Was the NZ Coroner right to rule that he couldn’t determine the cause of the sudden death of a 13 year old boy following Covid vaccination?

In any case, what should the coroner have said and who or what is to blame for the tragic death?

The NZ Herald reports this morning the ruling of the coroner Robin Kay in the case of a healthy 13 year old boy who died suddenly as a result of myocarditis (heart inflammation) 10 days after Covid-19 mRNA vaccination. Despite the fact that myocarditis is a known and recognised side effect of Covid mRNA vaccination, the coroner said he couldn’t decide what the exact cause of death was because, on the advice of ‘experts’, he couldn’t rule out the possibility that the myocarditis was caused by viral particles.

Evaluating the Coroner’s Decision: The Need for Scientific Rigor in Judging Individual Cases

It is true that in an individual and tragic case of young sudden death such as this, there will always be an element of doubt, so was there doubt in this case, and what should the coroner have said in his judgement?

The coroner’s ruling omitted to reference the established process of science in deciding the balance of probabilities in individual cases. When faced with the outcome of a single individual case, science looks closely at the bigger picture and analyses a large number of statistically representative outcomes among the wider population. This enables a more precise probability of cause to be assessed.

In this case, a comparison of Covid vaccination status among the cases of death and hospitalisation in the whole New Zealand population should be made. The coroner should have noted, as the Hatchard Report has informed the Health Minister, that not only has this not been undertaken in New Zealand but that the process has been blocked by the government working in tandem with the allopathic medical establishment.

The coroner should have ruled that access to public health data relevant to the case before him had been denied for no good reason.

Such cases of wilful blindness are not unknown in science. The theory of general relativity discovered by Albert Einstein was rejected by the Nazi state, despite decisive evidence verifying it, and outlawed from German science since its architect was Jewish. In other words, the power and policy of the state took precedence over the evidence of science.

Are we brushing up against this perilous situation in little New Zealand? If so, how did we get here and what should we do to rectify the situation?

Concerns Over Long-Term Health Risks of mRNA Vaccines: Expert Warnings and the Rising Incidence of Serious Diseases

As we have been reporting repeatedly for three years now, the mRNA Covid vaccine carries risks of a long term increase in the incidence of heart disease and cancer. You can read a summary of the very concerning cancer statistics in the Australian Spectator provocatively entitled “Catherine and Cancer”. The article concludes with the depressing thought that there appears to be no end in sight to the epidemic of cancers which began to rise rapidly starting in 2021 way above and beyond the prior trend.

In fact, a significant number of eminent biochemists, geneticists, and medical experts warned back in 2021 that we would be facing unprecedented rises in heart disease and cancers following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. These included, for example, leading US cardiologist Dr Peter McCullough and Belgian Vaccinologist Geert Vanden Bossche, who, along with many others, published scholarly critiques of mRNA vaccine safety, both of whom and their colleagues were promptly cancelled and wrongly ridiculed as conspiracy theorists by orthodox main stream institutions (see here and here).

As their dire predictions are now showing up in public health data, if science is followed they should be vindicated and publicly lauded.

Personal Tragedies and the Closure of Inquiry: Navigating the Aftermath of COVID Vaccine Policies

Let’s not forget that behind the worrying statistics and suspected future trends are a very large number of personal tragedies that we are glimpsing daily as the tip of this iceberg through newspaper reports of the distressing cases.

Our coroner’s failure to reference the need for close investigation of public health data, underlines the doors that have been firmly closed and shut in the face of the Covid vaccine injured by those responsible for creating and mandating the universal use of mRNA technology. So-called experts who omitted to assess or warn the public about the risks, which were well known pre-pandemic and published in scientific journals.

The Guardian newspaper headlines a report today that the last few years have been amazing for rich people. There have been 141 new billionaires in 2023 alone. It is worth reflecting that a few people have become very rich, influential and powerful during the Covid era, whilst a much greater number, almost everyone in fact, have become poorer as a result of the decisions of those profiting from Covid policies.

Robin Kay, the newly appointed coroner who ruled on the case in hand, is both a legal expert on insurance claims and a registered nurse, so he should have been able to articulate the arguments we have presented above. However, at this point in time, we need to reference the remedies rather than exclusively decry the errors, omissions, and negligence. Without these remedies, our future might be, as Geert Vanden Bossche warned four years ago, very bleak indeed.

The Public Are Labouring Under a Great Many Popular Misconceptions Concerning Health, Genetics and the Causes of Disease

The coroner’s ruling did nothing to clarify or dispel these. The presence of trace viral particles found in the young boy’s heart was not an oddity, such viral particles are in fact the norm, affecting almost everyone. A 2023 article in the BMJ entitled “Where do viruses hide in the human body?” confirms this. The crucial factor in keeping them under control is the capacity and efficiency of our immune system. If immune processes fail, life will be at risk.

Viral particles contain sequences of genetic instructions capable of interfering with the body’s essential processes. Our immune system is constantly involved in clearing these up in order to protect our health and genetic integrity. This is not in any way an occasional activity. It is on a grand scale. In every single cell there may be as many as 70,000 repair jobs undertaken every 24 hours, and we have 37 trillion cells, a total number that is almost beyond comprehension. This all happens more or less automatically, and one wonders how this is managed or controlled on such a vast scale.

