Health experts appearing on or writing in mainstream media to discuss Covid are reassuring the public that they are keeping up with science publishing and tailoring their messaging accordingly. But are they? Recently we reviewed a study published in the Lancet, which shows that, contrary to the assurances of New Zealand experts, mRNA vaccination fails to reduce transmission, serious illness, and death among the vulnerable. This article discusses two more recent studies that run counter to the government narrative.

German Study Implicates Myocarditis in Post mRNA Vaccine Deaths

German researchers performed standard autopsies on 25 persons dying within 20 days of mRNA vaccination. The results are reported in a paper entitled “Autopsy-based histopathological characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination”.

In four patients who received an mRNA vaccination, the researchers identified acute myocarditis without detection of any other significant disease or health constellation that may have caused an unexpected death.

The deaths were found to be caused by acute arrhythmia leading to cardiac failure associated with interstitial myocardial T-cell invasion. The effect was most notable on the right side of the heart, which receives blood returned from veins, which is likely to have contained elements of vaccine components.

The authors concluded:

“Myocarditis can be a potentially lethal complication following mRNA-based anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Our findings may aid in adequately diagnosing unclear cases after vaccination and in establishing a timely diagnosis in vivo, thus, providing the framework for adequate monitoring and early treatment of severe clinical cases.”

The prevalence of definitive causal myocarditis symptomatology was 16% among deaths within 20 days of mRNA vaccination. According to CARM data held by Medsafe, up to September 2022, there have been 157 deaths reported to CARM proximate to vaccination. Medsafe admits this figure is highly underreported by a factor of approximately 20. Therefore a conservative estimate of the actual total would be 3140. 16% of 3140 is 502 deaths.

It is noteworthy that over the course of almost two years, New Zealand Medsafe has admitted that only two deaths proximate to vaccination can be causally ascribed to the effects of vaccination. If the German experience is being repeated here, there could be 500 deaths from vaccine related myocarditis that have remained undetected and unacknowledged.

The huge discrepancy between the German results and the official New Zealand figures indicates that insufficient investigation, including autopsies, have taken place here. For a detailed discussion by Dr. Mobeen Syed of this technical study, see here.

Large Prospective Lancet Study Calls the Current Long Covid Narrative Into Question

Dangers of Long Covid are repeatedly cited as a reason to vaccinate and take severe precautions such as masking, ventilation of social spaces, social distancing, and isolation. A number of cross sectional studies have been completed on the prevalence and persistence of Long Covid. Those published so far appear to indicate that a very wide range of symptoms persist over long periods among a significant percentage of persons subsequent to Covid infection.

A potential difficulty with the information we have so far is the great variability of the estimates offered by different papers. Current estimates of Long Covid prevalence hover around 10-30% of those infected who still suffer some symptom(s) after three months. These include loneliness, mental health and well being, fatigue, and specific physical symptoms, including loss of taste or smell, pain, and shortness of breath. Is this picture accurate?

Studies to date have an inherent defect. They are based on surveys of populations at specific intervals post infection, but they don’t follow the course of Long Covid for the same groups of individuals over time. In other words, from a strictly scientific perspective, we have to ask: are the same people suffering symptoms throughout the study period? This defect can be rectified by prospective studies that follow individuals from the point of infection onwards

A prospective controlled study published by the Lancet of 7000 children and young persons (5000 covid positive and 2000 covid free) over the course of a year post infection during 2020 up to March 2021 is entitled “Natural course of health and well-being in non-hospitalised children and young people after testing for SARS-CoV-2: A prospective follow-up study over 12 months”. The results are very surprising and entirely up-end our understanding of Long Covid.

In summary, symptoms of Long Covid in all categories decline greatly over the course of the year which is very reassuring. But here’s the rub, for many young subjects, not initially subject to Long Covid, new symptoms appear after 6 or 12 months which are actually not related to Covid infection but have multiple other causes.

“New adverse symptoms were reported six- and 12-months post-test by both test-positives and test-negatives, particularly tiredness, shortness of breath, poor quality of life, poor well-being and fatigue.”

The authors conclude that the evidence points to:

“The new-onset adverse symptoms arising 6- or 12-months after initial viral infection should not exclusively be viewed as new long COVID symptoms as a consequence of the initial SARS-COV-2 infection. Rather, these adverse symptoms should be seen in the wider context of health and well-being in the general adolescent population.”

Some symptoms being ascribed to Long Covid have other causes unrelated to Covid infection. Thus young persons are likely to be affected by the stressful social effects of pandemic policies which could include lockdowns, loss of school time, peer interactions, inadequate medical care, masking, etc. In other words, pandemic policies could be making things far worse for young persons, not better. For a good video summary by Dr. Vinay Prasad, see here.

Why Have Alarm Bells Remained Silent at the Ministry of Health?

