At the height of the fear and panic about possible pandemic outcomes, there is no doubt people acted under a fight or flight psychology. Anyone familiar with emergency situations will realise what this means. You either meet the threat head on or you rush to the nearest exit. Everything is concentrated on self-preservation, you are looking to cling on to lifelines. There is little time to think it through.

The nearest exit rapidly became the development and eventual rollout of a ‘vaccine’, the most trusted and revered word in the modern medical lexicon. But this was no ordinary vaccine, it was using novel biotechnology whose eventual effect was little understood, but already known to be mutagenic. What lay behind the offered exit was largely untested and highly risky, but no one was prepared to admit this to the public. They still aren’t (we have written extensively on this at GLOBE).

Novel Biotech Vaccines Are Ineffective and Unsafe

Extensive research is now published indicating that the novel biotech vaccines are ineffective and unsafe, but the nature of the early information presented to the public, who were in a state of near panic, has been imprinted too deeply in the individual and collective consciousness to allow for doubt to emerge.

Over the last few months, a thirty year old social media personality has experienced a miscarriage, loss of health, and irregular menstrual cycles, her husband has had a heart attack, but hundreds of her followers have urged her to ignore anyone asking questions about vaccine safety. She has become caught in a network of irrational responses and a reluctance to question the safety of the so-called exit strategy. She is a victim of disinformation.

Unequivocal data shows she is not alone. Here in New Zealand and in many other highly vaccinated nations we have entered an era of record rates of excess deaths (up 18%); and hospitalisations including a high incidence of cardiac illness up 83%, strokes up 25%, miscarriage and stillbirths up 25%, and acute kidney injury up 40%. Cancer incidence is climbing. Yet the causes of these remain unaddressed in the media. People are suffering repeated ill health episodes, but due to saturation government advertising and media compliance, many still thank God they are vaccinated.

The gratitude of survivors to their rescuers is well known, it can last a lifetime. People maintain contact, and the shared experiences of escape become the stuff of legends to be passed down through generations. But what if the dangers were exaggerated, the causes obfuscated, and the eventual poor outcomes ignored, as they are being now?

Government Control of the Dialogue

An article published yesterday in the UK Telegraph “Covid disinformation unit made ‘hourly contact’ with tech firms, its leader reveals” indicates the extent of control the UK government exerted over information during the pandemic. A control that is still continuing today. The article reports that a career civil servant, Sarah Connolly is Head of the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU). Ms. Connolly has just admitted in testimony to MPs that the CDU was in contact with “almost all” social media platforms, and that discussions were “daily, sometimes hourly… to encourage…the swift take down of posts”.

The Telegraph reports these contacts were intended to curtail discussions about vaccine safety and discussion of controversial lockdown policies during the pandemic. Addressing MPs, she said that the most concerning types of anti-vaccine material included discussions about side-effects and the speed with which the vaccine was produced.

When asked about the CDU’s process for having posts removed, Ms. Connolly said: “If somebody from our cell says: ‘We are worried about this,’ that goes immediately to the top of the pile. Whoever it is, in whatever company.” In other words, since many scientific papers and leading scientists were raising these questions, she appears to be frightened by the normal process of scientific investigation and determined to control it.

The Telegraph reports that the UK Government confirmed last night that social media firms had taken action on more than 90 per cent of the posts referred to them by the CDU during the pandemic, often by deleting them or using AI algorithms to ensure they were not seen as widely. This is the modern equivalent of government-sponsored book burning.

The effect of these policies on media reporting was laid bare by current and former BBC staff who have told the Telegraph that, during the pandemic, a “climate of fear” existed within the BBC among those who argued that its reporting lacked balance, saying they were branded “dissenters” and were ignored when they raised their concerns about impartiality with senior managers. Staff were fearful of losing their jobs if they spoke up.

Sources told the Telegraph that Connolly took control of the Covid narrative like a puppeteer. CDU rapidly silenced respected scientists such as Dr. Alexandre de Figueiredo from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and many others, who argued against mass vaccination of children against Covid-19, questioning its need or safety.

There are fears that Connolly’s control at CDU indicates the close involvement of the UK intelligence services. Connolly’s CV notes she previously worked in the Home Office and Foreign and Commonwealth Office on a range of security and counter-terrorism policies. Were government ministers so poorly informed about a technical area that they became misinformation perpetrators in the hands of people used to enforcing agendas by any and every means?

