The extraordinary New Zealand data of chest pain and cardiac incidence among the under forties, which has increased tenfold and remains high right up to the present, has provoked many questions and comments to our email inbox. Ranging from ‘how could the authorities let this happen’ to the ridiculous ‘the OIA doesn’t exist’ and everything in between. Making sense of the scale of the disaster is hard, and facing up to the failure and duplicity of those charged with protecting our health is even more perplexing.

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

The OIA data for chest pain and cardiac events is not an isolated statistic. Medsafe have just released the results of a follow up survey of 298 NZ patients who received a clinical diagnosis of mRNA vaccine induced myopericarditis at least 90 days prior to filling in the survey. This survey was conducted two years ago. Inexplicably, Medsafe have waited until now to release the results. Contrary to earlier advice given to people experiencing symptoms of myocarditis that the final outcome would be mild and self-limiting, the survey revealed persistent serious problems beyond 90 days which had not been resolved.

“The median age was 36.5 years. 62% were male…. Chest pain was the most frequently reported physical symptom, experienced by 287 (96.3%) participants, followed by fatigue (256; 85.9%), shortness of breath (251; 84.2%), palpitations (234; 78.5%), and dizziness (189; 63.4%).. Twenty-two (7.4%) participants reported fainting.”

Representative survey responses to a range of open-ended questions about work, family life, treatment, follow up, etc included the following:

“Tried to exercise again and pericarditis symptoms returned.”

“Chest pain is extreme… not being able to walk without a cane.”

“This experience has caused anxiety and depression.”

“Before I was diagnosed, I was a full-time worker and into [sporting activity], since I got it, I can’t work at all or do any exercise.”

“Not being able to take care of my children is just awful. I can’t even kick a ball with my sons anymore.”

“I was initially told a number of times in ED that I was having anxiety attacks. I felt like no one was listening to me which made it even harder.”

“Was anxious about having the booster and I was fobbed off. I am not an ‘anti-vaxxer’. Doctors need to listen and be more empathetic.”

“Disappointed with lack of after care. Absolutely no specialist follow-up. Very disappointing.”

“Utter frustration that I had to go privately to get any help. Was told it would take one year to get any cardiac test. I would still be waiting for a diagnosis. I had to go privately.”

“To hear… myopericarditis repeatedly being reported as a mild consequence of vaccination was a huge insult and should immediately stop. This is not a mild sequela for many. This is a profound life changing and devastating event.”

“ACC – although accepting my vaccine injury treatment injury claim – decided seven days was sufficient time to recover [from it]… it took… nearly 8 months after the claim, for full cover to be approved.”

The Key Learnings section of the report admits there were deficiencies in:

• The vaccine information given to the public.
• Reporting systems for adverse reactions.
• Knowledge about possible adverse reactions.
• Keeping up to date with the implications of clinical publishing

The net effect was to create a deficient clinical and informational response to the tens of thousands of individuals reporting to GPs and emergency departments with chest pain. As a result, myopericarditis has been greatly under diagnosed or a diagnosis and clinical response has been delayed, even in some cases for years.

This is still continuing. The New Zealand Herald leads this morning with an article “Auckland man waited in Middlemore Hospital A&E in seven-hour ordeal”. A 39 year old man reported with chest pains. He was triaged and x-rayed within 35 minutes, but then waited 7 hours to see a doctor. During this time, he sat and sometimes had to stand along with hundreds of patients in the waiting room. He witnessed people sleeping on the floor, others walking out with medical tubes attached to their arm and a bleeding pregnant woman who sat on a hard chair for five hours before being seen.

The article doesn’t inform the public that the man was just one out of well over 30,000 individuals who will report to Accident and Emergency with chest pains this year, compared to just 2,000 pre-pandemic. It doesn’t tell us whether this was his first visit. It doesn’t tell us what the outcome was, whether he was referred to a cardiologist with a wait time of over a year. In other words, it leaves the public poorly informed. Despite the official data that has just come to light, it fails to correct the misleading information about vaccine-induced myopericarditis and chest pain incidence that the paper has been dutifully relaying to the public at the behest of the government and the health service for the last few years.

It doesn’t tell the public that if the man eventually secures an appointment to see a cardiologist, he will probably be asked if he is COVID-19 vaccinated and then confidentially and quietly advised to never have another shot. In contrast, while he is waiting for the appointment, he might receive numerous messages from the free-spending PR department of Health New Zealand via TV or text advising him to get another mRNA COVID-19 booster.

All because, as the Medsafe report concludes, Health New Zealand and the government are suffering from a clinical information deficit that they have failed to correct, along with an irrational faith in a so-called vaccine that doesn’t prevent disease, but rather causes it.