Increasingly government policies around the world are falling out of step with Covid findings published in journals. There is a need for greater vigilance and an educational programme to get medical professionals up to date. However, this is not the whole story, if you listen to eminent UK Cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra in a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, you will be horrified to learn that many doctors are actually up to date with mRNA vaccine harms, especially those related to cardiac problems, but they are carefully protecting big pharma from blame by keeping silent and pressuring others to do the same.

The systemic pathology of the regulatory system and the profit incentive in the pharmaceutical industry have distorted the safety data and hidden the adverse effects of mRNA vaccination. Many people are anxious to keep it that way. The latest findings reveal mRNA vaccination is far more dangerous than Covid itself. Malhotra’s in-depth interview with Carlson is one of the clearest and most measured discussions of research on safety data I have seen. Please take the time to watch this so that you inform others and help protect public health.

MSM is Still Offering the Nz Public Incomplete Information

Is any of Dr. Malhotra’s message coming to public attention in New Zealand? Unfortunately not. The New Zealand Herald published an article yesterday, “Covid 19 Omicron: Explained – the two big variables that could slow or grow this wave” —another missed opportunity. Curiously, the article didn’t mention mRNA vaccination and didn’t tell us why it got left off the page. Short answer: mRNA vaccination doesn’t work, and more to the point, it leaves recipients more vulnerable to Covid and other illnesses, including cardiac conditions. This could have been avoided if the Ministry of Health had examined the Pfizer trial data more diligently early on.

So here is the sad outcome of a highly vaccinated New Zealand, we are now all being encouraged by mainstream media to:

1. mask, test, socially distance, and isolate

and wait for it:

2. take antiviral medication

Yale Medicine lists the possible side effects of antiviral Paxlovid (currently being widely advertised on TV) as: hives, trouble swallowing or breathing, swelling of the mouth, lips, or face, throat tightness, hoarseness, skin rash, an altered or impaired sense of taste, diarrhoea, increased blood pressure, muscle aches, abdominal pain, nausea, and feeling generally unwell.

Studies show significant measures that we can take to improve Covid outcomes and cardiac outcomes include the following: dietary improvements, including a lighter fresher diet, regular exercise, sufficient sleep, nutrition, and reduced consumption of ultra-processed foods. Dr. Malhotra discusses these factors in his interview and in many of his earlier writings. He expresses disbelief that governments chose to ignore warning signs early in the pandemic that easily rectified lifestyle factors were important determinants of Covid outcomes. We also tried to alert medical decision makers to this over a year ago.

Our medical system has closed its eyes and looked the other way. It has failed to offer informed consent to the public, and it has ignored potential cost-effective remedies. The longer we postpone informing the public about the dangers of mRNA vaccination, the greater the pain is going to become.

The papers last week were filled with rhetoric which will fuel and exacerbate attacks upon those with doubts about vaccine efficacy and safety.

The New Zealand Herald reported, “Complaint lodged against lawyer and anti-vaccination campaigner Sue Grey” Sue Grey is the lawyer representing the parents of Baby W. A number of complaints have been lodged with the Law Society during the two years of the pandemic asking that Grey be disbarred because of her vaccine-hesitant views. One complainant said: 

“I am worried about the damage Grey does to people by spreading deeply concerning conspiracy theories.”.

It is apparently very easy under the influence of pandemic panic to forget that the right to legal representation is a cornerstone of our democracy. Quite apart from Covid, every single case that comes before the courts involves discussion of opposing views and interpretation of evidence. If lawyers holding views opposite to public perceptions were routinely disbarred, we would not be living in a democracy but a dictatorship.

Public Reaction Has Become Hysterical and Detached From Fact

The New Zealand Twitter-verse was overwhelmed last week by attacks on the parents of Baby W, who unwisely chose to appear on Infowars and be interviewed by Alex Jones, infamous for denying the Sandy Hook school massacre ever happened. In the thread Debunking Conspiracies Aotearoa, for example, complaints that Sue Grey and others are unhinged right-wing fanatics intent on bringing down the government are carefully sandwiched between assertions that vaccine injuries reported to Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring (CARM) are fake or inconsequential.

This highlights just how uninformed the New Zealand public is about the extent of vaccine injuries. No doubt, tight manipulation of media content is mostly at the root of this. Should we blame the government alone? No. Whilst there are a lot of heavily pro-vaccine political players on both sides of the parliamentary benches, there are also sponsors and advertisers using their dollars to influence media content. There are high-profile experts who are dyed-in-the-wool vaccine proponents, refusing to debate the issues, requiring sanitised platforms that enable them to assert their views unopposed.

The contrast we are experiencing these days is disconcerting. On the one hand scientists who have had their concerns marginalised are now confined to alternative channels where they are presenting charts and analysing data from scientific studies in great detail to try to get their point across. But if you only watch MSM you are on a diet of so-called experts who have a free pass to appear on national TV and be quoted in print, saying whatever they wish without any requirement for justification. The two worlds never meet.

