Every day, my attention is drawn to efforts to extend the reach of mRNA vaccines. For example, nightly news anchor Mark Steyn of GB News has just been removed to make way with a pro-vaccine, pro-lockdown advocate. Mark was famously asking hard questions about vaccine safety. The CDC and the NHS have included mRNA Covid vaccines in the advised regular schedule of childhood vaccination freeing the providers from any legal liability forever.

I can understand it if people feel depressed by these and other trends. Following three years of misleading official pandemic advice fueled by carefully placed PR (paid for by commercial pharmaceutical interests and governments), people who are vaccinated feel different and want to keep separate from the unvaccinated. Many believe the unvaccinated are deserving of censure, segregation, and even punishment.

The US Federal government is actually tracking people who are unvaccinated (for any reason other than a medically approved exemption). In other words, the unvaccinated are subject to surveillance and listed as obstinate (or dare I say it—asocial).

This is not a random piece of Federal record-keeping. A paper “Estimating the risk reduction of isolation on COVID-19 nonhousehold transmission and severe/critical illness in nonimmune individuals: September to November 2021” published 8 February 2023 seeks to estimate how many ‘nonimmune’ individuals need to be isolated from society to stop the spread of infectious disease. The results of this paper are obscure even to a careful reader, but the intent is obvious—the authors set out to calculate out just how many unvaccinated individuals you need to lock up and for how long to prevent the spread of a disease.

Analysis of Recently Published Research

These sorts of actions and imaginings are completely out of touch with careful analysis of pandemic data genuinely seeking to scientifically work out what happened during the last three years rather than merely pushing the biotech vaccine agenda. A petition presented to the UK Government entitled “Investigate UK excess deaths not related to Covid.” received a response last week. The government reply included the following:

“Analysis shows that, in England, for the week ending 28 October 2022, the leading causes of death contributing to the excess were deaths involving cardiovascular diseases; the highest levels of excess mortality were for deaths involving heart failure (21% higher than expected), and ischaemic heart diseases (17% higher than expected). Deaths involving acute respiratory infections were 16% higher than expected. You can view OHID’s (Office for Health Improvement and Disparities) excess mortality tool here.

Estimates show that for deaths registered in England during the whole of 2022, deaths involving four conditions were all over 10% higher than expected: heart failure (15% higher), cirrhosis and other liver diseases (14%), diabetes (12%) and ischaemic heart diseases (11%).”

There was no mention of vaccination at all, even though it is a very obvious causal candidate, one that has been widely discussed even in the media. The Daily Sceptic (a publication of the UK Free Speech Union) filled in this lamentable oversight with an article “Higher Excess Deaths Clearly Linked to Higher Vaccination Rates in England, New Analysis Shows“. The article found:

“The more vaccine doses an area of England has received, the greater the number of excess deaths it has experienced, an analysis of official data has found – adding to worries that the novel Covid vaccines are contributing to the sharp rise in excess deaths seen since mid-2021.”

The analysis of 300 UK administrative areas found that the more jabs people received and the more time that had elapsed the relationship between high vaccination rates and death became stronger. What are people dying from: The UK government figures suggest heart disease, liver disease, and diabetes were especially at fault. It is just a short step to conclude mRNA vaccination might be causal, after all myo/pericarditis is a known side effect.

These high risks of vaccination are firmly underlined by a preprint paper analysing the spread of risk of death by age entitled “Age-stratified COVID-19 vaccine-dose fatality rate for Israel and Australia“. This paper found the risk of death following vaccination doubled for every 5.2 years increase in age. In other words, contrary to the policy of prioritising the vaccination of those over 65, those in this age bracket actually suffered an increased risk of death following vaccination.

So what stops governments from investigating the fundamental cause of excess deaths and what drives them to continue to promote vaccination? What leads them to ignore the growing weight of published evidence?

It is hard to fathom, unless you accept that people have been strongly schooled to a degree of bias. You might also begin to wonder if mRNA vaccines are affecting cognitive ability. Is this also in play? In fact, cognitive decline is a well known side effect of heart disease. A 2016 paper in the journal Cardiac Failure Review “Cognitive Decline in Heart Failure: More Attention is Needed” reports:

“Heart failure adversely affects various cognitive domains, including attention, learning ability and working memory, executive functions, and information processing speed”

Recently published papers from Taiwan and Thailand indicate that cardiac dysfunction is far more common subsequent to mRNA vaccination than previously realised. It can affect a high percentage of vaccine recipients. A significant number of people may be suffering from degrees of cardiac damage. Could this be affecting cognitive ability to a measurable degree? We have discussed this before at the Hatchard Report here and here. It is worth more research.

Biotech Advocates are Seeking to Reject Nature

Whether this is the case or not, there is a more general philosophy associated with the push for normalisation of biotech interventions. We have written about this in our article “Genetic Essentialism and Biotechnology Experimentation“. This involves an increasing rejection of natural law and those advocating more natural lifestyles, along with the suggestion that governments can and should demand uniformity and compliance with modern medicine and all that that implies.

The Therapeutic Products Bill (TPB) was recently introduced into Parliament where it passed its first reading virtually without dissent. The Bill will smooth the way for new biotechnology products in medicine and food, but proposes high hurdles for natural products and traditional medicines that will inevitably discourage their use.

