergency and they should be withdrawn, especially as clinical trials do not finish until 2023 and as we now have a safe and effective treatment in ivermectin (Hart bulletin) and other drugs and supplements.

A review of ivermectin studies is here: https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/06000/review_of_the_emerging_evidence_demonstrating_the.4.aspx
Other treatment includes the use of corticosteroids and antihistamines if symptoms are still present on the 8th day of illness as suggested by Dr. Shakara Chetty here: https://covexit.com/the-8th-day-therapy-for-covid-19/. In the UK this is being followed up by Dr. Chris Newton here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chris-newton-813ab229/detail/recent-activity/shares/

Animal trials for these vaccines are not even complete. It is misleading to say that they do not affect fertility. There is no data for this yet. (Hart) Neither is there any long-term safety data. Neurological effects, for example, may take 3 years to develop. The Astrazeneca blood-clotting issues are now well-known and many younger people have died because of this. There are however other concerns e.g. the spike proteins which the vaccine causes the body to produce, may cause disease in other parts of the body: https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/ and https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA-2020-N-1898-0246. At the end of this email is a link to a comprehensive article about the Covid-19 vaccine.

Effect on fertility: as there is no data on this yet (Hart), it is highly misleading of the RCOG to state that ” “We want to reassure women that there is no evidence to suggest that Covid-19 vaccines will affect fertility. Claims of any effect of Covid-19 vaccination on fertility are speculative and not supported by any data” . In fact there is no evidence to suggest that it does not affect fertility. In addition one doctor has grave concerns about this: https://www.jennifermargulis.net/halt-covid-vaccine-research-scientist-urges-cdc/

Individual examples of harms and deaths:
1. 12 year old girl in Moderna trial paralysed from waist down etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GKIFgmm7xI
2. Young man has heart attack after Pfizer jab despite healthy cardiovascular system: https://twitter.com/HowardSteen4/status/1388043539108429827
3. Fit and healthy 32-year old man dies after AZ jab: https://twitter.com/GillRaeWalker/status/1388072474491895808m
4. 27 year old man dies after AZ jab: https://twitter.com/robinmonotti2/status/1388381054688546817 (includes link to site for other deaths)
5. Death of fit and healthy woman after 2nd jab: https://twitter.com/RealJoelSmalley/status/1391017188509769733

Plan to vaccinate children and child vaccine deaths
This is covered by Hart. Children are at no risk from Covid and must surely NOT be vaccinated with an experimental, new type of vaccine, with no long-term safety data. Why do teaching unions want this? To protect teachers? Since the vaccine trials were not set up to test the spread of the virus (see table1 here: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037 ) then the union campaign must be based on an irrational belief in the myth of asymptomatic spread, still promoted by Mr Hancock and government adverts. But it has been proven that the Sars-Cov-2 virus is only likely to be spread by those with definite symptoms, aside from the short pre-symptomatic phase. The evidence is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w and https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851 and https://probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-cambridge-study-testing.html

Out of 4000 children vaccinated in the US, 9 died, 7 almost died and 3 were permanently disabled . Many secondary schools have over 2000 pupils, so there would a lot of casualties in one school alone, if children were to be vaccinated. I assume we don’t want this. This data comes from these 2 websites: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccination-demographics-trends and https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html.

Vaccine adverse effects can transfer to the unvaccinated if they come into close contact with the vaccinated
This is described by Pfizer as occurring through “environmental exposure” to the vaccinated via inhalation or skin contact. This is described here: https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2020/11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf in Section 8.3.5. Of particular concern to Pfizer is “exposure during pregnancy” (EDP) and this must be reported within 24 hours.

From reports so far, these transferred adverse events seem particularly to cause havoc with female reproductive systems as described at Questions 3 to 5 of this document: https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.org/action-alerts/identifying-post-vaccination-complications-their-causes-an-analysis-of-covid-19-patient-data

Is anyone in the UK following these reports up?

No end in sight
Unfortunately, I am aware that the Government’s intention is to continue fear-mongering using the myth of asymptomatic spread and fear of variants. The proof that Government wishes restrictions, testing and vaccines to continue is
1. that various councils are advertising for Covid Marshalls
2. that the government wants to “normalise testing as part of everyday life” which was part of the job description (now deleted) for an “Interim Head of Asymptomatic Testing Communication”, copied here: https://twitter.com/GillRaeWalker/status/1377364958753615873 and
3. that in April they were also offering a 2 year contract to a Covid advertising contractor. They also continue this social conditioning by allowing leaks from Sage officials on TV and to the press. Surely these people should not be on TV offering their opinions. Any announcements should be made by Government ministers only.

Mental health hypocrisy
Aside from the devastating effects of lockdowns (not Covid) on people’s lives and livelihoods, the emotionally manipulative and misleading advertising and statements from Government have caused this directly. The “case’ and “death” figures have been exaggerated and taken out of context, so that there has NEVER been a balanced presentation of possible dangers from Sars-Cov-2. The Government is therefore only paying lip service to the huge short and long-term mental health problems developing, by talking about funding for it. What they need to do is stop the adverts, stop pointless testing of healthy people and restart normal life without coercive pressures NOW. Coercive pressure includes Covid-status certification. The suppression of the voices of scientists and doctors whose views differ from those of Sage also need to be heard and a mature debate needs to be had.