This has become a problem for the government. Over the course of two years government advice has systematically schooled the public to believe deeply and uncritically in the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccination—a novel form of gene therapy. A vocal segment of the population has adopted this perspective with a depth that borders on fanaticism. Now the data is in, it is not looking good for the vaccinated. They are disproportionately represented among Covid related deaths.

Over a quarter of the eligible population, a significant minority, have twigged that something is up and ducked the boosters. So what is the government going to do?

Is Ardern Trying to Calm Concern About Covid Vaccination?

It was somewhat surprising and also moderately gratifying to hear an attempt at a conciliatory statement from Jacinda Ardern when she gave a Christmas interview looking ahead to 2023. For people who still felt disenfranchised, she insisted that the government’s intentions have “Always been about how we best look after people.” And continued:

“Those who may have very strong feelings about, for instance, vaccines, that might have been their starting point – that was ours too.”

“We always were focused on how do we best look after people – so let’s start from the point we’ve shared and find ways so where we don’t agree, to accept that,” she summarised.

I know you are going to say she didn’t say anything near enough to that which our situation demands. Acceptance of difference resolves little. I totally agree, but could I also detect in these words a tacit acceptance that there is evidence about vaccine harm that needs to be addressed and convincingly resolved through actual published science rather than prejudice?

Ardern’s remarks were definitely not the staunchly pro-vaccine rhetoric that we have come to expect from the government. Are they having doubts? Just possibly. They should be. Might some Labour politicians have read papers in leading journals pointing out that there is a net harm from vaccination for younger recipients, such as this recent article from the British Medical Journal?

Ardern has started the ball rolling by posing a question. None of these parties—National, Greens, and ACT—have made any conciliatory comments. Any political figure who steps out of line, such as Winston Peters, who made comments opposing mandates, has been cancelled and mercilessly attacked. The longer the opposition parties fail to step up to the plate, the harder it is becoming to make the transition. They are increasingly looking like dinosaurs.

Will Jacinda Ardern’s tentative comments do much to curb public hysteria directed against the unvaccinated? I doubt it. Far more clear explanations and discussions of published scientific evidence will be required to calm down the current level of vocal public prejudice. In other words, a genuine moderated public debate.

Highly Risky Biotechnology Experiments Are Quietly Continuing

In truth, whether vaccinated or unvaccinated, we have much in common to be concerned about. For example, recent evidence has cemented a lab leak origin of Covid-19, but incredibly we now read in the authoritative Nature journal that gain of function experiments are continuing at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

An article entitled “Close relatives of MERS-CoV in bats use ACE2 as their functional receptors” reports that Wuhan researchers have found out how to mutate two bat viruses closely related to MERS CoV to make them more dangerous for humans. Just recall that MERS was far more deadly than Covid. It had a 35% mortality rate. Is that too going to escape accidentally? Why on earth are scientists still making novel deadly viruses in weakly protected lab conditions? Is the Covid death toll not enough for them? No lab is safe enough to contain these risks.

As everyone does, we live in hope of sanity and rational sense. So much decency and reason has been abandoned during the pandemic with little or no justification. The thing that really appalls and worries me is that ongoing biotech experiments and projects are being carefully concealed from view. The world has been subject to manipulation as for example revealed by this article “Emails show Wuhan lab collaborator played central role in public messaging about COVID-19 origins”.

Emails released under the North Carolina Public Records Act document a rare insight into behind the scenes manipulation. EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak, who worked closely with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, helped steer the media and scientific community away from questions about whether COVID-19 could have originated in a lab. Unbelievably, his misleading and disproved views on Covid origins still hold sway with our government.

This is in the past, but even now, new biotech medicines and vaccines are in the pipeline and about to be sprung upon the public. Those developing them and expecting to profit greatly are being very careful to ensure that no independent judges of safety are able to look over their shoulders and comment on what is really going on. Simultaneously the highly funded biotech PR machine is presenting an idealised rosy future free from disease—a carefully crafted fiction. This is anti-scientific.

The biotech lobby succeeded in glossing over risks and harms during the pandemic. Now, they don’t want anyone asking questions about the safety of future biotech products. Governments and investors are blithely handing out funding to almost innumerable incredibly risky biotech projects around the globe.

We Need Calm Heads Accessing Reliable Knowledge, Not Open Conflict

The fiction of biotech safety is being maintained through the diversion of attention. For three years, the public has been unnecessarily polarised. As long as the media continue to stoke fear and thereby ensure sections of the population remain angry with each other, we are lost. Venting anger on one another is not a strategy that can facilitate a way ahead. Conveniently it keeps the misinformed public from asking key safety questions.

Biotechnology involves editing the building blocks of life, our life, our DNA. Changes and inevitable mistakes cannot be recalled; they spread without limit, affecting not only living populations but future generations as well. Slowly but surely, catastrophic danger is creeping up on civilisation.