The TPB goes against provisions of the NZ Bill of Rights which contains articles guaranteeing freedom of medical choice. Personal choice of treatment is a complex process as anyone who has been seriously ill will be aware. This involves weighing options from a science perspective, taking dietary advice, subjectively assessing your own condition, consulting with family, and reviewing traditional medical interventions.

In my experience, you never know in advance exactly what will help or hinder your condition. In many cases, assessment of cancer treatments for example demonstrate that no single treatment options are clear winners. Decisions about whether to accept chemotherapy or not often come down to weighing evenly balanced outcomes from different modalities and interventions. Some of these options are entirely natural.

The right to go through this personal process of choice should not be taken away from anyone. The pandemic has shown us that forcing compliance with a single approach can rapidly turn into a public health catastrophe when that procedure later turns out to be ineffective, risky, and even in some cases fatal. As far as natural health options, the TPB will appoint a regulator who can and almost certainly will take away many options from the reach of individuals.

This is part and parcel of the denial of consciousness that constitutes the mechanistic view of life. Individuals make a myriad of decisions everyday. We have five senses, our mind, an intellect which chooses, and a sense of self or identity. We interact with the world via personal experience, behaviour, rational thought and reflection, traditional and learnt knowledge, and personal preference. Placing these health choices in the hands of a government regulator does not make any sense unless you are the type of psychopathic politician who seeks obedience as the desired outcome of governance.

The pandemic should have taught us that limiting diversity and locking down individual and collective behaviour is disastrous, not the least because once behaviour is forcibly stopped, it is hard to bring it back to life. New Zealand destroyed its tourist industry by locking down borders. It has proved very hard to resuscitate. Once you have strictly schooled the population to vaccinate, mask up, reject social contact, and abhor the unvaccinated, you have created a degree prejudicial behaviour. One that is hard to shift, even if these methods have been proven ineffective.

The laws of psychology are such that once attitudes are repeatedly reinforced and made routine they often become inflexible prejudice. This has happened during the pandemic to an unprecedented degree. Whether this is sufficient to explain the polarisation of society and the rejection of newly published science papers indicating dangers of mRNA vaccination remains to be seen.

Legislative attempts in the TPB to restrict natural health options, promote risky biotech experimentation, and approve synthetic foods without adequate testing should be opposed. If we wish to be able to continue to freely choose herbal medicines and supplements without government interference, we will need to speak up. Go to this link to make a submission before March 5th (the deadline has been extended). Write to your MP and complain that the appointment of a regulator amounts to an open ended blank cheque to control the use of products used by more than 50% of our population without fully specifying the principles he should use.

In fact, we need to speak up more and more from this point in time moving forward. Research confirming our worst fears about mRNA vaccine dangers has been published. Any attempt to continue to suppress this information has the depressing smell of psychopathy. We should not be daunted by this task. Remaining silent at this point amounts to compliance and complicity. I am greatly heartened that we are not letting this go in New Zealand. The situation needs to be addressed openly and completely. The truth about the lack of mRNA vaccine safety and biotechnology in general is not going away nor can it remain hidden. It has to be thoroughly and openly faced. Otherwise, as time unfolds, those involved may feel emboldened to launch future public health deceptions on an uninformed public as a matter of routine.

---

Guy Hatchard, Ph.D., was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a food testing and certification company (now known as FoodChain ID).

Discovering and Defending Your DNA Diet

Guy is the author of Your DNA Diet: Leveraging the Power of Consciousness To Heal Ourselves and Our World. An Ayurvedic Blueprint For Health and Wellness.

In this groundbreaking book, Dr. Guy Hatchard takes a fresh look at the 4.5 billion years of evolution on planet earth.

In everyday language, he explains the findings of the leading edge of quantum cosmology, evolutionary biology, nutrition, and epigenetics then puts these next to the ancient health system of Ayurveda.

The implications for our diet, digestion, and health care are startling.

Tactile version

For those who appreciate the tactile experience of holding a book in hand, Your DNA Diet is available in large A4 format, glossy cover, containing 268 pages, 65 diagrams, charts, and illustrations, many in full colour.

Price NZ$50.00, including postage (New Zealand only).
To order, email your.dna.diet@hatchardreport.com, and we will reply with how to complete the sale.

Electronic version

Available now on Amazon as a Kindle eBook, Your DNA Diet
Don’t have Kindle, no worries; download the free Kindle App

hatchardreport.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

How Did This Happen and What Should Be Done?

One of the most effective ways to repress occupied populations is to cut out sources of information and remove the possibility of investigation. When reprisals against resistors caused public outrage in 1941, Hitler devised the Nacht und Nebel (Night and Fog) policy. Henceforth the fate of captured resistors, whether they were dead or alive, would be withheld from their dear ones and the public, who, living in dread, did not know whether to protest or hope. Inevitably, news of their cruel fate eventually leaked out.

Here is a personal family story of cardiac vaccine injury from the USA. You may have read similar stories, especially if you have searched for them. I am concerned here to point out the similarities and differences between the approach of the US medical services in this case and those here in New Zealand.

Emily’s sister, Jordan (age 26), reported to her GP with tachycardia (very fast heart rate) after her first J&J jab. Jordan was rapidly transferred to hospital for assessment. Later Emily’s child, Aiden (age 14), reported to hospital with chest pains after his second Pfizer jab. At hospital both were extensively tested.

The doctors ordered an echocardiogram (ultrasound of the heart) for Jordan and saw a pericardial effusion (fluid around the heat). It progressed, and she then was diagnosed with pericarditis (inflammation of the saclike membrane surrounding the heart) due to the J&J vaccine. The doctors issued Jordan with an exemption from further Covid vaccination.