I don’t want to sound too harsh, but now we are aware of the astounding figures Health New Zealand has been sitting on and hiding from the public for the last few years, we have to ask serious questions about the probity of the management. They are supposed to protect and promote public health. Health New Zealand has become a medical system out of sync with reality along with a staff stretched beyond elastic limits. In other words, its left hand doesn’t know what its injured right hand is doing.

In the comments section of the Medsafe report, there were people who said they felt isolated and too socially embarrassed to even speak to their GP in case they were labelled as an anti-vaxxer and became a complete social pariah. It is easy to forget how much effort and money the government pouted into labelling the unvaccinated. They became antisocial, extremist and anti-science. They were accused of seeking to undermine democracy and overthrow the government. The government funded documentary Web of Chaos aired twice on prime time TV and remains On Demand. It complained about so-called disinformation over images of nuclear bombs exploding and Hitler making speeches.

We now know that current Health Minister Shane Reti’s plans to fix Health New Zealand by targeting reduced wait times and Science and Technology Minister Judith Collins plans to deregulate biotechnology experimentation and do away with GM food labelling, are straight out of Alice in Wonderland. Those asking questions about mRNA vaccine safety, mandates and died suddenly were right all along. The longer a public mea culpa and a stop to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccination rollout is delayed, the further Health New Zealand, the media and the government are falling down their own rabbit hole which poses a very serious danger to public health and stability.

Vaccine injury and the serious long term adverse health prospects

Today, we report two new sources of alarming information about COVID-19 vaccine injury. One from Health New Zealand data and the other from the New Zealand health insurance industry. We ask how the government could have either missed these or deliberately ignored them. We then go on to discuss network theory and physiology. We will show how mRNA vaccines are able to have extensive and long lasting effects.

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

Health New Zealand Emergency Department data

An OIA (freedom of information) request to Health New Zealand asked for “The number of people under the age of 40 presenting to Emergency Departments (A&E) throughout New Zealand hospitals with Chest Pain or Heart Issues by year?” The Health New Zealand answer (OIA reference: HNZ00061156) contains shattering information:

Year | Number presenting to Emergency Departments with chest pain

2019  2219

2020  4406

2021 13063

2022 21416

2023 20005

2024 (to June) 14639

The definition of chest pain for the purposes of this data includes right sided chest pain, chest wall pain, chest pain, musculoskeletal chest pain, chest pain on breathing, acute chest pain, chest pain on exertion, assessment of chest pain, anterior chest wall pain, atypical chest pain, history of chest pain, costal margin chest pain, non-cardiac chest pain, cardiac chest pain, dull chest pain, left sided chest pain, central chest pain, and ischaemic chest pain.

For the benefit of our overseas readers, these figures need to be read in the context of COVID-19 incidence in New Zealand. Because of border closures, quarantine, and lockdowns, New Zealand had close to zero Covid cases until February 2022. In contrast, Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccination became available in February 2021 for older people and those at risk. General availability for those under 40 years started towards mid 2021. Legislation making COVID-19 mRNA vaccination compulsory for those in various state employment sectors (vaccine mandates) was enacted in November 2021. The mandates were also adopted by the vast majority of private employers.

With this timeline in mind, the close association between COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and chest pain and/or heart disease among younger people becomes very clear. The surge in Emergency Department chest pain admissions began well before the COVID-19 infection took hold in New Zealand but immediately after the COVID-19 mRNA vaccination programme began. The incidence of chest pain and heart disease took off in 2021 as more of the age group were vaccinated. Nor do the figures suggest a strong independent effect of lockdowns on chest pain and cardiac health.

Whilst the OIA figures are only by year and for the under 40s, 2021 official weekly figures for vaccination and mortality for all age groups combined, that we reported at the time, show a very close association. All cause death rates rose in tandem with mRNA vaccination.

The OIA figures suggest approximately a ten fold increase in chest pain and/or cardiac events among those under 40 probably associated with the administration of mRNA vaccines. Moreover the figures to June 2024 indicate the trend is still continuing.

These alarming figures are not marginal. They stand up and slap you in the face. They have been in the possession of Health New Zealand from the outset, but the public has heard nothing about them from official sources. Health New Zealand is still offering mRNA vaccines and telling the public the jabs are safe and effective. The serious implications are obvious. As we have been asking repeatedly, the government must first pause mRNA vaccinations and then publish the health outcomes of the last few years by date, age, vaccination status, and disease category. Only then can the longer term effect of the mRNA vaccines be known in detail. Instead, the government is not just hiding the figures and continuing to promote the mRNA vaccines, but also prosecuting a whistle blower who leaked mortality data.

• How many parents have taken their children in for COVID-19 mRNA vaccination relying on the safe and effective narrative of Health New Zealand and the government when all along Health New Zealand was sitting on these truly alarming figures?
• How many young adults have casually accepted COVID-19 vaccination, unaware that those offering them knew they could be very dangerous?
• How many working age Kiwis were coerced after November 2021 into taking the jab on pain of losing their job, profession and home?
• How many New Zealanders are still suffering the devastating adverse effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine injury years later?