Faced with this danger, whatever has happened so far during the pandemic, whatever water has flowed under the bridge—united we stand, divided we fall. Together we can eliminate the dangers posed by biotechnology experimentation by calling for global legislation and agreements imposing a ban. Go to GLOBE.GLOBAL for more information.

Last night we heard the decision of the High Court Judge in the baby W case, who ruled that the state should enforce a transfusion from the national blood bank in defiance of the wishes of the parents. He declined to allow an obvious and simple work around of donated unvaccinated blood. In so doing, he was ruling on a scientific matter, but was his ruling scientific?

To qualify as science, a theory must accurately describe a large class of observations or measurements on the basis of a model or set of rules which is simple and plausible. Crucially it must make definite and accurate predictions about the results of future measurements. If its predictions fail to agree with measurement, the theory should be adjusted or in some cases it might need to be abandoned and a new theory sought.

This was the case with the early Egyptian theory that the sun and the planets go around the earth in a set of crystal spheres. The model was adjusted to try to account for the observation of retrograde motions of planets, but eventually it became very complicated and didn’t ever quite fit observed planetary positions. When Galileo saw the moons of Jupiter through a telescope, the theory was abandoned and the sun-centred ideas of Copernicus were accepted.

Adequate theories must make predictions which can in principle be falsified by experiments. For example, a theory which predicts that a jolly green giant lives at the centre of the earth is not scientific because it cannot be proved right or wrong, as no one can travel there to look. Nor is such a theory plausible. A person who claims to be an expert on jolly green giants, should rightly be laughed at and dismissed.

The public has been offered a relatively simple theory of the action of mRNA vaccines. They invade a few of our cells, instruct the cells to produce spike proteins which are similar to those found on the surface of the Covid virus. The immune system detects these and in theory learns to neutralise the Covid virus if and when we are exposed to it. The physiology is supposed to rapidly clean up any excess spike protein or vaccine ingredients within a few days of vaccination.

It won’t have escaped your notice that a lot of predictions about the effect of Covid vaccines have been found to be false when actual health data is examined. They are clearly not effective or safe as claimed. Recent data indicates they fail to even provide protection against severe disease or death. They appear to suppress immune system function and leave some recipients vulnerable to a range of illnesses.

Is the Theory of mRNA Vaccines Incomplete

So is the theory of mRNA vaccines incomplete or even wrong? It seems so. Fragments of genetic material in the vaccine are more mobile than first thought and last longer, months even in some cases. The immune system appears to be confused by this in some way that is not yet fully understood. Blood clots may be generated. So has the theory been adjusted? No. Governments, medical experts, and the media have unaccountably been doubling down on the theory and cancelling critics. This is not the normal process of scientific debate, in fact, it is not science at all. It involves a measure of prejudice and hubris.

You must have experienced that sinking feeling when you have said or done something wrong. Generally, wishing to avoid embarrassment and blame, we rush to correct our mistakes and apologise. Occasionally, as is sometimes the case with the young, we may protest our innocence against all evidence or try to hide the evidence.

There is another kind of response that can arise if we are particularly invested in what we were doing at the time and expecting a good result or some gain. The disappointment of failure can lead to self-justifying anger. Anger clouds our judgment, which leads us to describe or even remember the actual events differently. When we lie to ourselves or others in this way, our rational faculty gets suppressed. If we are not careful, one thing leads to another and we get caught in a web of deceit.

This seems to have been happening as cracks have appeared in the pandemic response and the official narrative has unravelled. Yesterday the 11 year old son of a prominent entertainer collapsed on the sports field. According to a news report the father said “He was going blue and was unconscious until he calmed down. It was scary, but it turned out to be a panic attack”. It was suggested this could have been brought on by the son’s desire to impress his father with his performance.

The media agreed, and reported this reassuring advice from the NHS:

“there are a number of symptoms of a panic attack including a racing heartbeat, feeling faint, chest pain and shortness of breath.” 

They omitted to mention that becoming unconscious and turning blue are definitely not normal results of a panic attack. In fact, chest pain, racing heartbeat, feeling faint, and shortness of breath are all symptoms of myocarditis, a known side effect of mRNA vaccination, especially prevalent among under-40s, including school children.

The incident should be added to a long list of tragic events on the sports field that are occurring in unprecedented numbers. When I say ‘unprecedented’, I don’t mean this in the sense of a casual turn of phrase. Given what typically happened (or rather didn’t happen) pre-pandemic, the current rate of events on the sports field should be a statistical impossibility. A ten fold increase should raise panicked alarm, an almost hundred fold increase, as has been estimated by some, should have compelled medical authorities to revise everything they thought they knew about mRNA vaccination. It hasn’t.