Not just heart and organ health are affected by latent viral particles, but also cancers. There is a public misunderstanding that only a few unlucky people have a susceptibility to cancers latent in their physiology and genetics. This prevalent idea enables more obvious causes for the recent rapid increase and speed of cancers, such as the introduction of mRNA vaccines, to be dismissed without scrutiny. The truth is that almost everyone can be susceptible to cancer if the efficiency of immune repair is impaired, as is known to be the case for some individuals following mRNA vaccination.

Balance is at the Basis of Immune Functioning and Automated Efficiency

Does immune repair involve mechanically automatic sequences of events like a thermostat switching a heating system on and off according to the ambient temperature, or are immune processes crucially different in some way? The answer to this is very revealing. In essence, immune processes involve the balance of three elements: elimination of known foreign impurities, maintenance of existing processes, and creative appropriate responses to novel situations. Cancers grow when the balance between these three processes is lost to the extent that novel genetic structures are allowed to develop at least initially unrecognised and unchecked.

Balance is a very abstract notion, therefore its fundamental significance to modern medicine has been largely overlooked. Let us revert to the history of science to understand what is at stake. From the beginning of the twentieth century, a controversy overtook physical science. Einstein’s gravitational science was deterministic—one thing followed another according to a set of strict rules. However with the advent of quantum mechanics, it was found that certain situations resulted in chance outcomes. The great endeavour of physics then became the reconciliation of Einstein’s deterministic laws with the quantum mechanical laws involving chance. The focus of this process has become the understanding of super symmetry or balance.

Balance is a universal abstract characteristic of the universe which has apparently found its expression in living systems. It is at once rigidly lawful and infinitely flexible. It is independent of anything external to itself. Our immune response is deeply connected to this fundamental property of natural law, as is our self-referral consciousness. It is perhaps for this reason that Ayurveda, the ancient health system of India, recognises loss of connection with the universal balance, unity or symmetry of nature as the fundamental cause of disease. The seat of balance in us is both physiological and psychological, involving body and mind. Each relies on the other, but it is our inner consciousness which fully reflects the balance of natural law.

Our immune processes are the result of the abstract coordinated collective intelligence shared by trillions of cells. The physiological unit of consciousness or awareness is the whole cell, therefore anything that interferes with the functioning of the cell puts our connection with innate balanced functioning at risk. If the functions of too many cells are edited, as happens deliberately to billions of cells through mRNA vaccination, then the fundamental collective and specific immune processes are put at risk.

This understanding needs to inform our assessment of the risks of mRNA technology and our medical responses. As we have previously noted, there are herbal technologies and techniques of meditation which research shows sustain balance and immune efficiency. These could play a vital role in alleviating the immune crisis that is engulfing medical practice. To find out more about the role of balance in the physiology, read our article “Action to Face the Medical Crisis Can No Longer Be Postponed.

From a broader perspective, balance is a defining characteristic not just of individual physiology, behaviour and intelligence but also of biological eco systems and collective behaviours. We have discussed this in our article “The Long Read: Could Individual and Collective Intelligence Have Been Negatively Affected by the Covid Pandemic?”. The preservation and maintenance of balance is the cornerstone of our biological and physical world.

The sad case of a 13 year old boy whose life was tragically cut short should not be the subject of mere hand wringing and protestations that we don’t know what happened, but rather a determination to investigate more and understand more. The coronial ruling today was an opportunity thrown away and another example of the medical establishment refusing to face up to the realities of current public health data.

Government inquiries seldom change reality. Public submissions to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into COVID-19 Lessons Learned are now closed and the Commissioners blandly note on their website:

“The submissions we have received will be considered alongside other interviews conducted and evidence received to form the Inquiry’s final report.”

This article is available as a PDF document to download/print, or share, or you can listen to Guy here.

You can still sign ‘The People’s Terms’ and register your concerns. These will be submitted to the Commission on behalf of the 31,432 people (0.8% of our adult population) who have signed so far. There is very little time left to sign and add your voice. More support and action is still needed that will have to go well beyond any possible outcome of the inquiry. Inquiries in other countries have petered out into irrelevance and controlled double speak.

What Can We Do Now?

During the pandemic, the Hatchard Report and countless others have written of the dangers and referenced the scientific evidence until there seems to be little more that could be said. Much of what was predicted from the early days has come out to be verified by research.

Yes, Covid vaccine components can integrate into our DNA.

Yes, Covid vaccination rates are correlated with excess mortality.

Yes, there is an ‘unexplained’ (???) epidemic of heart disease and cancer.

Yes, record numbers of people are becoming sick and leaving the workforce

Despite this growing evidence of harm; medical, pharmaceutical and biotech policies, procedures, finances and power structures have become entrenched in local, national and global governance. We are in the thick of it.

