Where and how are decisions being taken about prevention and treatment options for Covid 19?

In 2014 a new international regulatory body was convened.

The International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities—ICMRA—comprises the Heads of the regulatory authorities of countries around the world, including the New Zealand regulator Medsafe, with the World Health Organisation (WHO) as an observer.

ICMRA does not have the sanction of any governments, it is a bureaucratic alliance of medical regulators who enjoy close relationships with the global pharmaceutical industry.

It operates a shared database among all its members which it uses to harmonise and control medical choices amongst countries ensuring that all governments will receive the same advice from their regulatory bodies. It aims to control use of all human medicine including the new genetic biologic medicines and vaccines.

The ICMRA website states its strategic aims:

Regulatory convergence, alignment, and standards development of all human medicine, which will lead to harmonisation of global regulations.

Regulatory cooperation, information- and work-sharing allowing controls on products in any country to be rapidly globalised.

It further states:

During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities (ICMRA) is acting as a forum to support strategic coordination and international cooperation among global medicine regulatory authorities.

The aim of these activities is to expedite and streamline the development, authorisation, and availability of COVID-19 treatments and vaccines worldwide.

ICMRA members from around the world have jointly developed a statement to answer questions and reassure people about the oversight of COVID-19 vaccines.

Despite their emergency approval before safety tests have been completed, this statement explains vaccines undergo robust scientific evaluation to determine their safety, efficacy, and quality.

Through a single body, powerful commercial interests are able to work behind the scenes to hijack and harmonise the global approach to medical regulation in every country.

They are able to control the information available to governments and limit the public message.

So when you hear from the government that Medsafe (or the equivalent regulator in your country) has approved their policies as best practice, you now know that information came to the regulator via their connection an extra-governmental body located in cloud space, subject to commercial influence, that is not accountable to anyone.

Anti vaxxer is a misleading label that is leading to ugly comments, resentment, sackings, and exclusion.

I’ve had vaccines over the years. Of course my wife’s sister died within 24 hours after having a polio vaccine, but then my mother had polio and suffered discomfort until her passing at 95.

So I have two minds.

My concern about Covid vaccines stems from another area.

We are at a medical crossroads, which way will we go?—individual voices do matter.

Traditional vaccines involve injecting a pathogen that has been disabled. The intact immune system learns to recognise it and develops resistance according to its own system.

Bio-engineered vaccines are an attempt to intervene the other way around.

They aim to train the immune system to work differently. They do this by stealing into cells and inserting a set of instructions designed by a human.

My general conclusion—traditional vaccines disable the pathogen, biotech vaccines alter (disable/bypass?) the immune system.

Which Path Would You Trust?

From my life experiences and my scientific study, I have come to realise that Nature is always a holistic system.

It has a presence in every cell and its activity is globally coordinated within the physiology.

The immune system works holistically and specifically at the same time. In fact, that is how Nature designs.

It constantly balances the individual and the social interest, it balances part and whole.

How does it do that? It works from Unity.

Advanced physics reveals the non abelian character of the most fundamental physical laws, they create from within themselves and when they do that, balance is sustained at every time and distance scale.

We Know this From Our Own Consciousness

We are fundamentally a unified whole, I am a person, a wholeness and that finds expression at every level of the physiology—a living presence in every cell.

Why would we want to begin to tinker with that?

Would I presume to force someone to my views?

No.

Would I fight my corner?

Yes.

IMO vaccine mandates are a step into a vaguely discerned and risky territory—a potential medical dystopia.

The short-term risks are becoming more evident as adverse effect reports roll in, the long-term risks are unknowable, but eminent scientists have predicted some with cogent and detailed explanations.

Such debates are essential when it comes to public mandates, their absence in main stream media is concerning.

How do we unite against Covid 19?

Worried about vaccine hesitancy?

What should the government do to improve health outcomes?

If you are worried that unvaccinated people will expose you to ill health, rest easy. The vaccine does not actually stop transmission through the general population.

Unfortunately, the widely publicised initial promise of the Pfizer vaccine (exclusively used in NZ) to virtually eradicate Covid has proved to be unfounded.

Yes, it will reduce the severity of the disease, but research shows its protective effects drop off quite quickly.

The single most important factor affecting covid outcomes is general health.

Overwhelmingly, comorbidities affect the severity of the disease progression. These include (in no particular order)

• uncontrolled hypertension
• obesity
• diabetes
• alcohol use
• weakened immune system
• certain medications (of which there are many)
• excessive fatigue
• shift work
• heart conditions
• liver and kidney conditions
• asthma
• smoking
• gender
• ethnicity
• advanced age
• poverty and crowded living conditions
• cancer
• cystic fibrosis
• sickle cell anaemia
• pregnancy
• dementia
• stress
• and substance abuse.