Medical Gaslighting

What is going on is medical gaslighting. Victims are being sent home with false diagnoses and reassurances that their serious and unusual symptoms are mild, short-lived, or ordinary, and unrelated to vaccination. This does not bode well for the future evolution of the pandemic response and our health system in general. Authorities are deliberately looking the other way in the face of accumulating evidence of risk and harm. The public are being fobbed off with suggestions they are merely weak or anxious.

There is a fundamental problem here. There are a lot of experts in epidemiology, virology, vaccines, and public health who know next to nothing about biotechnology and gene therapy. My guess is they are experiencing that sinking feeling increasingly these days as new health data comes in falsifying all their preconceived ideas, but instead of correcting their mistakes and revising naive opinions, they are getting angry. From the start they should not have pretended that they were experts on biotechnology, they never were.

Caught in a Web of Deceit

Now the media, medical authorities, governments, and a number of high profile experts are caught in a web of deceit. Like the confused or proud astronomers adding new crystal wheels to their planetary models in order to prop up their theories of the Heavens, they are adding new medical diagnoses to protect the illusion that interfering with genetic structures and functions is inherently safe—an illusion that they themselves created or endorsed without having sufficient, or even in some cases any knowledge and evidence. Others are withholding or hiding medical data, including the incidence of disease or vaccination status of victims.

In essence, the authorities have been caught in a lie and they are trying to lie their way out of it. As a result, they are failing to warn the population of an increasingly obvious and serious danger to individual and public health posed by Covid vaccines. In the process, they are putting the health of children and adults at risk by continuing to advise that mRNA vaccines are safe whilst pontificating about their own position and status and their right to decide the fate of others. Time to come down off their high horse and admit that jolly green giants don’t exist except in fables and advertising jingles. It is a very serious matter, a matter of scientific validity and public safety.

Scientists and experts: if you were expecting to make your reputation and your fortune during the pandemic, you can salvage what is left by immediately and publicly admitting a mistake has been made and a wrong impression created that urgently needs to be corrected. Lives are at stake every day in the home, on the sports field, and at work. All-cause mortality has reached record levels here and in highly vaccinated countries overseas. A silent killer has been let loose amongst us.

Florida authorities have ceased offering mRNA vaccines to young males aged 18-39, citing the risk of myocarditis. A few countries, notably in Scandinavia, have clarified their pre-vaccination advice to young men and urged a degree of caution. Florida has copped a lot of flack over its precautionary decision, and the CDC is counter-advising everyone to go ahead and boost regardless.

The risk of myocarditis for women has been found to be only slightly less (and curiously, in at least one study higher). However, women are still being advised in most jurisdictions they should take the jab—sure, it’s safe for women, it must be. Women also face additional risks. Risks connected to fertility, pregnancy, stillbirth, and breastfeeding (see here also). Indicative data on these appears to have been brushed over, hidden, or simply ignored.

In fact, reliable V-safe data shows that more women than men reported injuries after Covid vaccination. Women seem to have more difficulty persuading medical officials to take their issues seriously.

This points to lopsided ideas about risk. Are women’s lives perceived to be worth less? The misogyny involved might have escaped your notice until now, but questions about the morality of biotech medical risk assessment, in general, have probably occupied your thoughts from time to time during the pandemic.

I’m not going to use the term myocarditis, preferring now to say it how it is—heart disease—with all the normally associated life-shortening risks and the requirement for a lifetime of caution, moderation, monitoring, and treatment. The post-vaccination risk of developing heart disease is not just very high; it is unprecedented. People are falling ill and dropping dead because of it in numbers never seen before, including women.

Sign up to receive our newsletter!

Covid Hysteria is Being Used as an Antidote to Protest

To counter voices urging caution, the pharmaceutical industry, the medical establishment, governments, and MSM have curated Covid hysteria—irrational fear of Covid. Now that the data is becoming even more clear about the huge risks of the jab, they can’t stop, nor apparently does hardly anyone want to. It is difficult to escape the notion that there is a bunker mentality and a tinge of madness involved.

Last Friday, Purolator, the Canadian courier system 91% owned by Canada Post, terminated all its unvaccinated employees. Trudeau meanwhile, like Ardern feels that “using protest to demand changes to public policy is something I think worrysome”. In Canada, being concerned that you have been fired for avoiding a potentially life-threatening medical intervention is good cause for Trudeau to label you “mysogenist and racist”; asking why “do we tolerate these people?” Short answer: they don’t tolerate the unvaccinated in Canada, they persecute them.

Is Biotechnology Worth All the Sudden Unexpected Deaths?

You don’t need me to answer this silly question, but it does actually require some thought to find out why we need to ask it. Have you noticed that aside from being dangerous and ineffective, biotechnology is incredibly expensive?

Most highly vaccinated nations are going broke. In the UK, incredibly rich Rishi Sunak has raised the pension age to 68 and reinstituted austerity into the foreseeable future. Here in NZ, the pandemic has cost $75 billion, which is about twice the annual health budget of our little island nation. It is all printed or borrowed money, and the piper will have to be paid sooner or later.

