I had a shock this weekend, which has turned into a wake-up call. For years I had been sprinkling Black Salt (Kala Namak) on my avocado toast with its unique sulphurous flavour reminiscent of eggs.
The traditional texts of Ayurveda recommend it as an aid to digestion. Recently, it has become something of a sensation among Western cooks and chefs seeking new, exciting flavours for their dishes. In the shops, it is often labelled โIndian Volcanic Salt,โ and I always imagined it was mined in some remote exotic place in the Himalayas.
But it is not volcanic at all, browsing the internet I discovered that it is manufactured by an ancient process using extreme heat to fuse a particular kind of mineral salt with a range of herbs and fruits. The shock came when I discovered that there are only a couple of places left preparing the highly prized salt using traditional methods. Instead, industrial companies are making a look-alike salt that tastes somewhat similar but is, in fact, a blend of chemicals, some of which, such as fluoride, are quite poisonous. Hence, for years I have been unwittingly poisoning myself.
You may comment that perhaps the lack of regulation in the diverse Indian market place is to blame, whereas here in the West we have stricter standards and labelling, but is this the case? Among New Zealandโs most prized export products is butter from mostly grass fed cows roaming on green pastures often within sight of snow capped mountains. So far, so good, until you begin to ask how the butter is made. Numerous YouTube videos explain a very reassuring process of churning cream, however more than 90% of butter you find in the shops is no longer made that way.
Giant factories use secretive technologies that more closely resemble margarine manufacture. This involves separating out the different kinds of fat in cream and using only the softer fats to make spreadable butter. The essentials of this process were discovered in NZ in 1970, but only became widely used around 1990, by which time, after much research, a commercially viable industrial manufacturing process had been perfected. So what became of the harder fats? Yes, you guessed it, they were not thrown away. They just might have found their way into ordinary butter.
Your grandmother might tell you that around 1990 butter no longer performed quite the way it used to in home baking. While those who make clarified butter (ghee) for cooking found that when heated, butter separated into strange layers of milky liquid and greenish fat unsuitable for ghee. No one even informed the public of the switch, and the health implications of the hard separated fat content remains an open question, no doubt uninvestigated and swept under the carpet. Butter manufacturers all over the world now use these techniques aside from the few boutique creameries still traditionally churning.
This has happened despite the fact that traditional churning can be and has been a large scale simple process. It is also very easy to make butter at home. It is the work of just a few minutes to churn room temperature cream using a whisk or kitchen aid and then squeeze out the buttermilk (which can be used in other yummy dishes).
The Global Dairy Industry Didnโt Stop There
As vegetarianism became more popular, the use of animal rennet in cheese became a marketing problem. Animal rennet is used to precipitate the curds from milk as the first stage of cheese making. The solution was โmicrobial rennetโ. It was much cheaper, more readily available, and acceptable to animal loving vegetarians. Microbial rennet is made in a laboratory, and it is so powerful that just a few drops precipitate the solids from the liquid milk. Today almost all cheese throughout the world is made using this so-called โethicalโ microbial rennet. That is progress, right?
Just think, when you eat cheese, you are now ingesting a powerful agent designed in a laboratory to precipitate solids in solution. Well, there are a lot of solids happily performing their functions in solution in our body. We are 60% water. If you have problems with constipation, haemorrhoids, blood clotting, varicose veins, menstrual pains, and other health problems involving congestion or coagulation, you might consider how much commercial cheese you are consuming.
However, you can create fresh cheese at home within ten minutes by heating whole milk (not homogenised milk) to a full rolling boil and then turn off the heat, add a little vinegar, lemon juice, or pure yoghurt. Stir and sieve to create a tasty fresh cheese that is healthy. If you crave the sharp tastes, cheeses like brie or camembert and some European cheeses are still made using traditional methods (but read the labels).
We like a slice of bread with our butter and cheese, and here, too, the industrial chemists are hard at work. In 1961, the Chorleywood Bread Process was invented, which enabled the continuous production of bread rather than the traditional batch process. This necessitated the introduction of hard fats and some mysterious bread improvers, which has given modern packaged bread that rubbery springy quality which seems to last for weeks.
No problem though, you can buy an automatic bread maker and the machine will make it for you without hard fats. Bread lovers will know about sour doughs and have their favourite artisan shops.
Synthetic Ingredients Approved as Substantial Equivalence
You can see the problem canโt you? Industrial scale manufacturers are taking over our food supply and changing it without telling us. Government regulators work hand in glove with such companies. Medsafe lists over 3000 synthetic ingredients it has โapprovedโ often under a convention known as โsubstantial equivalenceโ. This does not generally involve testing, but instead, if something looks and tastes similar to a natural ingredient or has a chemical composition that is somewhat similar, it is probably OK and therefore approved for general consumption, or is it OK?
A 2019 study in the USA, the country leading the way towards industrial food production and processing entitled โBurden of Gastrointestinal Symptoms in the United States: Results of a Nationally Representative Survey of Over 71,000 Americans” records that there are over 100 million ambulance visits to ED each year in the US as a result of gastrointestinal (GI) problems. A survey of 71,000 individuals found that during the week prior (yes, just one representative week) symptoms included heartburn/reflux (30.9%), abdominal pain (24.8%), bloating (20.6%), diarrhea (20.2%), and constipation (19.7%). Less common symptoms were nausea/vomiting (9.5%), dysphagia (5.8%), and bowel incontinence (4.8%).
So, our government-approved, highly-processed and adulterated diet might not be so safe after all. There are a number of factors for the wary consumer to consider here. The purity of ingredients (organic farming excludes pesticides), additives, synthetic substitutions, genetic modification, and changes to traditional processes. Lax regulations are allowing all of these to be altered without public discussion or labelling.
Which brings me back to black salt. I was really disgusted, but then I should have been more alert and less naive. Supermarkets are now full of processed packaged food that is unhealthy and it is a long list. The Dutch have a saying “If you want to be happy for a day, get drunk. If you want to be happy for a year, get married. But if you want to be happy for a lifetime, plant a garden.โ If you havenโt already voted with your feet, you might start with a vegetable patch. If gardening is very new and intimidating, talk to neighbours and friends who can help you get started. Modern civilization began with agriculture, make sure it doesnโt end with biotech culture.
As you are fully aware we have suffered an extended health crisis along with most nations, closely related to the emergence of a novel coronavirus and our response to it. We are still suffering the effects of this pandemic. This letter relates to the concerning and puzzling replies of Health New Zealand to two Official Information Act (OIA) inquiries seeking information about health outcomes following the Covid-19 response. In particular, the persistent high rates of excess deaths and any possible relationship with Covid vaccination.
Firstly I want to appreciate the dedication and knowledge of the medical staff at Health New Zealand. I have recently been under care at two hospitals for an extended period. I underwent surgery and I was deeply impressed by and grateful for the competence and quality of care I received. I have no doubt this saved my life. We are justly proud of a long tradition of funded public health care in New Zealand and we all wish this to continue to play its vital role in promoting and protecting public health.
My letter relates to OIA responses HNZ00013886 and HNZ00033573. Both requests asked for information about the availability of any data that matches all-cause mortality with Covid vaccination status. I note that prior to the pandemic the existence of any relationship, even if minor, between the use of a drug or vaccine and all-cause mortality was considered critical in evaluating drug safety.
โAll-cause mortality, (in contrast to disease-specific mortality), does not require judgments about the cause of death. Instead, all that this endpoint requires is an accurate ascertainment of deaths and when they occur. Furthermore, all-cause mortality is a measure that can capture unexpected lethal side effects of medical care. Because of the concern that some cardiac interventions may cause non-cardiac deaths, for example, there has been a trend toward the use of all-cause mortality as the primary end point in cardiac drug trials.โ
As you know, the various Covid vaccines did not go through the normal long term trials that are designed to pick up any such relationship. Now, three years since the introduction of Covid vaccines in New Zealand, it is possible to remedy this deficiency by comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated cohorts with those of matched unvaccinated cohorts separated by age and cause of death.
It would not be in any way an exaggeration to suggest that this comparison will settle any debate concerning Covid vaccine safety.
It would enable Health NZ to respond appropriately based on sound evidence. Incredibly, the replies from Health NZ to the OIA requests cited above present a completely contrary picture. They present a puzzling collection of ad hoc statements without evidential support or compelling logic.
HNZ00013886 says:
โTo provide some context, those who have been vaccinated/had boosters are more likely to have high all-cause mortality risk (additional to being aged) than those who did not. Therefore, vaccination will likely be misinterpreted as being associated with increased risk of death. To explain this requires a regression level analysis, which can take upwards of three months based on previous experience.โ
The Health NZ official, Michael Clearly, Acting OIA Manager continued:
โGiven the amount of work that would still have to be carried out to provide you with this information, we have decided to refuse your request under section 18(f) of the Act as the information requested cannot be made available without substantial collation or research.โ
Thus the reply appears to concede that the vaccinated do have a higher rate of all-cause death, a huge red flag, but then decides this does not need to be investigated.