Aiden’s assessment by emergency department doctors revealed abnormal ECG (test measuring electrical signals of heart), and elevated troponin (an enzyme suggesting heart damage). At that point, Aiden was diagnosed with “vaccine induced myocarditis”.

It is now a year since these incidents. Emily reports she is incredibly thankful for their medical care staff, the actions of Aiden’s cardiologist and other specialists, and the ongoing care through the year-long road to recovery. She has not received any compensation. Emily publicised their story, she reports:

“I truly expected some compassion and empathy, instead I was met with labels, accusations and blocks. I’m sad to say the bulk of it has come from the Twitter medical community. I find it beyond hypocritical to support a vaccine and deny the existence of the vaccine-injured, especially with clear causation.”

The vaccine-injured here in New Zealand will empathise about the abuse and the lack of compensation, but will look with envy at the rapid issue of vaccine exemptions and the outstanding level of medical care and support.

The New Zealand Government Deliberately Hid Information About Vaccine Safety

Early on, our government appeared to decide to ignore the safety recommendations of Pfizer itself. Pfizer was advising that vaccine exemptions be granted to anyone with injuries subsequent to inoculation or with a health history of allergic reactions or adverse responses to other vaccines. Our government began by refusing almost all applications for vaccine exemption from people in these categories.

Simultaneously the government publicly maintained that mRNA vaccines were entirely ‘safe and effective’. GPs who told patients of risks and advised caution put themselves at risk of public censure and even expulsion from the medical profession. Some were actually struck off.

Our Ministry of Health delayed warning District Health Boards of the risk of myocarditis until mid December 2021 (nine months after the start of the vaccine rollout in late February 2021 and at least six months after they were first made aware of the problem). This Ministry of Health warning incorrectly described vaccine induced myocarditis as rare and generally mild.

As a result, there was an obvious incentive right from the start of the vaccine rollout for GPs and medical staff at hospitals to ignore alarming cardiac symptoms and fail to order necessary investigative tests. Instead blaming it on anxiety and sending patients home with ibuprofen.

As of November 2022, there have been 13,000 cases of chest pain and 7,500 cases of shortness of breath (both known symptoms of myocarditis) reported to CARM (Centre for Adverse Reaction Monitoring) in Dunedin. Reporting is voluntary, and Medsafe itself estimates that only 5% of reactions are reported. Medsafe has still not acknowledged a connection between these reported reactions and mRNA Covid vaccination (except in a very small number of cases of myocarditis).

The reports include 184 deaths. As of November 2022 only two of these deaths have been acknowledged as connected to myocarditis due to vaccination. The rest have been vaguely labelled as ‘unlikely’ to be connected to vaccination.

Up to December 2022, the Accident Compensation Commission (ACC) has received 3,326 claims for vaccine injury. 40% (1,349) of these have been accepted, and 60% have been rejected. To make an application for compensation you must have the support of your doctor and other relevant specialists (doctor reluctance to become involved is the main reason why so few affected people have been able to lodge ACC claims). Only 152 of the accepted claims are for cardiac injury; among the rest, approximately 450 (1/3) appear to be due to accidental injury sustained as a result of errors in the actual process of administering the vaccine.

Our government has resolutely maintained a level of controlled silence about the fate of those seriously affected by vaccination. Credible reports circulating privately indicate the Ministry of Health went to great lengths to erroneously assure parents of children and teenagers who died suddenly following vaccination that these events could not possibly be related to the vaccine. These extreme efforts at suppression were undoubtedly aimed at reducing vaccine hesitancy among the young and possibly silencing parental concerns. Yet studies published by mid 2021 indicated that young people were especially vulnerable to vaccine induced cardiac injury. Early figures which have since become highly verified by more research.

The German policy of Nacht und Nebel in occupied France came to an end in late 1943 when an official in Auschwitz accidentally sent a death notice to the family of a French woman detained for her activities in the resistance. The French national conscience was awakened and outraged. Demands were issued to know the fate of thousands of detainees. In fact, the vast majority of those held under Nacht und Nebel had perished. Knowing that they were going to lose the war and perhaps worried about retribution, German authorities relented, improving French prisoner conditions and allowing parcels to be sent and letters exchanged with the surviving prisoners (this did not happen for imprisoned Jews, Gypsies, and Russians).

The extremely low figures for vaccine injury admitted so far in New Zealand are in stark contrast to those reported in a preprint paper published two weeks ago in the Lancet by the New Zealand Ministry of Health. This found statistically significant rates of myocarditis and acute kidney injury (AKI) due to mRNA vaccination. There were 1778 extra kidney injuries involving hospitalisation and 229 extra cases of myo/pericarditis involving hospitalisation within 21 days of receiving a shot. That is a startling injury rate of approximately 1 in every 2000 vaccine recipients.

Up to this point, the Ministry of Health has only admitted injury rates of 3 in every 100,000 vaccine recipients. Accordingly, the study points to a rate of injury 16 times higher than previously acknowledged, but that only covers injuries involving hospitalisations within 21 days of the jab. Injuries emerging over a longer term remain uninvestigated by the Ministry of Health. Nor does the study take account of the effect of a presumption of safety on the hospitalisation rates and the lack of routine testing for cardiac injury.

How Did the Government Manipulate Public Information?