My position
I will not be having a Covid vaccine, due to the lack of knowledge of long-term effects of this new gene-based technology, because of the low infection fatality rate and because I trust that either my immune system will deal with it or I can use proven treatments such as ivermectin. I do not believe “case” figures, because I know that many positive test results are false positives. I believe asymptomatic spread is rare. I know that far fewer people than 120,000 died FROM Covid. I will not submit to testing unless I have serious symptoms. I do not own a smartphone and never will, so will not be using the various NHS apps. I will never use any sort of medical status certification as I believe it is coercive and divisive. As a result I may never see my mother, brother, 2 sister and 6 nephews again as they live on different continents. This is sad, but I will not bow to coercive pressure.

A few months ago, every MP received a briefing from Drs. Craig, Yeadon, Joel Smalley and Jonathan Engler, in which the confusion over data and the inadequacy of PCR tests was clarified by experts, but MPs took no action. But because of this I have signed the UK Citizens’ Declaration of Freedom and Human Rights, which can be found here: http://ukcitizen2021.org/

Would you please:
Ask the Government to find a uniform system of reporting verified Covid deaths and Vaccine deaths and side effects, so that there can be fair comparisons and accurate figures. The cause of deaths from now on needs to be confirmed and verifiable if we are not to continue in restrictions for years to come. The Yellow Card system needs to be improved and used by all.
Ask the Government to fully investigate treatments for Covid 19, instead of spending money on testing those with no symptoms and rolling out experimental vaccines.
Ask the Government to stop advertising misleading information such as “vaccines are safe” and “1 in 3 people could be spreading the virus”.
Ask the Government to make people fully aware of the risks of taking the vaccine and that clinical trials are not finished, so that there is informed consent.
Ask the Government to encourage diverse scientific contributions to the policy and disband Sage, which contains too many non-medical people.
Ask the Government to lift censorship of dissenting views everywhere – especially on the media and social media, which has recently banned anyone talking about ivermectin.

Please also read this alternative view by Professor (retired) Romeo F. Quijano, Dept. Of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila available here: https://www.academia.edu/45058943/Should_We_Take_the_Vaccine_Against_Covid_19

Gillian Jamieson
6 Burnet Crescent
East Saltoun
EH34 5BZ

...

BE VERY FEARFUL- DEMAND VACCINES, IMMUNIZATIONS AS YOU RIGHT. ( IA: 2030 ) UN AGENDA 2030 INTRODUCED IN 2015

https://www.who.int/teams/immunization-vaccines-and-biologicals/strategies/global-vaccine-action-plan
Global Vaccine Action Plan
The Global Vaccine Action plan (GVAP) was developed to help realize the vision of the Decade of Vaccines, that all individuals and communities enjoy lives free from vaccine preventable diseases.

As the decade is drawing to a close, the SAGE Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) 2011-2020 review and lessons learned report, provides an overall assessment of plan’s successes and challenges. It also proposes 15 recommendations for the development, content and implementation of the next decade’s global immunization strategy
The Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) ― endorsed by the 194 Member States of the World Health Assembly in May 2012 ― is a framework to prevent millions of deaths by 2020 through more equitable access to existing vaccines for people in all communities.
GVAP was the product of the DoV Collaboration, an unprecedented effort that brought together development, health and immunization experts and stakeholders. The leadership of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI Alliance, UNICEF, United States National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases and WHO, along with all partners – governments and elected officials, health professionals, academia, manufacturers, global agencies, development partners, civil society, media and the private sector – are committed to achieving the ambitious goals of the GVAP. Many more are expected to add their support in the future as the plan is translated and implemented at the country and regional levels.
https://iris.wpro.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665.1/10921/9789290617099_eng.pdf;jsessionid=3588ABFA01DADF7788502691C106876B?sequence=1 WORLD HEALTH ORG., (UN) REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR IMPLENMENTATION OF THE GLOBAL VACCINE ACTION PLAN IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC (This includes Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands) 92 page Report.
Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020 (GVAP). Aims of the Regional Framework for Implementation of the Global Vaccine Action Plan in the Western Pacific Introduction of new vaccines, immunizations

BE FEARFUL ENOUGH TO DEMAND IMMUNIZATIONS, VACCINATIONS.
In May 2012, the 194 Member States of the World Health Assembly endorsed the Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020 (GVAP), a global framework that builds on its predecessor, the Global Immunization Vision and Strategy 2006–2015 (GIVS). GVAP offers a broad range of strategies and activities and establishes new goals for achieving the Decade of Vaccines vision of a world in which all individuals and communities enjoy lives free from vaccine-preventable diseases.
A wide array of stakeholders was involved in the development of GVAP. The Regional Framework for Implementation of the Global Vaccine Action Plan in the Western Pacific has been prepared to translate strategies and activities recommended by GVAP into the context of the Western Pacific Region and to incorporate all global and regional immunization goals. By consolidating all of this information in one document, the framework aims to accelerate progress towards achievement of global and regional immunization goals and to help stakeholders better understand how to work together in implementing GVAP in the Region

Strategic Objective: All countries commit to immunization as a priority. Individuals, communities understand the value of immunization and vaccines, o much so they demand them as their right and responsibility.
Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020 In May 2012, the Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020 (GVAP) was endorsed by the 194 Member States of the World Health Assembly. GVAP builds on the Global Immunization Vision and Strategy 2006–2015 (GIVS), endorsed by the World Health Assembly in 2005, and outlines a vision in which the full benefits of immunization are extended to all people, regardless of where they are born, who they are or where they live. Developing GVAP brought together multiple stakeholders involved in immunization, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Gavi, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United States National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and WHO, along with all partners – governments and elected officials, health professionals, academia, vaccine manufacturers, global agencies, development partners, civil society, media and the private sector

https://iris.wpro.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665.1/10921/9789290617099_eng.pdf;jsessionid=3588ABFA01DADF7788502691C106876B?sequence=1

...