The justification for this lack of action appears to be an unsupported and statistically implausible assertion that โit is likely that vaccination may still appear to increase mortality risk due to โresidual confoundingโ coming from measurement of comorbidities.โ
Dr. Diana Sarfati, the Director General of Health is an eminently qualified cancer researcher, I expect that she will appreciate the underlying assumption of this strange assertion: i.e. 87% of our population who have been vaccinated are a special group who were intrinsically sicker than the general population from the beginning. A very highly unlikely and prima facie completely untenable hypothesis.
HNZ00033573 goes further and takes an even more alarming direction. Danielle Coe, Manager (OIA) Government Services replies that:
โโฆan order was made by the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) on 1st December 2023 which prevents all access, use, and publication of information held by Te Whatu Ora on the National Vaccination Database, or any copies, extracts or information derived from it.โ
In other words, it appears to close the door to any research into any relationship that might or might not exist between Covid vaccination and all-cause mortality. The reply asserts that even if such research were to use anonymised data, there is a residual privacy interest in the information that would likely damage the public interest.
Despite this, the OIA is accompanied by an anonymised data set of deaths by age, month, number of Covid-19 shots and days to death. This was released on Dec 15 but a preliminary look at this data appears to confirm the assertion of HNZ00013886 that the vaccinated might indeed have a higher mortality rate. Note: here are still key pieces of information that are missing from the released data set.
Despite this, the OIA reply asserts in its own words:
โVaccination is safe and effective and everyone should keep up to date with their vaccines to protect themselves, their whฤnau and their communities. There is no evidence that vaccination is responsible for excess mortality in New Zealand.โ
I trust you can see the fallacy in this argument. No rigorous investigation is necessary into long term Covid vaccine safety, because vaccination is safeโa circular argument. Such a categorical statement should require evidence and analysis, but none is provided.
The naivety is on a par with this tweet from rich lister Lord Alan Sugar who reports he has had six Covid jabs but has come down with his second infection which was serious and then says โOne will never know how much more ill I would have been had I not had the 6 jabs.โ Sugar appears unaware of the well known evolutionary course of viruses to adapt and infect highly vaccinated populations.
I suppose, although please correct me if we are wrong, that you are relying on the conclusions of studies such as a paper published in the journal Vaccine on 2nd February entitled โThe impact of Covid-19 vaccination in Aotearoa New Zealand: A modelling studyโ authored by a group of NZ academics. The Abstract claims that between January 2022 and June 2023:
โOur results estimate that vaccines saved 6650 (95% credible interval [4424, 10180]) lives, and prevented 74500 [51000, 115400] years of life lost and 45100 [34400, 55600] hospitalisations during this 18-month period.โ
They concluded that: โCovid-19 vaccination has greatly reduced the health burden in New Zealandโ
The paper itself, as the title suggests, is a mathematical modelling of the effect of vaccines, masking, and antiviral drugs on the rates of Covid infection, hospitalisation, and deaths. The error in the paper being its reliance on disease-specific (i.e. Covid-specific) data rather than the more reliable all-cause mortality data.
The paper does not investigate differences in health outcomes between the vaccinated and unvaccinated and thus falls flat at the first hurdle. It completely ignores the issue that overall mortality is ~20% higher about 5 months after vax roll-out compared with historic trends and continues high until the present. A key point is found in the paperโs supplement which describes their model.
“The antibody titre is assumed to be a correlate of protection and a given titre is generally more protective against more severe clinical endpoints, in line with the findings of [5].”
Translated, this means, the authors assumed that the vaccine was effective against all-cause death and severe Covid and just projected the benefits of the vaccine based on this assumption. They never even considered the possibility that the vaccine was not beneficial, which is what the all-cause mortality data in NZ is indicating. In simple terms, vaccine harm was considered unthinkable.
As a result, the paperโs claims are at complete variance with the overall statistics for excess deaths in New Zealand during the study period which were amongst the highest in the world when compared to the pre-pandemic period accompanied by very high levels of hospitalisation especially for cardiac conditions, but also cancer. As you know we have very high volumes and long wait times in ED. There are 60,000 NZers waiting more than four months to see a specialist. No doubt these are figures the government wishes to see reduced.
Yet Health New Zealand is apparently unwilling to investigate a possible causal link to Covid vaccination.
We contend that the secrecy imposed by the ERA, no doubt with the encouragement of Health New Zealand, is excessive and amounts to a denial of natural justice. Members of the public have a right to expect that the government will take all appropriate and adequate steps to ensure that medical interventions are safe. Setting up regulations that ensure safety cannot be fully investigated using the normal criteria of risk assessment is a clear breach of Provision 27 of the NZ Bill of RightsโThe Right To Justice which states:
(1) Every person has the right to the observance of the principles of natural justice by any tribunal or other public authority which has the power to make a determination in respect of that personโs rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law.
(2) Every person whose rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law have been affected by a determination of any tribunal or other public authority has the right to apply, in accordance with law, for judicial review of that determination.
(3) Every person has the right to bring civil proceedings against, and to defend civil proceedings brought by, the Crown, and to have those proceedings heard, according to law, in the same way as civil proceedings between individuals.
This provision binds the Crown, Tribunals, Regulators and Public Authorities to respect natural justice which according to the NZ Bill of Rights includes the right not to be deprived of life, the right to refuse medical treatment and the right not to be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation.
Court of Appeal decides NZDF Vaccine Mandate Unlawful
Today, the Court of Appeal upheld an appeal by members of the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) and reaffirmed that the NZDF COVID-19 vaccine mandate is unlawful. The High Court ruled in Yardley (2021) that the government vaccine mandate for all NZDF and uniformed Police workers was unlawful. Despite this, the NZDF then created its own internal vaccine mandate, forcing those in uniform to get vaccinated or lose their job.
The Court of Appeal ruling today held that the NZDF vaccine mandate limited the right to refuse medical treatment and to manifest religious beliefs. It decided that the Chief of Defence Force was not justified in limiting these rights by imposing a vaccine mandate in the way that he did. This is the third time that members of the NZDF have successfully challenged a vaccine mandate.
Clearly the courts have decided that members of the NZDF have rights that were denied to the general public by the previous government and the courts upon whom vaccine mandates were imposed bypassing any redress under the provisions of the NZ Bill of Rights.
The OIA replies from Health NZ raise deeper issues of human rights and natural justice. There is clearly an admission in the reply to HNZ00013886 that some sections of Health New Zealand believe or possibly have found out that vaccinated individuals have higher rates of all-cause mortality. The Health Act 1956 establishes the founding principles of the NZ Health Service. Its overriding purpose is stated in:
โClause 3A: The Ministry shall have the function of improving, promoting, and protecting public healthโ
A decision to refuse to investigate an increased rate of all-cause mortality shared by a group who have undergone a specific intervention administered by Health NZ amounts to a violation of the founding legislative principles under which Health NZ operates and a violation of the rights of its patients.
Moreover the continued assertions of Covid vaccine safety can only be seen as an attempt to avoid public accountability and circumvent Provision 27 of the NZ Bill of Rights as explained above.
In this regard, the energies of Health NZ appear to have been misdirected following the data leak from a whistleblower. An article in Stuff yesterday entitled Covid-19 vaccinators personal details leaked on US blogsite details extensive efforts by the Chief Executive of Health NZ Margie Apa to investigate whether the anonymised data that was leaked could possibly with โconsiderable effort and technical expertiseโ indicate the identities of some individuals. This is in stark contrast with the OIA replies from Health NZ, which point blank refuse to investigate record levels of actual deaths. Instead Apa doubles down on the unsupported assertion that Covid vaccines are safe.
The implication of the Stuff article and the Health NZ response to the data leak is that somehow people raising questions about vaccine safety are rogue operators. This is a classic smear. In my experience, hundreds of NZers are writing to us with their personal stories and those of relatives and friends concerning severe health issues following Covid vaccination. Investigating these issues should be among the primary responsibilities and top priorities of Health NZ.
How could investigation of all-cause mortality be sidelined?
I have worked at a genetic testing company. I suspect that Health New Zealand has lacked sufficient independent advice on the known health risks associated with gene therapies and biotechnology manufacturing processes that have been reported extensively in the scientific literature. Instead, the historical reliance on vaccine technology and the presumption of vaccine safety took precedence over caution with a novel biotechnology
In essence, we are used to a linear conception of drug interventions. In the subcellular world of genetic interventions, a linear model needs to be replaced with an expectation of multiple side effects. Some genes undertake as many as 200 functions in conjunction with a multiplicity of other genes. These functions are transmitted through RNA molecules which exhibit a similar complexity of action. It is no surprise that mRNA vaccines might interfere with these fundamental processes and have a diversity of adverse effects in multiple organ systems that could extend to a range of immune system failures.
In this context, the absence of long term safety testing and monitoring of all-cause mortality can be potentially catastrophic for long term public health. Whatever rules have been created under the smoke screen of confidentiality, the net result is that vital clues are being missed to the detriment of public health and well being.