The Covid vaccines are the latest in a long line of so-called modern pharmaceutical miracles that seem to cause the very things they are designed to prevent. Blood thinners for example that are aimed at preventing cardiovascular disease have shortness of breath, chest pain, heart arrhythmia and bleeding listed among their many side effects. Pain killers, whose long term use increases pain and slows healing. Antidepressants that increase the incidence of suicidal thoughts. And so on. Modern medicine is in crisis, but few are prepared to acknowledge it openly; and it is getting worse.

As we have outlined at GLOBE, Covid vaccines go one step further. A step too far.

A vast army of mRNA and DNA fragments penetrate the protective membranes of billions of cells and take control of our immune system. Which equates to increased vulnerability to a wide range of illnesses and a loss of flexibility in our immune responses referred to as immune imprinting. The failure to acknowledge, discuss or tackle the crisis smacks of extreme cowardice, avarice, and cruelty. The sheer scale of harmful effects and casualties runs against all morality whether contained in the canons of medical ethics, the commandments of religions or the constitutions of nations.

It is four and a half years since the man-made Covid virus first escaped from a lab. There have been very few ‘Lessons Learned’ since then and a cynic might say that the Royal Commission is unlikely to say or do anything new. After years of coming up against an official brick wall is anything likely to change in a hurry? Far more likely, with trillions of biotech investment dollars at stake, we will be pushed and coerced to accept more of the same, almost certainly without being informed of risks.

You must have heard of the expression having a bob (or a dollar) each way, meaning that we should always be prepared, whatever happens. So in addition to lobbying decision-makers, what can or should we do?

Knowledge Has Organising Power

The situation we face requires that we gain a broader understanding of natural laws pertaining to our biology. We need to understand ourselves better, and act accordingly. Ayurveda, the ancient health science of India, traditional Chinese medicine, and indeed modern iterations of integrative medicine understand health in terms of balance.

There is a natural three in one structure to life. Ayurveda expresses this in terms of the balance between the transport (vata), transformation (pitta), and structural systems (kapha) in the body. It uses herbal preparations and other approaches to maintain this balance. In my book Your DNA Diet I explain how a healthy diet must include a variety of natural foods which are based on DNA. Our body uses the genetic intelligence in these foods to maintain balanced health.

Further dramatic evidence of this intimate relationship between food and genetics was published just yesterday in the leading journal Nature entitled “The level of protein in the maternal murine diet modulates the facial appearance of the offspring via mTORC1 signaling”. The study found that the biochemistry of the diet of mice during pregnancy affects the appearance of mice including the size of their cranium and facial features. The study found this effect was also applicable to maternal human diets during pregnancy. In other words, not just the genetics of parents but also the genetic dynamics of our food affects the characteristics of offspring.

Balance, or Homeostasis as It is Known in Medicine, is a Dynamic Process in the Body.

Homeostatic feedback systems manage more or less automatically the balance at the level of our cells, organs, organ systems, and for the body as a whole. This is not a one size fits all system, local and global adjustments to biochemical balance in trillions of cells are distinct and specific to the need to maintain balance in each cell and simultaneously the body as a whole. These varied responses are governed by the abstract organising intelligence in the body which is ultimately connected with our consciousness or awareness and supported by our diet.

Thus Ayurveda describes our homeostatic physiological mechanisms not only in terms of the balance between our transport, transformation, and structural systems, but also in terms of the togetherness of knower, knowing and known. We have written extensively about this before in Your DNA Diet and elsewhere and also referenced the practical health benefits of a lighter purer diet and the daily practice of meditation.

In contrast, modern medicines go deep into the physiology and dictate physiological responses by indiscriminately flooding cells and systems with inflexible biochemical and now genetic instructions, unheeding of local situations and needs. None of this does more universal damage than mRNA vaccines which directly affect the immune functioning of the whole body. This all translates into an upset of balance in both local and global physiological systems. The exact opposite of time-honoured traditional approaches to balancing health.

Education Needs to Encompass Well Being

From this perspective, modern medical interventions are contributing to the growth of hospitalisation, medical misadventure and the record levels of disease, including cancers, heart disease, and infectious diseases. Yet there is a brick wall shutting out questions, criticism and complementary approaches. The crisis has become so intense and intractable that observant independent commentators of the modern world are starting to talk about a looming mega-disaster whether it will be geopolitical, financial, or pharmaceutical, including Senator Ron Paul and many others.

Ron Paul’s solution is the education of people and I agree with him. The content and style of education today is largely regulated by the state with the support of the legacy media. If we are to forge a new and safer direction of civilization we will need to revitalise education and extend its content to include well being in all its facets. Education needs to value life. Efforts to improve education need not be ‘calls in the wilderness’, they can involve collective efforts and individual initiatives. These cannot be postponed.

Recently, a close friend who was taking statins developed muscle pain, digestive weakness, and peripheral neuropathy (loss of sensation in hands and/or feet). They stopped taking the statins and talked to their doctor, who suggested tests to assess their cardiac health. Most of the symptoms dissipated gradually after stopping the drug, and they got a clean bill of cardiac health. So are statins the most effective therapy to prevent heart disease?

