The UK Telegraph reports “Special education spending surges 70pc amid autism wave”. UK Department of Education figures show that the cost of supporting schoolchildren with special needs has jumped by more than two-thirds since lockdown from £6.9bn in 2018/19 to £12bn today. One in 100 UK primary schoolchildren are now entitled to formal council support as a result of autism, double the one in 200 before the pandemic.

This article is also available as a PDF to download, print, and share and as an audio version.

Crucially, experts say that the autism figures are likely to understate the true scale of the issue as waiting times for a diagnosis have continued to grow. Which means the figures are not likely to be an artefact of changed reporting procedures or public awareness of the problem as is suspected to be the case for adult ADHD for example. It appears due to a steep rise in symptomatic autistic behaviour.

The UK is not alone in facing these problems. A report released by our Education Review Office (ERO) in March found that New Zealand school students are among the worst-behaved kids in the OECD. Notably behaviour has worsened during 2022 and 2023. As a result, Kiwi teachers are struggling to manage disruptive behaviour.

Our article “The Long Read: Is This the End of the Materialist Paradigm?” published in July referenced an analysis from the New York Times entitled “The Youngest Pandemic Children Are Now in School, and Struggling”.

The post 2019 mental health impairment is not just limited to children. In September 2023 we published “The Long Read: Mental Health Issues are Multiplying. Why?”. This reported multiple statistics documenting recent deterioration in mental health profiles.

The scale and scope of the post pandemic individual mental health problems and classroom disruption are unprecedented. There has been a tendency to ascribe these to the effects of lockdowns on home and work environments. We believe this is a speculative stretch and possibly the result of a blinkered or biased outlook which lacks the backing of sufficiently convincing scientific data and analysis.

The rapid rise in autism rates since 2019 is indicative of deeper causal factors. Scientists have found rare gene changes, or mutations, as well as small common genetic variations in people with autism, implying a genetic component. A growing area of research focuses on interaction of genetic and environmental factors. For example, a mother’s exposure to harmful contaminants during pregnancy may trigger a genetic mutation leading to autism in her child.

The suggestion that vaccines may cause autism became a scientific battleground for two decades from the early 90’s. To date any association has been dismissed by mainstream science as flawed and a myth. Significant questions remain, but despite these, the door is closed. Pursuing further research in this field has become a career ending option.

Now it seems the controversy needs to be revisited. mRNA vaccines are not traditional vaccines in any sense of the term. They are actually intended to edit intracellular genetic functions. A study published in 2022 found “Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line”. In other words, mRNA vaccines are both long acting and have the potential to cause genetic mutation—a strongly suspected causal factor for autism.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a complex developmental condition involving persistent challenges with social communication, restricted interests and repetitive behaviour. While autism is considered a lifelong disorder, the degree of impairment in functioning because of these challenges varies between individuals with autism. In essence, autism involves an unbalanced outlook, a lack of ability to engage appropriately with the social and behavioural environment.

In our article “The New Genetics — Huge Deficiencies in Our Understanding Need Correcting” we asserted “The greatest absurdity in the science of genetics is the exclusion of consciousness from its study, along with the false assumption that you can edit DNA and its expressions without altering consciousness or identity.” We reported that human life starts with a single cell which multiplies eventually into around 37 trillion cells, but only one single unique identity. The integrity of our identity relies on the preservation of genetic uniformity among cells.

In May we published our thought provoking article “Can Biotechnology Control Human Behaviour?“. Research on transplant recipients demonstrates how memory and behaviour can be distorted by the presence of foreign DNA in the body. We concluded:

“It is just a short step now to realise that gene editing, including any sort of editing of the chain of genetic functions within cells, could more or less automatically change our behaviour and psychological profile. More importantly, since our knowledge of cellular genetics now appears to be very incomplete, cellular genetic editing, if carried out on a scale commensurate with organ size, can scramble our behaviour, thinking, and understanding.”

At GLOBE we have been gradually building up a framework for the life sciences that includes consciousness. We recognise that mRNA vaccination in some cases may have impaired the holistic outlook and empathy usual to human thought, precisely because it disrupts the holistic genetic functioning that is uniformly shared by our trillions of cells. In our article “The Long Read: What is a Human Biofield?”, we have expanded on this understanding and suggest that genetic effects are networked and can be shared among groups of people. We suggest that higher human functions rely on very specific genetic and cellular characteristics that could be disrupted by mRNA vaccination.

The autism surge evident in newly released UK government data is a canary in the coal mine moment. Although changes in genetic structure and function following mRNA vaccination are not germline effects shared by all cells, they can affect billions of cells and do so to a lesser or greater extent in different individual recipients. Therefore there is a potential partial fit between the effects of mRNA vaccines on genetic and immune functions and the known association between genetic mutation events and autism incidence.

