Home Blog Page 25

The Official Covid Narrative Unravels at a Staggering Pace

0

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 didnโ€™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:

โ€œYou 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? โ€ฆ..If environmentalism means anything, itโ€™s that our damaging gratifications should take second place to the interests of others.โ€

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

Monbiotโ€™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, โ€œWhat do you do if your views differ from those of your party?โ€. Her reply โ€œI canโ€™t conceive of any circumstance when this would happen. My party and I are one.โ€ 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 Ministerโ€™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 clearlyโ€”their points of view are so far apart. Ardern had to go because the failure of the governmentโ€™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 โ€œAdverse Events Following the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine (Pfizer-BioNtech) in Aotearoa New Zealandโ€. The paper reveals there is a statistically significantย 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 didnโ€™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 authorsโ€™ 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 Abandonedโ€”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 โ€˜vaccineโ€™ 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 โ€œbullshitโ€. 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 darkโ€”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.

How Government Regulation of Therapeutic Products Will Work in Practice …

… not at allโ€”it is designed to unleash a tsunami of biotechnology and synthetic food.

The New Zealand government is introducing the Therapeutic Products Bill, which is an omnibus piece of legislation controlling, among many other things, the availability of Natural Health Products and the introduction of biotech medical interventions. Given our experience of the last three pandemic years, we should be doubting the capacity of governments to protect our interests. Letโ€™s look at what is already happening:

Do we really need legislation facilitating the further implementation of biotechnology in medicine, or do we rather need legislation outlawing its use?

An article in Mother Jones is raising the alarm. Mother Jones is actually a very pro-vaccine publication, so why is it alarmed? A clue is in the title โ€œThe DNA of Deadly Pathogens Is Easy to Obtainโ€. A virologist David Evans has created a close relative of smallpox, a devastating disease that was thankfully eradicated 36 years ago. He was able to do so because he was simply able to order long stretches of the virusโ€™s DNA in the mail from GeneArt, a subsidiary of Thermo Fisher Scientific. Mother Jones summarises:

โ€œToday there are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of companies selling genes, offering DNA at increasingly low prices. (If DNA resembles a long piece of text, rates today are often lower than 10 cents per letter; at this rate, the genetic material necessary to begin constructing an influenza virus would cost less than $1,500.) And new benchtop technologiesโ€”essentially, portable gene printersโ€”promise to make synthetic DNA even more widely available.โ€

An Unregulated Multinational Biotech Industry

The dangers of the wide availability of deadly pathogens is not too hard to figure out for the average citizen, but it is apparently very hard for governments. The United States imposes few security regulations on synthetic DNA providers. In the USA it is perfectly legal to make a batch of genes from Ebola or smallpox and ship it to a US address, no questions asked. A number of nonprofits pushing for regulation are finding it hard to gain traction in the spiralling multinational biotech industry.

The most prominent scientist sounding warnings about the danger of unchecked DNA synthesis is Kevin Esvelt, a biotechnologist at MIT. He explains the problem is that even a recent graduate level biotechnologist would have no problem assembling a bioweapon from readily available synthetic gene sequences. A bioterror attack is only a short time away, according to Esvelt.

Others disagree. Milton Leitenberg, a biosecurity expert at the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland, concedes that making a virus might be easy, but carrying out a bioattack would be difficult(???). Now correct me if I am wrong, but arenโ€™t we in the middle of a global pandemic which was likely started very simply by a lab in China which says it wasnโ€™t even trying to start a bioattack? It seemed to manage it quite simply by accident (???).

Governments Are Covering Up or Ignoring Safety Signals

The main problem is that nobody appears concerned about biosecurity. Most governments, including ours, have been ignoring pandemic safety signals and even covering them up. This article points out that the regulation of gain of function research is vague, secretive, opaque, lacks accountability, and captures very little thatโ€™s risky in the life sciences. You could be forgiven for thinking the US government wants to encourage it.

Surely not? In any case, it wouldnโ€™t happen here. We have an honest government, right? It seems not. Dr. Vinay Prasad is an American hematologist-oncologist and health researcher. He is a professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). He is the author of the books Ending Medical Reversal (2015) and Malignant (2020).

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.

He is a highly published author known for examining drug trial reliability. Vinay rates a preprintย paperย authored by our Ministry of Health (MoH) claiming satisfactory Covid mRNA vaccine health outcomes asย โ€œreally badโ€ย followed by a LOL emoji (that is about as low as you can go), because it uses misleading statistical methods in order to downgrade the safety signal for myocarditis.

Prominent Drug Safety Expert Criticises the Ministry of Health Methodology – Not!

I can see the headline in our papers โ€œProminent drug safety expert criticises the Ministry of Health methodologyโ€, no wait a minute I canโ€™t see that headline anywhere in New Zealand. I wonder why not?

It is papers like these put out by our Ministry of Health that are enabling Albert Boula, CEO of Pfizer, to falsely claim he hasnโ€™t seen a single safety signal. He might try a new eyeglass prescription and look at this recent paper analysing the results of 29 studies of post-vaccine myocarditis indicating a significant safety signal.

Moderna has a similar disregard for safety issues, see here, and a close relationship with US government regulators. Unbelievably Moderna was busy developing a Covid vaccine even before the pandemic (!!!) based on information it received from the government (yes, they knew what was coming, but no one told us). You canโ€™t read about this in MSM either.

Was this an isolated connection between biotech vaccine researchers and the US government? Apparently not. There is a history of US involvement with Ebola that is very worrying indeed.

Natural is Undoubtedly a Misused Term

So OK, it seems that governments canโ€™t be trusted to regulate biotechnology, but will they be able to regulate Natural Health Products as they intend to do post pandemic here in New Zealand and elsewhere? โ€˜Naturalโ€™ is undoubtedly a misused term around the world. The EU has agreed to allow โ€˜acheta domesticusโ€™ aka natural common house crickets to be added to:

โ€œmultigrain bread and rolls, crackers and breadsticks, cereal bars, dry pre-mixes for baked products, biscuits, dry stuffed and non-stuffed pasta-based products, sauces, processed potato products, legume- and vegetable- based dishes, pizza, pasta-based products, whey powder, meat analogues, soups and soup concentrates or powders, maize flour-based snacks, beer-like beverages, chocolate confectionary, nuts and oilseeds, snacks other than chips, and meat preparations, intended for the general population.โ€

Only the โ€œdefatted powder of house cricketsโ€ will be used. Whew!

Just in case you are worried that an ugly inch long bug will crawl out of your loaf or be found floating in your beer, be assured that only โ€œdefatted powder of house cricketโ€ will be used. If you want to know how to turn house crickets into defatted powder, forget it. This is protected proprietary information, nor are details of its digestibility to be released. You may have to find out for yourself by eating it.

It is not all bad news though. Insect protein from house crickets is, in fact, already known to be allergenic, so you wonโ€™t be in for too much of a shock when you turn purple and swell up unexpectedly. The EU is a bit worried about that, but never mind; the regulator is planning to design some allergenic tests for some unspecified time in the future.

Insect Powder is the Way Ahead to Combat Climate Change

In the meantime, the EU has ruled that no advice on the label will have to warn unsuspecting recipients of defatted house cricket powder. In other words, the EU has looked into their crystal balls, realised that insect powder is the way ahead to combat climate change, and passed the paste. Regulators are wonderful, arenโ€™t they, and they even get paid.