A meta-analysis of 21 randomised clinical trials in primary and secondary prevention published by the JAMA Network entitled Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis concluded that:

“the absolute benefits of statins are modest, may not be strongly mediated through the degree of LDL-C reduction, and should be communicated to patients as part of informed clinical decision-making as well as to inform clinical guidelines and policy”.

Unverified Link Between Cholesterol and Disease Reduction

In layman’s terms, the study found reductions in the absolute risk of just 0.8% for all-cause mortality, 1.3% for myocardial infarction, and 0.4% for stroke in those randomised to treatment with statins compared with controls. More worrying, their meta-regression was inconclusive regarding the association between the magnitude of statin-induced LDL-C reduction and all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke. In other words, an association between cholesterol reduction and disease reduction could not be verified.

More than 200 million people around the world take statins daily, and their use is climbing rapidly from 31 million in the USA (12% 0f the population) during 2008/9 to 92 million (35% of the population) in 2018/19. Currently, half a million (10% of the population) are taking statins in New Zealand. Studies show the side effects of long term statin use include muscle pain and damage (experienced by 5% of people), liver damage (2% to 6% of people), and peripheral neuropathy (as high as 7% of people). The FDA warns on statin labels that some people have developed memory loss or confusion while taking statins.

Vegetarian and Vegan Diets Linked to Significant Cardiovascular Health Benefits

In contrast, a meta-analysis of nine studies entitled Association of Vegetarian and Vegan Diets with Cardiovascular Health: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies and Randomized Trials found very large effect sizes including a 29% risk reduction for cardiovascular disease (CVD). It reported a 14% reduction in CVD mortality and a 32% reduction in Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) mortality. One of the studies evaluated showed a significant 39% risk reduction for stroke incidence.

These results imply that following a vegetarian or vegan diet is at least ten times more effective than statins in preventing heart disease or stroke. It is also of note that such diets are free of the negative health side effects of statins. The authors conclude that:

“Policymakers and healthcare professionals should prioritise promoting healthy diets for CVD prevention.”

In addition to the beneficial effects of vegetarian and vegan diets on heart disease, multiple studies show they have a beneficial effect of reduced cancer incidence, the number two cause of death after heart disease. Something that statins do not affect. Thus the reductions in risk factors start to add up, meaning that a vegetarian diet will significantly reduce your all-cause mortality risk. In other words, you live a longer, more healthy life with less chronic illness and pain.

Doctors Rarely Recommend Vegetarian Diets Over Statins Despite Health Benefits

But when was the last time your doctor initiated conversation with you about switching to a vegetarian diet or eating more fruit and vegetables? Probably never, despite the fact that this would be many times more effective at keeping you alive and healthy than their routine statin prescription. Doctors have little training in nutrition and diet. Moreover, current professional ethical (???) standards require that doctors prescribe certain pharmaceutical drugs for certain conditions even if a more healthy, proven, natural approach is available.

Rather than develop the resources and knowledge base in the direction of safe and effective alternatives to drugs, Health New Zealand prioritises and uses its resources to encourage and monitor drug compliance. For example, Health New Zealand tracks whether we renew our prescriptions on time at the chemist. You have probably been on the receiving end of a health professional’s stern lecture on the need to take drugs, sometimes even extending to warnings that your life might end prematurely if you don’t do as you are told. The measured outcomes for statins are too small to justify this approach.

Are There Other Approaches to Preventing Heart Disease That Might Further Improve Outcomes?

A study of 2000 regular participants in Transcendental Meditation enrolled in a health insurance scheme for five years was compared to 600,000 members of the same health insurance carrier. The study found an 87% reduction in inpatient admission for heart disease among the TM group. But that wasn’t all. Hospital admissions per 1000 were lower for the TM group than the norm for all of 17 major medical treatment categories, including 55.4% less for benign and malignant tumours, -30.4% for all infectious diseases, -30.6% for all mental disorders, and -87.3% for diseases of the nervous system. An across the board health outcome improvement.

TM is a simple, easy twice daily practice of twenty minutes that does not require belief, but your doctor has probably not advised you to learn meditation for your health. An article in the journal Hypertension entitled Evidence for Upgrading the Ratings for Transcendental Meditation: Response to AHA Scientific Statement on Alternative Methods and BP encourages doctors to examine the evidence and upgrade their advice to patients with hypertension.

In the 1980s, I had a series of meetings with Dr. Hiddlestone, who was then the Director General of Health and informed him about research on the health benefits of Transcendental Meditation. He was impressed with the published research but met a brick wall when he sought to convince his colleagues. When it comes to health care, the pharmaceutical paradigm dominates against the evidence.

Statins may slightly improve endpoint outcomes for just 1.3% (13 in 1000) suffering from heart disease, a figure that pales in comparison to 14% (140 in 1000) for vegetarian diets and around 87% (870 out of 1000) for meditation. However, these statistics have not penetrated the walls of doctor surgeries. With over half a million Kiwis on statins, the rate of heart disease is rocketing up. Almost doubling over five years. Are statins working? You tell me.