Among others, autistic traits include:

• Finding it easier to talk ‘at’ people, rather than engaging in a conversation.
• Persisting with behaviour that is unreasonable in the wider social context.
• Becoming fixated on ideas or behaviours including repetitive rituals.
• Being blunt in your assessment of people and things.
• Becoming upset if something unusual happens or if people express ideas or require behaviours that clash with your own preferences.

This is not an exhaustive list. In fact a great many other traits are associated with autism. Moreover the intensity of symptoms varies across a spectrum. Very often autistic people are misunderstood and their abilities underestimated. They can excel in their chosen specialised career. Far from being emotionally deficient, a significant body of research shows that autistic people often have intact emotional (affective) empathy alongside reduced cognitive empathy.

However all of the above list of characteristics have become more evident in individual and social interactions during the pandemic, including a polarisation of views that sometimes cuts across prior social, cultural, political and familial boundaries. This is sometimes associated with a refusal to accept that others may have their own good reasons to adopt views distinctly different from one’s own.

We suggest there is a case to propose and investigate a novel post mRNA Covid vaccination autistic syndrome which shares many characteristics with classical autism symptoms, but which also might have distinct differences.

To what extent any symptoms might or might not be a result of Covid vaccination can only be decided through research. Research comparing the short and long term health outcomes of the vaccinated with the unvaccinated across a wide spectrum of physical and mental conditions is required. Unfortunately most governments have closed access to the sort of health data that will allow such assessments to take place. We can only ask why? This sort of persistent and unreasonable denial could in fact be characterised as an autism trait. Can a government become autistic? You tell me.

Many subscribers have requested an article specifically suitable for circulation to people in New Zealand who are beginning to question the official Covid narrative, but are still being bombarded by potentially misleading information. The following article has been written especially for this purpose, setting out the issues clearly and in historical order. It is sourced from official data and contains links with supplementary information. Please circulate widely to those feeling in need of answers.

This article is also available as a PDF to download, print, and/or share.

Newsroom is an independent news outlet which says it believes New Zealanders deserve exclusive, trustworthy, high quality independent local journalism. With this brief, we were astonished to read their article on Friday 6th September, entitled: The truth about New Zealand’s death rate that the Covid Commission will hear. It claimed that:

“Wild claims of excess deaths in the wake of the Covid vaccination campaign are at stark odds with the mathematical facts: New Zealand’s mortality rate is actually lower than expected.”

In other words, the article claims to have evidence that since the pandemic began no one has died from Covid infection or Covid vaccines who wouldn’t otherwise have died from other natural causes. The article was written by David Hood who is credited as an adviser for IT training and development at the University of Otago. Apparently, he is training us to believe that nothing extraordinary happened during the pandemic. Are they about to gaslight us again?

The article makes the outrageous claim that it is “demonstrably false” to say that New Zealand has had excess deaths in recent years. According to the article, people who claim that excess deaths have increased are not taking into account our rising total population and the fact that the population is ageing. The Newsroom piece is not a scientific article, it would not qualify for publication in a journal. It appears to be intended to influence public opinion. As the article dives into the statistics we quickly see that it appears to be employing a statistical sleight of hand that it is accusing others of using.

Age standardised adjustment of mortality data

The article tells us “New Zealand has seen big changes in ages, with 23 percent more living people aged 65-plus now than there were in 2017, as the children of the ‘£10 Pom’ migration era reach old age.” To the uninitiated, a 23% rise sounds huge, but in fact the figure is exaggerated and distorted by the author’s failure to take account of our rising population. In 2017 15% of the population were over 65, in 2023 16.6% of our population were over 65. That is a 10.5% rise over 6 years, not 23%.

The author correctly states that old people are more likely to die than young people, but the more than faint implication of the article was that somehow deaths of people over 65 don’t matter as much. In fact, statistics show the average kiwi should expect to live around 82 years. Below this age, your chances of dying decrease markedly. A 70 year old man in the USA for example has only a 2% chance of dying within 12 months.

The article suggests that if you take into account an ageing population, excess deaths disappear. Is this true? No, our article will explain why. So-called age standardisation of data is a complicated process. Current New Zealand population data ultimately references the census held in 2018. Every year there are hundreds of thousands people arriving or leaving New Zealand permanently with a range of ages. People die and are born, although continuously updated, gradually the data becomes less reliable.

In fact, broad adjustments based on large age ranges, such as the 60+ used in the graphics in the Newsroom article, actually mask the effect of the wide distribution of ages within any broad range. In New Zealand for example, the relative size of the most vulnerable 85+ years cohort with the highest death rate has remained unchanged since 2017. It has not increased. They made up 1.8% of the population then, and the exact same proportion in 2023. So is the author suggesting that the excess deaths are concentrated in the lower end of the 65+ age range? If he is, it is very concerning.