I am asking you to reply and elaborate the reasons why Health New Zealand is ignoring safety signals and red flags, whilst insisting that mRNA vaccines are safe and effective against the mounting evidence of data signals being reported in scientific journals?
On what legal basis is Health NZ flouting its fundamental duty to protect public health?
I remain fully supportive of the daily efforts of Health New Zealand staff to help individuals facing a great variety of health challenges, but I know this effort cannot be managed effectively unless sufficient analysis of causal factors is undertaken.
I donโt see how Health NZ can continue to omit traditionally sanctioned standard safety analysis, when the actual data of all-cause mortality as it relates to Covid vaccination status would settle any argument very quickly.
As Minister of Health, do you plan to overturn the current ban and secrecy surrounding this traditional avenue of safety analysis, if so when? Will you insist that Health New Zealand rectify errors of judgement and fully investigate any relationship between all-cause mortality and vaccination status broken down by age and condition? There is an urgent need to do so to protect life and an overriding public interest in the outcome.
As you know we live in extraordinary times, of note not just because of our technological achievements, but also because of the pervading mood of science fiction that sits easily with those leading us and a population schooled to accept the dream.
We are continuously sold promises of health breakthroughs that are just around the corner, but we forget they have been just around the corner for decades. We are told technology, and especially biotechnology, will enable us to live longer, healthier lives in greater comfort, yet publicly available statistics show we are now living shorter lives with greater stress, greater wealth divides, and ever-growing rates of chronic and serious illness, including cancers.
I was forcibly reminded this week that it is heresy to deny the imagined march of progress. The burgeoning class of highly paid government technocrats, regulators, and consultants, along with the medical establishment, will do almost anything to protect their imagined future, and that appears now to include the loss of life. Just remember that one murderer or the work of a serial killer is invariably tracked down, but actions that kill millions can be passed off as the price of progress or peace.
A discussion between Dr. John Campbell and Mr. John OโLooney, funeral Director from Milton Keynes, UK, published on YouTube laid bare the deceit of the UK authorities in denying justice for victims and information to the public. The discussion detailed the refusal of coroners and pathologists to investigate the well documented formation of unusual fibrous clots in many Covid vaccinated individuals, including some young people who died suddenly as a result of the consequent thrombosis. The excuse of the senior authorities: the clots must have formed after death, a complete impossibility as death ushers in decay but never growth.
The speakers pointed out that the denial of vaccine damage goes right up to PM Rishi Sunak. To acknowledge that novel mRNA vaccines might be unsafe is truly off limits for our medical practitioners, researchers, administrators, and the leaders of once great nations.
Unfortunately, it is also happening here in trusting New Zealand.
โOur results estimate that vaccines saved 6650 (95% credible interval [4424, 10180]) lives, and prevented 74500 [51000, 115400] years of life lost and 45100 [34400, 55600] hospitalisations during this 18-month period.โ
They concluded that: โCovid-19 vaccination has greatly reduced the health burden in New Zealandโ
The paper itself, as the title suggests, is a mathematical modelling of the effect of vaccines, masking, and antiviral drugs on the rates of Covid infection, hospitalisation, and deaths. The above claims appear to be at complete variance with the overall statistics for excess deaths in New Zealand during the study period which were amongst the highest in the world when compared to the pre-pandemic period and also at variance with the continuing reports that Health NZ is overwhelmed with high volumes of illness.
So who is right?
The paper does not investigate differences in health outcomes between the vaccinated and unvaccinated and thus falls flat at the first hurdle. It completely ignores the issue that overall mortality is ~20% higher about 5 months after vax roll-out compared with historic trends and continues high until the present. A key point is found in the paperโs supplement which describes their model.
“The antibody titre is assumed to be a correlate of protection and a given titre is generally more protective against more severe clinical endpoints, in line with the findings of [5].”
Translated, this means, the authors assumed that the vaccine was effective against death and severe Covid and just projected the benefits of the vaccine based on this assumption. They never even considered the possibility that the vaccine was not beneficial, which is what the all-cause mortality data in New Zeland is indicating. In simple terms, vaccine harm was considered unthinkable.
It is actually very hard indeed to deny the existence of continuing high excess deaths, they are after all official published figures. The leaked vaccination/death data only adds to the misery of officials who are fighting a rearguard action to deny the obvious. Here is a recent reply to an OIA request made to Health New Zealand. The original request was made almost a year ago and asks Health New Zealand among other things for:
โData regarding the vaccination status and age brackets of All Cause Mortalities in New Zealand each month since 2019 to presentโ
This is of course the holy grail of Covid data if we are ever to learn what is causing the collapse of our health system and the blow out in excess deaths. Health New Zealand explained that after a miserly 100 hours of work over a whole year to try to track down the information, they have put it in the too hard basket and are refusing to answer the request because they say it would involve them in too much work.
However, that is not the whole sorry story. The Health New Zealand reply includes this revealing admission:
โTo provide some context, those who have been vaccinated/had boosters are more likely to have high all-cause mortality risk (additional to being aged) than those who did not. Therefore, vaccination will likely be misinterpreted as being associated with increased risk of death.โ
It doesnโt take a rocket scientist to conclude that whatever the 100 hours of work yielded, it almost certainly confirmed a higher rate of all-cause mortality among the vaccinated.
This admission is extraordinary and damning.
The author of the Health New Zealand reply hedges bets by saying that the differential mortality is “likely” due to “residual confoundingโ. They are suggesting here that the vaccinated population had some unidentified different characteristics from the unvaccinated which predisposes them to die at a greater rate.
However 87% of the population has been jabbed and/or boosted, this is not a group who were selected because they were sick, old or on the verge of death, it was almost everyone. Because of mandates, healthy working age people had cause to be vaccinated. To suggest that they might be dying in greater numbers as a result of some uninvestigated statistical bias which Health New Zealand is refusing to assess, because of lack of time, resources, and presumably inclination, is utterly absurd and exhibits a blatant disregard for life,
In fact, Health New Zealand is continuing with a counter factual narrative that biotech vaccines are safe and effective, as such they are refusing to face reality. The public are the losers here, left in the dark and continually urged to get boosted. The unvaccinated are still being labelled conspiracy theorists.
Health New Zealand and its employees are sworn to protect our health. In that light, this question is of the essence: Is the Covid mRNA vaccine safe or is it killing people? Apparently, even Health New Zealand is afraid that it is killing people, but they are refusing to investigate. Because of their deep faith in one word โvaccinationโ and their enthusiastic embrace of our biotechnology future, they have decided to stone wall any attempt to address the situation. In effect, they are prepared to let people die in order to defend their faith.
So what is the right approach here?
Pre-pandemic, the most important criterion of safety in drug trials was any effect on mortality. This paper entitled โAll-Cause Mortality in Randomized Trials of Cancer Screeningโ from 2002 spells out the overriding importance of looking at all-cause mortality as an indicator of drug safety or harm, saying:
โAll-cause mortality, (in contrast to disease specific mortality), does not require judgments about the cause of death. Instead, all that this end point requires is an accurate ascertainment of deaths and when they occur. Furthermore, all-cause mortality is a measure that can capture unexpected lethal side effects of medical care. Because of the concern that some cardiac interventions may cause non-cardiac deaths, for example, there has been a trend toward the use of all-cause mortality as the primary end point in cardiac drug trials.โ
The paper in the Vaccine journal cited previously and the OIA reply from Health New Zealand are relying on discussion based on Covid-specific outcomes alone, they are ignoring the huge rise in all-cause mortality. They are ignoring the canons of accepted scientific assessment, in doing so they are failing in their duty to protect public health and life.
So what do we think of all this?
Clearly, a huge number of people, many associated with the medical profession, have formed a mutually supportive network of communal amnesia in the face of fact and standard procedure. Incredibly, it appears they are prepared to put even their own lives at risk, let alone the publicโs in order to justify their opinions.
There is of course more to this story and I am very grateful for those well versed in scientific practice with whom I correspond and hold discussions. As you know, the Pfizer vaccine was never subjected to long term testing prior to its release, so there was no opportunity to assess its impact on all-cause mortality. This is something that can be, and desperately should be corrected right away.
So why did the government allow a novel experimental biotech engineered vaccine into the country and mandate its use on virtually the whole population? This document from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) explains the twisted logic that was used to bypass the obvious safety issues. The EPA decided that the mRNA vaccine was not an โorganismโ according to their interpretation of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act and therefore did not require regulation. In reaching this erroneous conclusion that suited the government of the day, the Decision Making Committee (DMC) of the EPA worked closely with Pfizer and concluded:
โThe DMC decided that the only thing that BNT162b2 was capable of producing was the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and not more copies of itself. On this basis, the DMC determined that BNT162b2 did not meet any of the criteria for it to be called an organism.โ
The EPA never investigated whether the mRNA vaccine might be a hazardous substance, they decided it was safe in the absence of any long term testing which for novel vaccines would normally take place over at least ten years.