The extreme reliance on pharmaceutical approaches took a giant leap forward (or is it backward) during the pandemic into the intimate world of biotech medicine. A world in which those alert enough to do their own background research into drug safety are reviled and cancelled. Patients are routinely cajoled and harassed for asking questions, let alone non compliance. Adverse medical events are routinely ignored and remain unrecorded. Losing your job and personal freedom at the behest of medical tsars has become the cost of common sense. We have entered an era of medical doublespeak and fanatical faith. God help us.

A large number of recent articles and studies raise crucial questions about the standards being applied to drug assessment and regulation.

This article is available as a PDF document to download/print or share.

Are the regulators facilitating drug approval by failing to require adequate long term testing and assessment of adverse effects? In other words, are the general public now firmly established as legitimate subjects for experimentation? We look at three examples among the many causing growing public concern:

Weight Loss Drugs

Weight loss is one the highest earning drug sectors. An article in the Daily Mail entitled “How the new weight-loss drugs may work BETTER than Ozempic and other jabs. So will they really be free of the grim side-effects which mean so many give up within a year or two?” illustrates how the merry go round of drug approval works—short term testing, miracle promises, lax drug approval, adoption by the medical profession, widespread use among the public, adverse effects come to light, then new drugs are offered as replacements with promises that this time….

A very profitable business for all concerned except Joe Public who invariably has to bear the burden of pain, disappointment, and disability.

Weight loss drugs Wegovy and Ozempic have been wildly popular market winners with celebrity endorsement and reportedly amazing results, which a few years ago, before their introduction, seemed an impossible dream. All of the weight loss drugs, including a soon-to-be-released new generation of drugs, work by mimicking GLP-1, a hormone made naturally in the body that helps slow the passage of food through the stomach — which makes people feel less hungry and rapidly lose weight.

It’s not difficult to understand why drug companies are pouring into this field. Analysts at Barclays forecast that sales of weight-loss drugs will top £19billion globally this year, with the market growing to £110billion by 2030.

Nor is it difficult to realise why manufacturers are ‘promising’ new versions of the weight loss drugs with ‘fewer side effects’.

The long term side effects of the weekly injections have started to bite. Mounting evidence suggests that in the real world, the drugs’ side-effects such as vomiting, diarrhoea, nausea, constipation and tiredness are proving so common and overwhelming that it makes the current versions impractical for most patients to stay on for very long.

Less common complications of GLP-1 medications are gallstones, increased heart rate, kidney damage, and pancreatitis — a condition where the pancreas rapidly becomes painfully inflamed.

Another serious concern is gastroparesis, a severe disorder where the stomach muscles become effectively paralysed and the stomach does not empty. Sufferers vomit days-old food. For some patients, the only remedy for gastroparesis may be a gastric bypass. Around 10,000 patients in the U.S. are now suing Ozempic’s maker, Novo Nordisk, and Mounjaro’s manufacturer, Eli Lilly, for medical-injury damages.

A study in the journal BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care in 2022, entitled “Real-world weight change, adherence, and discontinuation among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in the UK” looked at health records of 589 Britons who had been prescribed GLP-1 medications for type 2 diabetes. It reported the patient drop-out rates were a staggering 45 per cent after one year and 65 per cent at two years.

The researchers warned that their study results ‘suggest the real-world benefit of these agents on weight loss may be lower than that observed in clinical trials’.

Prime Therapeutics, in an analysis of data from over 4,000 US patients prescribed GLP-1 drugs, found that more than two-thirds of patients stopped taking them within a year.

Other studies show once a patient drops out of the regimen, most of their weight returns, along with related risks for heart disease and type 2 diabetes, such as obesity, chronic body-wide inflammation and problems with insulin control. Meanwhile, longer-term side-effects are also emerging. One concern is muscle loss: trials of GLP-1 drugs show roughly 40 percent of the weight loss is muscle mass rather than fat.

The Daily Mail article goes on to describe efforts to develop alternative weight loss drugs, all of which appear to already have known side effects as serious as GLP-1 inhibitors. Yet this doesn’t seem to stop drug companies from promising that side effect-free weight loss drugs are just around the corner.

Ahmed Ahmed, a consultant bariatric surgeon at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust in London, strikes a note of warning:

“Unrealistic expectations of a weight-loss cure have been driven by social media, not science or medicine, and by marketing rather than public health….

“These drugs are still quite new and we only have three or four years’ worth of evidence. I worry that after ten years of taking the drugs people may develop very serious physical side-effects. We just don’t know yet. As for other types of new drugs that speed the metabolism, we just don’t know whether they will work and there is certainly a risk of serious side-effects such as heart damage here.’’

If you want to dive deeper into the murky world of weight loss drugs, watch “The effects of Ozempic and other weight loss injections | 60 Minutes Australia“. The video features reports of deaths following Ozempic use. It asks questions of drug regulators, doctors, and researchers which reveal an elaborate system of evasion, passing the buck, blaming others, and dismissing deaths as the price of health.

NSAIDs

You may not be taking weight loss drugs, but most of the public are now fully conditioned by their doctor to take non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) like ibuprofen to relieve acute inflammation. New research suggests this might not be a good idea. An article entitled Anti-Inflammatory Drug Might Lead to Chronic Pain, While Inflammation Could Heal: Experts in Epoch Health explains more. It asks: does short-term relief—and interfering with the body’s natural healing process—come at the cost of chronic pain?