Due to the incidence of seasonal influenza, death rates vary slightly from year to year depending on the severity of the flu variant, but even so during the ten pre-pandemic years 2010 to 2019, New Zealand’s average rate of death was fairly consistent at 6.8 deaths per thousand population. During this time the 65+ cohort of the population rose by a significant 18%, but the death rate remained stable. It was 6.9 deaths per thousand in 2011 and 6.9 in 2019 for example. This is because survival rates for our biggest killers, cancer and heart disease, have been gradually improving which is exactly balancing out the effect of ageing on mortality. Therefore artificially subtracting deaths from mortality data based on minor and very gradual changes in age distribution, as the article suggests, is very problematic from a statistical point of view.

Excess deaths in New Zealand

So let’s look in detail at how the Hatchard Report has consistently and rigorously demonstrated that excess deaths in New Zealand during the pandemic are concerning. In 2020, New Zealand virtually closed its borders and quarantined the small number of arrivals. This continued until late 2021. Social distancing was encouraged and the health department tracked and traced the very small number of Covid cases. To all intents and purposes, New Zealand was Covid free. As a result, for the most part, we avoided the more deadly Alpha and Delta Covid variants. Something else happened, the closure of the borders meant that in 2020 and 2021 there were minimal cases of influenza type respiratory illness. In 2020 the mortality rate fell to just 6.4 deaths per thousand population, certainly the lowest for ten years, and probably the lowest ever. This was a very good outcome. There were 2000 fewer deaths in 2020 than would have been expected from the trend over the previous ten years. Well done New Zealand. We avoided the peak Covid deaths seen overseas.

In 2021 we continued to be Covid free up until the year was drawing to a close. We were also largely influenza free. In March the mRNA Covid vaccination rollout began and something strange happened. The Hatchard Report reprinted the relevant weekly statistics in a single chart as above.

The shaded blue area represents all-cause deaths. The black line flu incidence. The shaded grey area Covid deaths. And the red line Covid vaccines administered. You can see very clearly that all cause mortality rose and peaked in line with Covid vaccinations despite the fact that there was virtually no Covid and very little influenza incidence. It is hard to escape the notion that Covid vaccines may have been causing an increase in mortality.

So what were people dying of? In February 2022 we reviewed the St John’s Ambulance call out data for 2021 which shed light on what was going on.

There were over 13 thousand additional callouts for chest pain, breathing problems, stroke and cardiac issues when compared to 2020 and the rise was not due to Covid or influenza. This also corresponded with tens of thousands of reports of similar vaccine injuries made to Medsafe by the end of 2021. Figures which Medsafe itself admits were vastly under reported.

New Zealand’s data was unique because unlike overseas, where Covid incidence and mortality was conflating any possible measurement of the effect of the Covid vaccines, we had an increase in death rates prior to Covid infection and in the absence of influenza, but after the introduction of Covid vaccines.

In early 2021 the Pfizer mRNA Covid vaccine rollout began. It was administered to approximately 90% of the adult New Zealand population. This was a novel type of biotech vaccine. Its mechanism was completely different from previous vaccines. To assess the effect of such an intervention the correct statistical methods to use are:

• Assess the timeline of mortality rate and disease incidence before and after the intervention.
• Assess any difference between the longer term trend before and after the intervention.
• Assess any difference in mortality rates and disease incidence between those who were administered the intervention and those who were not.

With these definitive assessments you can judge if there is any evidence for a causal relationship between the jabs and mortality or disease rates.

If we take the Covid vaccine intervention to cover 2021, 2022, 2023 and the part 2024 for which we have mortality data, the average mortality rate is 7.1 per thousand population. That is 4.4% above the long term pre-pandemic 2010/2019 average of 6.8. In all, by the end 2024, the trends indicate there will be 6300 excess deaths adjusted for population rises. If you subtract the 2000 excess deaths deficit in 2020, that will leave 4,300 population adjusted excess deaths for the period 2020 to 2024. This is a far cry from the astounding suggestion in the Newsroom article that we have had zero excess deaths during this period.

So what were these 4,300 deaths caused by? So far there have been 2763 deaths where Covid-19 has been officially recorded as the cause of death. That leaves at least 1,500 excess deaths where Covid was not the official cause. We have taken the most conservative approach above that we can. However we note that excess deaths are still continuing in 2024 above the long term pre-pandemic trend. This is very concerning. It points to possible long term health effects of Covid mRNA vaccination. We also note that adverse effects of Covid vaccination are a possible cause of death among the 2763 official Covid death toll. Is there any evidence for that? Yes.

We published this figure in 2022 compiled from official data being released weekly by Health New Zealand. It shows that any protective effect of the mRNA Covid vaccine wears off rapidly leaving the recipient with an immune deficit. A fact widely recognised in the published scientific data, and referenced in our recent “Open Letter to Medical Professionals and Life Scientists“. By July 2022, 52% of the population had received an mRNA Covid booster vaccination but they accounted for 62% of Covid deaths. These figures and many others published in learned journals overseas support the notion that repeated Covid vaccination may eventually increase the risk of Covid infection, Covid vaccine adverse effects, and in some cases death.

Is Covid vaccination also making people sick?