It makes you wonder what the independent (???) New Zealand regulator will do when they are appointed as the high wizard of New Zealand breakfast, lunch, and dinner with the ability to do whatever they like as long as they check with, yes you guessed it, our dear Ministry of Health.

Hereโ€™s a clue from the UK Express. Apparently, people in the UK have inexplicably been suffering from blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, and circulatory problems. No one can figure out why (???) The Express has figured it out with the help of the Cleveland Clinic and reports, โ€œBlood clots: Compound found in eggs linked to an enhanced risk of blood clotting…which can lead to death. No worries for us then. There arenโ€™t any eggs on our supermarket shelves. Letโ€™s hope the regulator keeps it that way, and it is a big break for chickens. Funny though, we have been eating eggs for millennia and suddenly they are a big problem in 2023. Must be climate change again, something to do with gestation egg temperatures no doubt.

The Therapeutic Products Bill: Version 3

Joking apart, the New Zealand government has drafted an omnibus Therapeutic Products Bill, and it has passed its first reading in Parliament with the support of all parties (except the Maori Party, which might just be concerned about its effect on their traditional medicine). This Bill enables the government to facilitate biotechnology and gives a blank cheque to a regulator to tell us what herbs and supplements we can use and in what quantity. They are also allowed to tell us what herbs we canโ€™t use.

This is the third attempt over recent years to pass a Bill like this. The last two failed because of public opposition. No one is being harmed by Natural Products, so why is our government doing this? You tell me because I canโ€™t see any reason for this at all. It is good news for wannabe well paid government employees and multinational pharma-owned supplement suppliers. It is bad news for kiwi businesses.

Be Silent No More!

  • Ask your MP to reject the regulation of Natural Products and the facilitation of biotech medicine proposed by this Bill.
  • Write to Chris Hipkins (contact details) and let him know what you think.
  • Go to this link to make a submission before February 15th.

At first glance, it may not seem to affect you personally, because not much is actually specified in the Bill, just a little clause allowing one government employee to decide what we can consume.

If you want more details, this short video on YouTube explains what is likely to happen to the availability of our favourite Natural Health Products. Itโ€™s not pretty. If you want more information on the risks of biotechnology visit GLOBE.GLOBAL.

Related links

Press release Therapeutic Products Bill introduced.
The Therapeutic Products Bill
Related Documents and Downloads


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

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.

Our Post Ardern Way Ahead

0

Yesterday I had a very wide ranging and interesting discussion with Farmer James and Jono Frew. You can view it on Farmer Jamesโ€™ FB page. I realised how important it is to offer ideas about a way ahead in the vacuum created by Ardernโ€™s abrupt departure. We are facing Chris Hipkins as PM, who is firmly identified with Ardernโ€™s failed policies.

More importantly, we are living in a broken society. Our health system is overwhelmed. Excess all-cause mortality is at record highs. Our school system is in crisis. Social cohesion is at a low ebb. Crime is rising. The cost of living has skyrocketed. More of the same policies are not going to solve these crises. If nothing is changed, the coming year will bring a harvest of bankruptcies and mortgagee failures.

You may feel like me that we donโ€™t need more government, we need less. With some trepidation (I know that many will differ with good reason) here are a few suggestions to kickstart a debate:

Housing: Repeal the Resource Management Act and amend building and planning regulations. We live in a country the size of the UK but we only have a population of five million (UK has 60). Why are planning regulations herding us into inner city multi-unit dwellings known to breed crime and pollution? Why canโ€™t we build our own houses on our own land? Why canโ€™t farmers provide dwellings for their children? Why canโ€™t groups of young people buy land, subdivide and build for themselves? This single measure will enable Kiwi enterprise to solve the housing affordability crisis, soften the impact of Labourโ€™s interest rate rises, and stimulate the economy.

Cost of Living: Remove GST on primary produce, fruit, and vegetables. Come to think of it, why is the US economy more flexible than ours? They donโ€™t use the European taxation model at all. They just have a retail (end-user) sales tax, removing at one stroke the huge bureaucratic nightmare of GST. GST is a burden on every enterprise and a disincentive to start ups, investment, and economic resilience. GST pushes up prices of staple commodities across the board as they pass from hand to hand in the supply chain taxed at each transaction point.

Youth Crime: Jail time has to take on an educational and aspirational character. We have among the highest rates of imprisonment in the developed world, but it is not working. Prisons are turning out hardened criminals. There are models of reforming success in Scandinavian countries for example that we can adopt. They really do reduce crime.

Education: One size does not suit all, especially in our rapidly changing modern world. Educational achievement is falling. Children are not inspired. Mastery learning schemes will help children to acquire the basics, no child will be left behind. At the moment, only those able to afford private education have a choice. Consider instituting an education voucher system which would give all parents, teachers, and pupils a choice of content, providers, and systems. We should explore good practice.

Health: Mandated health workers should be allowed back to work. The scientific evidence is overwhelming. A July 2022 study undertaken in Qatar found that natural immunity offers long term 97.3% protection against reinfection, higher than the protection of mRNA vaccination which in any case wanes rapidly. Over the longer term, more proven complementary preventive approaches to health should be co-opted into our health funding system. They work. In contrast the present government is planning to regulate and restrict availability of Natural Health Products. This Bill should be abandoned.

Politics: The NZ Bill of Rights should be entrenched. Reduce the MMP threshold to one per cent. Remove parliamentary privilegeโ€”MPs should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. Use modern electronic communication systems to make MPs and Parties more closely accountable.

These are a few ideas. You will have lots. We have always been a can-do country. It is time for a positive new direction.

Jacinda Ardernโ€™s Legacy of National Division and Excessive Use of Power

0

New Zealandโ€™s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has resigned after months of rumours. Ardern, whose popularity has plummeted during the last six months, told us โ€œshe had nothing left in the tankโ€.

The backstory to this resignation is a tale of woe. Ardern said she wants to be remembered as someone who tried to be kind. The subtext is: the country is in an unprecedented mess but donโ€™t blame me.

Last year school attendance was reported as running at just 67% on any given day. Machete wielding teenagers are ram raiding liquor outlets, vape shops, dairies, and jewelry stores daily in a frenzied crime wave. The health system is overwhelmed. Ardernโ€™s government promised to build 100,000 new homes over three years. It has delivered just 1500 to date.

Our tourist, farming, and hospitality industries have not recovered from lockdowns and border closures. It now takes weeks to get a visa to visit New Zealand (it used to take two days) and the government says it only wants rich people to come. No wonder, we are all poor now.

Ardern famously insisted on universal Covid vaccination mandates. There is a suspicion that our 90% vaccination rate has left everyone in a lethargic fog. Excess all cause deaths are still running 15% above the long term trends, and it is not Covid.

History will judge Ardern harshly, but donโ€™t blame her alone. This was a Parliament who woke up on all sides of the house to the weakness of our constitutional arrangements (there are none worth the name). The Bill of Rights was tossed aside, and no one in Parliament cared.