An article in Science Translational Medicine entitled Acute inflammatory response via neutrophil activation protects against the development of chronic pain reported mouse studies where early treatment with a steroid or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) also led to prolonged pain despite being analgesic in the short term. Analysis of pain trajectories of human subjects reporting acute back pain in the UK Biobank identified elevated risk of pain persistence for subjects taking NSAIDs.

In other words, the natural inflammatory response of the body to injury is part of the long term healing process. Interrupt that, and the risk of long term chronic pain is elevated. This is in addition to the previously noted risks of NSAIDS which include cardiovascular events and gastrointestinal bleeding.

NSAIDs are one of the most commonly used drug classes in the world. It is estimated that more than 30 million people use them on a daily basis, and they account for 60% of the analgesic market in the United States. The new findings suggest that NSAIDs may actually prolong the painful injuries they are supposed to benefit and turn them into chronic conditions.

Puberty Blockers

On March 12th the NHS banned puberty blocker prescriptions for children under 18 in a ‘landmark decision’. MPs called for the ban to be extended to private medical practice. Dr Hilary Cass, the former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health warned that the drugs may permanently disrupt the brain maturation of adolescents, potentially rewiring neural circuits in a way that cannot be reversed, and said there was a lack of long-term evidence and data collection on their safety and effectiveness. The article said:

“The significance of NHS England’s statement that there is not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of puberty blockers cannot be overstated.”

The American College of Pediatricians warns that puberty blockers may cause mental illness. They can cause depression and other emotional disturbances related to suicide. In fact, the package insert for Lupron, the number one prescribed puberty blocker in America, lists “emotional instability” as a side effect and warns prescribers to “Monitor for development or worsening of psychiatric symptoms during treatment.”

The list goes on. We recently reported that MHRA, the drug regulator in the UK, is investigating high rates of adverse effects from blood thinners, another class of products among the world’s most heavily prescribed drugs. As powerful new drugs are brought to market via biotech research projects which investigate and manipulate fundamental biomolecular pathways, doctors are grappling with significantly increased rates of serious adverse effects. This has been the background to a gradual distortion of medical ethics which now accepts medical misadventure and even death as the inevitable price of ‘progress’.

mRNA vaccine technology

mRNA vaccines have been associated with the highest rates of adverse effects ever recorded in the history of vaccines. But we don’t see regulators wringing their hands in concern or offering weak apologies as with the above drugs. Instead, there is still a barrage of endorsement and encouragement along with a wall of silence and denial when it comes to adverse effects. Why is that?

The answer lies in the PR dynamics of the pharmaceutical industry and the modern medical profession. mRNA interventions are the poster child of future health. The biotechnology industry is promising nothing less than freedom from disease as more and more products which manipulate the transcriptional interface of DNA with RNA inside the cell are researched and brought to market.

No disease is too insignificant to be missed, they have a long list, but the unprecedented range and rate of mRNA Covid vaccine adverse effects is a fly in the ointment of this biotechnology dream. The insiders’ story is clear: we may have got this wrong but we will eventually get it right. The story for public consumption is a brazen lie: Nothing to see here, it is all wonderful. The insiders’ story ignores the reality of risk: Genetic processes inside the cell control the whole physiology in a complex dance of multitasking—wide ranging mutagenic events from genetic interventions are inevitable. The public story tacitly admits that it’s OK to experiment on Joe Public without letting on what is happening.

At root is a complete misunderstanding of human life, which should be obvious but is carefully hidden by a scientific paradigm that seeks to hide the essence of humanity. The whole physiology works to support our everyday experience, of knower knowing and known. The tripartite 3 in 1 structure of our awareness—the togetherness of observer, process of observation and observed. As biotechnology delves too deep and disrupts fundamental cellular processes, it is putting this structure of human life at risk.

If the risks of biotech medicine were publicly admitted, a trillion dollar industry would come crashing down and the myth of a genetically manipulated perfect future would be dispelled. There is too much money, prestige, power and hope at stake to let that happen. Voices raised with questions are cancelled and denied a platform. The public remains misinformed.

However, the writing is on the wall. The New York Times has just published an article entitled “Four Years On, the Mysteries of Covid Are Unraveling.” There is no mention of the increasing evidence of a lab origin for COVID-19 and, crucially, no mention of COVID-19 vaccines. The NYT was previously leading the charge for Covid vaccines, the silence is now becoming noticeable.

Here in New Zealand concerns are not yet being released to the public or covered in the media. Without full information, the New Zealand public will remain misinformed.

ACT NOW

You can register your displeasure at www.covidinquiry.co.nz, which offers you the opportunity to agree with The People’s Terms (Full text available at the above link) and also make a submission to the review process of the current terms of the Royal Commission. The aim is to get 100,000 signatures to demonstrate the growing level of public concern, the need for transparency, and a wide ranging revised scope for the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19.

The government inquiry is closing within a week. Please act now.