In New Zealand We Are Being Left in the Dark

We too have a government Disinformation Project funded by the Prime Minister’s office whose staff appear to share political agendas and a lamentable deficit of scientific understanding. Crucially there have been no moderated public debates between those determining policy and those asking questions. There has been no cross examination of government experts in the courts. There has been free media access granted to paid proponents of biotechnology.

Two days ago Kathryn Ryan of RNZ Nine To Noon interviewed Michael Spector. According to Wikipedia, Spector has a degree in English and was formerly the New York Times Bureau Chief in Moscow (???). He has described the value of organic food and concerns about vaccine safety as ‘fictions’. He is now a New Yorker science writer and author of an adoring biography of Fauci whom he describes as “The Enlightenment’s human shield”.

Ryan was apparently ill equipped to ask scientifically probing questions of Spector. As a result, we were subjected to a barrage of disinformation, a sort of black comedy. Asked to define Covid vaccines, Spector replied “mRNA vaccines deliver the blueprints that tell the cells how to build the antibodies needed to defend against Covid. Once they do that they hang around for a couple of days then disappear”.

Anyone with even a modicum of Covid scientific knowledge would know that this is not just a simplification but a fiction. mRNA Covid vaccines override cellular processes and create copies of the toxic spike protein on the surface of the Covid virus. This circulates in the physiology where the immune system attempts to destroy it by creating antibodies. Spike protein has been found in the blood up to 28 days following vaccination and in some cases longer. It can cause a range of adverse effects on health including myocarditis.

The conversation between Spector and Ryan rapidly deteriorated into the wild imagination of genetic essentialism. The false idea that any desirable human trait can be engineered by editing genes. Spector suggested that we could make kids taller or play the cello better. These are laughable fantasies. Ryan jumped in to say we could make female possums infertile. Segue to a cure for cancer. If you want a more informative assessment of so-called miracle biotech cures read my articles “Genetic Essentialism and Biotechnology Experimentation” and “Speak up now, it is almost too late“

Or watch Professor Richard Dawkins answer actual probing questions about Covid pandemic science in this interview with Unheard on Youtube. Dawkins struggles to try to justify his earlier extreme moral condemnation of the unvaccinated, and eventually admits he got it wrong. In a convoluted defence, he blames politicians for wanting a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer when actually scientists didn’t know about the efficacy and safety of the vaccines or government lockdown policies.

Yes, you read that right, one of the world’s best known scientists publicly admits they didn’t know much about Covid vaccine efficacy or safety when they accused the vaccine hesitant of being killers. More than that, he now admits he and many others made the wrong call.

Let us return now to the hapless social media personality, suffering repeated bouts of unexpected ill health but assailed on all sides by her own pro-vaccine followers bolstered by government propaganda. She feels alone, but she is not actually alone, she is certainly misinformed about the extent of vaccine injury and quite possibly one of hundreds of thousands of severely vaccine-injured individuals.

There are key processes of data analysis that would help decide the causes of current unprecedented high rates of illness and death. Including analysis of vaccine status at the time of hospital admission and death, segmented by age and condition. This can be compared with historical data. Why are medical authorities around the world refusing to undertake this and even hiding data? Why are mainstream media not asking these questions? The present need is for rational re-evaluation.

Image Credit

Photo by Melanie Wasser on Unsplash

The World Health Organisation has announced an agreement with the European Union to develop a digital health certificate. WHO has stated that they will use the “EU Digital COVID Certificate” as a model to establish a global digital health certificate otherwise known as a vaccine passport (you can follow the reaction on Twitter here).

This brings to mind the conditions imposed on daily life during pandemic lockdowns which were enforced using vaccine passports. Restrictions on movement and participation which are now known to have had an overwhelmingly damaging effect on society. An article in the authoritative UK Daily Telegraph on 4th June headlines “Painful lockdowns a global policy failure that must never be repeated“. According to new research, we will be suffering drastic effects on the economy, educational outcomes, and mental and physical health for years to come as a result.

Now that the pandemic panic is subsiding, you may hope that this will not affect you or your family. Think again. The latest WHO initiative is one among many being promoted around the globe to restrict the freedoms of unvaccinated individuals.

In our backyard, the headmaster of prestigious Auckland Grammar School Tim O’Connor has written on 1st June to parents and friends of the School and spoken to the student body saying:

“It is our intention for all teaching and extracurricular programmes to be in person, with appropriate health and safety procedures in place”. Warning students that “personal health can affect their ability to attend and/or to actively participate in School activities”.

He announced that AGS has received advice from Public Health and medical professionals about the need for pupils to receive MMR shots and influenza vaccines. Mask wearing is also advised.