We have discussed mortality figures, is there more to know?. In April 2023 we published leaked data from the Wellington Region showing that the number of heart attacks resulting in hospitalisation has increased by a massive 83%. Hospitalisation for myocarditis up by one third (33% increase). miscarrriage, stillbirths, and strokes all up by a quarter (25% increase). Acute kidney injury (AKI) up by 40%. Cancers were also beginning to increase.

These leaked figures square with frequent media reports of hospital ED rooms overwhelmed with unprecedented numbers of sick. They also square with the June 2024 Quarter Labour Market Statistics. Alarmingly, the working age population who are disabled rose by a massive 8.2% from June 23 to June 24. This underlines our excess deaths figures. People are also falling sick and unable to work in unprecedented numbers. During this period the New Zealand working age population rose by just 2.3%, so the year to June 2024 rise is not an artefact of population growth.

Are these massive rises in sickness due to Covid vaccination? Here we come to the crux of the information gap facing the public. It is a very simple matter to answer this question. Compare the health and mortality outcomes of the unvaccinated with the vaccinated which Health New Zealand tracks. Break the figures down by age, cause of death or disease type, and number of shots. Now we come to the dark part of our story. If Health New Zealand has already undertaken this analysis, they certainly haven’t released the figures. Moreover, a whistleblower who leaked some of the concerning data is being prosecuted. In fact, it has now been made specifically illegal to publish such data.

Worse, most of the data used to make our above charts is no longer being published by Health New Zealand and Stats New Zealand. We are being returned to an opaque form of government, more reminiscent of oppressive regimes than a democracy. I am sure your suspicions, like ours, have been alerted. As there are simple ways to settle the important questions of excess deaths, the extent and cause of the problem, why are the statistics being withheld? Especially when the issue is excess deaths—thousands of people dying early, before their time. Thousands of family tragedies.

We have all been misled

People discussing these issues openly have been gaslit. The Newsroom article for example attempts to label those asking questions as outsiders with weird ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are the ones talking common sense:

• We all know what a vaccine is supposed to do, it should prevent disease. It is obvious to everyone now—even repeated Covid mRNA vaccines do not prevent Covid infection.
• We also know that open government is a cornerstone of democracy, ours is anything but. It is hiding the concerning statistics.
• The government signed a secret agreement granting Pzifer immunity from prosecution if there were adverse effects of mRNA Covid vaccines. Why did it do this for a novel untried medical intervention?
• We know that looking for independent verification of results is an essential part of uncovering scientific truth. We were told not to go there. In order to save its own skin, our politicians and media have been describing this ordinary process of scientific investigation as a dangerous ‘rabbit hole’.
• Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, has admitted that the Biden administration pressured him into censoring Covid content. Similar censorship happened here in New Zealand. In 2021 we published a snapshot of Covid statistics on YouTube (owned by Google). This simply referenced New Zealand government sources. It was taken down by YouTube after 20,000 views within a matter of hours along with an advisory to us that Health New Zealand had required them to do so.
• Health New Zealand failed to acknowledge the extent of the myocarditis risk among children and younger adults, ignoring for example definitive prospective studies such this preprint prospective study from Thailand which found that 29% of adolescents suffered cardiac irregularities after their second jab.
• Health New Zealand failed to acknowledge that the three month long trials of Covid mRNA vaccines were poorly designed and gave no indication of the long term effects. Moreover, the trials assumed that adverse effects would be confined to a limited range of previously recognised effects of traditional vaccines, rather than the broad range, including cancers, heart disease, neurological and immune diseases predicted by a number of eminent researchers as likely additional outcomes of mRNA vaccination.
• Our General Medical Council censored and even deregistered doctors warning their patients about potential side effects of Covid vaccines.
• We now know that Health New Zealand secretly granted as many as 11,000 Covid vaccine exemptions to medical staff who knew enough about the risks to wish to avoid the jabs, but mostly refused exemptions for members of the public, even if they had medical conditions or a history that put them at risk of adverse effects of vaccination.
• The Labour Government funded the media, in a successful attempt to influence their Covid content to align with government directives.
• The Prime Minister’s Office funded a Disinformation Project with a specific remit to discredit anyone claiming a laboratory origin of Covid, mentioning herd immunity, or discussing the idea that some people might be dying ‘with Covid’, not ‘because’ of it.

Just remember, it is now clear and admitted by reputable mainstream media and government sources overseas that Covid escaped from a laboratory conducting gain of function research. So both Covid and Covid vaccines were the product of unregulated biotechnology. The vaccinated and unvaccinated have been pitted against one another by the media and the government in a cynical attempt to confuse the fundamental truth that our health has been damaged by biotechnology experimentation. This has prevented us all from taking common cause to call for open debate on biotechnology safety. New Zealand is almost alone among nations in continuing to maintain Covid vaccines are safe and effective. The article in Newsroom claims that the Covid Commission will hear the truth about excess deaths. I hope that they will.