An influential cross-party group of UK MPs has raised concerns that the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) knew of serious cardiac side effects of COVID-19 vaccines, including myo/pericarditis and clotting, but failed to alert the public for several months between February and June 2021. During this time, over 24 million people received the COVID-19 vaccine in the UK alone, unaware of the risks.

This article is available as a downloadable PDF document.

The UK situation finds an exact parallel in New Zealand. An OIA request H202117570 published on January 12th 2022 confirms that Medsafe, our medicines regulatory authority, was made aware of an extensive range of side effects of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine prior to its provisional approval. This included the information contained in the damning Cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports of Pfizer bnt162b2 dated 28 February 2021. Yet Medsafe failed to advise the public of any risks for some months, instead telling the public COVID-19 vaccines were beyond doubt ‘safe and effective’.

As late as December 2021, Director General of Health Dr. Ashley Bloomfield, whilst then belatedly admitting the risk of myo/pericarditis, was, as we reported in May last year, minimising its possible prevalence in his public statements and communications with District Health Boards.

MPs Demand Investigation into MHRA’s Approach to Vaccine Safety

A revealing article in the UK Daily Telegraph entitled “Medicines regulator failed to flag Covid vaccine side effects and must be investigated, say MPs” reports that the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) of 24 MPs on pandemic response and recovery has written to the Health Select Committee stating that “far from protecting patients” the regulator MHRA operates in a way that “puts them at serious risk.”

The group also warned that the MHRA Yellow Card reporting system – which encourages patients and doctors to flag-up medicine side effects – “grossly” underestimates complexities, and in some instances picks up just one in 180 cases of harm. In reply, Steve Brine, the health committee chairman, has said an inquiry into patient safety is “very likely”.

How is it possible that medicines regulators are failing in their duty and endangering public health?

APPG has submitted concerns that MHRA regulation of medicine is funded by the pharmaceutical industry and said the body had shifted from focusing on scrutiny to trying to help drugs get approved. Dame June Raine, the chief executive of the MHRA, who announced she would be stepping down last week, has previously said the agency was transitioning from “watchdog to the enabler,” a phrase which the APPG said warranted its own investigation.

Undermining Public Trust: The Conflict of Interest and Evasion in Drug Safety Regulation

The APPG said that concerns raised directly with the MHRA had been met with “an habitually dismissive and evasive response”.A phrase that aptly fits the tone and substance of Medsafe safety reports, which doggedly maintain to this day against all evidence that record number of reports of vaccine harm and death lodged with CARM (Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring) are unrelated to Covid vaccination. An indefensible position.

Medicine regulators, including Medsafe, are funded by the pharmaceutical industry they are supposed to regulate, which fosters a cosy if not corrupt relationship. Much is said about revolving doors between regulators and industry. Whilst this is true of countries with significant pharmaceutical manufacturing, the problem is more extensive than that. Global supply chains ensure that most countries end up mistakenly relying on lax or biased regulators based far away in other jurisdictions for a heads up on safety.

Often, the information is not originating from regulators at all. ICMRA (the international coalition of medicines regulatory authorities), of which Medsafe and MHRA are members, is largely funded by the global pharmaceutical industry. It operates a database providing information on drug safety and risks to its members. The database ensures that drug approval is semi-automated from the international level, which undermines the independent vigilance of national bodies. It provides an illusion of safety without the substance to guarantee freedom from risk to public health.

Rethinking Drug Safety: The Urgent Need for Transparency and Rigor in the Approval Process

The failure to publicly acknowledge the risks of COVID-19 vaccines shows what an unthinking process drug approval has become. The problem extends to a wide range of novel drugs. For example, the MHRA recently said it would investigate why very widely prescribed blood thinners were causing dangerous side effects in between two and five per cent of patients. In other words, as many as 5 out of 100 patients are being seriously affected by drugs MHRA had previously approved—an unprecedented stratospheric rate of risk. This augurs a catastrophic breakdown in drug safety regulation.

The introduction of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines raises even more serious safety concerns. The completely novel class of mRNA and other biotech vaccines which edit the command and control mechanisms of our immune system have been introduced despite early warning signals of serious harm at high rates. There was no long term testing data because of the rapid response to the pandemic but crucially nor was there any adequate on-going plan in place to monitor the missing long term effect data according to the canons of accepted risk assessment and criteria of causality.

Regulators like MHRA and Medsafe simply failed in their safety role and compounded this mistake in an apparent frenzy of ‘safe and effective’ public relations hype. How could they do that? They fell for the biotechnology myth promoted by PR gurus. In essence, the idea that biotechnology is so precise and accurate that any desirable trait can be enhanced scientifically and safely. A gobbledegook and totally at variance with published research.

Where does this leave New Zealand?

In 2023, we had the lowest birth rate ever in New Zealand, 26% below what is required to maintain our population. Our death rate is still running at 8% above the longer term rate. Life expectancy has stalled. These are canary in the coal mine figures.

Official mortality data by vax status released on February 15 under an Official Information Request HNZ00033573 show the excess deaths are almost entirely among the vaccinated, while the death rate of the unvaccinated remains stable.