Until now, many have believed that New Zealand rates of vaccine injury are low and not cause for too much alarm. In fact, Medsafe Safety Reports now appear to be entirely misleading. From the start, the New Zealand government and its medical service instituted a strict policy to suppress information about the extent and nature of vaccine injury whilst simultaneously coercing universal Covid vaccination compliance. How did they do that? Through government messaging, which:

• Repeatedly rated the Pfizer vaccine completely ‘safe and effective’.
• Assured the public Covid vaccines would prevent transmission, infection, and serious illness
• Strongly discouraged doctors from issuing vaccine exemptions.
• Threatened GPs advising patients to be cautious, with disbarment
• Mandated government employees to vaccinate or face dismissal
• Strongly encouraged private companies to mandate employees
• Failed to advise GPs of any known adverse effects of Covid vaccination
• Labelled the unvaccinated a danger to public health and source of disinformation—equating it with terrorism.
• Estimated (incorrectly) that the Pfizer vaccine would prevent tens of thousands of otherwise inevitable deaths

The net effect on public health was to create the impression among doctors, health professionals, and the general public that;

• Almost all health complaints following vaccination were unrelated or imaginary.
• Consequently, any adverse effects were likely due to anxiety and would dissipate quickly without investigation or special treatment.
• Any reports by doctors of vaccination injury might create a black mark against their record.
• The Pfizer mRNA vaccine was not experimental and had been fully tested over a long period.
• Any spread of Covid in the general population should be regarded as facilitated by unvaccinated persons.

The government also spent big on media support for a pro-vaccine stance, paid very generous per person fees to GPs administering vaccines, and rewarded organisations and individuals bringing people into vaccination centres. We now know the government also ignored safety concerns raised by CVTAG (Covid Vaccine Technical Advisory Group).

So why did they adopt this extreme position and ignore early warning signs of high rates of vaccine injury? The alarming Pfizer post-marketing vaccine assessment was completed and distributed by Pfizer at the end of April 2021 to governments with whom they had contractual arrangements. We presume this includes New Zealand.

The Public Heard Nothing About It. Why?

We can only speculate. Early in the pandemic, PM Jacinda Ardern described daily discussions over breakfast with former PM Helen Clark. On 9 July 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) appointed Clark as co-chair of a panel reviewing the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the response of governments to the outbreak.

Throughout 2021, Clark was a high profile proponent of universal Covid vaccination. As late as September 2021, Clark was strongly advising the NZ public that the Covid vaccines were completely safe and universally effective.

Ardern met Bill and Melinda Gates during a trip to New York in 2019. In November 2020, Melinda Gates furthered the association making an impassioned plea to Ardern to support Covid vaccination. The pair teleconferenced. Gates said, “the US, and the world, saw New Zealand’s response and PM Ardern’s leadership as an exemplar.” Ardern replied, “I am happy to assist”.

Was the extreme position on vaccination taken by Ardern and her government a response to Gates’ request that New Zealand become an exemplar? Were there incentives to do so? Or was the kudos enough to push Ardern towards the world’s most coercive mandates? Was this the reason for withholding information about vaccine injury from the public?

Whilst Ardern became the global poster child of universal vaccination and extreme lockdowns, she didn’t do it alone. All the opposition parties, in awe of Ardern’s poll support and the high rates of vaccination, joined in with calls for more extreme measures, including Chris Luxon, leader of the National Party, and James Shaw, leader of the Greens. Director General of Health Dr. (now Sir) Ashley Bloomfield personally made it his business to refuse vaccine exemptions in most cases. In fact, the few exemptions granted were only postponements. Covid response minister Chris Hipkins (now NZ PM) exceeded Ardern’s doctrines (the two tier society and the one source of truth) with his own threat to hunt down the unvaccinated. No one from Parliament met the protestors who were demanding transparency, instead turning the hoses on them and calling in riot police to disperse an entirely peaceful and lawful protest.

Andrew Little, former Minister of Health, and Dr. Ayesha Verrall, current Minister of Health and Minister for Covid Response, have both failed to institute investigation into unprecedented rates of excess all cause mortality (rates which are still continuing). With the data available to them, it would have been very easy to settle any controversy by comparing excess deaths with vaccination status. They were requested to do so on many occasions, but nothing has been done.

We thought we had a culture of openness and transparency in New Zealand, but the government has reversed this. Now is the time to speak up and demand it be restored. Almost 90% of the population got vaccinated in good faith or were coerced by mandates; they mostly remain in ignorance of the injury they risked and, in many cases, suffered. Many believe erroneously that the government was following international Covid science publishing, they weren’t. They were pursuing a political agenda and ignoring growing international evidence of the negative impact on public health.

Withholding information and failing to investigate are policies of repressive regimes. The government has failed to publicise the results of the latest Ministry of Health investigation of adverse effects of mRNA Covid vaccination in New Zealand. The responsibility to do so now falls squarely on the shoulders of our recently appointed Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins. For three years, he has been closely associated with Covid policy. So far, he has maintained a stiff silence. That is not sufficient to put things right. It does not do justice to those injured or to accepted standards of public health. This has become a defining issue of the modern era. Silence will not draw New Zealand together again as a nation.

Support Us

The Hatchard Report receives no independent funding; our team is all volunteers. We depend on our readers to help us cover these expenses.

If you are not already, can you help support us with a small monthly contribution or one-off donation today?