Finally and crucially, why is our present National coalition government now proposing to deregulate biotechnology experimentation in the wake of the devastating pandemic death and sickness rates linked to biotechnology? This is incomprehensible and fraught with peril. It affects us all. We need to protect ourselves from this second wave of misinformation. The Hatchard Report has debunked the government biotech deregulation PR claims under the title “Fact Checking the Incredible Claims of Prime Minister Chris Luxon, Judith Collins and the New Zealand Biotech Lobby“. The implications for our food supply are explained in this article “Urgent: Government Plans To Remove Gene Food Labelling. We can also understand the hidden motivations and obvious drawbacks of biotech medicine by reading this article “The Government of the Bio-Technocrats“.

If we arm ourselves with the facts we won’t be fooled a second time.

Yuval Noah Harari, writing in his 2015 book “Homo Deus—A Brief History of Tomorrow*”, believed that mankind had already conquered famine, plague and war through technology and common sense. Therefore he wrote that we stand on the doorstep of a future of abundance, peace and even physical immortality. According to Hariri, we now understand that hunger, illness and conflict all have technological solutions, thereby we are able to manage them. We have consigned want, fear, violence and death to the history books, and no longer need to appeal to God when disaster strikes.

*This article contains amazon.com affiliate links, which means that IF you click on one of these links and buy something from Amazon, we MAY receive a small commission payment – at no extra cost to you.

But what if Harari was wrong about technology (and certainly about God)? Harari was relying on the increasing longevity in every country in the world (it almost doubled from about 40 to 80 years during the twentieth century), he was unaware that the USA was about to post its first ever decline, with most other developed countries following suit since 2020.

He was writing before the Covid pandemic, the conflicts in the Ukraine and the Middle East, the growing tensions in the far east and the massive polarisation and unrest within western democracies.

Harari was writing before the first wide scale use of nanotechnology in medicine. It was used to package Covid vaccines in order to evade the safeguards of the immune system and penetrate into the inner sanctum of the cell. The extreme dangers nanotechnology poses are only just beginning to surface as this Japanese paper entitled “Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study” shows.

Harari was writing before 5G cell phone networks were first rolled out in 2018 using electromagnetic frequencies in common use by our physiology.

Hariri was writing as unlabelled biosynthetic engineered compounds were just beginning to enter the food chain in vast numbers coming on top of the ever growing use of tens of thousands of untested chemical ingredients, additives, flavours and preservatives.

Harari was writing long after the containment of the SARS and Ebola outbreaks and the successful elimination of Smallpox, supposing that all such pathogens would be ultimately banished. He wasn’t to know that, even as he wrote, biotechnologists were busy weaponizing deadly pathogens in porous laboratories around the world through gain of function research.

Harari believed that nuclear war had become unthinkable. He was writing just before every nuclear nation in the world decided to ramp up production of atomic weapons.

Harari’s theme is familiar to anyone taking a sober look at technological futurists:—the golden age is always just around the corner, we have almost arrived, so hang in there and keep funding the technocrats.

Hariri’s faith in the future was built on his adoration for technology, especially medical technology, but insight into medical statistics was lacking in his research. A close look into the world of health statistics reveals that the world might be getting more unhealthy, not better.

Last week the NZ Herald led with an article “Healthcare crisis: Desperate patients queue from 6am at Ōtara clinic for doctor visits“. When these people finally get to see a doctor, they will eventually be sent home or admitted to hospital with a specific diagnosis and a recommended drug. Unfortunately, many will be joining an estimated 60% of the adult population now suffering from chronic illness.

The number of people with hypertension aged 30–79 years doubled between 1990 to 2019, from 648 million in 1990 to 1278 million in 2019, despite stable global age-standardised prevalence.

Annual new cancer cases in the USA increased by 36.3 % in between 2000 and 2021.

The number of people with diabetes in the world rose from 108 million in 1980 to 422 million in 2014. A massive rise of 290%

In 2000, around 14 million people died from cardiovascular diseases globally, while in 2019, that figure was almost 18 million, up by 29%.

Kidney disease is the fastest-growing noncommunicable disease in the U.S. It currently affects more than 1 in 7 (or 14%) of American adults. There were about 135,000 Americans newly diagnosed with kidney failure in 2021.

It is not just the incidence of these diseases that is increasing, mortality is also on the rise. A paper published last week entitled Increasing Mortality Rates in the US, but Not From COVID-19 reports:

“Mortality from neurologic diseases (notably Alzheimer disease) has been increasing for decades, as has mortality from diabetes, likely a result of the obesity epidemic. Among young and middle-aged adults, mortality from hypertensive diseases and kidney failure has been increasing for 2 decades and mortality from other forms of heart disease (eg, heart failure) has been increasing since 2012.”

The study correctly points out that many diseases are associated with the rapidly growing global epidemic of obesity. In 2022, 1 in 8 people in the world were living with obesity. Worldwide adult obesity has more than doubled since 1990, and adolescent obesity has quadrupled. In 2022, 2.5 billion adults (18 years and older) a whopping 40% of the population cohort were overweight. Of these, 890 million were living with obesity.