This giant expenditure has had no real measurable results except misery, poverty, and continuing spread of ill health. Health systems around the world are collapsing under the weight of untreated patients. All-cause mortality is at record levels.

Contrast this with the cost of natural immunity, it’s free, and it works. Get a bit of exposure to sunshine, eat healthily, exercise regularly, and avoid unhealthy habits like smoking, excess hard fats, ultra-processed foods, and fizzy drinks. Studies show that your risk of serious Covid illness will fall by 70%.

Biotech Foods Pose Risks to Health and the Environment Despite Claims to the Contrary

Don’t be taken in by the wave of synthetic foods and additives appearing on supermarket shelves. Two weeks ago, the FDA declared lab-grown chicken meat developed by Berkeley, California-based food-tech firm Upside Foods as safe for human consumption. The associated commercial hype is promising an abundant, safe, tasty alternative to meat, but the reality is a world away.

So far, Upside Foods, which used to be called Memphis Meats, has attracted a billion dollars of investment and interest from figures and entities such as Cargill, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson, Kimbal Musk, brother of Elon Musk and co-founder of The Kitchen, “a growing family of businesses that pursues an America where everyone has access to real food,” and the World Economic Forum (WEF).

Synthetic meat is not going to come cheap. Its production in giant bioreactors is energy hungry (nor is it going to reduce greenhouse gases). The process of cloning meat involves using a mixture of bovine serum (most likely from fetal calves found in cows being slaughtered) and enzymes from the pancreas and intestines of animals. The process also uses engineered genes to promote continuous growth of the cells. This is disturbing in that it is likely that the genes being manipulated can promote cancers.

Bioreactors used to make synthetic foods typically suffer from accumulation of toxic byproducts. Eventually, the leftover toxic genetic sludge has to be dumped somewhere.

Support the Hatchard Report

Nature Really Does Know How to Organise Better Than Man

Give real chickens a go. They’re inexpensive, and they work. Chickens convert sunlight into meat and eggs very efficiently. You don’t need to be a highly-paid Ph.D. in biotechnology or own a giant bioreactor. A homemade coup and run in your backyard is sufficient. Your power bill will remain the same. Chickens reproduce without the need for genetic accelerants. Their waste doesn’t pose a problem for the environment, and it will fertilise your garden. Ditto for vegetables.

Yet Upside Foods will have you think otherwise. They are happy to play upon ignorance and prejudice. Before you know it, they will have you eating a questionable meat substitute while thinking you are saving the world. You are not, you are harming it and mortgaging your future, and that of your children.

The Reality of Biotechnology is a Lot Different, It’s Frightening

All over the world, the Covid Industrial Complex has been hiding adverse reactions, reaping huge profits, and covering its tracks whilst spinning lies about a non-existent bright future:

The authoritative UK Daily Telegraph leads with “ Top virologists betrayed science with their Covid lab leak cover-up.” Yet gain of function experimentation which caused the pandemic is ongoing.

In a seven-hour sealed deposition and a farewell address from the White House, on the eve of his retirement, Dr. Fauci was still insisting that mRNA vaccines stop the spread of coronavirus and that lockdowns really work.

Widespread public protests in China indicate that mandated jabs plus lockdowns are a road to social deprivation and the consequent unprecedented civil unrest.

Pandemic policy has left us bankrupt, anxious, and controlled by a medical/pharmaceutical elite. Human life has been devalued. Despite the almost universal vaccination, we are still suffering from waves of Covid illness with no end in sight. There is no wayback machine that comes with biotechnology.

Call for an end to biotechnology experimentation now, before it is too late. Visit GLOBE.GLOBAL for more information.

Photo by Dollar Gill on Unsplash

The answer is really quite simple. A year ago, I wrote about constitutional change, thinking naively that it presented a road ahead to protect us from ill-considered and unfair mandates. A safeguard that would protect our natural human rights. I have changed my opinion completely. You will, too, if you consider what we know about the basic equations of life and how the pandemic has destructively interfered with them.

The second law of thermodynamics states that as energy is transferred or transformed, more and more of it is wasted. In simple terms, this implies that entropy or disorder is always increasing in the universe. Like a fire burning in your front room, it is gradually running out of fuel.

There is one exception to this: living systems. Living systems are swimming against the current; they are increasing in order, they are evolving. This area is the subject of nonequilibrium thermodynamics. The remarkable molecule that orchestrates this miracle is DNA. DNA is found in every living cell, managing the trillions of actions that maintain life.

If you uncoil each strand of DNA in a cell and place them end to end, they would be 2 metres long. This might sound deceptively manageable, but we have trillions of cells and therefore a lot of DNA. Each DNA molecule contains 204 billion atoms. Stretch out all your DNA, and the resulting strand would be 107 billion kilometres long—about the same as 150,000 round trips to the Moon.