These figures should raise the alarm about the rapid introduction of biotechnology in healthcare. Yet Health New Zealand, the courts, and the government are still pursuing a campaign to discredit a sincere and principled whistleblower raising the alarm about excess deaths, whilst ignoring their own recently released figures, which, as the chart above indicates, verify and amplify the serious concerns highlighted by the whistleblower. Love is blind. The medical love affair with biotechnology needs to be put under the microscope. It is misguided. Health service administrators, drug regulators, and doctors alike need to face up to past mistakes and their own data illustrating the reality of declining public health.

Two papers published this week present starkly contrasting views of the scientific process. Dr. John Gibson economist at the University of Waikato, published “Cumulative excess deaths in New Zealand in the COVID-19 era: biases from ignoring changes in population growth rates” whereas the Global Vaccine Data Network published “COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals” whose contributors included Dr. Helen Petousis-Harris of the University of Auckland.

The second paper made headlines in newspapers all around the world, see for example “Two very rare Covid vaccine side-effects detected in global study of 99 million” in the Guardian. The Guardian article and most others highlighted the use of the word ‘rare’ in the paper when referring to adverse events and translated this into a bold endorsement of Covid vaccine safety saying:

Results confirm how uncommon known complications are as researchers confirm benefits from vaccines still ‘vastly outweigh the risks’.

The use of quotation marks implies that the phrase was lifted directly from the paper. It wasn’t. The paper made the same mistake we have referred to in the last three releases of the Hatchard Report. It was a disease-specific assessment of safety. It looked at a list of just 13 specific diseases and assessed whether their occurrence following vaccination was higher than the established background rate of these conditions in the general population pre-pandemic. It did not investigate any effect on all-cause mortality, the measure mostly likely to assess safety or risk.

In the event, rather than confirming benefits, it found the incidence of Guillain-Barré syndrome, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, myocarditis, and pericarditis were related to Covid vaccination as previously admitted, but also found an increased incidence of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis or acute brain or spinal inflammation following the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine.

It also cautiously noted that “Other potential safety signals that require further investigation were identified.” It did not adequately deal with the known under-reporting of conditions following COVID-19 vaccination, and whilst using the term Cardiovascular Conditions, it only investigated myopericarditis occurrence, not the incidence of heart attacks, nor did it look at cancer rates.

Therefore, the authors prejudged the issue by looking at a very limited pre-selected list of conditions, the same discredited method employed by health authorities around the world, including New Zealand, to minimise the significance of and dismiss the avalanche of reports of post-vaccination injury. In other words, they supposed there were just a few conditions that could be related to vaccination, thereby refusing to acknowledge the unprecedented increases in all-cause mortality brought about by unusual increases in a very wide range of conditions.

Gibson’s paper is tightly focused on correcting the methodology used by Michael Baker and others to claim that New Zealand has had a net fall in all-cause mortality since the start of the pandemic. A claim that has been widely reported by politicians and the media in an attempt to reassure the public.

Gibson shows that the methods used to project New Zealand’s population assumed a rising population, which was not the case due to border closures. When the actual population is taken into account, cumulative all-cause mortality rose by 4% between 2020 and 2022 and then rose by around 8% in 2023. Gibson points out this is not statistically distinguishable from comparable countries such as Denmark.

Gibson notes, “Accurate health and economic data are needed to evaluate policy responses to COVID-19. A potentially comprehensive health indicator is excess deaths.” His paper confirms excess deaths are rising and thereby casts doubt upon current health policy decision-making.

So How Should the Authorities Respond?

Clearly, hospitals and emergency departments are overwhelmed. Health Service New Zealand publicity keeps emphasising the importance of Covid boosters, but what if Covid boosters are a part of the problem or even the main culprit? Whether this is the case or not, the government has no clear idea of what specific health conditions are driving the health crisis. Any attempt to alleviate the situation will require an accurate audit of health care usage by age and condition and a corresponding analysis of all-cause mortality.

Three years ago, the New Zealand government and other governments around the world granted the Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) unfettered access to their health data and statistics. The paper published this month by GVDN shows just how miserably GVDN has let them down. It failed to ask any questions that would detect any long term effects of the Covid vaccines.

It is time for governments to insist that health services provide them with up to date information on the extent of health care usage and all-cause mortality, and that also needs to be related to Covid vaccine status.

A YouTube video by Dr John Campbell details the extent of the problem and makes the compelling observation that excess mortality is a problem in highly vaccinated countries including Canada,  USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands, South Korea and Taiwan, but nonexistent in nations with low vaccination rates including Bulgaria, Roumania and Hungary.

There is a popular saying in India ‘Truth Alone Triumphs’, this is echoed in various forms in cultures around the world including Shakespeare’s “Truth Will Out”. Truth, by its nature, is what it is; it exists independent of anyone’s opinion or whim. As such, it is eternal. Despite the growing tendency to believe that reality is what I think it is, truth surfaces over time. This statement reflects the Cosmic order, which is so vast and inviolable that no individual or government can swim against its tide for any but a short time.

Instead of relying on political rhetoric, lobbyists, foreign commercial interests, or consultants, the government needs to order a comprehensive audit of our health statistics, and then the truth will out.