The leader of the National opposition Chris Luxon famously said pre-pandemic if he was in power, he would withdraw benefits from unvaccinated single mothers. David Seymour, leader of the ACT party wrote on his FB those losing their jobs through vaccine mandates only had themselves to blame. Labourโ€™s coalition partners, the Greens, led by example, encouraging mothers in labour to ride to hospital on a bicycle (yes they did).

Politicians of all parties were afraid to meet protestors and turned the hoses on them rather than listen to their concerns.

Revelations this week (hereย andย here) that Ardern personally overruled her scientific advisors who were expressing doubts about the safety of Covid vaccines for young people and the wisdom of mandates, have circulated very widely and no doubt this has further undermined confidence in the government.

Ardern introduced ‘rule by regulation’. Adopting the enabling model favoured by fascists in the 1930s, her government has empowered authorities to tell us all what to do, when to stay at home, and where not to go. The courts, the Human Rights Commission, and the broadcast regulators have all followed the government line meticulously which has had a devastating effect on business, families, communities, and professions. To cement her policies, Ardern introduced massive government funding of our media and broadcastersโ€”a hallmark of repressive regimes.

Ardern was a protege of Tony Blair and a graduate of the Klaus Schwab World Economic Forum young leaders program. Both must shoulder some blame too. What fantasies of global power did they offer to a young person who was given to idealistic dreaming that segued into fanaticism?

Ardernโ€™s government, in an absurd overreach, has also funded a nationwide effort to discredit critics of policy, labelling them terrorists. This has divided a formerly egalitarian society, instituting a snitch culture that encourages us to dob in a neighbour. Government Disinformation Project employees appeared on funded films aired on television to a backdrop of atomic bombs exploding and Nazi stormtroopers marching. Absurdly they labelled knitting, blond hair, braids, vaccine hesitancy, love of natural foods, Yoga, and yes motherhood as signs of terrorism that should be reported to the intelligence services (yes they did, view it here on TVNZ if you can stand watching this nasty piece of propaganda and hate).

Why did Ardern suddenly change overnight in August 2021 from being a kindly figure saying she would never mandate vaccines, to being one of the worldโ€™s most draconian proponents? We can only speculate. New Zealand is a member of the five eyes intelligence network. Given the Pentagonโ€™s recently revealed massive involvement in US Covid policy and gain of function research funding, was she fed information that a bioweapon was in play? We will likely never know.

The cynical will say that Ardern left early like Key to avoid the ignominy of U-turns and election defeat. Leaving open the possibility of political rebirth. The New York Times wrote this morning that Ardern, like Helen Clark, is in line for a global role and a bigger platform. We live in dread.

For a couple of weeks now government announcements and advertisements encouraging vaccination and boosters have been conspicuously absent. Has the penny finally dropped? We doubt it. It will take an honest, intelligent politician (are there any left?) to roll back Ardernโ€™s dictatorial powers and kickstart New Zealand. Why would any aspiring newby give up that much power? The prospect will be too intoxicating, but that is what it will take. Someone has to rise above the mire of our current politics and realise that governments should represent the interests of people. Leadership is about fulfilling the aspirations of your followers, not just telling them what to do.

Our final verdict: It is not Ardern, but the whole New Zealand Parliament elected in 2020 that will be judged as the worst in our short history as an independent island nation, formerly famous for championing the underdog and offering opportunity to all. Ardernโ€™s resignation lights a bonfire of the excesses of modern democracy. To find a way ahead, at the very least, the New Zealand Bill of Rights needs to be entrenched beyond the reach of power hungry politicians and compliant courts.

What is the Difference Between Reading Studies Published in Scientific Journals and Listening to Politicians, Msm, or Government Health Experts?

0

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:

โ€œWe need the staff, but I wouldnโ€™t want a family member being treated by an unvaccinated nurseโ€

โ€œFor Godโ€™s sake take the jab, go back to work, take one for the teamโ€

Just what are they expecting nurses to โ€˜take for the teamโ€™? A paper published on bioRxiv on 5th January 2023 is entitled โ€œThe 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:

โ€œOur data demonstrated that the Spike protein could induce long-term transcriptional suppression of mitochondria metabolic genes and cause cardiac fibrosis and myocardial contractile impairment.โ€

That Canโ€™t Be True, Can It?

In other words, long term heart damage, but that canโ€™t be true, can it?โ€”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 โ€œAdmission 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 doesnโ€™t stick out. Numerous carefully completed research papers are being published telling it how it isโ€”mRNA vaccination causes long term heart damage. But you wouldnโ€™t know it if you just watch the 6 oโ€™clock news and glance at the daily papers.

Vaccine injury doesnโ€™t just affect males. This study entitled โ€œCOVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Functionโ€whose horrifying findings we have summarised before, published 30 December 2022 concludes:

โ€œPregnancy 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.โ€

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. Seeย hereย andย here.

So How Come We Donโ€™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 substackย hereย andย hereย 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 withย โ€œTwo Shots For Summerโ€. 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 thatย 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 didnโ€™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 atย official data from 29 EU countriesย for example and found a strong association between mortality and booster uptake.

Dr. Clare Craig, formerly an NHS pathologist tweets:

โ€œThere 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.โ€

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) entitledย โ€œ100 Days To Outrace The Next Pandemicโ€ย whose content is advertised as follows:

โ€œCreating safe and effective vaccines in 100 days is estimated to give economies and societies a chance of containing the next outbreak before it spreads.โ€

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), visitย https://GLOBE.GLOBAL. In a modern world, it is beyond foolish to remain uninformed.

The Origin of Life, Consciousness, and Gene Editing

0

The general public has been educated to regard DNA as the molecule which unravelled the mystery of the origin of life. When you hear that a mystery is solved, there is a tendency to want to go home, put your feet up, stop worrying, and start looking for something more interesting such as pizza and chips or a good movie.

In fact, the suggestion that we know how life originated is not just an oversimplification, it is a completely misleading suggestion. DNA does not function as a naked molecule. It only acts within the cell. Molecular mechanisms in the cell read the information in the DNA and translate this into hundreds of proteins used in the body for a myriad of functions. The transcription and translation of genetic information is achieved via a complex information-processing system utilizing many types of nucleic acids (mRNA, tRNA, and others) and many specific enzymes. These form a tightly integrated system of systems.

More than a hundred highly complex proteins are involved in translation. The paradox therein has not escaped commentators, these proteins cannot themselves be made except by DNA. The late British philosopher Sir Karl Popper mused for example:

โ€œWhat makes the origin of life and the genetic code a disturbing riddle is this: the code cannot be translated except by certain products of its own translation.โ€

In simple terms, the cell presents a chicken and egg paradox. It is impossible to decide which came firstโ€”proteins or DNA. Cells present a complex system of multiple interdependent parts, and it is, therefore, hard to imagine how the whole system came into being. It is a self-referral system which functions holistically.

Self-referral systems point to fundamental principles and laws that characterise the search for unified field theories of physics.

Letโ€™s conceptually break down cellular functions:

  • DNA contains strings of information, like the software programme of a computer.
  • The information in the DNA is accessed by forms of RNA, aided by multiple enzymatic proteins and then conveyed to the Ribosome.
  • The Ribosome manufactures proteins, some of which are the same proteins which aid transcription and translation of DNA.
  • Crucially the whole system is integrated within the cellโ€”it refers to itself.