Yesterday the NZ Herald, our most read legacy media newspaper, published an article, “Australian woman reveals heartbreak as ‘loving’ husband sucked into conspiracies”. The article purported to tell the story of an anonymous woman in Western Australia whose ‘gentle, kind loving husband’ had fallen into an ‘antivaxxer conspiracy cult’.

According to the woman, her hapless husband erroneously believed the vaccine was experimental since no long term studies had been completed. He asserted that it did not provide immunity from infection or prevent transmission. He also warned of adverse effects which might result in death.

The woman professed to love her husband dearly and mentioned his high IQ, but referred to him as a ‘freedumb fighter’ whose stance on mRNA vaccine safety amounted to ‘domestic abuse’.

The article drew on the expertise of Kim Cullen, who I found has a master’s degree (not a doctorate) in organisational psychology (not a clinical qualification). She described a range of possible sources for the husband’s opinions, including a personality disorder, feelings of vulnerability and isolation, pride and superiority, asserting control, the internet, and, crucially the need to cling to unfounded false beliefs to avoid embarrassment.

At this point in the pandemic, I think you must be aware that mRNA does not stop Covid transmission, infection, or indeed reinfection, so you may be harbouring secret feelings of sympathy for some of these views. You might also be wondering if it is the NZ Herald editorial staff who are “clinging to unfounded false beliefs to avoid embarrassment”. Why on earth did the Herald print this appalling article?

Association Between Pfizer mRNA Vaccination and Both Myocarditis and Acute Kidney Injury

A few days ago, Ministry of Health researchers secured publication of their preprint paper in the Lancet, “Adverse Events Following the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine (Pfizer-BioNtech) in Aotearoa New Zealand”.

The paper reveals there is a statistically significant association between Pfizer mRNA vaccination and both Myocarditis and Acute Kidney Injury (AKI). Here in little New Zealand, you wouldn’t know AKI was a potential side effect of mRNA vaccination. The Herald has not covered it. Instead, choosing to print the dreadful tripe above.

Many Kiwi’s are no longer able to follow the Herald uncritically because it doesn’t fit with reality on the ground. We are living in a country with an unprecedented high rate of excess all-cause mortality and an overwhelmed health service. I now have four vaccinated friends who have developed debilitating kidney disease since the shot, but if you want to read more about the NZ study, you will need to read about it in the British press.

The Ministry of Health study only looked at mRNA vaccine outcomes for 21 days after the shot, validating the husband’s point—the long term outcomes remain unassessed. Or are they really unknown? Read this substack article assessing the evidence for longer term serious myocarditis outcomes following mRNA vaccination.

Nor are long term outcomes unknown to the relatives of those adversely affected by mRNA vaccines (there are tens of thousands affected in New Zealand), but they would be unknown to those relying exclusively upon the NZ Herald. They would naturally still believe against all up-to-date published evidence that the vaccine is protecting them from serious illness and death (it isn’t).

The New Zealand Ministry of Health Has Started to Come Clean, but MSN Hasn’t

So the New Zealand Ministry of Health has started to come clean, but MSM hasn’t. Why? We don’t really know. We are left with speculation. Do sources of advertising revenue come with conditions attached? Does the media have signed agreements with the government that preclude coverage that might lead to vaccine hesitancy, possibly conditions of generous government subsidies?

If that is the case, it is undermining our Kiwi culture, which is one of trust. For a long time, there has been an assumption of honesty. In 2021 New Zealand retained the top ranking as the world’s least corrupt nation. The Hon. Kris Faafoi, Minister of Justice, commented:

“New Zealand has a well-deserved reputation for being relatively free of corruption, with a high level of public trust in government built on a foundation of transparency.”

At that time in January 2022, Faafoi thought the government pandemic response would send New Zealand into the stratosphere of anti-corruption scores, but by mid year, much like Ardern, he decided to exit parliament to “spend more time with his family” and by some lucky chance almost immediately landed a job as head of a lobbying and PR firm.

Our Culture of Transparency Has Been Eroded During the Pandemic

The government used the historical record of Kiwi trust as a cover for their absolute rejection of concerns about mRNA vaccine safety. As it has turned out, transparency would have served us well. Instead, we have been subjected to a ‘safe and effective’ media narrative for two years, paid for through government grants and reinforced with unfounded attacks against counter narratives funded directly by the Prime Minister’s office.

We have learned a lot about society during the pandemic. The glue of public trust is truth and transparency. Without it, we are left with the fog of uncertainty and fear of the unknown. This equates with elevated levels of individual and social stress well known to be associated with negative social outcomes, including crime, low educational achievement, family violence, economic under performance, and high rates of illness.

Despite having the data to do so, the Ministry of Health has not undertaken any investigation to determine if there is any correlation between all cause deaths and vaccine status over the longer term. This simple procedure would settle any controversy. It hasn’t happened. We are being kept in the dark. Requests put to the Minister of Health have been met with deafening silence. Why?

Full Disclosure and Transparency Cannot Be Delayed Any Longer

It may seem to politicians and MSM that there would be a downside to admitting inaccuracies, mistakes, or, dare I say, ‘fault,’ but it will eventually all come out. It already is. The UK has abandoned mRNA vaccination for the under 50s, as have a number of other countries. A growing number of senior UK medical specialists are asking questions about hugely elevated rates of heart disease and rapid onset or recurrence of cancers.