Mr. O’Connor appears not to realise that parents may have legitimate reasons to be concerned. He writes as if his audience is convinced of the need for universal vaccination and of its safety. He may not have read of the study conducted in Thailand on the effect of mRNA vaccination on adolescent boys which found cardiovascular effects in 29.24% of secondary school students, ranging from tachycardia and palpitation to myopericarditis.

He may not have read recently published studies including “Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Bivalent Vaccine” which found not just zero effectiveness of the bivalent Covid vaccine, but an increased susceptibility to Covid infection following repeated vaccinations. Possibly Public Health and the unnamed medical professionals advising him have failed to share the results of these studies.

Is this a taste of what is in store for us all—removal of medical choice and restricted access to reliable information? Or could it be worse than that?

In 2020 during Operation Warp Speed something happened that possibly escaped your notice but its effects are just now altering everything we took for granted about the safety of medical interventions. Operation Warp Speed was the programme to develop Covid vaccines rapidly in the heated climate of fear surrounding the initial stages of the Covid pandemic.

The usual 10-12 year period of careful safety and effectiveness research evaluating new vaccines was cut short to a matter of months. You may remember something else happened after these initial months. All the control group who had been given a placebo were suddenly given the same mRNA vaccine as the experimental group. This meant the Pfizer study had no possibility of evaluating the long term effects and safety of mRNA vaccines. Pfizer documents released under court order now show that by this point more people had died in the experimental vaccinated group than in the unvaccinated control group, a fact that Pfizer tried very hard to hide.

Move forward now to late last year, the bivalent vaccine was developed and rolled out around the world. It had different ingredients from the original vaccine but its testing period was even shorter. You can see where this is heading, can’t you? The pandemic has legitimised wide scale testing of novel pharmaceutical drugs on the general public. Drugs whose long term effects are unknown.

WHO is fully involved in a push for rapidly updated vaccine types. See this article in the Atlantic “Fall’s COVID Shots May Be Different in One Key Way” which explains that the FDA’s advisory panel is expected to authorise an ‘updated’ Covid vaccine, something ‘experts’ described as “momentous, but wise”. In other words, we have become guinea pigs, unprotected by any standards of safety that ruled drug development before the pandemic.

The introduction of vaccine passports on a global scale is one more step in this direction. Someone at the World Health Organisation, closely associated with the highly profitable pharmaceutical industry, will be dictating which drugs and vaccines you need to take. These standards set up a framework which may restrict freedom of movement, access to education and employment. Public health officials, medical professionals, headmasters, employers, and many others will no doubt be enforcing these WHO standards by adopting their digital health certificate. Theirs will be unthinking decisions, they will be following the crowd without knowing where it is heading. Given their position and responsibility they should be looking carefully into research findings before acting, not relying on others.

No doubt many have been seduced by the constant barrage of articles appearing in the press which promise miracle cures through biotech medicine. A sobering assessment is given in an article by the BBC entitled “The quest for the era of personalised medicine” which says:

“The Human Genome Project was supposed to lead to personalised medicine tailored to our DNA. It’s finally happening, but it is proving more difficult than anyone could have imagined.”

Instead of ‘difficult’ they might have used the words ‘dangerous’ or ‘concerning’. The article recounts the story of five year old Mila who had a rare disease understood to be caused by a genetic defect. Her mother raised $3 million in 2017 to fund the development of a personalised medicine designed to block the function of the defective gene. This medicine called ‘milasen’, relieved some symptoms for a while, but they returned and sadly Mila died two years ago aged 10.

It won’t have escaped your notice that medicine costing $3 million per person is not a prescription for a sea change in global health. Indeed the long and informative BBC article repeatedly bemoans the massive and ultimately impossible cost of various genetic research initiatives, whilst enthusing about their potential. ‘Potential’ is the right word because the article fails to describe a single initiative that is actually working. Sadly, poor outcomes continue to dog genetic medicine.

Projects to monitor the genome of hundreds of thousands of babies to screen for genetic defects are underway in the UK and USA, but the treatments are not. Clinical trials of conventional drugs have a notoriously poor success rate, or rather a 90% failure rate and, even for those that pass, a very low effectiveness and a high rate of adverse events. Genetic interventions haven’t yet even been able to graduate from trials.

The article reports some health officials noting there are sometimes treatments available for genetic conditions that don’t involve personalised genetic testing and medicine, treatments that are cost-effective. This advice tends to fall on deaf ears when billion dollar genetic projects are on offer.