All this happened when Health New Zealand should have realised, or possibly did know very well, what was going on from their own data and from overseas sources early in 2021. When finally on 15 December 2021 Health New Zealand wrote privately to District Health Boards admitting that mRNA vaccines could cause myocarditis, they said the incidence was as few as 3 cases in 100,000 vaccinations. Their own data, as reported above, told a completely different story.

If these were all single individuals, the OIA figures would show that in the under 40 age group in New Zealand in 2021 1 out of every 130 individuals reported to an Emergency Department with chest pain or cardiac events. In fact, individuals with more serious cases would have been presenting multiple times, therefore this ratio will be higher, but not by orders of magnitude.

The majority were apparently sent home with ibuprofen and told to stop worrying (???). They were not made aware that overseas studies indicated their symptoms could be the start of long term illness and vulnerability to cardiac issues, as we reported in our March 2022 article “Study Finds Persistent Heart Abnormalities Among Child Vaccine Recipients”.

In 2022, chest pain incidence increased by a further 64% among the under 40s to a total of over 20,000 cases and continued at that level in 2023. These are not all the same people week after week and year after year, suggesting the long term rate of incidence of chest pain requiring a visit to an Emergency Department is staggeringly high.

The 15th December 2021 letter was signed by Ashley Bloomfield, New Zealand Director General of Health now honoured as Sir Ashley Bloomfield and currently directing the global pandemic response plan at WHO (World Health Organisation). The letter was also signed by Dr Andrew Connolly, Chief Medical Officer, Dr Juliet Rumball-Smith, GM Clinical Quality & Safety COVID-19 Vaccine & Immunisation Programme, and by Astrid Koornneef, Director, National Immunisation Programme. From the above OIA, it is clear that these people carry the heavy responsibility of failing to investigate the extent of vaccine injury, misinforming the public, GPs, and the DHBs, and endangering public health.

In addition to this, there has been a persistent public narrative that the potential risks of COVID-19 vaccination are limited and generally mild. This is a false narrative. It is counterfactual to the known pre-pandemic ten year 25% mortality risk of acute myocarditis. In fact, mRNA COVID-19 vaccination poses significant cardiac mortality risks. A study conducted in Spain and just published by the prestigious journal Vaccine entitled “Association of SARS-CoV-2 immunoserology and vaccination status with myocardial infarction severity and outcome” concluded:

“The combination of Covid vaccination and natural SARS-CoV2 infection was associated with the development of severe heart failure and cardiogenic shock in patients with myocardial Infarction, possibly related to an increased serological response.”

The researchers examined outcomes from 950 heart attack patients from March 2020 through March 2023 in a Madrid hospital. They found COVID-19 vaccinated and previously COVID-19 infected patients had an over 50 percent higher risk of death or heart failure than unvaccinated people who had also been previously infected – and a 90 percent higher risk than those who were unvaccinated and previously uninfected.

These researchers in Spain simply did what we have been asking our government to do for four years. Monitor the health outcomes of patients, compare the data for the vaccinated with the unvaccinated and analyse the results. Given our alarming increase in Emergency Department stats, why would our government omit to do this?

The Spanish study goes a long way to explaining why there is the persistently high rate of Emergency Department admissions with chest pain and heart failure up to the present day as the OIA data shows. In other words, cardiac adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination are not necessarily mild and often do not go away over time. In fact, the adverse cardiac effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination can be exacerbated by a subsequent COVID-19 infection. Moreover, as we have been reporting, COVID-19 mRNA vaccination also raises igG4 antibody levels which leaves the COVID-19 vaccinated more vulnerable to COVID-19 infection, a process known as immune imprinting. In other words, COVID-19 mRNA vaccination triggers a form of cardiac double jeopardy.

Alarm bells sounding among private health insurers

Our second source of information has been passed on to the Hatchard Report from within the New Zealand Private Health Insurance industry. Around 36% of the New Zealand population are covered by some form of private health insurance. Among these there are about 920,000 working adults (up to 65 years). According to our source, the incidence of heart disease and cancer has accelerated to record highs in the years since 2020. However the most concerning trend for our health insurance industry involves another condition.

Some health insurance policies include income protection coverage for working adults should they become sick and unable to work. In the event of an illness, the insured’s income will be covered if they are absent from work as a result. For the majority of illnesses this coverage does not extend indefinitely because treatment for most conditions can get people feeling well enough to return to work. However there has been a recent significant and concerning blow out in the number of working adults suffering from cognitive decline—a condition sufficient to cause long term incapacity to work. Individual cases can cause insurers to continue to make income support payments over many years, costing millions of dollars per person.