If gain of function experimentation, biotechnology innovation, military exploitation and casual public exposure to increasing risks of novel medical interventions is allowed to continue unchecked and in fact enthusiastically funded and defended, there is little doubt that there will be another pandemic and there will be a deepening of our medical crisis. Given the existing illusion of biotech safety and efficacy still governing the thoughts and actions of those in charge, the future response of governments and medical authorities will be unpredictable, likely draconian, and possibly catastrophic.
I think you will agree with me that such a pervasive alliance of deliberate scientific amnesia directly involving the medical authorities and their regulatory agencies which has firmly established itself over four years will probably now be very hard to shift. Despite this, please make a submission to the Covid-19 inquiry which is seeking public input to expand its terms of reference, you may do so at the following website: Covid-19 Commission Inquiry Have Your Say.
It used to be the case that kindergarten children played at โconnecting the dotsโ to make drawings, these days this activity is considered to be too structured. Which brings me to the question โHave we lost the capacity to connect the dots?โ
So do we still believe in the efficacy of Covid mRNA vaccines? Apparently we do, against all evidence and common sense. A multitude of government websites, including the most recently updated, adviseโPeople should not wait to get a boosterโ.
Meanwhile Te Whatu Ora reports 60,000 Kiwis are waiting too long for an appointment to see a specialist. That is a 67% increase on a year ago and the health service admits โReferrals for first specialist assessments are greater than our capacity to treat.โ In other words:we canโt cope with the additional sheer volume of extra illnesses.
Cardiac departments have been especially hard hit. Almost a year ago we reported leaked data from the Wellington Region documenting an 83% rise in hospitalisations for heart attacks. The latest official figures from Te Whatu Ora show this was not a one off statistical blip.
We are not alone. The Office of National Statistics in the UK reports that long term sickness sufficient to incapacitate from working has reached a record 2.8 million. Up by 33% when compared to pre-pandemic levels. UK excess deaths are running at record levels, as they are here in New Zealand, but Joe Public doesnโt appear to know about it and Governments donโt care to discuss it.
Curiously there is no official national debate on the causes of the alarming decline in public health. As we have been suggesting for two years now, it is vital that health outcomes be documented by Covid vaccine status, age, and type of illness. Without this data it is impossible to rule the suspected effect of the Covid vaccine out or in.
So what is the official response? A Covid Commission of Inquiry. Thank goodness you might say, that is until you read the terms of reference of the Commission effective 27 September 2023. Incredibly, the Commission intended:
1. To use information that is publicly available rather than the data which has not been made public.
2. The Commission does not intend to summon witnesses itself or take evidence under oath.
3. Neither the public nor media will be entitled to attend without the Commissionersโ permission.
4. No person will be permitted to cross-examine those the Commissioners are meeting with. Thereby omitting a fundamental principle of natural justice.
5. Commissioners will be focused on identifying strategies and measures that could strengthen New Zealandโs preparedness for, and response to, any future pandemic.
6. The Commission does not intend to investigate the safety of mRNA Covid vaccines
The two current Commissioners are:
Chairman of the Inquiry: Professor Tony Blakely, an Australian epidemiologist who has jointly authored articles with Professor Michael Baker a New Zealand epidemiologist and high profile advocate of universal Covid mRNA vaccination.
John Whitehead an economist, formerly an Executive Director and member of the Board of the World Bank.
If you think any conclusions of such an inquiry will be comprehensive, revealing, or even in a deep sense healthy or scientific, it is highly probable you will be disappointed. Especially given its terms of reference and the historical views of the Chairman of the Commissioners.
Fortunately, probably due to the good offices of Hon. Winston Peters, Deputy Prime Minister, the Commission has just announced it intends to โexpand the COVID-19 Inquiryโs terms of referenceโ. It is asking the public to make submissions explaining โspecific topics that people would like considered and which could be included, or clarified, in the terms of reference.โ You can make submissions at the following website:Covid-19 Commission Inquiry Have Your Say.
Information gathered through this public consultation will be provided to the Department of Internal Affairs, who will then provide advice to the Government ahead of any changes it might make to the Inquiryโs terms of reference. The Minister for Internal Affairs is Brooke Van Velden of the ACT Party who encouraged us in May 2021 on her FB Page:
โToday, I received my Covid-19 Pfizer vaccine. I didnโt feel a thing. The Covid-19 vaccine works by triggering your immune system to produce antibodies and blood cells that can work against Covid-19. Keep an eye out for when you are eligible to receive your vaccineโ and subsequently suggested that now largely discredited concepts such as โpeak vaccine effectivenessโ should guide government policy.
If you feel it is worth making a submission to the Commission I suggest you emphasise the following points:
1) Without public health data comparing the health outcomes of the Covid 19 vaccinated and unvaccinated by age and health condition it will be impossible for the Commission to reach any scientifically valid conclusions about the Covid-19 response.
2) The use of novel mRNA biotechnology is well known in the published literature to introduce novel risks whose long term effects are still unknown but suspected with good reason to be serious and detrimental to longevity. Moreover, along with the well documented adverse effects of the bioengineered vaccines, the lab origin of the Covid virus has been widely denied and ignored.
In conclusion, I want to reiterate my opening question โHave we lost the capacity to connect the dots?โ. Our civilisation is at least partly built on a consensus concerning the scientific method. In the past we have trusted matters of fact, shifted the evidence, and admitted to universal truths. It wonโt surprise you if I reflect that risk assessment and health ethics appears to have departed from these fundamental canons of science.
It will take months for new terms of reference for the inquiry to be decided by people, some of whom previously endorsed or acquiesced to our governmentโs Covid-19 response. It should take just a few days and a little courage, to ask the obvious questions that people have been avoiding and ignoring for four long years.
An opinion piece caught my eye in the New York Times this week entitled โMy Patients Used to Be Enthusiastic About the Covid Vaccine. What Changed?โ. The article is behind a paywall, but you can guess the content canโt you?
A vaccine enthusiast medic bemoaning the near universal rejection by the public of the latest mRNA Covid vaccine boosters. For the author, Dr. Ofri, the sanctity of vaccines is unquestioned and unquestionable, no matter how poorly they perform and how many people are severely affected. If you want to know about her sorry arguments in detail you can read a critique by the indefatigable journalist Alex Berenson under the title โThey STILL won’t quit pushing the mRNAsโ.
Dr. Ofriโs opinion is just the tip of the iceberg that is freezing out anyone who openly questions mRNA vaccine safety in the medical profession. Nor apparently can anyone expect relief from the courts: the NZ Herald reports the sad story of a Wairarapa nurse Amanda Turner fired by Te Whatu Ora over mild FB posts questioning the safety of mRNA vaccines. She may need to pay $20k in court costs after unsuccessfully challenging her dismissal and then proceeding to lose on appeal. Her crimeโshe shared a FB post from another person saying they had experienced a rash or hives after receiving an mRNA shot (a known and recognised side effect to the Covid mRNA vaccines). It must feel like a personal assault and, of course, a rejection of the time honoured principles of the Hippocratic oath and medical ethics.
Other institutions are also presenting a united front. The Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal has ruled that Dr. Peter Canady is guilty of professional misconduct because he publicly questioned the safety of mRNA vaccines. Numerous private companies have successfully defended themselves before the ERA against the charge that they breached employee rights when they sacked the unvaccinated. The basis of these court decisions has been faith in government mandate policy and worthless assurances of vaccine safety and efficacy.
Toot your horn if you think the court rulings are ill-informed, nutty and draconian.
Letโs face it: in a country where 90% of the population is already mRNA vaccinated, you can hardly expect justice or sympathy from those in authority. Any backtracking would reflect very badly on their own role during the period of vaccine rollout and mandates. The UK Daily Telegraph is rightly referring to these die hard Covid policy administrators as โCovid vaccine fanaticsโ.
But there is no longer a united front. Many GPs and hospital staff at the patient care coal face are becoming aware that something has gone horribly wrong and their pro-vaccine rhetoric has gone suddenly silent. Talking to doctors I am hearing stories of confidential advice to patients to steer clear of boosters. For example, the surgeon who told his patient about to be discharged from hospital after a major transplant operation. โI wouldnโt want to see you back here again so promise me no more Covid boosters.โ
Despite this, mainstream media in New Zealand and elsewhere cannot let go and start questioning the wisdom and safety of near universal Covid mRNA vaccination. Why? There is now an abundance of high quality published evidence of serious harm, but the scales have been tipped against it by the media business model. The media are clinging on to solvency by the tips of their fingers. Advertising revenue and sponsorship from drug companies is in many cases a significant part of their dwindling revenue stream.
Instead, a close study of media offerings reveals a growing preponderance of disturbing stories about people who have recently fallen sick or died with serious illness, including so called turbo cancers and heart attacks, etc. An article by one of the worldโs leading cancer experts Dr. Angus Dalgleish reveals the way a cacophony of medical authorities have sought to hide and dismiss the variety, extent and causes of the precipitous rise in cancer cases.