Do We Know Any Other Systems Which Work in an Analogous Self-referral Way?

Yes, we do. Our everyday process of experience in which there is anย observer, aย process of observation, and anย object of perceptionย all integrated within ourย consciousness, our sense of self. In this analogy:

  • The DNA is like the observerโ€”which is both a constant controlling source of information for the whole project of perception whose memory gets updated by events or experiences
  • The RNA is like the process of observation, it reads the DNA and it connects with and creates proteins.
  • The proteins are similar to the objects of our perception, they are very diversified and active like our environment, and they keep us alive.
  • Our abstract consciousness or sense of self and identity is a silent witness to the whole process and keeps it all together.

This three-in-one structure of consciousness is, therefore, a source candidate for the origin of life. The more so because one primary function of our physiology as a whole seems to be to act as a platform for consciousness to express itself.

Cells divide and thereby replicate themselves. Each new human life begins with a single cell which grows into a complete person through replication. Imagine a machine which makes lego bricks. Lego bricks are inanimate. Each new lego brick is independent of every other lego brick. It takes the consciousness of a person to assemble them into something meaningful.

Cells, however, are alive as they divide and grow; each new cell is connected with a whole system, and each new cell is connected to the unique identity of the personโ€”their consciousness. Cells are bound together, not just mechanistically, but they are part of a system that is alive in the sense that a person is aliveโ€”creative, intelligent, self-aware, emotional, and so on.

Our physiology has an extraordinary capacity to coordinate the activity of trillions of diverse types of cells and structures within a single whole system internally communicating while maintaining homeostasis and repair. This also supports a consistent human identity which at the same time communicates intelligently with other humans. This points to the involvement of more universal abstract unified physical laws and also to the primary role of consciousness in human life and physiology.

The Origin of Life

Consciousness is a very good candidate for the source of individual life forms for other reasons. In the structure of natural law, more fundamental explanatory principles are always more abstract. Consciousness is undoubtedly the most abstract concept with which we are familiar.

The qualities which regulate cellular function are also analogous to the functions of consciousness in other very important ways. In the cellular environment and whole system these factors are crucial:

Shapeโ€”molecules have to fit into spaces to function and may also form larger systems aided by quasi crystallization processes and molecular folding. There are โ€˜jigsawโ€™ or โ€˜lock and keyโ€™ mechanisms whereby only certain components of a molecule can bond with other molecules.

Viscosityโ€”the cellular system is a โ€˜wetโ€™ or fluid environment whose characteristics must remain optimised for smooth transport of components.

Navigationโ€”cellular components must be able to navigate their way around the cell. This is no small task, there are 42 million molecules in the average cell.

Vibrationโ€”there are vibrational modes of all molecules which are modulated by their energy and the temperature of the cellular environment. There are integrated energy sources in cells and feedback loops to maintain this and other functions.

Timingโ€”the sequences of events and their timing are crucial for cellular function.

These processes bear some relationship with the physiology of perception and decision-making. These could be the subject of future discussion, but for the moment consider the complexity of the cell and its dependence on its own self-referral integrated functioning.

The introduction, as happens with mRNA vaccination, of foreign genetically active components could and does upset this integrated balanced functioning. The introduced genetic material has functions that differ from expected cellular functions, it has a different shape, carries different information, bonds and folds differently, etc.

What Does This Mean in Laymanโ€™s Terms?

This Christmas, we had some guests who used our clothes dryer. Unaware of its routine care, they failed to empty the condensed water before using it, it overflowed internally, and the dryer stopped working. Yesterday I took it to bits, cleaned and dried it out, and now it works again. Effectively I reset it to its factory condition. Very often, complex equipment such as computers have software fixes to restore initial factory settings, which are used in case the parameters or sequence of instructions have failed. However, this doesnโ€™t solve all problems, as every computer owner eventually finds out.

Cells have their own internal reset buttons. Every day hundreds of thousands of repair jobs are carried out in each cell, whereby the integrity of DNA and a myriad of other crucial parameters are preserved. mRNA vaccination actually aims to override these safety factors and retask some cells to perform an entirely different function. You can imagine what can go wrong. The cell may never recover its factory settings. It might, and research now shows it often does, go on producing toxic spike protein and sending it around the physiology for some time. We are left like a little child, who having inquisitively torn off the arms of its favourite toy, sits and weeps with disappointment when parental repairs are not possible.

Having investigated and proposed an intimate connection between the cell and consciousness. It appears obvious that mRNA vaccination could put the integrity and stability of our consciousness, physiology, survival, and even our identity at risk. Certainly, we are seeing an unprecedented range of adverse effects proximate to mRNA vaccination extending to neurology, cancers, and cardiac effects affecting organs and organ systems. Such effects appear in some cases to be related to the dispersion of inoculated foreign genetic material in physiology carrying rogue instructions.

Health systems around the world are struggling to arrive at effective responses to these adverse effects. A sensible diet, exercise, and rest are always an aid to health conditions, along with many other approaches known to medicine, but the extent that these can facilitate the self repair of deliberate genetic modification is unknown.

Because consciousness is fundamental to physiology, there are reasonable grounds to suppose there are techniques of meditation, technologies of consciousness, which can at least partially assist with recovery from health conditions resulting from mRNA vaccination. I have discussed these at length elsewhere in my book Your DNA Diet along with over 800 references to research demonstrating physiological, psychological, and sociologicalย benefits of meditation.

However, there is no evidence at present suggesting this or any other approach will be curative for serious long term damage from genetic modification. There appears, in the case of those who might be seriously impacted by genetic dysfunction, to be no external reset button to rewind the clock of gene editing. There are no known magic bullets. Any possible efficacy concerning recovery would first have to be assessed by research.

The main point I want to make in this article is to emphasise the extreme risks of genetic manipulation. Natureโ€™s designer went to great lengths to place the cell, especially the cell nucleus, off limits to interference and modification. It is at the core of life and its perpetuation via reproduction. Nature similarly ring-fenced the nucleus of the atom for very good reasons. If we were unsure in any way before the pandemic about the safety of gene editing, there should be no doubt now. It should be off limits. Its continued use is an unfolding catastrophe.

At GLOBE.GLOBAL, we are calling for Global Legislation Outlawing Biotechnology Experimentation.


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

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.

The New Zealand Government Reaches for Total Medical Control

For millions of years, humans and animals have maintained their health by eating the fruits of the earth.

The necessity and benefits of a broad natural diet are evident from Egyptian skeletal remains from 6000 years ago, which suggest scurvyโ€”a disease resulting from a lack of vitamin C. In 1753 a Scottish surgeon, James Lind demonstrated that scurvy could be treated with citrus fruit. The New Zealand government seems intent on changing history.

Just before Christmas, our Government introduced the Therapeutic Products Bill for its first reading. Public consultation is being rushed through the summer holidays here in the southern hemisphere and closes on February 15th. The Bill contains 423 pages of dense provisions with countless cross references. I am not sure whether any MPs actually read it before voting for its acceptance or whether the public could stand to do so. You can view my video summary of its draconian provisions here.