To put it bluntly, this information may indicate there has been a significant increase in the incidence of early onset dementia among working age adults.

A year ago we published an article “The Long Read: Mental Health Issues are Multiplying. Why?“. We now have to ask if the alarming rises in anxiety, confusion and depression that we reported at the time have in some cases been developing into long term cognitive decline? The Health Insurance Industry is generally very secretive, the fact that they are now very concerned and seeking solutions says a lot about how serious this might be.

Networks and COVID-19 vaccine injury

The general public in New Zealand is so poorly informed on these issues, that people are still unable to connect the dots joining the well publicised crisis in our health system and COVID-19 vaccination. A lot of people accessing mainstream media sources are wondering why there are still people who have refused multiple COVID-19 vaccinations. To them it might seem incredible for anyone to suggest that a simple vaccination can cause widespread harm. In fact traditional vaccination has always been associated with adverse effects, some of them very serious. Moreover, reductions in the rate of serious infectious diseases like smallpox preceded vaccination programmes and was largely achieved via public hygiene measures. However, whatever you might think about that, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are not traditional vaccines in any sense.

How could a vaccination cause cancer, heart disease and dementia, that’s ridiculous right? Apparently, though, mRNA vaccines are at high rates. How? To answer this question in simple terms we refer to network theories of immunity. Networks are connected by a communication system and are usually designed to achieve a shared purpose. Every person has around 37 trillion cells that each contain identical DNA (with the exception of red blood cells which have no DNA to expedite unimpeded circulation). Our cells are networked through multiple means of communication, chemical, electrical, vibrational etc., yet we have a single personal and genetic identity and our cells share a single immune purpose to maintain health. Cells cooperate with one another to achieve this purpose. They do so through multiple trillions of communications and actions everyday which repair the integrity and uniformity of our DNA and repel foreign pathogens and toxins.

Cooperation is crucial to the functioning of networks. Individual units in a network must continue to work towards a shared purpose, otherwise a network could collapse. This is why botnets and viral software are so dangerous to computer networks. They repurpose the protocols of network members which can eventually spread and collapse the network viability. We have seen many cases of computer viruses over the last few years affecting the networks of various organisations and corporations.

mRNA vaccines cross the cell membrane (traditional vaccines do not) and repurpose their genetic functions. Thereby they affect the command and control functions of our physiology. In the case of COVID-19 vaccines, billions of cells are repurposed to produce the spike proteins found on the surface of the COVID-19 virus. The purpose of the mRNA vaccine is to encourage the immune system to develop a response against COVID-19 spike proteins and therefore COVID-19 infection. Almost everyone now realises these mRNA vaccines are very ineffective at protecting from repeated COVID-19 infections, but the accompanying risks are not generally well known. In simple terms:

• The spike protein produced in massive quantities following COVID-19 vaccination, sometimes for months, is now recognised as a cardio toxin.
• The billions of cells repurposed by mRNA vaccines are no longer able to properly perform their immune functions and their role in the immune network which includes fighting cancer and protecting from pathogens. Thus opening a door for a wide range of illnesses.
• Our higher mental functions rely on unique, exact and specific characteristics of genetic functions which are disrupted by COVID-19 vaccines. Thereby the potential for mental illness is increased.

In sum, our cell-based immune network no longer has a single purpose. Our internal physiological communication systems distribute the resulting imbalanced functions and proliferate health problems. It is as if our whole physiological network of genes, cells and organs has been invaded by a rogue agent. The network is fighting itself, as happens with autoimmune diseases. If the number and density of mRNA vaccine repurposed cells is sufficiently large our immune system can fail to clear up the mess. In this case, a wide variety of disease outcomes can result.

This has to stop now

This has not been a merely theoretical article. The Health New Zealand data and the other results and studies we have been reporting speak for themselves. The fact that Health New Zealand has not acknowledged the import of their own statistics is a huge failure of intelligence. It is all but unforgivable. Despite early warning signals, Health New Zealand has failed to take account of facts well known to biotechnology researchers and reported in the literature long before the pandemic began. Gene therapies, of which COVID-19 mRNA vaccination is a type, can have multiple physiological adverse effects including whole system instability and collapse.

Health New Zealand have hidden behind an unjustified fiction that COVID-19 vaccination can only be blamed for a very limited, often mild and treatable known set of adverse reactions. In other words, they have excluded reported serious health outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination from any causal investigation. They turned their heads and looked away. In fact the data we have reported above illustrates just how far they have misled the public. In reality, the public have become unknowing participants in a deadly game of Russian roulette.

It is so far past time to recognise past mRNA COVID-19 vaccine harm and the growing dangers ahead. Especially as multiple mRNA vaccines are under development and soon to be offered to the public. Our government is planning to deregulate biotechnology, rushing like a moth to the flame. This has to stop now.

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.