As long as the government fails to publish a comprehensive comparison of hospitalisation and deaths by Covid vaccine status and disease type, vaccine injury will remain under the publicโs radar. Itโs worse though isnโt it? Leaked NZ health data correlates mRNA Covid vaccination with excess death, and more to the point record levels of excess deaths are persisting here in New Zealand and around the world in highly Covid vaccinated countries. Without facing up to these hard facts, governments will be unable to tackle the problems assailing health services.
Moreover, as long as the suppression of fact persists, continuing to call for justice and posting more and more evidence of COVID-19 vaccine harm amounts to whistling in the wind and dancing outside the fire circle. No doubt many are feeling upset and angry, but anger is no help when there is no unbiased court of appeal. In fact anger is the invincible foe, it only serves to harm the sufferer, not the guilty party.
So where can we go to safely dance and whistle now?
The answer I suggest brings in a second element and one that might be very timely and politically acceptable as New Zealandโs population continues to rapidly rise.
In a country the size of Britain, we have just three main cities all overcrowded, spreading into the surroundings, gridlocked, and environmentally polluted. House prices have rocketed beyond affordability driven by high demand, low supply, and the absurd red tape of the Resource Management Act. Government policies have encouraged higher and higher densities and smaller housing units, a policy well known overseas to drive crime and social unrest. Proposed high density developments around the country in cities such as Nelson, and elsewhere without gardens or open space are rightfully being described as an entre to future problems and the collapse of the Kiwi experience.
Yet we are a nation with vast open areas of land, much of it under utilised by agriculture or horticulture.
It is time to start developing entirely new cities that prioritise quality of life, safety, family values, a clean environment, healthy living and a sustainable future. Cities with wide boulevards, large section sizes, non-polluting personal transport, energy efficiency, and public amenities. Cities that value pure food, the natural environment, parks and gardens, sunshine and clean air, that are free from excessive EMF smog. Basic section sizes of one quarter to a full acre would allow for multigenerational living and nearby family support. One acre is sufficient to grow enough food to feed a family more efficiently. The skills involved can be fostered through education.
To maximise the advantages of cost-free passive solar heating and cooling of housing stock, each house should be orientated east-west to the cardinal points. Communications can be hard-wired to avoid the hazards of dense wi-fi and cell phone radiation. With comprehensive pre-planning, employment, recreation and educational opportunities can be placed within easy walk or cycle to work distances. Ten thousand inhabitants and all the required community and cultural facilities can be accommodated within an area approximately 4 kms by 4 kms.
So what is to stop such cities from being controlled by the same short sighted and over bearing administrators that are all too common everywhere?
It is no good leaving this to governments. Designed by faceless bureaucrats, new cities become soulless concrete jungles more akin to prisons and labour camps. Success demands the participation of those who are alert to the growing dangers with the support of those responsible citizens who have resources. There is still a window of opportunity to get this done before the inevitable damaging contradictions of health and military biotechnology experimentation overwhelms our social and political stability.
As we have frequently discussed, the missing element of modern science is knowledge of consciousness. Consciousness is not a subject of dry study but rather our own living Self. According to many cultural traditions, the built environment has a profound effect on our consciousness. Almost everyone has experienced the profound silence and expanded consciousness when you walk into the soaring spaces of buildings such as St. Peters in Rome.
There is a sophisticated system of design which originated in India known as Vastu which lays out exact principles of architecture to enhance the experience, decision-making capacity and health of those living and working in buildings and cities. Vastu is not a vague set of general ideas, it involves mathematically precise proportions, placement and orientation of buildings with respect to the wider environment and the influence of the laws of nature including the sun. Vastu buildings are constructed out of nonpolluting materials.
In fact the original grid layouts of the garden cities of Christchurch, New Zealand and Adelaide, Australia were heavily influenced by Vastu principles absorbed by their respective town planners when they served in India.
At its basis is a profound principleโas is the macrocosm so is the microcosm. Shape is profoundly important and related to proper function at the molecular level. Misfolded molecules can be a cause of disease. Similarly the materials, proportions, placement and orientation of some buildings enhances the health of the occupants while others can degrade it by a significant degree. Currently all the decisions of governments are being taken in buildings that are poorly designed. For example east facing entrances admit the positive and healing first rays of the rising sun. Buildings designed to face east will be more healthy.
Vastu design is a highly precise and mathematical science which finds echoes in the classically proportioned buildings of ancient civilisations including Greece. Vastu design requires mathematical training in traditional principles and some developers have already begun to apply these principles in NZ and Australia to individual house design.
Faced as we are, with growing chaos, polarisation and technological extremes, there is a need to revive principles of living which have been lost to view. Knowledge is inevitably lost with the passage of time, often swamped by conflict both current and historical. If we are to survive the global transition that is already in progress, revival of knowledge is a necessity. The design, construction, and occupation of new cities in harmony with Nature can forge a powerful path to help achieve this.
The peaceful and orderly state of mind that Vastu produces is the need of our time, not just here in New Zealand but around the world. In ten thousand cities, like minded people could live together where the collective effect of the built environment will create a peaceful atmosphere. This could purify collective consciousness and help safeguard the future from stress, mistakes and conflict. As geopolitical tensions rise, this is not just an imaginative hope but a necessity to foster individual insight, good governance, health, and a community cooperative spirit that can help to carry us through the current crisis and beyond.
I hope you have enjoyed a Christmas and New Years break. I am writing to distil the lessons of the past three years and look to the future. Very interesting findings are surfacing almost daily, not only highlighting the contradictions inherent in the growing use of biotechnology approaches to pharmacy, but more importantly, some consciousness-based interventions are opening the door to a completely different approach to health.
I have just been discharged home from hospital and I am still in recovery mode. I want to thank all those who sent messages for a speedy recovery. The hospital staff were caring, talented people who looked after me through the weeks I was there.
The hospital departments (I was in two hospitals during the course of treatment) were very busy and working at full stretch. In general, all hospital staff, at every level, work in their silos and their whole day is taken up with saving lives. It is an unenviable task but one being met energetically and with dedication. The most influential sector of longer term care is based around pharmaceutical approaches which are largely unquestioned as the leading paradigm of ongoing treatment.
Few if any in the system have the time or inclination to look beyond the daily needs of patients and ask pertinent questions about the safety of novel biotechnology.
On two occasions I met senior staff members who had a wider perspective and responsibility for the whole system and range of departments. They both noted that they had insufficient information about what exactly was causing the ongoing high volumes of admissions and the varied nature of ailments.
It goes without saying that without a complete picture of health data any decisions about how to tackle overloaded hospitals will be flawed.
It appears that those responsible for the big picture have been wilfully ignoring their responsibility to document and/or investigate health data and have thereby been failing the public. Up to the minute hospital admission data and death rates need to be broken down across the whole system by cause, age, vaccination status and compared with prior years.
There is a clear responsibility here to make full information available to the new government and to the broader public domain. Unfortunately, some of those in a position to control information and policy have dug in and resisted change. Even seeking to hide the facts. The prosecution of the NZ whistleblower is a case in point. Our sources confirm there is currently an all court press on hospital staff to refrain from sharing or discussing concerning data, with a clear instruction that anyone doing so will face prosecution and imprisonment. This intimidation is undermining the core safety standards of healthcare.
For three years now we have been raising questions about the latest generation of biotech vaccines and medicines, highlighting research findings and data including unprecedented rates of adverse effects, massive increases in hospital admissions and persistently high rates of excess deaths. In the end the truth will out, the growingย scientific evidence of continuing harm is overwhelming, but it is a question of how much long term damage could result and how many more lives will be lost before this happens. mRNA flu vaccines are in the pipeline and gain of function experimentation continues.
Catastrophic consequences are being suggested including the inevitable emergence of an as yet unknown Disease X.
Taking stock of our progress can be painful or disappointing but it is at this point very necessary. There has been increasing polarisation surrounding issues of health, climate, and conflict, all of which impact everyoneโs future. With polarisation has come the rejection of dialogue and rational discussion of key facts. The climate of uncertainty and fear breeds further division, extreme views, and an irrational urge to dictate responses and ignore facts. Yet lack of communication serves no oneโs interests. Unfortunately it is hard to envision change anytime soon, but easy to predict that matters will continue to come to a head and eventually reach crisis proportions without too much delay.
The contradictions inherent in biotechnology research and development are simple to understand within the framework of modern science and simple observation but apparently hard to accept among those gainfully employed in the field who are determined to open novel channels of highly risky experimentation.
Simply put, as we examine smaller time and distance scales in human physiology, elements become more interconnected and multitasking. Some genes for example are involved in hundreds of distinct tasks. Thus the potential for unwanted off-target effects of biotech interventions increases exponentially as more subtle biomolecules are manipulated, eventually culminating in the disruption of the whole physiology as interventions cross the cell membrane. mRNA Covid vaccines are a case in point, but many similar dangers are also associated with the latest generation of biotech medicines across the board.
High rates of adverse effects and lack of documentation of their extent have become the norm.
The pandemic has pushed medical misadventure from the third place cause of death to first place. Man made medicines, diseases, vaccines, exotic foods, and biotech research products taken together are now by far the leading cause of death including premature death.