Remarkably, the article touts the very high incidence of sudden cardiac arrests as an opportunity to develop personalised genetic medicines. Ironically, the authors fail to realise that the incidence of such events has doubled during the era of mRNA vaccines.

The article concludes with a chilling statement:

“It is going to potentially require a different approach to the way drugs are tested, and some willingness to embrace risk.”

Who is going to adopt this risk—the general public of course. Will we do so willingly or will we be left misinformed of its full extent? Will we be forced to participate on pain of loss of employment or housing? It has happened before, hasn’t it? It is our job to ensure it doesn’t happen again. Don’t let these initiatives be introduced unchallenged. Speak up now, it is almost too late.

This article is available as a PDF file:
https://hatchardreport.media/pdf-files/speak-up-now-it-is-almost-too-late.pdf

Image Credit

Photo by Juliana Romão on Unsplash

Members of the Public Adversely Affected by Covid Vaccines May Be the Last to Hear About It.

In his book Structure of Scientific Revolutions Thomas Kuhn describes what happens when new experimental data contradicts the established scientific orthodoxy. According to Kuhn, there is a period of extraordinary science where new theories abound and compete with one another to explain the new findings.

This is often accompanied by an almost irrational effort on the part of the proponents of the discredited theories to cling to their old ideas. Even Einstein for example was vilified by a number of colleagues for more than a decade after his 1905 discoveries of relativity, quanta, and Brownian motion.

Eventually, controversy settles down, and a new broader scientific paradigm or understanding becomes widely accepted, one which explains the anomalous experimental results which precipitated the crisis.

We Are in the Middle of a Paradigm Shift

For seventy years it has been more or less accepted that DNA is a biological molecule that contains an almost alphabetical system of information storage like a giant manual which guides the development and operation of biological systems. This linear understanding underpins the development of biotechnology—the attempt to edit DNA in order to modify the operation of biology.

The era of biotechnology has reached a point of crisis where the current theories of DNA operation are proving insufficient to explain the proliferation of adverse effects of Covid vaccine technology. On the GLOBE website, we have discussed that DNA and its cellular functions form a biomolecular interface between consciousness and matter, necessitating a change of paradigm—a scientific revolution that must encompass consciousness within the scope of biology.

The crisis we have arrived at is intrinsically different from those in scientific history. The globalisation of information, the commercialisation of science, the overreach of political control into every aspect of everyday life, the involvement of military interests, the power of online media, billion dollar investment, and the pharmaceutical society all wish to interpret and influence scientific debate.

How is This Vast Competition to Control the Scientific Narrative Playing Out in Our Lives?

Ever since the Christchurch earthquake, I have checked my email and read the newspapers from around the world when I first wake up. I feel the need to know what is happening, you probably do too. Take this morning for example:

The BBC asks “Could ultra-processed foods be harmful for us?“. Two identical twins were given different diets which had identical nutritional profiles (the same quantity of fats, fibre, calories, nutrients, sugars, etc.), but one twin ate these via ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and the other through fresh ingredients. The UPF twin put on weight, and increased unhealthy blood sugar and lipid fat levels. The other lost weight.

The article references dozens of studies showing that UPFs increase the risk of developing serious illnesses like cancer, strokes, and diabetes. It discusses the possible causal role of various additives in UPFs like emulsifiers and artificial sweeteners. It should have also identified a major difference between UPFs and fresh foods—one has DNA and the other doesn’t—but it didn’t because current nutritional paradigms ignore genetics. Fresh foods we could say have more ‘genetic intelligence’ and availability of nutrients that the body can utilise to maintain health. I discuss this more fully in my book Your DNA Diet. Understanding this possibility will involve a paradigm shift in our concept of nutrition.

The UK Guardian’s Health Editor based in Chicago writes “Global ‘silver tsunami’ of older cancer patients is coming, experts warn“. The article reports that an aging population is likely to suffer from cancers at a rate that will overwhelm oncology care facilities. This may be true, but no current discussion of cancer incidence would be complete without discussing the fall in longevity, decline in population growth, and the rise in cancer incidence that the world has been experiencing since the start of the pandemic. As we have repeatedly discussed at the Hatchard Report and GLOBE, data shows cancer incidence is on the rise among all age groups, not just the elderly. Why?