There is now not only no point in postponing a reckoning with the emerging scientific picture of a very wide range of long term adverse effects, but there will be a huge downside if it is delayed any longer. In the weird Herald article, the husband clearly had some valid concerns about mRNA vaccines, while the woman was misinformed by MSM. A carefully curated discussion in the media along with some public debates will put everyone back on an even playing field.

The opportunity to undertake cross examination of government witnesses in high court actions has also been so far missing in action. Curiously the courts have deferred to the government for scientific advice. Since when was scientific verity the sole prerogative of government departments?

It is clear that detailed knowledge of the adverse effects of mRNA vaccines would enable GPs and hospital staff to deal appropriately and sympathetically with injury. It would also enable doctors and medical staff to relay factual informed consent to patients. This has not happened so far.

Transparency would also help to heal some family rifts like the one reported so one-sidedly by the Herald. Under the circumstances, the husband should be exonerated for thinking that truth doesn’t count for much when it comes to modern democracy and mainstream news reporting. How many extra sudden deaths are required before the media grows a conscience and starts asking questions? It is time to level up.

Our new Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins, promises he is going to re-evaluate unpopular Labour policies. Is he also going to re-evaluate misleading ones? We hope so. No point in postponing the inevitable. As Shakespeare said, “The truth will out.”

This week I might just as well have sat back and let Pfizer shoot itself in the foot, except mainstream media was missing in action. Project Veritas managed to record a senior Pfizer executive admitting they were conducting experiments aimed at mutating even more virulent strains of Covid. The video accumulated more than 20 million views over 48 hours, but among MSM only Tucker Carlson and briefly the Daily Mail ran with this astounding story. Nothing here in New Zealand, as if the most prolific serial killer in history had been caught in the act, but it was judged unnewsworthy.

Answering a question in the House of Commons this week about record levels of excess deaths, the UK Permanent Under Secretary of State for Mental Health Maria Caulfield replied briefly that it didn’t matter because it was happening all over Europe. Then abruptly sat down. She said this despite the crisis necessitating the construction of temporary morgues across the UK. It is comments like this along with the Project Veritas sting which reveal a striking failure of commonsense behind the official pandemic response. So how could this have happened?

Belief and Fact

Yesterday was Holocaust Memorial Day, and it is worth reflecting on how such an horrific mass extermination became possible. We now know through letters and diaries that most Germans became aware of the mass killing of Jews as the war progressed, but somehow it was perceived as necessary because the people were conditioned to believe that Jews were inferior, disease-ridden parasites who were undermining national solidarity. Something that was far removed from reality with no basis in fact. Propaganda and long standing religious and cultural prejudice overruled both truth and fundamental human rights.

The initial perception in early 2021 that the Pfizer mRNA Covid vaccine was going to prevent infection and transmission created a great deal of public faith. This was carefully curated by governments anxious to avoid the scenes of chaos and mass casualties being relayed to our screens from the city of Wuhan. The relief and belief went deep into our individual and collective psyche. On the surface, it seemed moral to get the vaccine and immoral to refuse it. This provided a philosophical basis to override long standing human rights

As the flawed science behind the claims of efficacy and safety began to unravel, the belief did not. It had gone too deep. George Monbiot, a crusading environmentalist whose work I formerly admired in another life, writes in the Guardian two days ago:

“You could see Covid-19 as an empathy test. Who was prepared to suffer disruption and inconvenience for the sake of others, and who was not? …..If environmentalism means anything, it’s that our damaging gratifications should take second place to the interests of others.”

Monbiot goes on to attack those raising questions about vaccine safety. He has fallen into the belief trap and asserts his views should take precedence. Crucially Monbiot labels those asking questions as a danger to society. He rejects natural immunity as a fantasy because, despite vaccination, he has had Covid three times and is feeling increasingly under the weather. A very self-centered and myopic view of science.

Monbiot is right that the long term consequences of repeated Covid infection are serious, but he appears blind to the role repeated mRNA vaccination has played in creating the now well-recognised immune deficiency at the root of reinfection. He comes across as irrationally blaming the unvaccinated for everything. Moreover, he cites Jacinda Ardern as the epitome of correct leadership.

Politicians Became Pandemic Torch Bearers of Faith

Monbiot’s outlook no doubt resembles that of our former PM. When I went to university in the late sixties amidst a hotbed of social and intellectual upheaval, I saw the most committed and, in many cases, most extreme activists of my generation decide to enter broadcasting, print media, and politics. They and their modern day successors were on a mission that has ultimately changed our notions of governance almost irrevocably.

Jacinda Ardern is from that mold (or is it mould?). In 2009 as a newly minted politician speaking to a class of law students at Auckland University, she was asked, “What do you do if your views differ from those of your party?”. Her reply “I can’t conceive of any circumstance when this would happen. My party and I are one.” Ardern is fanatically sure of herself. When she rose to power, her views became those of the Labour Party and, amazingly, all the parties it appears.

Ardern took the imposition of her faith to new heights and believed in herself so completely that she came to a point where even the existence of intellectual freedom and debate was a threat to her conception of governance and, ultimately to herself. The Prime Minister’s office set up and began to directly fund an arm of New Zealand academia which is known as The Disinformation Project. Project personnel attacked freedom of speech on national television, speaking over imagery from the Nazi era and atomic explosions. The Project closely monitors people who express views different from those of the government and seeks to discredit them with obviously unscientific canards. Simultaneously Ardern funded MSM and reached agreements with social media hosts. Thereby she was able to dictate content.