Therefore it was no surprise to read an article in the UK Daily Telegraph this week entitled “Ozempic hailed as ‘fountain of youth’“. If you read my blog regularly, you will be aware that weight loss drug sensation Ozempic is plagued with unacceptably high levels of serious adverse effects, but this hasn’t stopped the PR hype.

The Telegraph article reports “Ozempic could offer “the fountain of youth” and turn back the clock on a host of diseases, scientists have found. In an unprecedented development, 11 studies published in one day found that the new class of semaglutide medications have “far-reaching benefits” beyond what was ever imagined. The findings will put pressure on the NHS to roll the drugs out much more widely, like statins. The studies suggest millions of people, including those who are not overweight, could potentially benefit from the drugs to improve quality of life, possibly saving the health service much-needed funds.”

Wow, that is quite a lot to digest (if you will forgive the pun). Ozempic suppresses appetite and is currently used in the treatment of diabetes and obesity. The article reported that research on Semaglutide, the active ingredient in Ozempic, found other improvements in conditions including high blood pressure and cardiac and kidney disease, all of which are conditions exacerbated by obesity.

At this point, the article went into hyperdrive fantasising that semaglutide injections will reverse the ageing process by slowing cognitive decline and brain shrinkage, thereby preventing Alzheimer’s disease and benefiting Parkinsons. Dr Jeremy Samuel Faust, from Harvard Medical School, said the injections were so powerful they were “akin to a vaccine” which would only get stronger over time (sound familiar?).

In contrast to many articles sounding the alarm on Ozempic adverse effects, the Telegraph piece was entirely positive, it glowed with hope—the golden age is almost upon us, if only the government will agree to fund Ozempic injections for us all at $1550 per month.

You could tell the author was overwhelmed by the enthusiasm of the well funded scientists presenting the findings of the 11 papers at the European Society of Cardiology congress in London. No doubt Novo Nordisk, the patent holders of Ozempic, the most profitable drug in history, were rubbing their hands in glee.

The article was mainly based upon a three year trial of 8803 people aged 45 and over who were given weekly jabs which resulted in a 23% lower death rate from cardiovascular disease when compared to controls taking a placebo. The details of the trial results, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in November 2023 under the title “Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Obesity without Diabetes“, do not paint such a rosy sounding picture: “Adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation of the semaglutide injections occurred in 1461 patients (16.6%)”

So is the hype justified? It is important to realise that most of the claims in the Telegraph article are based on extrapolated hope, and crucially all of the claims must be weighed against the serious adverse effects of semaglutide drugs, especially the difficulties associated with long term use. There are also statistical reasons to question the hype.

Just consider, if you have diseases whose incidence is growing very rapidly, you can complete drug studies which show an improvement in outcomes which are still dwarfed by the rapid rise in incidence. Let’s explain how this works with an analogy. Suppose you have debt which has to be repaid at $1000 per month. You are getting into difficulty, so you go to a loan shark who offers to lend you $200 per month to help out. You don’t read the small print which reveals that the repayments to the loan shark will soon top $300 per month. In other words you are worse off.

In this analogy, the debt repayments are like the increasing incidence of a disease, the $200 a month loan is like a palliative pharmaceutical drug and the $300 a month required by the loan shark is like the adverse effects of the drug. A study might report a small benefit of a drug, but fail to take into account the increasing rate of incidence of the disease and the long term adverse effects on the drug. Despite this, the drug is hailed as a ‘breakthrough’, whereas it will eventually make the problem worse.

Obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, kidney disease, and heart disease are all conditions that are exacerbated by modern lifestyles. Changing these lifestyles is well known to be the truly effective way to control their incidence without any downside. But in the world of pharmaceutical hegemony, doctors have given up on changing lifestyles, gaslighting the victims as weak-willed, putting any attempt to change habits into the too hard basket.

Behind this is something else going on, the pernicious design, production and marketing of foods that are known to damage health by giant corporations. These include foods loaded with sugars, unhealthy fats, synthetic flavours, additives, processing agents and preservatives. Very often they are labelled as ‘natural’ by the food manufacturers in a cynical attempt to create a false aura of healthy choices for consumers. The close relationships between regulators and producers ensure that this deadly paradigm is never seriously challenged.

It appears from the frightening health statistics we reported above that immune systems are collapsing under the weight of unhealthy food, lifestyles and pollution. The matter has reached a tipping point with the introduction since 2015 of biotechnologies—the last straw that is breaking the camel’s back. The addition of one more biotech medicine is not going to solve the problem, it is simply driving the growing problem over the edge.

Modern medicine is offering diagnoses of specific diseases but overlooking the whole system collapse of health that is behind the epidemic of sickness sweeping the world. When the immune system starts to fail us, the most significant vulnerability in our personal health profile fails first. Identifying that is a useful step, but failing to address the systemic immune failure behind the runaway proliferation of specific disease types is a death sentence.