Another article in the Guardian reports “AI could outwit humans in two years, says UK government adviser“. He suggests “You can use AI today to create new recipes for bioweapons or to launch large-scale cyber-attacks.” AI systems do not launch attacks on their own volition, they can only do so if they have been programmed by a human being. AI systems were used during the pandemic to promote biotechnology acceptance, helping to generate hundreds of articles, fake social media posts, automated fact checks, and advertisements. Powerful secretive lobby groups were controlling the content of mainstream and social media. AI was not the culprit here, massive commercial interests were at fault. They used AI to distribute distorted information.

A few days ago the NZ Herald reported “Number of antidepressants dispensed to children and teens jumps 53 per cent in five years“. The article talks about the concern psychologists are feeling about over prescribing of antidepressants by GPs, a familiar story you might think. The article prints a table of total antidepressant prescribing by year and age.

We calculated the percentage change by year. Up until 2021, antidepressant prescribing was increasing by a worrying figure of about 5% per year. In 2021 prescriptions to 1-18 year olds increased by 23% four times the prior rate, to 19-24 by 14% double the prior rate. Prescriptions to 24+ also doubled. 2022 increases returned to roughly historical levels. So what happened in 2021 to cause such a dramatic rise? You might say lockdowns, but then there were lockdowns in both 2020 and 2021. You might say Covid, but then there was very little Covid in New Zealand in 2021.

If you want to know why, examine the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System) in the USA. Jessica Rose queried the VAERS database with the keywords: “psych”, “schiz”, “halluc”, “delus”, “visions”, “voices”, “suicid” and “mania”, “dreams”, “seiz”, “conscious”, “memory” and “depress”. This yielded 54,905 cases clustered around younger age groups (similar age groups to those affected by antidepressant prescribing increases here in New Zealand). These figures are astonishing considering VAERS is highly under-reported. Yes, mRNA vaccines do have neuropsychological adverse effects, although you wouldn’t know it if you only read New Zealand newspapers.

One feature of the competition occurring during paradigm shifts is the denial and falsification of data. Vatican officials famously looked through Galileo’s telescope but still denied that Jupiter had moons which would have falsified their theory that planets are embedded in solid crystal. Looking beyond newspapers to scientific comment, Dr. Clare Craig pointed out in an article published by HART (Health Advisory and Recovery Team) that the NHS had drastically and retrospectively altered records of atrial fibrillation incidence. Why? One wonders who to trust. You tell me.

In another example, the UK Telegraph reports that the Conservative government’s Covid Disinformation Unit asked social media tech companies to remove articles it considered to be ‘potentially harmful’. This included any suggestions that lockdowns were ineffective and damaging. Yet a giant meta analysis by Johns Hopkins University and Lund University had already concluded in 2022 that benefits of lockdowns were “a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs”.

Finally on to one of this week’s published scientific papers. The European Heart Journal published a paper “COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis: a Korean nationwide study” This study of 44 million health records of vaccinated Koreans reported that 8 deaths of young people initially recorded as sudden cardiac deaths unrelated to vaccination, were actually caused by vaccine related myocarditis as shown by subsequent autopsy results. Sound familiar? Do you think the New Zealand press could learn from this? The study suggests that around 20% of confirmed cases of vaccine induced myocarditis are severe with long term health implications.

As we indicated in our most recent article, our government is continuing to promote Covid vaccination even though multiple studies show the bivalent vaccine has zero effect on the dominant XBB variant, and repeat vaccine doses even increase susceptibility to Covid infection.

In this release, we have argued that a paradigm shift is underway. A time of extraordinary science where competing theories and explanations for events and data are being considered. Unfortunately, as a result of censorship, the general public is unaware of the risks of Covid vaccines and biotech in general. Scientific debate is being suppressed. The Hatchard Report is committed to report on science publishing and bring the arguments and counter-arguments to the attention of the public.

Image Credit:

Photo by Dave Goudreau on Unsplash

An article “Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Bivalent Vaccine” has been published in the journal Open Forum of Infectious Diseases in their June 2023 issue. The study of 51,107 healthcare employees found that the bivalent vaccine was only a miserly 29% effective against the BA4/5 Covid variant which was in any case superseded by the BQ variant after which vaccine effectiveness dropped to 20%, and then, when the XBB variant began to dominate, effectiveness fell to zero. Yes zero, but not actually nothing; incredibly, repeated vaccination makes things worse.

This should be a familiar story. For decades, Coronaviruses have been well known to rapidly mutate and avoid vaccine protection. The fact that our government has launched an expensive promotional campaign to promote the bivalent vaccine, when it is proven to have zero effectiveness against the currently dominant XBB strain, speaks volumes about their incompetence.