You might be interested in the kind of nation we will end up inhabiting:

Reverse Patenting

If a Natural Health Product is found to benefit a serious illness (such as lemons which benefit scurvy), according to the Bill it should be classed as a medicine. Consequently, according to the letter of the new law, only doctors will be allowed to prescribe lemons. Joking apart, most foods benefit serious illness. You might think there is no need to pass a law classifying them as medicines, but according to the government you would be wrong.

80% of drugs are in fact derived from the properties of plants. For years pharmaceutical companies have been trying to patent medicinal plants and secure a monopoly of their supply and use. But this effort largely failed in the patent courts. The remedy for pharmaceutical companies is contained in the Bill being introduced by our Labour government. If a plant is used to make a medicine or the molecular structure of any of its compounds is mimicked by a medicine, then the use of the actual plant should be restricted.

For this reason, in 2016, a bevy of well-paid Ministry of Health experts (???) produced an idiotic list of common plants that they envisioned should be restricted. Natural products in this list included cinnamon, eggplant, almond, mustard, tea (yes you did read that correctly), coconut, and many many others. The present Bill (the third attempt over the years to get this past Parliament) sets up the same conditions that prompted the 2016 list of restricted plants. A sort of frenzied desire to control the minutia of individual life driven by a mad instinct that the government always knows best.

More than 50% of NZ citizens use natural products, so you might think their availability should not be controlled by the government. Wrong again. The Bill requires the appointment of a regulator who will decide for us what among what we have eaten for millennia can be sold openly and what should be restricted. The idea that one person can decide for all of us what plants that grow in the earth, can be sold, eaten, or used puts New Zealand in a unique class among tin pot kingdoms. We can imagine as we gather around the family breakfast table a swarm of well-paid government experts with pens and questionnaires hovering close by for a final check.

The situation at the border is very similar. If a herb benefits health, it will be a medicine and therefore cannot be imported except with a permit. Border officials will be very busy examining packages and if they find anything healthy, tossing it in the bin. Am I exaggerating? No. Rauwolfia Serpentina is an Indian herb that reduces blood pressure. Studies such this one published in 2015 show it is a safe and effective treatment for high blood pressure, but it is banned here in New Zealand because some hypertension drugs contain synthetic copies of one of the many alkaloids found in the whole plantโ€”reverse patenting at its best.

Why is the Government Intending to Regulate Natural Health Products?

A rational answer to this question is hard to find. A recent EU study found that natural health products are 45,000 times safer than pharmaceutical drugs. The government, however, apparently believes they are unsafe, but where is the evidence? It doesnโ€™t exist. An imaginary NZ doctor explains to their teenage patient:

โ€œYears ago, before you were born, dearly beloved, a person whose name is lost in the mists of time might have felt a little off colour after taking a vitamin tablet and then recovered quickly. Ever since then, the New Zealand government has quite rightly been very suspicious of vitamins and plants grown in soil. So they are introducing a new and very honest law for us all.โ€ or words to that effect.

There are many continuous traditions of natural approaches to health that have been followed by cultures on every continent for thousands of years and still are. There are more modern ones too that have attracted followers guided by trained practitioners. These include Indian Ayurveda, Chinese medicine, Chiropractic, Homeopathy, etc. The idea that a regulator who is unfamiliar with these traditions should control their practice and availability is inherently flawed.

This Bill represents an attempt to impose a modern medical/pharmaceutical straight jacket on the process of medical choice. A straight jacket that will no doubt be administered by people who are unfamiliar with and even opposed to natural medicine. The apparent intention is to drive people towards pharmaceutical-based medicine. It is worth noting that modern medical misadventure and misprescription is the third leading cause of deathโ€”hardly a direction that deserves a monopoly.

The logic of insisting on total government control of medical choice escapes me. It fits with a perspective that has been steadily growing throughout the pandemic: the government is seeking to control every aspect of life and impose a kind of uniformity on the nation. This originates from a distorted one size fits all view of reality. Diversity is actually a great source of progress and happiness, not something to be stamped outโ€”a discredited communistic perspective.

It is rather curious that for two years the government has been denying there is any connection between serious illness and mRNA vaccination despite tens of thousands of instances of illness proximate to inoculation and studies showing a statistical connection, as well as plausible biomolecular mechanisms. In contrast, on account of a very, very small handful of unproven historical complaints about natural health products, despite widespread safe use, they wish to control what we eat and what health choices we can make.

Whichever side of the vaccine debate you are on, it should be clear that the government cannot have it both ways. They canโ€™t apply different and incompatible logic as it suits their agenda. All the more curious when many vaccine injured and long Covid sufferers are relying on natural health products to help get them through conditions which many of our medical professionals deny exist.

Last night I spoke to a medical doctor who described how his comments on the benefits of Vitamin C and D have been censored by his colleagues and officials. No surprise really, doctors only spend an hour or two learning about the principles of nutrition during the entire course of their long training. One of his colleagues told him the only benefit of vitamins is to change the colour of urine. That just about says it all. James Lind, who found that lemons cure scurvy, must be turning in his grave.

There is in fact no reasonable rationale for introducing restrictions on Natural Health Products, they are not harming anyone and studies show that many of them have significant benefits for health. The introduction of the new law will cost a lot and it will be paid for by financial levies on manufacturers, importers, suppliers, practitioners, and retailers. A single company selling 300 products, each making two health claims, will be liable for as much as $3 million in government charges. Ultimately these costs will be passed onto the public making natural health products unaffordable.

What the Bill Doesnโ€™t Do

Gradually over the last few years, synthetic flavours and additives have been turning up in processed supermarket items. If you are buying vanilla ice cream, it is now usually labelled as containing natural vanilla flavour. This is not in fact made from natural vanilla beans, it is a synthetic flavour. The use of the term โ€œnaturalโ€ is intended to disguise this fact. In 2016 our Ministry of Health approved over 3,000 synthetic ingredients, many of them without safety testing. The Therapeutic Products Bill will do nothing to correct the sleight of hand that is describing synthetic additives with an unknown safety profile as โ€˜naturalโ€™. I discuss many of the ways synthetic additives are affecting health in my book Your DNA Diet.

Nor will the Bill encourage the distribution of information about natural approaches to health that studies show are very beneficial in controlling common serious health conditions. Advice for example about diet, exercise, and the curbing of unhealthy habits such as smoking, excessive drinking, or ultra processed foods. Changes in lifestyle can be very influential in reducing cardiac problems as this BBC interview reports. Many other serious health condition outcomes could be improved in this way including cancer, obesity, diabetes, blood pressure, etc.

If the government wishes to encourage improvements in health and longevity, it would do well to launch a public education programme about natural health products and approaches rather than seek to limit their use.

What You Can Do

If we wish to be able to continue to freely choose natural health options, herbal medicines and supplements without government interference, we will need to speak up. Go to this link to make a submission before February 15th. Write to your MP and complain that the appointment of a regulator amounts to an open ended blank cheque to control the sale and use of products used by more than 50% of our population without fully specifying the principles he should use. Moreover, it will put many NZ businesses out of action. I could say a lot more but now is the time for all of us to have a go and hold up our hands. If we donโ€™t, we will only have ourselves to blame. Given the short submission time available, we have to take a scattershot approach, contact as many people as you can and explain how this is going to seriously affect their health options now and down the line.