Now is a great time to improve your health habits.

A few of the above causes of covid severity are under the control of the individual.

If it affects you, give up smoking, cut down on alcohol use, increase exercise, rest more, drink more fluids, and eat a more balanced diet including more whole grains, less ultra-processed food, and five portions of fresh fruit and vegetables a day.

The Government Too Can and Should Help You

They can abolish GST on fresh fruit and vegetables, introduce a tax on excess sugar and hard fats, and offer educational programmes such as those pioneered by Jamie Oliver in schools.

Why are some people hesitant about taking the vaccine?

Historically vaccines have been very safe.

This is because they went through trials and assessments over many years before being authorized.

Covid vaccines have been granted emergency authorisation only, they have not been subjected to extended trials and analysis of outcomes.

Because of the general historical assumption of safety, reporting of vaccine adverse reactions is not mandatory.

As a result, Covid vaccine adverse reactions are greatly unreported.

There are persistent reports of vaccine adverse reactions.

For example, there were over 34,000 reports registered on Jacinda Ardern’s FB page.

Recently a number of countries have back tracked on mandatory vaccinations for people under thirty due to safety concerns.

The gap in our safety data can be easily filled if the government were to update the vaccine adverse reaction reporting procedure to make it mandatory and also undertake analysis of the data to determine if the pattern of reported reactions diverges from the known health statistics of the general population.

This normal check of vaccine safety is currently missing in NZ and in most countries.

Write to your MP and ask the government to do more to encourage the general health of the population, keep the public fully informed, and insist on an updated vaccine safety procedure.

Full information and open discussion of the science go a long way to reducing fears and alleviating stress.

Thank you for sharing this post widely.

Open Letter To: Jacinda Ardern

Varying Methodologies to Assess Relative Risks have Distorted the Covid Debate, Tended to Misinform the Public, and Opened the Door to Mistakes in Public Health Policy.

Dear Jacinda

I want to thank you for the great compassion and clarity you have exhibited during your tenure as Prime Minister.

Your promotion of science and scientists in alliance with government has been inspiring. Your capacity to communicate ideas is of the highest order. Your patience is exemplary.

As a scientist who has worked with statistical analysis of social data including time series analysis and panel regression analysis I am well aware that to draw useful conclusions methodologies and data collection criteria have to be at foundation consistent.

I clearly understand that Covid poses a unique challenge to immediate and long term health.

I also realise that our emergency health facilities here in New Zealand will be inadequate to provide services should Covid become widespread in the community.

I support all efforts to prevent this happening including effective vaccination.

Recently I have become puzzled by persistent personal reports of vaccine harm circulating in the public domain that are not reflected in the government reports of adverse reactions to the vaccine.

I have reflected upon this, and communicated with friends and scientists here and overseas.

As a result I am beginning to get a clear picture of a distinct divergence of methodologies which is distorting the presentation of information.

Firstly, overseas there has been a general tendency in countries where there is an adequate reporting system in place, to certify deaths within one month of being actively ill with Covid, as being due solely to Covid.

This has occurred even though it is clear that comorbidities are determinants of the risk of developing serious Covid.

These comorbidities include (in no particular order)

• uncontrolled hypertension
• obesity
• diabetes
• weakened immune system
• certain medications (of which there are many)
• excessive fatigue
• shift work
• heart conditions
• liver and kidney conditions
• asthma
• smoking
• gender
• ethnicity
• advanced age
• poverty and crowded living conditions
• cancer
• cystic fibrosis
• sickle cell anaemia
• pregnancy
• dementia
• and substance abuse.

The policy of recording Covid on the death certificate irrespective of the comorbidities can be consistently applied and has its own logic.

However the method of recording adverse effects of Covid vaccines is applied distinctly differently and in an opposite way.

When a vaccine adverse effect is reported, the policy is to search for possible confounding morbidities, if one can be found then it is judged that the vaccine is not responsible.

It is also not a policy to examine all deaths and adverse events for a whole month after vaccination, thus in addition many possible adverse effects are being omitted.

It is well known that vaccines including Covid vaccines are vectors (or triggers) which can and do exacerbate a large number of co-morbidities.

Thus, taking a specific example, Covid vaccines are known to be associated with thrombosis, but this association is dismissed as causative because it predominantly occurs among people who already are known to be at risk of stroke.

For example, a small number of people taking the contraceptive pill are known to be at risk of thrombosis.