But it is another finding of the study that is actually of far greater concern. The authors note:

“The risk of COVID-19 also increased with time since the most recent prior COVID-19 episode and with the number of vaccine doses previously received….The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19”

The authors describe this finding as ‘unexpected’, but then go on to admit three other large studies have found similar results (see here, here, and here).

The inescapable conclusion:

mRNA Covid vaccines increase your risk of contracting Covid 19.

This substantiates those arguing that Covid vaccines ‘imprint’ the immune system and limit its flexibility to deal with infection. In simple terms, the immune system becomes stuck with not just an ineffective response, but it steps backwards. In technical terms, the authors conclude:

“Immune imprinting from prior exposure to different antigens in a prior vaccine and class switch toward noninflammatory spike-specific immunoglobulin G4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination have been suggested as possible mechanisms whereby prior vaccine may provide less protection than expected….it is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed….The unexpected finding of increasing risk with increasing number of prior COVID-19 vaccine doses needs further study.”

You might think that this is the fact which governments and pharmaceutical firms most want to hide from the public, but you would be wrong. Quietly vaccine adverse effects have been piling up, hospitalisations increasing, and excess deaths rising. All at unprecedented record levels, but even this is not the most carefully hidden dirty secret. People have, after all, been figuring this out for themselves. Fewer and fewer people are taking the boosters because they obviously don’t prevent Covid infection. More and more people have been asking probing questions of their GP, because they don’t feel well.

The Biggest Secret Being Kept From the Public is the Use of Biotechnology Itself

Remember at the start of the vaccine programme, the government, pro-vaccine scientists and experts, the health department, the fact checkers, WHO, big pharma fact sheets and the media all took great pains to tell the public this was NOT an experimental vaccine. This was the biggest lie of all in need of near total protection from exposure.

It was important to everyone who sought to profit from the pandemic and the vaccines that biotech medicine should be seen as an extension of existing medicine. It isn’t.

When physics began to penetrate the nucleus of the atom, it was more than an extension of previous physics. The laws, the energy levels, the potential instability, and the nuclear particles all functioned under rules structurally different from those of earlier physics. Rules so different that the potential destructive outcomes dwarfed any previous man-made cataclysm. Since that time, nuclear technology has had to be guarded more carefully than any previous technology. The longevity and carcinogenic properties of nuclear waste and the threat of global annihilation have cast a shadow tens of thousands of years into the future.

mRNA vaccines penetrated, not the nucleus of the atom, but the cell wall and its nucleus—the very basis of life. mRNA and adenovirus vaccines are not mere extensions of modern medicine, they aim to redesign the cellular operation. Life begins with a single cell. The truly miraculous stability of human physiology and psychology was set to be altered.

It was already known that such interventions were mutagenic and highly risky, but against all common sense a decision was taken to press the launch button, not in a contained laboratory but in every country simultaneously altering every human life on the planet. It was essential for those seeking to profit from the new biotech era they have initiated, and remains essential, that the public should not know of the risks or the extreme novelty of what is being undertaken.

An analogy should make this clear. When a foreign power is seeking to insert their spy into the heart of a rival’s intelligence service, it is a time of the greatest sensitivity. No one must know what is being attempted. This action is going to place them in a position of superiority, and render their opponent’s intelligence ineffective. Until their mole is established, fully accepted, and above suspicion, it is vital that no one should suspect them.

Biotechnology medicine is a field that is conceived as a source of vast almost unimaginable profits. A field that will supersede much of conventional medicine and render it obsolete. The United States, UK and many other nations believe that their long term economic future and global superiority is intimately tied to the development, implementation, and promotion of patented systems of biotechnology medicine. A lot is at stake. Hence no one must know just how premature its implementation is and just how risky.

Biotechnology is a step far into the unknown, way too far. Scientists do not actually know how cellular genetic structures and functions support human consciousness, health, and development, yet they have been prepared to risk all this in a global spin of the roulette wheel. The ball has already come to rest on the wrong colour, but it is essential that no one knows, because like hopelessly addicted gamblers, the same scientists, corporations, and misinformed political hacks wish to spin the wheel again,…and again, ….because they are blinded by their own hubris, convinced that in the end they will win back their losses. But you cannot recoup human life.

Next time you read in the paper about the wonderful future of biotechnology, spare a thought for the cautious scientists who have found that mRNA vaccines are not just ineffective, they make things worse. They are gradually finding out just how terribly bad it could become. Biotechnology experimentation needs to be banned, the evidence is available now, the dirty secret is out of the bag.