Press release Therapeutic Products Bill introduced.
The Therapeutic Products Bill
Related Documents and Downloads


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

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.

Related Articles

Natural Products Regulationโ€”An Overreach of Government Control

How will the 2023 Therapeutic Products Bill affect the Availability of Natural Health Products? – Includes a very informative video.

A Week of Extraordinary Revelations: Studies Confirm Serious Adverse Effects After Covid Vaccination

0

Flying under the radar, the BBC has been accused of orchestrating an alliance of legacy media outlets and social media sites to suppress competition from alternative media. This is entitled โ€œThe Trusted News Initiativeโ€. 

An antitrust lawsuit filed on January 10th 2023ย in the US has obtained documents which they say indicate that the BBC joined with the Washington Post, Reuters, AP, Meta, Google, Twitter, and others in order to protect their business models from competition. Whilst publicly talking about suppressing misinformation, documents indicate that the real intention was to exclude other information platforms, whether their reports were true or not. You can view Tucker Carlson interviewing Robert Kennedy Jnr. about the lawsuitย here.

There appears to be little doubt that vital information about Covid vaccine safety was withheld from the public as a result.

Covid Vaccination Increases the Risk of Pulmonary Embolism in Persons Over 65

Meanwhile, published studies continue to pour in which reveal the horrifying extent and prevalence of Covid vaccine injury. For two years, we have been told that Covid vaccines are especially essential for older age cohorts. A study published January 9th, 2023, in the journal Vaccine entitled โ€œSurveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and olderโ€ reports that Covid vaccination increases the risk of pulmonary embolism in the age group by 50%. A pulmonary embolism occurs when a clump of material, most often a blood clot, gets stuck in an artery in the lungs, blocking the flow of blood.

A study published in Vaccine on 22 September 2022 โ€œSerious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adultsโ€ by Dr. Joseph Fraiman and others, is gaining increased traction. The authors completed secondary analysis of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA phase III clinical trials and found they were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI โˆ’0.4 to 20.6 and โˆ’3.6 to 33.8), respectively.

The study concluded: 

โ€œThe excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. These analyses will require public release of participant level datasets.โ€

The continued refusal to release the datasets from the Pfizer and Moderna trials is raising eyebrows very high indeed. Even the BBC has been forced to consider the evidence that the vaccines are raising all cause deaths to record levels in the UK. Watch this interview with Dr. Aseem Malhotra, which took place yesterday. It is a first for mainstream media exposure.

An article in Frontiers of Immunology published 12th January 2023, โ€œmRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 induce comparably low long-term IgG Fc galactosylation and sialylation levels but increasing long-term IgG4 responses compared to an adenovirus-based vaccineโ€ reveals some concerning news. The initially obscure conclusion reached by the study states:

โ€œRepeated immunization of naรฏve individuals with the mRNA vaccines increased the proportion of the IgG4 subclass over time which might influence the long-term Ab effector functions. Taken together, these data shed light on these novel vaccine formats and might have potential implications for their long-term efficacy.โ€

Translating this into everyday English, the study found that mRNA vaccines cause a worrying drop off in immune responses to Covid infection that increases over time, leaving vaccine recipients more vulnerable to repeated infection. Crucially the long term outcomes of this are unclear. Igor Chudov discusses the possible implications for our immune tolerance here.

Eminent cardiologist Dr. Malhotra is asking that the mRNA vaccination programme be withdrawn based on the published evidence. Our government and the health service remain silent and apparently unrepentant. For two years, many science writers, doctors, and other professionals asking questions have been labelled conspiracy theorists. The mounting evidence is by now unequivocally pointing to a conspiracyโ€”a very concerning alliance of media, government, medical professionals, and pharmaceutical companies determined to remain silent in the face of overwhelming evidence of harm to the public.

How will the 2023 Therapeutic Products Bill affect the Availability of Natural Health Products?

An Open message to Parliament.

Why are they regulating natural health products?

How will the therapeutic products Bill affect us?

What does the public want?

The public are aware that research findings on diet, nutrition, and lifestyle indicate that there are proven health benefits.

Over 50% of the public use natural health products and alternative approaches to health care.

The public realise there are many traditional sources of information about what products can be used safely.

If an individual suffers from a chronic or serious illness, or simply wants to maintain health, they need to retain their options to research and choose the most effective treatment for them.

The new bill will regulate all natural health products that claim to benefit health.

This is an enabling bill. As a result, the government will appoint a regulator who will then decide for you what products can be sold and what health claims can be made.

Well, what will the regulator decide?

In 2016, the Ministry of Health published a draft list of 5500 approved and all restricted ingredients. Most likely, the decisions of the new regulator, when appointed, will be based on this list.

Let’s answer the public’s first question.

Are all these ingredients safe?

The 2016 Ministry of Health permitted list included 3000 synthetic and chemical additives.

A closer look shows that the permitted list includes many additives which are suspected of causing illness and cancer. Including:

  • FD&C red No. 2
  • Amaranth, No. 3
  • Erythrosine No. 4
  • Ponceau

All are banned in the USA by the FDA.

A 2007 study in the UK found a possible link between six food dyes, a preservative and hyperactivity in children. All these compounds are likely to be permitted by the bill.

Thousands of artificial fragrances and flavours have been approved, even though they have not been tested properly.

Here’s an example of a pre-approved synthetic product. This cheap popular drink is available in New Zealand supermarkets. All of its ingredients have already been approved by the Ministry of Health.

These include:

  • Sugar: which predisposes to obesity and aggravates diabetes
  • E330 Synthetic citric acid
  • Synthetic raspberry flavour, effects unknown.
  • E211 sodium benzoate: implicated as a possible cause of hyperactivity when used with E122
  • Colour E122 Carmoisine: banned in the United States, Sweden, Norway and Austria
  • Artificial sweetener E961 Neotame: similar to aspartame and banned in organic products. US FDA application noted adverse reactions. Dr. Mercola recommends this be avoided at all costs.

This bill will allow this synthetic product to be marketed as a natural health product.

We’re talking about serious health issues here. During the last 20 to 30 years, there’s been a huge expansion in chronic diseases, including cancers, diabetes, heart disease, anxiety, depression, and other mental and physical illnesses.

No one knows the exact causes but poor nutrition food, food additives and environmental pollution are all suspected.

Over 2000 new chemicals are registered each year. There’s been a rapid expansion in the use of chemicals in food and synthetic chemicals. Many of these have been approved without sufficient scrutiny.

Using discredited principles such as substantial equivalence additives that are similar to but slightly different from natural compounds have been approved in though is well known that very small differences in chemical structure can cause serious side effects.

The bill requires the regulation of entirely natural ingredients already known to be safe, in other words, foods.

Under the bill, all ingredients have to be pre-approved. We estimate a supplier will pay $200 annually for each ingredient.

The probable minimal cost of making a health claim on the label will be $5,000 to the regulator for each application. And for each mild condition, your product claims to benefit.

But you will not be allowed to claim that a natural health product can benefit a serious health condition.

If it is considered that your product has therapeutic value, you will pay around $100,000 to register it as a medicine. And only a medical doctor will be allowed to prescribe it.

An EU report found that natural health products are 45,000 times safer than pharmaceutical drugs; Despite this, suppliers will have to comply with pharmaceutical style regulations and undertake frequent costly testing of ingredients and products.