Should such a person die after receiving the vaccination as happened recently in New Zealand, the cause of death is ascribed to the contraceptive pill. This is an excessively conservative and misleading approach.

Since the reporting methodologies of Covid severity and death versus vaccination adverse effects are divergent, conclusions drawn from these two sets of data are unsound.

The distortion these two differing methodologies produce turns out to be significant in terms of public policy.

Apples are being compared to oranges.

Whilst Covid deaths appear inflated, vaccine adverse effects are greatly reduced to the extent that they appear to be virtually non-existent.

This is not the case.

As you are aware from your recent post on your Facebook page about vaccine side effects, which garnered 33,000 comments, vaccine side effects are highly unreported by the government agency but are not going unnoticed by a significant cohort of the public.

What are the principle effects of this and other known facts on public policy?

1. Members of the public who have significant comorbidities likely to be triggered by the Covid vaccine are not being informed of the potential risks, quite the reverse.

They are being encouraged and even pressured to take the vaccine with the impression that it is scientifically proven to be harmless.

Thus they are being denied informed consent, and should they suffer adverse effects denied redress or acknowledgement.

The imposition of vaccine mandates in certain professions confounds this further.

The present discussion of possible vaccine passports will also do so.

2. The overriding importance of tackling comorbidities is masked—prior ill health is actually the main cause of death from Covid.

Thus government policy is not doing enough to favour healthy diets and lifestyles.

It could be doing more than it is, such as abolishing GST on fresh fruit and vegetables, imposing a sugar tax, introducing closer assessment, information, and control of additives, ultra processed foods, and known harmful pesticides, as well as maintaining clean air (including reducing off gassing in building materials and household goods).

In this regard a huge opportunity is going missing. Approximately 75% of people recover from Covid without suffering serious illness or long term effects.

Where is the funding for research to be done to determine what it is about their lifestyle, diet, environment, etc., which is supporting their health?

3. The vaccination of minors is a scandalous side effect of this misinformation.

Research is yet incomplete, but an initial indication from the USA is that the Covid vaccine is four times more dangerous for males under 18 than Covid itself.

Moreover other research shows that the natural immune protection developed after recovery from Covid is 13 times more powerful that the temporary protection offered by the vaccine.

Since the vaccine does not stem transmission of Covid, the purpose of vaccinating 12-17-year-olds (not to speak of 5-12-year-olds) is obscure and risky. It flies in the face of your caring stance.

4. It is not being publicised that the vaccine has been approved on an emergency basis.

Its long term effects, which would normally be assessed before general use, have yet to be researched.

Thus youth in particular and the whole population in general are be exposed to some unquantified risks.

How did it come about that you have been advised that the policies being followed are soundly based on science, whereas there is a fundamental methodological flaw being applied?

The answer lies in historical policies which in their day might have been useful or expedient, and in the fragmentation, inconsistency in thinking, and lack of alertness among the busy scientific and health professionals formulating advice.

Also in a certain willingness to accept at face value the consistency of data and conclusions sourced from different bodies, countries, and commercial interests.

Vaccine developers and manufacturers are commercial bodies.

At the heart of their endeavour is not just a desire to benefit health but also a push to secure profits in a highly competitive market.

Over 117 vaccines have or are being developed worldwide.

The failure to address statistically and publicly the interactions of vaccines with comorbidities is not just a matter of history but also a matter of marketing.

Despite the fact that vaccine companies have been granted immunity from prosecution, they are still sensitive to public acceptance.

Covid is new disease that emerged rapidly and spread globally.

Whilst Covid is very obviously greatly affected by comorbidities, vaccine side effect assessments have continued to follow protocols established for illnesses where comorbidities were of less importance.

This needs to be urgently corrected.

I trust that you will continue to take account of the science and be bold in adjusting your message accordingly.

At present an erroneous impression might have been created that vaccinated individuals can be allowed free movement without downside, whilst the vaccine hesitant are blameworthy.

On a positive note, it appears that new treatments for Covid are emerging.

These are promising to lessen the impact and mortality rate of the disease. If these prove safe, your policy of elimination will be vindicated.

In this light, extension of elimination strategies may prove within a short time frame to result in a long term benefit.

As you know, vaccination alone is proving insufficient to control the disease around the world, even in developed countries.

Therefore it is unlikely to do so here.

New treatments may hold one answer. No doubt your government is closely monitoring these and proposing to adopt them.

If there is one clear lesson of the pandemic it is this:—maintenance of personal health through access to diet, exercise, cleanliness, and adequate rest is still the most vital determinant of public health and should be the priority of government health policy.

With best wishes

Guy Hatchard PhD