As she spoke, MPs heckled and shouted at her like yobos. In today’s article we write about what has brought us to this shameful situation, where it will lead us and what might the remedies be? I know almost everyone on both sides of the argument would like the pandemic and all it stands for to come to an end, but we are divided and polarised as a nation by opposite views of what happened and how to tackle it. Phase 2 of the Royal Commission will publicly air the arguments and debates and make recommendations in 2026.
Today we ask if this will be enough. We note the entrenched opinions involved and recognise that the published scientific analysis concerning mRNA vaccine safety is already sufficient on its own to pause the mRNA vaccination programs and suggests extreme caution with biotechnology experimentation, yet it is being ignored by governments.
The UK Telegraph led yesterday with an article “Disease and bankruptcy beckon for Britain as the costs of long term sickness soar“. In common with New Zealand data, Britain is suffering from greatly increased hospitalisation, sickness and disability which has accelerated since 2020 and shows no sign of slowing down. The article says the costs of benefits for the 2.8 million people currently unable to work and the loss of tax income for the government are crippling the UK economy, as it is here. Worse still, if the current trend continues, the number unable to work due to multiple health conditions is predicted by the UK Institute for Public Policy Research to balloon to 4.3 million by the end of the decade with 60% of the working population struggling to labour at their jobs whilst suffering chronic health problems.
The reaction of the UK government advisers as reported by the Telegraph is predictable and devoid of intelligence. They describe the cause as a “crisis in the benefits system”. Rather than tackling the root causes of the illness epidemic, they advise the introduction of changes to the benefits system which will incentivise (coerce???) chronically sick people to return to the workforce whilst also ensuring those newly falling sick remain chained to their desks and machines. Their vision is worthy of George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, but before you fear for our future, reflect for a moment that what we are actually witnessing is the collapse of a system under the weight of its own contradictions.
As we have been reporting in detail, and the Telegraph article reiterates, chronic illness has been on the rise for years and our health system’s reliance on allopathy has been playing a crucial part in this trend. Many pharmaceutical prescriptions are associated with serious adverse effects, especially when multiple illnesses result in the added problems of polypharmacy. The recent sudden acceleration in illness rates during and after the pandemic has a more complex cause. Both Covid and Covid vaccines resulted from biotechnology experimentation which opens a new frontier in medicine. It crosses the cell membrane and interferes with the genetic command and control operations of living systems. As the Hatchard Report has referenced, studies show biotech editing inevitably mutates and compromises immune responses and therefore health.
Instead of heeding the alarming health statistics and drawing the obvious conclusions, the New Zealand government is forging ahead with deregulation of biotechnologyeven before the current Royal Commission presents its findings. The extent of this madness was revealed this week when official documents from a Ministry of the Environment meeting in June chaired by Judith Collins MP surfaced. They revealed that the government will exclude consideration of the precautionary principle and ethics from the new legislative framework (or lack of it) for biotechnology.
Two ideas precede the modern Precautionary Principle. First, that prevention is better than cure, exemplified in an early 13th century book of Jewish aphorisms, the Sefer Hasidim: “Who is a skilled physician? He who can prevent sickness.” Secondly, Thomas Sydenham’s 17th century assertion that in healthcare it is important above all not to do harm, “primum est ut non nocere.” The modern use of the Precautionary Principle has its roots in the early 1970s as the German principle of Vorsorge, or foresight. Beginning in the 1980s, several international treaties endorsed precautionary measures, like the 1987 treaty that bans the dumping of toxic substances in the North Sea.
In New Zealand, the precautionary principle was included in legislation controlling biotechnology experimentation following the recommendations of the lengthy Royal Commission on Genetic Modification in the 1990s, which considered detailed submissions on its potential dangers and benefits. In essence, the precautionary principle counsels decision makers to not only avoid risks but take positive action to prevent their occurrence and consequences, which is what we need and what we will always need.
Even more extraordinary is the intent to remove ethical considerations from the legislation which will free biotechnology from any sense of safety. Biotechnology is so invasive to the structure of life that from the outset, ethical considerations have weighed heavily in discussions on safety. When it is known that a single gene out of billions in the wrong place or damaged can cause fatal inheritable illness, why on earth would you seek to exclude a discussion of the rights or wrongs of such procedures?