Say you’re selling 300 product products to the public, and each one benefits two mild conditions; the application fees alone will be $3 million before you’ve even begun to prepare your evidence.

The experience in Australia has been that the preparation of a single application can cost in excess of $100,000.

These restrictions are so costly that most suppliers will simply refrain from making health claims, so you’ll have less information. Many will go out of business.

The net effect of these regulations will be that consumers will have less information than they did before.

Restrictions on scientific information regarding serious illness

Did you know that the simple kitchen spice turmeric is effective in preventing bowel cancer?

There are a lot of studies.

New Zealand has one of the highest death rates from bowel cancer in the developed world.

Studies show that garlic, ginger, turmeric, thyme, rosemary, sage, spearmint, and peppermint all inhibit the growth of colon cancer cells.

A study found that 1/3 of patients with end stage bowel cancer for whom no other treatment options existed, improved after treatment with turmeric extract.

If the bill is passed, I would not be allowed to tell you this and could be liable for a substantial fine.

So there are restrictions on free speech

It has been proven for years that garlic benefits healthy heart conditions. No one selling garlic will be allowed to communicate this factual scientific information. Thereby the bill will restrict free speech and suppress matters of fact.

There’ll be restrictions on health claims

A consignment of this product, Vicks vapour rub, was seized by Medsafe. Officials in May 2016 and destroyed because the Label made this unapproved health claim:

Apply to the chest, throat, and back for 3-way relief from blocked nose, cough, and body ache.


Thousands of products could be snagged by this rule.

Restrictions on dose

In 2016 the Ministry of Health believed that the maximum daily dose of vitamin B 12 should be 50 micrograms. This product, vitamin B 12, is commonly used by people who are deficient. It has hit each dose 20 times the maximum daily dose specified by the Ministry of Health. So it could be banned.

A typical Indian or Thai meal may contain 50 grams of tamarind. The maximum daily dose of tamarind that has been permitted by the bill is 500 milligrams, that is 100 times smaller than the amount you might consume in a meal.

Civil servants have been employed to make up this ridiculous rule and hundreds more like it.

Banned ingredients

Even though this traditional coffee substitute contains only natural plants, it will be banned by the bill because it contains an ingredient that is listed under the medicines act.

A sort of reverse patenting that bans herbs if they are used to make medicines.

Hundreds of traditional remedies will disappear.

Neem is one of the world’s most revered traditional healing plants with many medical uses. Among its many uses, it reduces inflammation associated with internal ulcers. It’s so effective that pharmaceutical companies have tried to patent this plant.

The regulator is likely to classify this herb as suitable for external use only. Effectively banning its traditional use for no reason.

This popular form of vitamin C could be banned because it contains a derivative of lecithin (commonly used in chocolate and other supermarket products), which in 2016, was classified by the Ministry of Health as for “external use only“.

Restrictions on traditional Indian and Chinese medicine

The bill will empower the regulator to restrict the traditional practices of ethnic communities, and it will violate the Bill of Rights.

More than 150 commonly used Indian herbs and a similar number of Chinese herbs were wrongly placed on a not permitted list by the Ministry of Health in 2016.

To a large extent, this is because many traditional herbs have been found to be so healthy, that they have been used to develop medicines and therefore these ingredients will be restricted in natural health products.

There are more than 10,000 traditional healing herbs. It will cost more than $100 million to register their healing properties, so in effect, their use will likely cease in New Zealand.

Just look at this list. This is just a short extract from 300 herbs that the Ministry of Health sought to restrict in 2016. The last time they tried to introduce a bill of this type.

These are foods that we consume many of us regularly, why should they be restricted it doesn’t make any sense.

What will it cost you

And these restrictions are going to cost a lot. Last week a 50 gram packet of Rubia Cordifolia, a herb used to make healthy tea cost $12.

After the bill is passed, the same packet may cost 60 to $80, just due to the compliance clock costs.

There are over 100,000 eligible plants. It will take an army of civil servants years to classify even a small proportion of them.

Assessment costs will be paid by the manufacturing industry so the cost of natural health products will obviously rise dramatically.

What will escape regulation

Well, many unhealthy products will be allowed to be sold without regulation.

Sugary Drinks, hard fat, synthetic flavours, and alcohol will continue to be sold unimpeded….

while the government pours millions of dollars and years of fruitless effort into controlling products that are already known to be safe and healthy foods.

This would be ridiculous if it wasn’t immoral and criminal.

There is absolutely no need for the government to regulate natural foods that are based on DNA that are used in natural health products.

Natural foods and herbs should be automatically excluded from regulation. There is no need to do this.

Meanwhile, there is a crisis in healthcare

Medical misadventure, experimentation and interventions have just become the number one cause of death in the world.

Healthcare costs are spiralling out of control.

Mental illness has quadrupled.

Cancers, chronic diseases, heart disease, and many other conditions are increasing to epidemic proportions, all cause mortality is rising.

Clearly something has gone horribly wrong. But no one knows quite why.

There is no doubt that food additives and the drugs we take play a pivotal role in the development of disease.

There have been multiple failures in the regulatory processes which approve agricultural practices food and medicine.

How has this happened?

The process of regulation has moved away from science and becomes a cosy relationship between industry and regulators permitting unsafe and inappropriate products onto the market.

The bill, the proposed, bill represents a new phase of this cosy relationship. Regulators worldwide are cooperating to place restrictions on natural health products. And this will only benefit multinational companies.

What can we do to reverse this trend?

There is a scientific standard scientific approach to identify cause

Eliminate suspected causal factors and reintroduce them one by one.

Dr. Dee Mangin at Otago Medical School, has found that if you stop all non-essential medication for the elderly, their health improves.

Dr. Julia Rutledge at Canterbury University has found that greatly improved nutrition benefits children with ADHD.

Dr. Kulreet Chaudhary, a renowned San Diego neurologist, has found that her patients, including MS sufferers, improved dramatically when placed on a traditional herbal diet.

These are just pointers to the many scientific preventive approaches to health care, which are springing up everywhere based on natural foods.

So why is our parliament planning to restrict natural health products?

We need to remind ourselves there is no evidence that natural health products are unsafe.

In fact, there’s a great deal of evidence that they benefit health and prevent illness.

Natural health products are traditionally made from plants and animal products which are based on DNA and natural minerals.

Our digestive system has developed to easily metabolise food based on DNA without side effects.

Many people rely on natural health products to maintain their health. It will be criminally negligent to restrict their options.

True natural health products are in fact foods.

There is nothing risky about their use.

Taking natural health products is no different from the need to have a balanced meal.

Food is life. It is our first medicine.

The healing properties of plants are proven to benefit public health. Our right to use them should not be taken away by law and transferred to pharmaceutical interests.

We are a people here who believe in fairness.

This is not the time for New Zealand to become involved in an international effort to subvert regulatory safeguards.

This is not the time to restrict access to preventive health care.

This is not the time to allow suspected unhealthy synthetic ingredients to be included in natural health products.

This is not the time to restrict access to herbs and impose huge unjustified costs on traditional medicine.

This is a time for New Zealand to lead the world in the development of application of preventive approaches to health care.

The therapeutic products bill is currently up for public submissions up until February 15, 2023. Make a submission here.