Contrast this with the obvious but ignored dual reality of our daily life: Consciousness is the constant partner of physiology and natural foods the primary source of our health. In the absence of meaningful dialogue in a polarised world, if communication is to be restored it is obvious that a second element needs to be introduced into the health debate. I, along with others, term this a โconsciousness-based approach to healthโ which of necessity draws upon traditions of holistic healing long known to the world across many cultures.
Not surprisingly scientific endeavour is finding deep truths which can transform our world.
Steven Cole has undertaken studies of people exposed to chronic threat and has identified a Conserved Transcriptional Response to Adversity (CTRA) in circulating immune cells. In other words when threatened or stressed our physiology exhibits an unhealthy pattern of reduced immune function including the upregulated expression of genes involved in disease causing inflammation and downregulated expression of genes involved in cancer fightingโType I interferon responses
Long term practice of Transcendental Meditation reverses this process establishing healthy genetic responses to stress.
To understand this, we have to consider the difference between point and infinity, between part and whole. Nature functions as a whole and its essence is awake, conscious. Consciousness is that which encompasses the harmonious functioning of the WHOLE physiology. As such, truly holistic consciousness-based approaches are free from unwanted adverse effects, yet capable of transforming and augmenting health. There is much to be understood and revived.
Similarly as I have discussed in my book Your DNA Diet, natural food, being based on DNA and under the control of the holistic level of natural law, promotes holistic health. The specific health values of herbal medicine are described in traditions including Chinese medicine, Ayurveda, and many other traditions often centred on the availability of local plants.
As we can see from the published research of the last few years, the general need for healthy approaches to daily life is increasing everywhere. On our sites, as the year unfolds, we wish to do more to fully promote natural approaches to health. We will be publishing specific updates on approaches to holistic healing and we also wish to support community efforts to inform the public of scientific assessment of their effects in order to facilitate their use.
There is little doubt that the growing crises in the fields of health, social stability, regional and global conflict and environmental sustainability are going to impact us all in ways that we cannot now fully assess.
Building closer community ties allied with knowledge of sustainable and healthy practices are going to be key to surviving and flourishing during the massive transitions that are looming on the horizon. If we remain too isolated from one another physically and intellectually it may be difficult to cope with the big changes that are coming. We shouldnโt underestimate the importance of developing conscious communities and we shouldnโt naively believe that our social circumstances will automatically settle to something resembling the pre-pandemic conditions. Irreversible changes in medicine, geopolitics, and the environment are already underway driven by the development and deployment of invasive and destructive technology in health, defence, and agriculture. Close cooperation among people alert to the dangers and solutions can form a protected way ahead.
The Korean National Health Insurance Service tabulates health data of the whole population, including vaccination status, which allows researchers to compare the ongoing health outcomes of the vaccinated with the unvaccinated. Precisely the information our government is hiding from independent researchers and public scrutinyโcomparative data, which we have been requesting they release.
So what have they found in Korea? Researchers have released a preprint paper entitled โHematologic abnormalities after COVID-19 vaccination: A large Korean population-based cohort study“. Haematologic diseases are diseases of the blood and blood forming organs. The researchers randomly selected half of the population of Seoul (around 4.2 million people) aged 20 and above and identified people who had received treatment for a range of blood disorders. They excluded people who had a history of blood disorders prior to the study period and then compared the rate of development of blood disorders among the vaccinated and unvaccinated over a three month period.
The researchers concluded:
โThis study demonstrated the haematologic adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccination using real-world data. The cumulative incidence rate of nutritional anaemia, aplastic anaemia, and coagulation defects significantly and constantly increased for 3 months after the COVID-19 vaccination compared to the non-vaccinated group.โ
Aplastic anaemia is a rare but serious blood condition that occurs when your bone marrow cannot make enough new blood cells for your body to work normally. There is no known cure at this point in time.
Nutritional anaemia refers to anaemia that can be directly attributed to nutritional disorders or deficiencies. Examples include Iron deficiency anaemia and pernicious anaemia.
Coagulations disorders are conditions that affect the blood’s clotting activities. Haemophilia, Von Willebrand disease, clotting factor deficiencies, hypercoagulable states and deep venous thrombosis are all coagulations disorders.
The study compared these cumulative incidence rates of non-fatal conditions in the following areas:
Gynecological ( including endometriosis, and menstrual disorders [polymenorrhagia, menorrhagia, abnormal cycle length, oligomenorrhea, and amenorrhea]),
Haematological (including bruises confined to non-tender and yellow-coloured especially on extremities),
Dermatological (including herpes zoster, alopecia, and warts),
Ophthalmological (including visual impairment, and glaucoma),
Subjects with a history of these illnesses were excluded from the analysis.
The researchers concluded:
โThe cumulative incidence rates of these conditions at three months following COVID-19 vaccination were significantly higher in vaccinated subjects than in non-vaccinated subjects, except for endometriosis.โ
A third study of the same official Korean health data, which we have already reported, found higher incidence of eight musculoskeletal conditions among the vaccinated when compared to the unvaccinated including:
Achilles tendinitis (pain in the back of the leg near the heel)
Bursitis (inflammation that increases friction between tissues in the body)
Rotator Cuff Syndrome (pain affecting the shoulder)
HIVD (upper back herniated disk),
Spondylosis (chronic neck wear and pain),
Adhesive Capsulitis (inflammation of the shoulder)
De-Quervain Tenosynovitis (wrist inflammation).
The researchers concluded:
โIndividuals who received COVID-19 vaccines, either mRNA, viral vector, or mixing and matching, were found to be more likely to be diagnosed with inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders compared to those who did not. Our results provide detailed information on the adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination. This information will be useful in clarifying adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and educating people about the potential risk of inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders based on their vaccination status.โ
I donโt really need to explain much about these results do I? They speak for themselves. These studies analysed the rates of some specific health outcomes for millions of people following Covid vaccination. The researchers concluded that a very wide range of concerning health conditions are initiated over extended periods as a result of Covid vaccination.
Medsafe, the media, and the New Zealand government are telling us that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, but they are not publishing any comparable data. A computer systems developer working at the Ministry of Health noticed that death rates among vaccinated populations were unusually high and blew the whistle. He has been arrested and charged with โdishonestly accessing health dataโ (his job actually).
Who do you believe? The researchers in Korea who have published analysis of millions of post vaccination health records officially made available by their government or our government who are still refusing to make health records available whilst insisting that COVID-19 vaccination is safe and effective?
In the words of rapper DertySesh (warning: a lot of words begin with โfโ), who publishes provocative social commentary on X and is unafraid to say how he feels, โwe donโt want bland reports from the media that someone has been arrested for vaccine disinformation, we want to know if the data he published is real or not?โ One of our data correspondents, Terry Anderson, sums it up as follows:
Terry picks just one week, number 25 of 2022 ending 19th June. In that week 858 people died (the 3rd highest of the year). The MoH tells us there were 61 Covid deaths in that week, made up of around 46 who died with Covid as the underlying cause and 15 where Covid contributed. That means at least 797 people died of something other than Covid. Over the previous five years from 2017 to 2021, an average of 701 people died. Even allowing for a small population increase (around 2%), excluding Covid there appear to be at least 82 excess unexplained deaths in this one June 2022 week alone, 12% above the long term average.
If 82 people died in a train accident the nation would agonise over it for years. Every effort would be made to make sure it never happened again. As we have discussed and documented repeatedly, it is not just one week, there has been an unexplained level of excess death occurring week in week out for three years, at least 6,500 New Zealand deaths in total since the vaccine rollout began. To put it in perspective, that is more than twice the 2,700 New Zealanders who died in Gallipoli, whose heroics and sacrifice we commemorate to this day. The whistleblower is right, excess deaths are completely and absolutely off the scale.
The Korean studies of official health data confirm the chief suspect: COVID-19 vaccination. You would think the newly elected government would be crawling all over the New Zealand health data, enlisting the help of those who are untainted by any association with the prior Covid policy formation and assessment, desperately trying to get to the bottom of what has happened and staunch the flow of injury and death.
In fact, our government, the Ministry of Health, and the media seem to be incapable of facing the facts. Through the arrest and public denouncement of a whistleblower, they have shown themselves to be cowards, afraid to face up to the consequences of past decisions. Unbelievably, they are continuing to push the COVID-19 vaccine on the population against all evidence.
A headline in the New York Times today reads โThere Are Politicians Who Lie More Than Is Strictly Necessaryโ. Once found out, the cover-up begins and then one lie leads to another. Eventually, any erstwhile friend can be abandoned to save your skin. In our case, the health and longevity of New Zealanders has become a political pawn that is being sacrificed to save Parliament and civil servants from public humiliation and disgrace.
The actual effect of the government policy of continued heavy vaccine promotion in the face of concerning data on adverse effects is frightening. It has completely distorted public perceptions and understanding. We have ended up living in an illogical and untenable world governed by propaganda rather than fact.