Since time immemorial the consideration of good and evil has been at the heart of righteous decision making. In recent times its consideration has preoccupied renowned leaders of the twentieth century like Gandhi and Mandela who sought freedom for their people and peace in the world. The New Zealand government is tossing aside this fundamental of humanity. It is proposing to deregulate biotechnology, the very thing that has for the last five years plunged the whole world into disease, uncertainty and economic distress.
To quiet legitimate concern and outcry, governments from America to New Zealand and everywhere in between have been promoting biotechnology as the gateway to an era of health and longevity which will also transform our quality of life via theorised future biotechnologies producing an abundance of synthetic food, mitigating the climate and unlocking energy sources. In contrast, it should have been abundantly clear from the experience of the last five years and earlier research findings conveniently swept under the carpet by profit hungry corporations, that the reverse is the case. As a number of eminent scientists warned right from the start, the true outcomes of biotechnology medicine and food include cancers, immune deficiency, inflammatory illness, environmental bio-pollution and early death. Moreover, self-replicating genetic structures like viruses, bacteria, GM crops and animals spread without limit and can never be recalled.
This is quite a different future from the biotech dream being sold to the public as the key to the golden age. But neither will our future be the sinister but stable dystopian world order imagined by Orwell and Huxley where people slave under the control of an exploitative state. The report in the UK Telegraph reveals a quite different picture. If the biotechnology era is allowed to continue unchecked with its gain of function experimentation and self amplifying RNA technology, people will be too sick to work for the state or themselves and civilisation will collapse.
So what is actually causing MPs to ignore the continuing trend of excess mortality in the United Kingdom and New Zealand, walking out of the debating chamber or heckling if it is mentioned? In many ways, if not in all ways, the government is a reflection of the collective consciousness of the nation. The beliefs and prejudices of the national population find their expression in the mouths and actions of parliamentarians. The collective consciousness of the nation is the unseen governor of the nation and something wicked has polluted our collective thinking and health.
Hitler would never have succeeded in setting the world on fire without the support of his people. He didn’t act on his own. Fortunately, Hitler’s vision of total war and repression also had its contradictions, which ultimately led to the defeat and downfall of the Third Reich. All such totalitarian outlooks will eventually fail because they are completely out of step with the power of natural law, the real governor of life everywhere. The structure of natural law is such that the entire power of all the laws of nature—gravity, quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, etc. is fully available in every point of creation. Whether we recognise this as God’s Will or natural law, it is the same nourishing, evolutionary power.
If you follow international news sources, you will know that along with ill health, conflicts are rising to form a continuous back drop to life. There are proxy wars where the weapons and funding on both sides are often supplied by bigger powers with global ambitions. The expression “endless war” is gaining currency.
So what is at the basis of increasingly polarised rhetoric and conflict? Clearly opposing sides each want peace on their own terms. This means that neither side understands peace. War is a failure of intelligence and peace is not just the absence of war, it is something far more than that. Calamities, crises, conflicts and catastrophes in any country or community arise when stress and negativity accumulate in collective consciousness as a result of the wrongdoing or inhuman behaviour of a large percentage of the population. A high concentration of negative forces, without positive life supporting behaviour to balance the situation inevitably ends in suffering and the destruction of life.
As you know, the Hatchard Report endorses natural preventive strategies for health. We also endorse preventive strategies aimed at peace. The military is tasked with protecting peace but they are failing to do so. My book Your DNA Diet discusses a strategy to create a prevention wing of the military based on the revitalisation of collective consciousness. It is supported by research findings of reduced conflict and well worth investigating.
We offer this today not just as an interesting idea, but as a necessity. Global conflicts and misinformed government biotechnology policy cannot be easily shifted by talk and persuasion without also healing the collective consciousness of the nation. The healing power of nature will have to be enlivened in our consciousness to achieve this. Without this, old habits, outdated ideas and prejudice will continue. It took many years after the discovery of the bacterial origin of cholera and typhoid before this understanding and appropriate hygiene practices were accepted and adopted.
With the growth of unsafe biotechnology experimentation and the proliferation of sophisticated weapons, we do not have years available to us to prevent disaster. We must act now.