To tackle the challenge to our immune system, a holistic approach is required. This will involve education, regulation, research and fully supportive mentoring involving diet, safe food standards, ingredients, food preparation, exercise, and removal of environmental pollution. As we have reported at length in many articles, there are already traditional sophisticated preventive health systems like Ayurveda and Chinese medicine whose principles can be easily incorporated into medical education programmes. They promote balance and restore intelligence to physiology. Research shows that most effective among their multi-pronged strategies are systems of meditation which promote the holistic experience of healing consciousness.

Rather than promoting proven natural approaches to improve health outcomes, our government is clinging to the futurist’s fantasies. They are about to deregulate biotechnology. This will further pollute our food and our environment, not just with chemical toxins, but with biotoxins—mutated genetic structures which can spread without limit and never be recalled. Our right to choose our diet and way of life is under threat. The International Genetic Charter has simple terms spelt out in a few sentences containing the safeguards necessary to protect human life from genetic degradation. Please take a couple of minutes to sign up to The International Genetic Charter here. Our aim is to use the charter to campaign for amendments strengthening and updating the Bill of Rights.

An increasing number of concerning papers about Covid-19 mRNA vaccine safety are being published this year giving us some perspective on the long term sequelae.

Two papers published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research entitled COVID-19 Modified mRNA “Vaccines”: Lessons Learned from Clinical Trials, Mass Vaccination, and the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex, Part 1 and Part 2 examine the evidence of long term harm, deficiencies in the original trial data, and the unethical practices used to promote their use. Part 1 of the paper reports:

“Rigorous re-analyses of trial data and post-marketing surveillance studies indicate a more substantial degree of modmRNA-related harms than was initially reported. Confidential Pfizer documents had revealed 1.6 million adverse events by August 2022. A third were serious injuries to cardiovascular, neurological, thrombotic, immunological, and reproductive systems, along with an alarming increase in cancers. Moreover, well-designed studies have shown that repeated modmRNA injections cause immune dysfunction, thereby potentially contributing to heightened susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infections and increased risks of COVID-19.”

Part 2 of the paper examines the main structural and functional aspects of modified mRNA injectables, which it explains are not classical antigen-based vaccines but instead prodrugs informed by gene therapy technology. It reports:

“The COVID-19 modmRNA injectable products introduce a unique set of biological challenges to the human body with the potential to induce an extensive range of adverse, crippling, and life-threatening effects…This is in part due to differences in spike protein production output, which depends on variability in cell metabolism and transfection efficiency….Valid concerns are raised regarding injection of infants and younger age groups for whom COVID-19 poses only minimal risks….We then categorize the principal adverse events associated with the modmRNA products with a brief systems-based synopsis of each of the six domains of potential harms: (1) cardiovascular, (2) neurological, (3) hematologic; (4) immunological, (5) oncological, and (6) reproductive.”

The paper also addresses the process-related genetic impurities inherent in mass production of these products, and the potential risks posed by these contaminants. It concludes by reiterating the urgency of imposing a global moratorium on the modmRNA-LNP-based platform.

Particular findings that contradict the accepted COVID narrative include the discovery that the increased incidence of myocarditis events is associated with COVID-19 vaccination but not with COVID-19 infection. Further to this, a paper published in the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal on July 30 entitled “Delayed Induction of Noninflammatory SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Specific IgG4 Antibodies Detected 1 Year After BNT162b2 Vaccination in Children” found similar effects to those already noted among adults. It reports:

“S1-specific and receptor-binding domain–specific IgG4 levels increase significantly 1 year after the second BNT162b2 vaccination in children 5-11 years of age. Understanding mRNA vaccine–specific IgG4 responses in all age groups is crucial as more mRNA vaccines will reach licensure in the coming years.”

To translate the significance of this: the exact long term effects of increased IgG4 switching are unknown but suspected by many authorities to be associated with vaccine induced immune deficiency. The increased concentrations may pose risks of long term organ damage. In other words, there are long term unquantified risks of mRNA vaccination for children who face only very minor risks from Covid infection. If you are a parent, you will be fully aware that no parent would want to expose their child to such unnecessary long term health risks.

The papers we cite above are representative, we have reported on many others over the last few months. They are raising increased concerns about the long term effects of mRNA vaccine programs. There are a large number of mRNA vaccine types under development around the world, more than 100 at last count. Should we be concerned and if so what action should be taken?

The concerns centre around the introduction of novel medical biotechnologies in the absence of long term safety testing. These had been presumed safe on the basis of largely theoretical considerations of immune functioning and very limited flawed and rushed testing lasting no more than a few months. In the light of new research and safety concerns, we need to review what we know about immune functions.