I am shocked every day by the stories I hear. Just take this, for example, someone has had persistent health problems over months, including a cardiac event after their third booster. After a fourth jab, they couldnโt drag themselves out of bed for three weeks. So they went to see their doctor recently who advised them to get another Covid booster as soon as possible, which they did. Have people lost their minds? Our health service certainly appears to have.
Where do we go from here? The health outcomes reported in this article have, I am sure, been very concerning for readers. For our next report hosted by GLOBE.GLOBAL we will discuss research which points to some positive benefits of health interventions which may help alleviate some of the wide range of symptoms of COVID-19 vaccination adverse effects.
Behind the concerns of a New Zealand Ministry of Health database analyst, which led him to become a whistleblower and land up in the courts, are some very serious scientific questions indeed. These relate to the health outcomes of ordinary New Zealanders and call into doubt the integrity of Medsafe and Te Whatu Ora (Ministry of Health).
This article is also available as aย PDF documentย that you can print, download, and share. Anย audio version is available here.
It now appears clear from the comments of Margie Apa, CEO of Te Whatu Ora (who has a degree in public admin), that the unprecedented record high rate of New Zealand excess deaths is no longer being vigorously denied. Rather, she has assured the public:
โThere is no evidence whatsoever that vaccination is responsible for excess mortality in New Zealand.โ
Margie Apa
At the basis of the Te Whatu Ora and Medsafe claims of COVID-19 vaccine safety is an assumption that Covid vaccines do not have any long term adverse effects. Medsafe Safety Reports (now over a year out of date) assert that the mortality rate of COVID-19 vaccine recipients during the 21 days after vaccination is lower than what you would expect in the general population. They are only looking at the three weeks following vaccination and no further.
Yet the latest available official figures put the average number of excess deaths (the number in excess of the long term average) at 14 extra deaths per day.
That makes an additional unexpected 775 deaths during the latest reported eight week period alone.
775 individual people now unexpectedly and prematurely lost to their families and communities. A massive 14.4% above the long term average.
Four years ago, this would have been considered a national disaster. Today, we are being assured that something other than the COVID-19 vaccine is responsible, but we are not being told what it is. We have long since moved on from peak Covid, so what is happening? Apparently, no one wants to talk about it.
But you donโt have to look very far into recent scientific findings about Covid to find that the assumption that there are no long term COVID-19 vaccine adverse effects is simply and obviously disproven. If you read our reports, you will be aware of many studies demonstrating risks. So, how big are the risks?
The retrospective study looked at the treatment records of 700 vaccinated and 303 unvaccinated male and female subjects with an average age in their fifties who had undergone tests to measure their uptake of a form of glucose in the heart muscle (myocardium) using PET/CT scans. The researchers found that those who had taken the COVID-19 vaccine had a significantly higher uptake of glucose into their myocardium than the unvaccinated.
This is concerning because the human heart prefers fatty acids as a fuel over glucose. Distressed heart cells take up more glucose. Hence, the study suggests that vaccinated individuals have a significantly increased risk of long term heart damage. Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough interpreted the study to support:
A single vaccine shot causes a 2.5% risk of long term heart damage. Those who got two shots have an 8% risk.
The study concluded: โWhen compared with non-vaccinated patients, asymptomatic patients who received their second vaccination 1โ180 days prior to imaging showed increased myocardial 18F-FDG uptake on PET/CT scans.โ In more simple language, even those people of all ages and both sexes who had no noticeable adverse symptoms following COVID-19 vaccination end up with a significantly increased risk of long term cardiac damage.
This has obvious implications for Medsafe data collection and assessment. Medsafe should have looked at health outcomes over a much longer time frame than 21 days, at least 180 days according to this study, and almost certainly much longer. The Ministry of Health whistleblower published data of suspiciously high death rates in the months after COVID-19 vaccination for precisely this reason. He wanted to highlight the way that his employer, the Ministry of Health, was glossing over suspicious deaths, not just one or two deaths but thousands, around 10,000 so far.
More concerning is the fact that the Japanese study is only looking at one possible adverse effect of COVID-19 vaccination. A rapidly growing number of recently published scientific papers we have been regularly reporting are pointing to a wide range of other long-term mRNA Covid harms, including immune deficiency, cancers, inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders, strokes, and mental illness.
Distressingly, the media, the government, and Te Whatu Ora have failed to address the substance of the whistleblowerโs concerns and the valid scientific reasons to acknowledge them.
Instead, he has been charged in court with the offence of โdishonestly accessing vaccination dataโ. None of them have told the public that accessing vaccination data was actually his job at the Ministry of Health. He was doing his job, spotted a concerning red flag, and went public after much heart searching about the inaction of his employer, whose job it is to protect public health.
I am receiving a number of communications from individuals who are in personal touch with their local MPs. It is a common report that their MP is now quite sure they will not be getting another jab, but doesnโt want to rock the boat by raising the issue of vaccine safety in caucus. Their excuse: they are unsure of their ability to present the science.
Meanwhile, Te Whatu Ora is rocking on telling the public from 30 years old upwards and from 12 years up in some categories, they need to get another shot with the tired refrain:
โVaccination is safe and effective,โฆ.Covid-19 is still in our communities and is a significant risk โ so please protect yourself, your whฤnau, and your community by getting immunised.โ
No mention of record levels of adverse effects, known lack of effectiveness of the vaccine, and the many recently completed studies highlighting the long term risks, including ironically that the vaccine can actually increase your risk of Covid viral persistence.
The whistleblower crisis is rapidly becoming a test of the new governmentโs ability to move on from the past three years of censorship and gaslighting.
Our national health records are now out on the international public stage. How the government responds to this crisis will tell us a lot more about their real intentions and their capacity or lack of capacity to think things through rationally in the public interest.
This week an interview with a Ministry of Health employee under the pseudonym Winston Smith, who leaked data to former journalist and recent political candidate Liz Gunn, caused an international sensation. A data set of four million vaccination records was briefly available for download and scrutiny from vaccine critic Steve Kirschโs site. Many of you have no doubt watched the hour long interview by Liz Gunn by now. Kirsch independently promised his readers that international statistics experts would be publishing analysis of the data shortly.
The Wasabi site hosting the data for download acted rapidly to cancel Steve Kirschโs account, and YouTube took down the video within minutes (it is still up on Rumble). The Ministry of Health issued a statement, widely reported in the New Zealand press, labelling the leak as misinformation. They announced that they had sacked the whistleblower and called in the police.
Dr. Shane Reti, our newly appointed Minister of Health, issued a statement:
โThere are many conspiracy theorists out there who unfortunately disseminate harmful disinformation, however, as Minister and as a physician, the public can and should continue to have confidence in vaccines. I am reassured by experts confirming that there is no evidence supporting the allegations that have been made.โ
So the government feels that we should all be reassured by unnamed experts who say there is nothing to see here without discussing any specific points in the data leak. If you have been reading our reports here and here, you will know that there is a great deal of evidence published in reputable journals, including from New Zealand, indicating vaccine harm. As a result, we have consistently called for the release of data comparing health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated, but access was consistently denied by the previous government.
It now appears the incoming government is also going to tell us to look the other way.
If health data shows that there is no harm from Covid vaccines why would the government deny access to the relevant data?
In fact, more than two years ago the government granted unfettered access to New Zealand Covid vaccine health data to vaccinologist Dr. Petousis-Harris Co-Director of the Global Vaccine Data Network. She promised to publish data on vaccine safety within months but has published no results since, and has publicly stated that she will not be getting another Covid vaccine. So what do you make of that?
Last week the relative of a friend phoned them with some bad news from Australia. They had been diagnosed with pericarditis. โDonโt worry,โ they said โI have seen a specialist and I should be able to come through it OKโ. The specialist told them it was โdue to a prior Covid infectionโ, โbut I havenโt had Covid, Iโve had the vaccineโ responded the patient. โAhโ, said the doctor, โyou must have had Covid, it canโt be due to the vaccine.โ
You get the picture donโt you? Pericarditis is a recognised adverse effect of mRNA Covid vaccination but medical experts are telling patients it canโt happen. I wonder what our experts are telling Dr. Shane Reti? It is โshow and tellโ time at medical kindergarten. Can Dr Reti show us the full data or is he going to continue with the absurd and dictatorial โone podium of truthโ lie of the last administration?
More on the data leak
The whistleblower was reportedly a computer systems programmer at the Ministry of Health who designed the computer payment system for vaccine providers. In the video he appeared visibly distressed by the rate of deaths among those who had received vaccinations. There were a number of charts displayed showing for example that some South Island vaccination sites had been disproportionately affected by deaths subsequent to vaccination. It was immediately clear from the names of the providers that these sites serviced the elderly, an obvious and unfortunate data bias which has garnered some criticisms.
Clearly the collection of vaccination data by the Ministry of Health has been a little haphazard and contains inconsistencies. There have been indications of this in earlier data, but in general the records leaked stand as authentic if incomplete. Statistically speaking, the main problem is the lack of sufficient data to make exact assessments of safety. In other words, a comparison of health outcomes between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated will be necessary. Precisely the data the Ministry of Health has refused to release. Unfortunately, the whistleblower only had access to data from the vaccinated.
