Table of Contents
Dr. Guy David Hatchard
Guy is an international advocate of food safety and natural medicine. He received his undergraduate degree in Logic and Theoretical Physics from the University of Sussex and his Ph.D. in Psychology from Maharishi University of Management, Fairfield Iowa. He was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a global food safety testing and certification laboratory. His published work uses the statistical methods of the physical sciences to analyse social data.
The NZ Herald has published a potpourri of National campaign promises under the headline “Election 2023: What gets axed under the National-led Government?“. I don’t know about you, but I am underwhelmed. We should be emerging from under the umbrella of the most prescriptive, divisive, and draconian parliament in our history.
Instead, Auckland fuel tax rates will be adjusted, we will be allowed to drive a little faster, and landlords will be given the whip hand, while gangs, free prescriptions, light rail, public transport, and cheaper cars get the thumbs down. Bearing in mind this is only the Herald’s weird assessment of a ‘bloodbath and a bombshell lurch to the right’, what could and should the government be doing?
When I was writing the title of this release, I hesitated to use the term ‘newly elected’, these are after all the usual suspects from the last parliament who largely supported the most egregious of the outgoing government’s pandemic policies. The policies that left us a divided nation with our health service and economy in tatters. During the pandemic, parliament grew strongly and comfortably into the idea that they were born to rule us without question. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any indication yet that this is about to change in any way.
Why am I so concerned about this?
A peer reviewed paper published five days ago in the British Journal of Pharmacology entitled “Cardiac side effects of RNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: Hidden cardiotoxic effects of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 on ventricular myocyte function and structure” might give you a clue. This is a very easy paper to read. Within 48 hours, mRNA vaccines establish themselves in the hearts of experimental rats producing arrhythmia, contractions and significant cardiac dysfunction. The authors conclude “mRNA injections may significantly increase the risk of acute cardiac events”.
Ninety per cent of NZers have received mRNA injections and a lot of people are having ‘acute cardiac events’, 83% more than usual according to leaked hospital data, many of them are dying. I don’t suppose that those thousands who are now suffering from cardiomyopathy will be greatly interested to know that prescription costs are going up but will be capped at $100 per year. They might have been expecting something more.
The fact is that you are unlikely to hear or read anything about the above paper, or many other papers reaching similar conclusions, in our mainstream media. Nor is your GP likely to sound any note of caution, they might be struck off. Nor will your MP mention it, they might be drummed out of the brownies in short order. I hardly need to say that this points to a level of moral bankruptcy and an ethical vacuum at the highest level of the nation (or is it the lowest?)
What exactly went wrong at the Beehive?
For a start, we only found out about the absolutely massive rise in heart attacks from leaked data. In other words, parliament didn’t want to let us know that anything had gone wrong or needed correcting. They left us in the dark. This ensured that any family affected by cardiac problems (and there were many) during the last three years would go on imagining that they were just unlucky or unhealthy. Incredibly, the government not only hid the tsunami of cardiac episodes, they sailed on spending our taxpayer dollars on advertising to ensure that more of us got more mRNA shots and they are still doing so. When is this deadly advertising bonanza going to stop?
We became the victims of parliamentary leaders who were sure they were right, sure that they could mandate health interventions, and sure they didn’t have to look into the matter as things went wrong. I use the term ‘parliamentary leaders’ with some justification. We now know there were some concerned MPs within each party quietly raising questions who were completely silenced by their leaders and mandated to vaccinate themselves. This alone should lead to a damning verdict on a dictatorial party system which brooks no dissent by individual MPs.
The leaders of all the parties were, in fact, so sure that they were right that they supported government funding of newspapers, control of social media, and a full blown witch hunt under the title ‘The Disinformation Project’.
I haven’t yet heard of any plans to halt these practices which were previously only confined to the sort of repressive regimes that were generally held up as inferior to ours (we have now joined them).
Parliament and the courts also felt confident to override the hard won provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights including the right of medical choice—a concept that goes back to the sixteenth century Herbalist’s Charter issued by Henry VIII. Yet it didn’t take a rocket scientist to realise that a vaccine developed and approved in just three months was experimental and had no guarantee of long term safety. The paper we have cited above is precisely the sort of test that was omitted with disastrous consequences.
What should happen now?
There is a family with three adult children. One of the parents decided to remain unvaccinated, and the other driven by fearful predictions vaccinated. One of the children remained unvaccinated and thereby unemployed, another wished to do so but was mandated, a third enthusiastically embraced the vaccine. This divided the family as each sought to impose their views on the other family members driven by feelings of social responsibility and moral superiority curated by the government.
Right now with the wisdom of hindsight reinforced by scientific findings, the family is reconciled. Family members have realised that each is entitled to their own opinions. Unfortunately, some members now have some serious health issues to address. No one is planning to get another Covid vaccine.
This situation mirrors what the newly elected government faces. A divided nation that needs reliable knowledge that can inform reconciliation, and a treatment and compensation programme for those affected. Without this, we will not be able to move ahead.
We are a nation with a proud heritage of self-sufficiency and independence. Our parliamentarians need to give up the notion that their role is to dictate to the nation, they have instead a limited mandate to serve the interests of the electorate. This cannot be a ‘business as usual ‘parliament. This is a time for some reflection and humility as we face up to past mistakes, current challenges, and an uncertain future.
- We suggest that the government demonstrate its commitment to our national identity by entrenching the New Zealand Bill of Rights as a constitutional principle.
- We suggest that the new government move swiftly to amend provisions of the Therapeutic Products Bill which are designed to further limit medical choice.
- We suggest that funding and censorship of the media end immediately.
- We suggest that key medical data be made available for public scrutiny and debate.
- We suggest that the programme of mRNA vaccination be suspended and a wide ranging enquiry into pandemic policy and outcomes that should be instituted immediately.
These measures would restore some common sense thinking and a sense of balance that was lost by the last parliament. These would constitute a fitting start on a journey to recovery.