The immune system encompasses a sprawling range of chemistry distributed throughout the body—antibodies, lymphocytes, cytokines, chemokines, histamine, neutrophils, B-cells, T-cells, NK cells, macrophages, phagocytes, granulocytes, basophils, interferons, stem cells and many more. It is understood that we have more than 300 different types of immune cells at work within us. The complication is so baffling that an overview of the whole immune system is well nigh impossible. Some researchers spend a lifetime specialising in just one single aspect of our immune response.

There is however one very important overarching principle. The immune system is looking to eliminate material and/or functions that shouldn’t be present in the human body and it does so automatically. We do not directly control our immune system, it controls us. Moreover everyone’s immune system has features that are unique to that individual.

The immune system not only has to respond to germs like viruses, it also has to deal with toxins, drugs, cancers, bacteria, foreign objects, foreign DNA, inflammation, strains, wounds, genetic damage from cosmic rays for example and other mutative sources, and even mental imbalance. To maintain health, the immune system coordinates trillions upon trillions of actions every day distributed throughout every part of the body, but it does so with one intent—to preserve the specific cellular genetic integrity and identity of the individual.

Thus there are two sides to the immune system. On the one hand, a single holistic intent which guides the whole process to protect physiological design and functionality and on the other a myriad of specific actions to eliminate pathogens and correct imbalance. Whole and parts.

It should be clear that there is a paramount need to protect the holistic intent of the immune system. This is centred in the cell. We have more or less 37 trillion cells in the body which contain identical DNA, with the sole exception of red blood cells which have no DNA component. Cells form the managing and manufacturing hub of the immune system producing all the components used in the countless specific immune responses whilst also participating in a coordinated approach to their application. It is apparent that cells are connected together into a single command and control system.

From this we can see that the immune system operates at the interface between us—a sentient being with choices—and the automatic functioning of the laws of physiology. The immune system ensures that we retain our own individual design and it does so by connecting us with the automatic operation of the laws of nature and physiology which are largely beyond our control. We comprise a whole uni-verse. We have a single identity and associated control system, itself automatically protected by the functional diversity of the immune system.

This brings us to mRNA vaccines. Each injection crosses the cell membrane of billions of cells and repurposes their activity to produce pathogenic spike proteins, thereby disrupting the intent and continuity of the automated system of immune responses. In simple terms, you can imagine the immune confusion this causes. It goes to the heart of the cellular control of immune responses. Does the immune system start to regard the product of the injected cells as foreign foe or helpful friend?

The switch to IgG4 antibodies which occurs over a period of months subsequent to Covid mRNA vaccination suggests that in many cases with repeated injections the immune system decides to tolerate the spike protein as friend, initiating the observed potentially disastrous increased rates of short and long term consequences—neurological damage, cancers, heart disease, etc reported in the studies cited above.

It would be a mistake to assume that the culprit here is solely the COVID spike protein; in actuality, it is also a matter of approach. There are good grounds to suspect that mRNA technology will inherently subvert immune processes, whatever disease it seeks to mitigate.

You will no doubt be aware that these concerns are not isolated. They have been publicly voiced by a small but significant number of eminent scientists and medical professionals. You will also be aware that many of these people have suffered setbacks in their professional standing and position as a result of speaking out their concerns.

Thousands of medical professionals in New Zealand were granted Covid vaccine exemptions by the government, presumably because they believed the vaccines posed unquantified risks or because they thought the risks of Covid infection were exaggerated. However, very very few of these spoke up publicly. Was this ethical? Did their silence embolden the government to introduce universal Covid vaccine mandates which exposed the public to serious health risks?

Clearly from the beginning there were medical imperatives to vaccinate. Media reports of high Covid death rates and reassurances of vaccine safety and efficacy bombarded the eyes and ears of everyone. We now know many of these were exaggerated or incorrect. There was a lack of specialist knowledge about the known risks of biotechnology within the medical profession. But today the position has changed. There is more than enough evidence to support a questioning perspective and a precautionary approach. Speaking out no longer entails professional suicide. In contrast, keeping silent has become an untenable unethical position.

Very early in 2021, I corresponded with a number of top molecular biologists including some advising G7 governments. At the time, although aware of risks, they framed Covid vaccination as a matter of personal choice despite not wishing to participate themselves. Whatever the reasons for taking this ambiguous position early on in the pandemic, recently published research indicates that such a position is no longer in any way morally defensible. It is time to speak out freely and correct public misperceptions about mRNA vaccine safety and efficacy.

As a medical professional or life sciences researcher you will be fully aware that the concerns we have raised above are very serious indeed, they involve human health and life. In 2021 Covid vaccine mandates virtually excluded any right of choice about vaccine safety and overrode the legal protections afforded by the NZ Bill of Rights concerning medical experimentation. The growth of biotechnology experimentation and the risks it poses suggest our Bill of Rights is in need of both updating and stronger clauses to ensure it is enforceable. These concerns speak to a compelling need for the International Genetic Charter. Its simple terms spell out in a few sentences the safeguards necessary to protect human life from genetic degradation driven by government ignorance, corporate greed and academic hubris. Please take a couple of minutes to sign up to The International Genetic Charter here.