That doesnโt mean the data leak is invalid, a conspiracy theory, or irrelevant. There were some very real and concerning questions raised which need answers. The reaction of the Ministry of Health and the Minister actually points to a conspiracy of silence on their part, not to the whistleblower. We do haveย whistleblower protection legislationย in New Zealand. It states that:
โAn employee can make a protected disclosure (sometimes called โwhistle blowingโ) when they report serious wrongdoing in the workplace that they reasonably believe is true or likely to be true.โ
The whistleblower was in the position that many people holding positions of responsibility in New Zealand now find themselves. We believe he acted responsibly because he disclosed very concerning information that the Ministry of Health has been withholding from public view.
We have unprecedented record high rates of excess deaths and hospitalisation which are continuing long past the peaks of Covid infection yet virtually no one among the media, the medical profession, and the government wants to talk about it. Instead, they are conspiring (yes, I do mean to use the term and donโt do so lightly) to hide the figures that will demonstrate the exact extent of COVID-19 vaccine harm.
This is all the more concerning since a rapidly growing number of recently published scientific papers we have been regularly reporting are pointing to a wide range of long term mRNA Covid harms including heart disease and immune deficiency,cancers, strokes and mental illness.
The message that most resonated with me during the interview was the heartfelt plea from the whistleblower for others to speak up. I encourage all those with inside knowledge to speak up if you havenโt already done so. We canโt continue with the disastrous censorship of health information enforced by the previous government. The health and longevity of the whole population is at stake.
Congratulations, and a big thank you to all our subscribers and supporters. Winston Peters announced yesterday that the scope and process of the Covid enquiry is to be extended as a matter of priority; the Therapeutic Products Bill is also to be repealed. Below, you will find our latest release reviewing where we stand and what is needed as we move ahead.
The coming months will require an ongoing effort to ensure the government, the public, and the COVID-19 inquiry are kept well informed and backed by cogent summaries and links to the latest scientific findings. We remain committed to keeping up our work and respectfully ask that you consider supporting our work with a donation according to your means. Small contributions help to keep our service going, larger one-off donations will enable us to improve and expand our outreach which is growing every day.
A huge thank you to those who read and circulate our reports and to those who support us regularly.
Yesterdayโs coalition policy announcements validated our lobbying efforts and those of multiple others over the last two years. Some key research findings and concerns finally penetrated the political firewall. We have turned a corner, but it is a first step and there is a lot more to do. As Winston Churchill said following the first allied victory of the war at El Alamein:
โNow this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginningโ.
All over the world, breakthroughs are being made slowly but surely as newly published research studies are overpowering the biotechnology โsafe and effectiveโ narrative. This is being led by concerns over mRNA vaccines. While our medical authorities and many in government still appear to believe that Covid vaccine adverse effects are either very mild or donโt exist, a team at Yale University have pushed ahead to publish details of what they have termed the โChronic Covid Post-Vaccine Syndrome‘
The study followed 241 individuals for a year who had self-reported feeling unwell after mRNA Covid vaccination. Despite trying dozens of treatment options, a survey of the participants found:
โThe five most common symptoms were exercise intolerance (71%), excessive fatigue (69%), numbness (63%), brain fog (63%), and neuropathy (63%). In the week before survey completion, participants reported feeling unease (93%), fearfulness (82%), and overwhelmed by worries (81%), as well as feelings of helplessness (80%), anxiety (76%), depression (76%), hopelessness (72%), and worthlessness (49%) at least once.โ
The authors concluded: โThere is a need for continued investigation to understand and treat this condition.โ
โItโs important to recognise that those who took the greatest steps to protect themselves and others have seen an enduring impact on their mental health [which] canโt be easily shaken off.โ
Although not specifically mentioned in the survey, compliance with government policy in 2020 evolved to include its flagship recommendationโCovid vaccination in 2021. Willegers, an academic at Bangor Universityโs institute for the psychology of elite performance concluded:
โFuture government campaigns need to highlight the personal costs and benefits involved, not just peopleโs responsibility to others.โ
The authoritative UK Daily Telegraph has run an article commenting on the legal claims of those harmed by Covid vaccination seeking compensation before the courts entitled The real Covid jab scandal is finally emergingโThe young and healthy, who were at minimal risk from Covid, should not have been told they had to take the vaccine.
It notes that the legal claim concerning wrongful death lists the absolute risk reduction of Covid infection after the AstraZeneca jab was only 1.2%, meaning that the risk of harm should have been recognised as sufficiently large to outweigh this very minor effect and tip the scales against a universal vaccination policy.
There are obvious lessons here for the new government in New Zealand. The outgoing government with the help of its supporters from across the political and social spectrum exercised almost total control over the Covid narrative, ignoring the novel nature of the technology, the absence of long term testing, and the warning signs of record rates of adverse effects. The exact details of how they achieved this level of censorship should no doubt be a subject covered by the forthcoming Covid Inquiry.
A paper issued by a group calling itself Public Health Communication Centre entitled โBriefing for the Incoming GovernmentโWhy we need an Aotearoa Centre for Disease Control (CDC)” illustrates how government policy is affected by lobbying. The paper is authored by a number of scientists including Michael Baker, well known as senior advisors to the previous government who steered Covid policy. It calls for a US-style disease control organisation to operate our health service.
On paper this sounds like it might be a sensible idea until you remember that the CDC botched the Covid response in the US. In fact the so-called Public Health Communication Centre is funded by the GAMA Foundation Governance and Policy Studies Endowment Fund which is solely controlled by a single family. The actual crossroads we have arrived at is not one in need of increased control by vested interests, rather more open dialogue.
Most importantly, no data has been released in New Zealand comparing the long term health outcomes of the vaccinated with the unvaccinated.
The outgoing government, scientists, our health service, Medsafe, experts and the media have all been complicit in hiding this data. Entrusting our future health policy to the same people in the absence of safeguards, open data and public debate makes no sense at all.
An investigative report in the UK Observer entitled โShockingโ scale of UK governmentโs secret files on critics highlights the extent of control that governments can exercise under the radar of public scrutiny. It reports โFifteen government departments have been monitoring the social media activity of potential critics and compiling โsecret filesโ in order to block them from speaking at public eventsโ. Did something like this occur in New Zealand ministries and at public and private institutions? It seems likely. We need to know and ensure it doesnโt happen again.
This means that we have to question the quality and veracity of the advice that the government received from so-called experts during the pandemic and is continuing to receive right up to the present day. An article in the NZ Herald on the 23rd November entitled โNational security threat โ NZโs isolation no longer a guarantee of safetyโ is a case in point:
In the article ,Professor William Hoverd โ the director at Massey Universityโs Centre for Defence and Security โ says the country now faces new internal and external threats exemplified by the protest at Parliament, which he believes consisted of a large group of New Zealanders illegitimately venting extremist frustrations. Hoverd is quoted as saying:
โWeโve seen the national security sector focus on social cohesionโฆ And why is that? Itโs because theyโre thinking about this tension that happens when legitimate protest, which is something we have a long successful tradition of in New Zealand, becomes extreme. And then thereโs the worry that this extremism becomes violent. And thatโs what we saw happen in Wellington.โ
Incredibly, the article continues: โThe problem is that this extremism bubbling under the surface has the potential to motivate some incredibly heinous acts, as was seen during the Christchurch Mosque terrorist attack,โโan attack which occurred three years prior the Wellington protest, whose perpetrator was a terrorist equally concerned to attack and kill both muslims and jews.
Conflating a largely peaceful demonstration about vaccine safety and policy with an extreme terrorist act calls into question the integrity and political motivation of those employed by the government to advise them on the identification and censorship of disinformation.
So you can see that we are making some progress, but very significant questions about the formation of government policy remain. This arises specifically because many government actions are not actually initiated or controlled by parliament. This has happened due to laws which have granted the power to make regulations to unelected bodies and tsars largely unfettered by parliamentary scrutiny. Such bodies can and do become subject to industry pressure driven by commercial priorities rather than public benefit
This is particularly true of the health and food sectors where the pharmaceutical, agrichemical, and biotechnology industries are using their trillion dollar power to sway government policy to endorse novel synthetic manufactured products whose safety is in question, thereby replacing time-honoured, natural, cost-effective and safe approaches.
When it comes to government, politicians should never lose sight of the well being of the public.
Our focus during the coming months is on the need to publicise research which is demonstrating the risks inherent in biotechnology experimentation. Many in our current health services appear to have normalised these risks in a twisted logic accepting them as some sort of inevitable cost of progress. We believe that the main take home lesson of the pandemic should be Global Legislation Outlawing Biotechnology Experimentation. We will be reinforcing this point in our ongoing submissions to the Covid Inquiry.
Guy Hatchard, Ph.D., was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a food testing and certification company (now known as FoodChain ID).