DNA is so vital to life that it is highly protected. Our human body is designed so that both air and food enter only through the mouth. Food is then filtered by our complex digestive system whose biomolecular processes transform our natural food (which is also based on DNA), into usable nutrients and building blocks through a myriad of steps only completed over the course of a month. Every single atom in the physiology is replaced according to a fixed order every 5 to 10 years. Ensuring our life is constantly being refreshed.

It doesn’t stop there. Each cell is highly protected from degradation, pollution, and the effects of radiation. Firstly by the cell wall which is largely successful in preventing the entry of toxins, pathogens, and pollutants. Deep inside the cell is the nucleus which contains the DNA. This is also highly protected. In each of our 37 trillion cells, there are 70,000 DNA repair jobs that are executed each day, ensuring as far as possible that the structure of DNA is stable and protected from radiation induced mutation.

Life Already Has a Constitution—DNA

There is a grand conclusion here—life already has a constitution, a sort of Cosmic Constitution—our DNA. DNA contains the miracle set of intelligent instructions which ensure that the second law of thermodynamics—the law of universal decay—is not just circumvented, but actually reversed to become a law of evolution. The myriad of living things on earth are guided, protected, and promoted by DNA (I have recently written about evolution, genetics, and the pandemic at length and you can download the paper here).

DNA is not a small collection of ideas such that you might find in the 85,000 words of a typical book or even in the entire collections of large libraries, it contains both sequential instructions and cross referencing between its billions of integrated components. Each gene engages in many collaborative projects with other genes. DNA has also stored the memories of countless microbiological undertakings through millions of years of species evolution which have protected and promoted life on the planet. It really is the Cosmic Constitution of Life with a capital L.

Now Consider What We Are Currently Doing to Ourselves

We have been exposed to novel genetically engineered pathogens, designed through gain of function experiments to make people seriously ill. In response, we are bypassing the natural safeguards of digestion by injecting material directly into the body. This material contains microscopic lipid nanoparticles. Particles that are designed to breach the protective cell wall. It also contains instructions designed to alter the way DNA works and/or expresses itself. Once inside the cell, these are capable of transcribing themselves into our nuclear DNA, corrupting its structure.

Once DNA is corrupted, it loses its incredible ability to overcome the second law of thermodynamics. We become subject to the laws of decay, rapid decay. If you want to know why so many people are becoming ill and dying this is it in a nutshell.

This is not a flight of fancy. The second law of thermodynamics is one of the most highly verified laws known to physics. Similarly, Ilya Prigogine was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1977 for his contributions to nonequilibrium thermodynamics, particularly the theory of dissipative structures which characterise living systems.

Imagine with me for a moment how a few biotechnologists subject to the same human vagaries and frailties as everyone else—mistakes, greed, limited perception of consequences, emotional instability, pride, and so on—are redesigning DNA according to their immature ideas of what life is.

They have no understanding of where or how human consciousness, compassion, and harmony originated. Their ideas about immunity are very mechanical, tentative, and have often been in great error, yet they are going ahead and injecting almost the whole population of the world with experimental biotech concoctions and waiting to see what happens.

Well they are seeing it now—excess deaths on a scale never before seen outside of wartime—but apparently they can’t believe their eyes. So they are looking the other way. I suppose there was an expectation of reward, plaudits, and victory parades. Possibly disappointed but undeterred they are calling for yet more injections. Convinced that they must be right, they keep pressing ahead, editing the very heart of living processes.

The massive public relations onslaught of biotechnology has had its numbing effect. People are falling ill, unable to work, or going to hospital in numbers which are clogging health services. Still many are raising angry voices against those who are unvaccinated because they have been sold a story that they alone are to blame. No government agency is prepared to reveal just how many cancers, cardiac events, hospitalisations, and sudden deaths there are. No government will let slip that they have genetically vaccinated their people to the point that suddenly they might have become detached from the river of evolution and are now subject to universal laws of decay.

Biotechnology experimentation cannot be contained. The effects of genetic editing are highly mobile and can spread without limit, as we have seen during the pandemic. They are passed onto future generations and cannot be recalled.

There is only one sure way out of the pandemic—protect the Cosmic Constitution of life—DNA. Join the campaign for Global Legislation Outlawing Biotechnology Experimentation. Go to GLOBE.GLOBAL for more information.

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’.

Photo by Mathew MacQuarrie on Unsplash

As the published Covid science narrative evolves overseas, Professor Baker is doing his best to prop it up here with his own special brand of magic beans.

At this point in time, the research findings of harm from the Pfizer vaccine have become overwhelming, but Baker is sticking closely to the safe and effective fantasy.

Even the most timid amongst us, fearful of visiting the internet, might have noticed that the vaccine doesn’t actually work, but Baker, in a kid gloves interview with Sean Plunket of The Platform, reassured us all that the mRNA biotech vaccine was still protecting us from serious illness and death. Is this misleading us?