The crisis arrived when fact began to overtake belief so completely that the disconnect between faith in vaccines and published science is now a yawning and rapidly widening gulf. So wide, in fact, that those on either side of the divide can hardly converse rationally or even see each other clearly—their points of view are so far apart. Ardern had to go because the failure of the government’s pandemic policy had become obvious to enough people who were awake.

How Fast is This Happening?

It has been three days since I last published an article. In this short time interval, more than 20 newly published scientific articles have come to my attention confirming adverse effects of Covid vaccination. The pace of publishing is so fast I can hardly keep up. Among these is a preprint paper published in the Lancet authored by our own Ministry of Health “Adverse Events Following the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine (Pfizer-BioNtech) in Aotearoa New Zealand”. The paper reveals there is a statistically significant association between Pfizer mRNA vaccination and both Myocarditis and Acute Kidney Injury (AKI).

The finding of AKI is new and concerning, but incredibly the paper concludes that its findings provide assurances about the safety of mRNA vaccines. How could they say that? The study compared the background rates of 12 adverse events of special interest (AESI) with their incidence following Covid-19 vaccination. The study only included events that occurred within 21 days after Covid vaccination that resulted in hospitalisation. Therefore the study specifically ruled out effects of Covid vaccination resulting in hospitalisation or death anytime after 21 days and it also ruled out adverse events for which those affected did not immediately seek hospital treatment.

Was the hospitalisation data reliable? No. We are a small country, we talk to one another. Multiple people have publicly reported presenting to hospital with concerning symptoms following mRNA vaccination such as tachycardia, chest pains, or neurological dysfunction, then being sent home without any investigative tests and a diagnosis of vaccine anxiety along with an ibuprofen prescription. My daughter-in-law was one of these. My neighbour acquired a kidney injury subsequent to vaccination but didn’t report it to a doctor for weeks. She now has difficulty eating.

So how far are reporting errors and the 21 day cut off skewing the authors’ conclusions of vaccine safety? How can we find out? We currently have record levels of all cause mortality, but despite having the data to do so, no investigation has been undertaken to determine if there is any correlation between all cause deaths and vaccine status. This simple procedure would settle any controversy, but belief in vaccine efficacy has prompted the Ministry of Health investigators to turn a blind eye to the obvious.

Exactly the same obfuscation, hiding of data and failure to investigate that governments have promoted around the world. Watch UK Minister Coffey in the House of Commons brushing aside concerns about and investigation of excess deaths as if rapidly rising death rates are an entirely normal feature of modern post-pandemic life.

Human Rights were Abandoned—a Fatal Error

I return to the original presumption of governments that legislation guaranteeing a human right to medical choice could be overruled during the pandemic on public safety grounds. Here in New Zealand, the provisions of the Bill of Rights were bypassed. Combined with coercive mandates, this became a catastrophe. 90% of 11-18 year olds in New Zealand are vaccinated despite having almost zero risk from Covid but a measurable risk of cardiac injury.

At root, this was a failure to distinguish between belief and proven fact. From the start the case for mRNA vaccines was unproven, the long term effects uninvestigated, but faith in the word ‘vaccine’ alone prevailed. Subsequently, it is apparent that Pfizer sought to hide concerning trial data. There is no clear path back now for simple reasons. Our government and most others granted Pfizer a form of legal immunity from liability and effectively coerced the population into compliance.

The Indian Government never approved mRNA vaccines because it refused to grant immunity from prosecution and insisted on local trials, neither of which were acceptable to Pfizer or Moderna. India dodged a bullet by applying commonsense. They did not suspend normal safety considerations as we and others did.

The Project Veritas exposure of Pfizer is important for another reason, the senior scientist involved described belief in the zoonotic origin of the Covid virus as “bullshit”. Apparently, everyone at Pfizer knows it escaped from a lab conducting gain of function experiments, but we have never been told that. Governments have been content to leave us in the dark—origins of Covid unknown. If the obvious lab leak origin were admitted, trust in government regulation might fall to even lower lows and according to some commentators endanger geopolitical stability, whatever that is in the modern context.

This makes it very concerning that 156 highly paid biotechnologists anxious to continue playing God with viruses writing in the magazine Virology are calling on governments to make sure gain of function research can continue unimpeded. In other words, safety be damned, we are in this for the long haul, it may go horribly wrong. but we want a ringside seat and a fat pay cheque.

The restoration of the fundamental human right of medical choice and the restoration of product liability for vaccines, are necessary steps now. Their omission has created a fertile field for charlatans, conartists, wannabe political dictators, and aspirational biotechnology Gods. Time to call time and get back to hard earned principles of natural justice, common law, and human rights. Time to rein in governments intent on extending their power far beyond any recognised remit. Time to annul freedom from legal liability, they lied to us.

Hello, if you are reading or listening to the Hatchard Report for the first time, it is possibly because someone has forwarded this message to you. You may have received mRNA vaccinations against Covid-19 and are now starting to ask questions about its effectiveness and possibly also wondering about safety.

I read and analyse scientific papers published in journals, and I am increasingly concerned that our politicians, media, and health system are falling behind in their research. Here in New Zealand, we are still on the receiving end of an unvaried diet of encouragement to vaccinate and treat the unvaccinated like the plague.

