Members of the Public Adversely Affected by Covid Vaccines May Be the Last to Hear About It.
In his book Structure of Scientific Revolutions Thomas Kuhn describes what happens when new experimental data contradicts the established scientific orthodoxy. According to Kuhn, there is a period of extraordinary science where new theories abound and compete with one another to explain the new findings.
This is often accompanied by an almost irrational effort on the part of the proponents of the discredited theories to cling to their old ideas. Even Einstein for example was vilified by a number of colleagues for more than a decade after his 1905 discoveries of relativity, quanta, and Brownian motion.
Eventually, controversy settles down, and a new broader scientific paradigm or understanding becomes widely accepted, one which explains the anomalous experimental results which precipitated the crisis.
We Are in the Middle of a Paradigm Shift
For seventy years it has been more or less accepted that DNA is a biological molecule that contains an almost alphabetical system of information storage like a giant manual which guides the development and operation of biological systems. This linear understanding underpins the development of biotechnology—the attempt to edit DNA in order to modify the operation of biology.
The era of biotechnology has reached a point of crisis where the current theories of DNA operation are proving insufficient to explain the proliferation of adverse effects of Covid vaccine technology. On the GLOBE website, we have discussed that DNA and its cellular functions form a biomolecular interface between consciousness and matter, necessitating a change of paradigm—a scientific revolution that must encompass consciousness within the scope of biology.
The crisis we have arrived at is intrinsically different from those in scientific history. The globalisation of information, the commercialisation of science, the overreach of political control into every aspect of everyday life, the involvement of military interests, the power of online media, billion dollar investment, and the pharmaceutical society all wish to interpret and influence scientific debate.
How is This Vast Competition to Control the Scientific Narrative Playing Out in Our Lives?
Ever since the Christchurch earthquake, I have checked my email and read the newspapers from around the world when I first wake up. I feel the need to know what is happening, you probably do too. Take this morning for example:
The BBC asks “Could ultra-processed foods be harmful for us?“. Two identical twins were given different diets which had identical nutritional profiles (the same quantity of fats, fibre, calories, nutrients, sugars, etc.), but one twin ate these via ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and the other through fresh ingredients. The UPF twin put on weight, and increased unhealthy blood sugar and lipid fat levels. The other lost weight.
The article references dozens of studies showing that UPFs increase the risk of developing serious illnesses like cancer, strokes, and diabetes. It discusses the possible causal role of various additives in UPFs like emulsifiers and artificial sweeteners. It should have also identified a major difference between UPFs and fresh foods—one has DNA and the other doesn’t—but it didn’t because current nutritional paradigms ignore genetics. Fresh foods we could say have more ‘genetic intelligence’ and availability of nutrients that the body can utilise to maintain health. I discuss this more fully in my book Your DNA Diet. Understanding this possibility will involve a paradigm shift in our concept of nutrition.
The UK Guardian’s Health Editor based in Chicago writes “Global ‘silver tsunami’ of older cancer patients is coming, experts warn“. The article reports that an aging population is likely to suffer from cancers at a rate that will overwhelm oncology care facilities. This may be true, but no current discussion of cancer incidence would be complete without discussing the fall in longevity, decline in population growth, and the rise in cancer incidence that the world has been experiencing since the start of the pandemic. As we have repeatedly discussed at the Hatchard Report and GLOBE, data shows cancer incidence is on the rise among all age groups, not just the elderly. Why?
Another article in the Guardian reports “AI could outwit humans in two years, says UK government adviser“. He suggests “You can use AI today to create new recipes for bioweapons or to launch large-scale cyber-attacks.” AI systems do not launch attacks on their own volition, they can only do so if they have been programmed by a human being. AI systems were used during the pandemic to promote biotechnology acceptance, helping to generate hundreds of articles, fake social media posts, automated fact checks, and advertisements. Powerful secretive lobby groups were controlling the content of mainstream and social media. AI was not the culprit here, massive commercial interests were at fault. They used AI to distribute distorted information.
A few days ago the NZ Herald reported “Number of antidepressants dispensed to children and teens jumps 53 per cent in five years“. The article talks about the concern psychologists are feeling about over prescribing of antidepressants by GPs, a familiar story you might think. The article prints a table of total antidepressant prescribing by year and age.
We calculated the percentage change by year. Up until 2021, antidepressant prescribing was increasing by a worrying figure of about 5% per year. In 2021 prescriptions to 1-18 year olds increased by 23% four times the prior rate, to 19-24 by 14% double the prior rate. Prescriptions to 24+ also doubled. 2022 increases returned to roughly historical levels. So what happened in 2021 to cause such a dramatic rise? You might say lockdowns, but then there were lockdowns in both 2020 and 2021. You might say Covid, but then there was very little Covid in New Zealand in 2021.
If you want to know why, examine the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System) in the USA. Jessica Rose queried the VAERS database with the keywords: “psych”, “schiz”, “halluc”, “delus”, “visions”, “voices”, “suicid” and “mania”, “dreams”, “seiz”, “conscious”, “memory” and “depress”. This yielded 54,905 cases clustered around younger age groups (similar age groups to those affected by antidepressant prescribing increases here in New Zealand). These figures are astonishing considering VAERS is highly under-reported. Yes, mRNA vaccines do have neuropsychological adverse effects, although you wouldn’t know it if you only read New Zealand newspapers.
One feature of the competition occurring during paradigm shifts is the denial and falsification of data. Vatican officials famously looked through Galileo’s telescope but still denied that Jupiter had moons which would have falsified their theory that planets are embedded in solid crystal. Looking beyond newspapers to scientific comment, Dr. Clare Craig pointed out in an article published by HART (Health Advisory and Recovery Team) that the NHS had drastically and retrospectively altered records of atrial fibrillation incidence. Why? One wonders who to trust. You tell me.
In another example, the UK Telegraph reports that the Conservative government’s Covid Disinformation Unit asked social media tech companies to remove articles it considered to be ‘potentially harmful’. This included any suggestions that lockdowns were ineffective and damaging. Yet a giant meta analysis by Johns Hopkins University and Lund University had already concluded in 2022 that benefits of lockdowns were “a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs”.
Finally on to one of this week’s published scientific papers. The European Heart Journal published a paper “COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis: a Korean nationwide study” This study of 44 million health records of vaccinated Koreans reported that 8 deaths of young people initially recorded as sudden cardiac deaths unrelated to vaccination, were actually caused by vaccine related myocarditis as shown by subsequent autopsy results. Sound familiar? Do you think the New Zealand press could learn from this? The study suggests that around 20% of confirmed cases of vaccine induced myocarditis are severe with long term health implications.
As we indicated in our most recent article, our government is continuing to promote Covid vaccination even though multiple studies show the bivalent vaccine has zero effect on the dominant XBB variant, and repeat vaccine doses even increase susceptibility to Covid infection.
In this release, we have argued that a paradigm shift is underway. A time of extraordinary science where competing theories and explanations for events and data are being considered. Unfortunately, as a result of censorship, the general public is unaware of the risks of Covid vaccines and biotech in general. Scientific debate is being suppressed. The Hatchard Report is committed to report on science publishing and bring the arguments and counter-arguments to the attention of the public.
Image Credit:
Photo by Dave Goudreau on Unsplash