The incredibly pro-vaccine Washington Post varies from Baker. It has now finally stopped holding the line. It headlines with “It’s no longer a pandemic of the unvaccinated”. It reports that even the US CDC, with a lack of a centralised health system and with its penchant for figures that exaggerate vaccine effectiveness, are roughly estimating that 58% of Americans who died from Covid in August are vaccinated. So the vaccinated are dying of Covid contrary to the Baker doctrine. Unbelievably, like Baker, the Post thinks this means we need more vaccines???

The UK ONS, who, unlike the CDC, are considered to compile accurate figures which cover countrywide Covid stats, is painting a much bleaker picture.

In 2022 there have been 41,000 excess all-cause deaths since April 1st. No official statement has endorsed any cause, but the figures are telling. Mortality per 100,000 pop. has been lowest among the unvaccinated for every month in 2022 that ONS figures are currently available (see chart). The implication is obvious.

Raw figures released by the New Zealand Ministry of Health paint a picture of deaths that is consistent with the US and UK figures; the boosted are disproportionately affected by Covid deaths (see chart), but Baker has chosen to pass over these figures.

The basis for Baker’s omission of this raw data, is a mysterious and unexplained adjustment (???) that the Ministry of Health have applied to these figures since July. Baker and the Ministry of Health claim that the booster shots protect you from serious illness and death, but the actual basis of this assertion appears to be nothing other than the medical establishment believing thoroughly in Covid vaccination—it couldn’t be otherwise.

Baker also claims that the scientific evidence about Covid vaccination from leading journals investigating cohorts of millions of people is overwhelming. I agree it is, but not in the way he suggests. A recently published study in the Lancet of 30 million people has found that the elderly, the immunologically compromised, and those with comorbidities remain at risk of serious illness and death despite being boosted. This study terminates at 28 Feb 2022, thereby it avoids the truly terrifying vulnerability that appears in the all-cause UK death statistics from that date onwards, but the results reported by the Lancet are still very concerning.

The study shows that any small protective effect that Covid vaccination offers wear off rapidly over 9-10 weeks. Other studies in prestigious journals referenced in the paper show it then enters negative territory by four months. In other words, you rapidly end up more vulnerable to Covid infection than before, and incidentally, as the ONS figures strongly suggest, you are then likely to be more vulnerable to death from any cause. The conclusion invariably reached in MSM and among experts—that this shows we need more vaccination—has come to have a distinctly hollow ring about it. Are we now to be vaccinated every two months?

Because the authors of the huge Lancet study are actually responding to a pro-vaccine government committee, they have to nuance their advice and concerns saying for example:

“Our findings indicate a range of demographic and clinical factors associated with increased clinical risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes despite booster vaccination and raise questions regarding future approaches to enhance protection.”

At this stage, the authors admit, these questions remain unanswered. They suggest that more surveillance of data should be undertaken and a range of possible alternative treatments explored. They also suggest that modification of vaccines and other approaches are “unlikely to overcome immune suppression in the most vulnerable groups”.

The subtext of their guarded conclusions is obvious to the skilled reader used to pro-vaccine speak—the Covid vaccine landscape has changed and there are real worries surfacing. Not the least of these is the suspicion that the vaccine itself is compromising immunity and causally complicit in the record levels of excess deaths seen in highly vaccinated countries around the world including New Zealand.

We didn’t have hear any of this from Baker, he left us snug in a soft blanket of reassurance—It is all OK, don’t worry. In the Plunket interview, he was at pains to place great emphasis on the fact that he is an expert, while others like myself are laughable cherry pickers of facts. You decide. If you read my work regularly you will be aware that I reference my writing carefully to published studies.

Baker conceded that everything we know now is going to be proven wrong in the future. Thank you for that. He is hedging his bets. He is not alone. Politifact, one of the internet’s leading fact checkers (???) admits that “embalmers are finding strange clots in jabbed people”, but escapes any meaningful acknowledgement of concern that the vaccine may be causing heart attacks by suggesting that the clots must be due to Covid infection—no credible evidence for this is supplied.

Baker tries to pull the same trick, he suggests that the rash of sudden deaths among all ages is due to undiagnosed (???) Covid infection. In other words, people are catching Covid but they have no symptoms nor a positive test result and they suddenly drop dead because they have weak hearts. Do you believe that? I don’t. It is about as plausible as a suggestion that aliens are running our parliament.

We could laugh Baker off, if it wasn’t for the fact that tragically people are dying and the media including Sean Plunket are still not asking sufficiently probing questions or in most cases any questions. Nor are any debates being arranged. If you trust the media, think again, they are asleep at the wheel or complicit in a coverup. The government plus the loyal opposition meanwhile are sailing on regardless, boosted by a strong following wind. Any concession to the growing tide of concerns would at this stage condemn them to the political wilderness—a pandemic outcome they cannot and will not countenance against all evidence.