Mainstream media reacted with derision to a poll showing that 57% of us want unvaccinated health professionals to be allowed back to work. TV comments included:

“We need the staff, but I wouldn’t want a family member being treated by an unvaccinated nurse”

“For God’s sake take the jab, go back to work, take one for the team”

Just what are they expecting nurses to ‘take for the team’? A paper published on bioRxiv on 5th January 2023 is entitled “The SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein induces long-term transcriptional perturbations of mitochondrial metabolic genes, causes cardiac fibrosis, and reduces myocardial contractile in obese mice“. The authors conclude:

“Our data demonstrated that the Spike protein could induce long-term transcriptional suppression of mitochondria metabolic genes and cause cardiac fibrosis and myocardial contractile impairment.”

That Can’t Be True, Can It?

In other words, long term heart damage, but that can’t be true, can it?—government experts have been reassuring us for years that vaccine induced myocarditis is mild and short lived. Think again. This study published in the journal of infectious diseases on 8th December 2022 entitled “Admission and follow-up cardiac magnetic resonance imaging findings in BNT162b2 Vaccine-Related myocarditis in adolescents” followed the outcomes of nine young male patients with vaccine induced myopericarditis for 3 to 6 months. 100% of participants showed persistent myocardial scarring and/or regional myocardial fibrosis.

It is worth noting that the journal sat on this study for six months following its submission, presumably afraid to rush the publication of research running against vaccine orthodoxy. These days this finding doesn’t stick out. Numerous carefully completed research papers are being published telling it how it is—mRNA vaccination causes long term heart damage. But you wouldn’t know it if you just watch the 6 o’clock news and glance at the daily papers.

Vaccine injury doesn’t just affect males. This study entitled “COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function”whose horrifying findings we have summarised before, published 30 December 2022 concludes:

“Pregnancy complications and menstrual abnormalities are significantly more frequent following COVID-19 vaccinations than Influenza vaccinations. A worldwide moratorium on the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy is advised until randomized prospective trials document safety in pregnancy and long-term follow-up in offspring.”

And by the way, the complications referred to are not mild or without a social impact. Across the EU and around the world there has been, in highly vaccinated countries, a marked decline in birth rates. See here and here.

So How Come We Don’t Hear About This Kind of Data?

Yesterday I was in contact with a former employee of one of our major news channels. Apparently, all employees have to sign a non-disclosure agreement; included in this is a clause preventing them from revealing the Covid-19 editorial policy. Just remember, many of New Zealand media outlets are owned by overseas interests who just may not have our kiwi health at heart, and in any case, all of them are paid by the government.

Surely the Elected Government Has Our Interests at Heart?

Shocking analysis published this week on substack here and here has looked at freedom of information (OIA) documents released by the various government departments and CVTAG (the body of experts that gives vaccine advice to the government). The record shows that during and before August 2021, CVTAG had concerns about the risk of myocarditis among younger ages, but abruptly without explanation on 19 August Jacinda Ardern announced that all 12-15 years olds should receive it.

CVTAG continued to have concerns, undoubtedly because research findings of vaccine induced myocarditis were mounting up. The government decided to sail on regardless. In October 2021 an advertising campaign was launched targeting the young headlined with “Two Shots For Summer”. The media, by now funded directly by the government, loved it and called it edgy and needed. On 7th December CVTAG sent out its strongest memo yet advising that those aged under 18 should not be required to have two doses of vaccine under vaccine mandates.

Vaccination Mandates Were Perceived as a Vote Winner

The government didn’t tell us that; by then, it was sailing away from scientific safety advice into the field of political strategy. Vaccination mandates were perceived as a vote winner by all the main political parties: Labour, National, Greens, and ACT. The die was cast and there was no going back. As studies have accumulated in 2022 showing that each successive vaccination or booster increases the risk of injury, politicians across the spectrum have kept silent. As all cause mortality has crept up, now running at 15% above the long term average, the silence has continued.

The figures have been kept from us because of a statistical trick. Ministry of Health analysts have kept asserting, against all evidence, that mRNA vaccination could only possibly have health effects for 21 days subsequent to vaccination. In other words, a false assumption that there are no long term adverse effects of mRNA vaccination. Mathematician Igor Chudov has looked at official data from 29 EU countries for example and found a strong association between mortality and booster uptake.

Dr. Clare Craig, formerly an NHS pathologist tweets:

“There seems to be a concerted denial that harm from injections can occur months after the last injection. Wilful blindness. There is plenty of evidence that harm can indeed occur months later.”

If you look back through my articles, you will see reports of a stream of concerning scientific papers coming out by the week and an increasing number of eminent scientists going public with their concerns. So why on earth in 2023 are the government continuing to be so wilfully blind to our interests? Possibly it is because of the way governments now work and how they acquire information.

100 Days To Outrace The Next Pandemic

Jacinda Ardern will be following the World Economic Forum in Davos. No doubt she is eager to review the presentation tonight by Tony Blair, Helen Clark (former New Zealand PM), and Albert Bourla (CEO of Pfizer) entitled “100 Days To Outrace The Next Pandemic” whose content is advertised as follows:

“Creating safe and effective vaccines in 100 days is estimated to give economies and societies a chance of containing the next outbreak before it spreads.”

It didn’t happen this time, and it won’t happen next, but if you walk the corridors of power, there is no alternative to a biotech vaccine future, adverse effects be damned. Albert Bourla will be laughing all the way to the bank and has been at our expense for two years. For our scientific view on the safety and effectiveness of biotechnology (or rather lack of it), visit https://GLOBE.GLOBAL. In a modern world, it is beyond foolish to remain uninformed.