Ask your MP to review this presentation, which shows that the bill relies upon outdated and discredited ideas.

Or you can contact me directly at my email ghatchard@gmail.com or go to my website for more information. Thank you

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

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.

How Can People In Power Lie So Comfortably

0

Yesterday I was enjoying lunch at a restaurant, and I couldnโ€™t help overhearing the extended family at the adjacent table having a concerning and tragic conversation.

A young boy of eight had died suddenly after a cardiac arrest and a brain bleed, and another boy of eight or nine, also known to the family, died suddenly on the very same day. The mother was upset, she was at a loss to understand how this could have happened. The grandfather offered some well intentioned words of comfort:ย โ€œit could have happened to anyone, it is Godโ€™s willโ€.

I am not a fatalist. Things happen through cause and effect. I believe we have the freedom to choose between right and wrong. Whatโ€™s more,ย โ€œAs you sow, so shall you reapโ€. Ultimately the universe is balanced and your deeds catch up with you. This is as much about Newtonโ€™s Laws as it is about religious faith. In India, they have a sayingย Truth Alone Triumphs.ย Their philosophy of karma mirrors that of Christ, the Buddha, and others.

You must have been reading about the Buffalo Billsโ€™ safety Damar Hamlin aged 24, who suffered a cardiac arrest on the field. Nine days later, he has now been discharged from the hospital. The football world breathed a collective sigh of relief for him and his family. You may not have heard of Hunter Brown, Air Force offensive lineman, dead this week at 21. The New York Postย reportedย Brown suffered a medical emergency, not on the field, but as he was leaving his dorm. First responders were unable to save him.

Thereโ€™s more. If you read the sports pages of the Euro Weekly, you suddenly become aware of just how many public sports figures of all ages are passing away suddenlyโ€”seven this week alone, and thatโ€™s just a representative few of them. That doesnโ€™t include those not in the public eye. It doesnโ€™t include two active young boys dying suddenly in the same town in New Zealand on the same day. Deaths I havenโ€™t seen reported in our newspapers.

People Who Lie Comfortably

Following public statements of concern about record high rates of excess death from high profile medical experts and some MPs, the BBC is reporting that there is no reason to be concerned (???). The author Rachel Schraer is a BBC reporter whom the Hatchard Report has had cause to criticise previously, for telling the public that the Covid jabs are safe and effective.

Here she does it again with cherries on top. The article reports Andrew Bridgen MP has been suspended for five days for quoting an eminent UK cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra who has concerns about multiple deaths related to Covid vaccines based on studies which he has discussed in detail in his peer reviewed scientific papers. Schraer responds: serious side effects from Covid Vaccines are rare (???) and says โ€œExtensive independent research shows that Covid vaccines are extremely effective at preventing deathsโ€, but unlike Malhotra she doesnโ€™t reference her research. There is a good reason for this. It doesnโ€™t exist except in the imagination of MPs, media moguls, die-hard vaccine advocates, and others anxious to please PM Rishi Sunak whose former hedge fund invested heavily in biotechnology.

Tory Chief Whip Simon Hart joined in the grovelling and jingoistic fervour withย โ€œAs a nation we should be very proud of what has been achieved through the vaccine programmeโ€ย (???).He didnโ€™t mention that Covid vaccines have not prevented infection, hospitalisation, or death. He didnโ€™t mention that the rate of excess all-cause deaths in the UK is continuing to rise. Presumably Hart is proud of vaccine injury; there appears to be nothing else to be proud about. Following Bridgenโ€™s suspension, adverse effects of Covid vaccines are now officially unmentionable in the UK Parliament; the government-funded BBC is applauding at every possible opportunity.

Actually, serious adverse effects from Covid vaccines are so rare that they dwarf the totals of side effects from all other vaccines ever given in history. There are clever ways to hide these astronomical totals. If you assume for example that Covid vaccines could only possibly cause deaths in the three weeks following the jab, you can minimise totals. If you then produce a list of fatal conditions like neurological conditions and cancers for exampleย that couldnโ€™t possibly (???) be caused by vaccines, you can subtract all those deaths and arrive at a manageable total which can be relayed to the public. Even that total (60 according to the BBC) would have, in days of yore (pre-pandemic), resulted in the withdrawal of a pharmaceutical product. Back then, even two deaths would have been sufficient.

For the Record, It is Not Safe

I donโ€™t want to put too fine a point on this, but all this obfuscation, hiding, sweeping under the carpet, and trumpet blowing about non-existent achievements amounts to lying. There seem to be a great many โ€˜greatโ€™ people in the public eye who have gotten used to lying comfortably. Many among our great and good rulers have difficulty admitting that they donโ€™t know much about something; they are quite happy to have us believe they know all about biotechnology safety. For the record, it is not safe.

In fact, biotechnology is busy shaking up the arrangement of the ancient building blocks of life and coming up with surprises almost every week. Here at the Hatchard Report we come across published studies almost every day and write about them (with links). A little knownย studyย published in August 2022 by PubMed reports that Botox injections are less effective after Pfizer Covid-19 injections. I havenโ€™t had one myself, so I am not in a position to recommend them, but I want to say that no one knows why Covid-19 injections interfere with Botox.

Popular beauty magazine Allure is having none of it. The article โ€œIs the COVID-19 Vaccine Making Your Botox Wear Off Faster??โ€ repeatedly urges its readers toย โ€œget the vaccineย [and the booster]ย anywayโ€.ย Beauty is apparently too precious a possession to let a study interfere with your botox routines or stop you from having a vaccine.

If It Doesnโ€™t Happen Within Three Weeks, It Doesnโ€™t Matter

Add botox to a very long list of what no one knows about Covid inoculations, and biotechnology in general. In truth, no one knows what effects are going to surface over time, but they would have you believe that if it doesnโ€™t happen within three weeks and itโ€™s not on their approved list, it doesnโ€™t matter. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a lie. One that is still rolling very easily off the tongues of government officials and pro-vaccine insiders all over the world who are increasingly worried that we might find out that they mandated a killer and told us to give it to little children.

Despite the collapse of the pro-vaccine narrative, the appetite for lying appears to have grown stronger. The BBC article puts asking questions on Covid vaccine safety on a par with denying the holocaust. An absurd comparison.

Evidently, there is something addictive about the โ€˜lyingโ€™ habit, despite it always being wrong. Our mothers and teachers were right to discourage it. If our MPs continue to wilfully employ this tactic on both sides of the house, if they continue to stand by and watch people die, they will all be suddenly due for a stretch in the wilderness. Deaths have a cause. They do not suddenly increase for no reason, nor are they convenient political footballs.

I would like to conclude at this point by saying thatย time has a habit of sorting this out,ย but time is not on our side right now. Tragically we have found out the hard way that we canโ€™t entrust the safety of our children to officials. They donโ€™t care. Much is unknown about biotechnology, but one quality that is becoming increasingly clear is its deadly effect. It upsets the physiological balance that our health relies on every day, and for some people, that is proving final. Apparently, our leaders only care about covering their behinds and hiding their Pinocchio noses with masks.

People who die do not have a voice anymore, but they deserve justice. Justice here can only be the restoration of truth and an immediate change in pandemic policy.