To register your concern about the safety of genetic engineering view the International Genetic Charter. Its simple terms spell out in a few sentences 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. Lobby your representatives to inform themselves fully of the risks inherent in biotechnology.
Dr Guy Hatchard is a former senior manager at Genetic ID, food testing and certification company. This article was first published HERE
Today we ask if this will be enough. We note the entrenched opinions involved and recognise that the published scientific analysis concerning mRNA vaccine safety is already sufficient on its own to pause the mRNA vaccination programs and suggests extreme caution with biotechnology experimentation, yet it is being ignored by governments.
The UK Telegraph led yesterday with an article “Disease and bankruptcy beckon for Britain as the costs of long term sickness soar“. In common with New Zealand data, Britain is suffering from greatly increased hospitalisation, sickness and disability which has accelerated since 2020 and shows no sign of slowing down. The article says the costs of benefits for the 2.8 million people currently unable to work and the loss of tax income for the government are crippling the UK economy, as it is here. Worse still, if the current trend continues, the number unable to work due to multiple health conditions is predicted by the UK Institute for Public Policy Research to balloon to 4.3 million by the end of the decade with 60% of the working population struggling to labour at their jobs whilst suffering chronic health problems.
The reaction of the UK government advisers as reported by the Telegraph is predictable and devoid of intelligence. They describe the cause as a “crisis in the benefits system”. Rather than tackling the root causes of the illness epidemic, they advise the introduction of changes to the benefits system which will incentivise (coerce???) chronically sick people to return to the workforce whilst also ensuring those newly falling sick remain chained to their desks and machines. Their vision is worthy of George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, but before you fear for our future, reflect for a moment that what we are actually witnessing is the collapse of a system under the weight of its own contradictions.
As we have been reporting in detail, and the Telegraph article reiterates, chronic illness has been on the rise for years and our health system’s reliance on allopathy has been playing a crucial part in this trend. Many pharmaceutical prescriptions are associated with serious adverse effects, especially when multiple illnesses result in the added problems of polypharmacy. The recent sudden acceleration in illness rates during and after the pandemic has a more complex cause. Both Covid and Covid vaccines resulted from biotechnology experimentation which opens a new frontier in medicine. It crosses the cell membrane and interferes with the genetic command and control operations of living systems. As the Hatchard Report has referenced, studies show biotech editing inevitably mutates and compromises immune responses and therefore health.
Instead of heeding the alarming health statistics and drawing the obvious conclusions, the New Zealand government is forging ahead with deregulation of biotechnologyeven before the current Royal Commission presents its findings. The extent of this madness was revealed this week when official documents from a Ministry of the Environment meeting in June chaired by Judith Collins MP surfaced. They revealed that the government will exclude consideration of the precautionary principle and ethics from the new legislative framework (or lack of it) for biotechnology.
Two ideas precede the modern Precautionary Principle. First, that prevention is better than cure, exemplified in an early 13th century book of Jewish aphorisms, the Sefer Hasidim: “Who is a skilled physician? He who can prevent sickness.” Secondly, Thomas Sydenham’s 17th century assertion that in healthcare it is important above all not to do harm, “primum est ut non nocere.” The modern use of the Precautionary Principle has its roots in the early 1970s as the German principle of Vorsorge, or foresight. Beginning in the 1980s, several international treaties endorsed precautionary measures, like the 1987 treaty that bans the dumping of toxic substances in the North Sea.
In New Zealand, the precautionary principle was included in legislation controlling biotechnology experimentation following the recommendations of the lengthy Royal Commission on Genetic Modification in the 1990s, which considered detailed submissions on its potential dangers and benefits. In essence, the precautionary principle counsels decision makers to not only avoid risks but take positive action to prevent their occurrence and consequences, which is what we need and what we will always need.
Even more extraordinary is the intent to remove ethical considerations from the legislation which will free biotechnology from any sense of safety. Biotechnology is so invasive to the structure of life that from the outset, ethical considerations have weighed heavily in discussions on safety. When it is known that a single gene out of billions in the wrong place or damaged can cause fatal inheritable illness, why on earth would you seek to exclude a discussion of the rights or wrongs of such procedures?
Since time immemorial the consideration of good and evil has been at the heart of righteous decision making. In recent times its consideration has preoccupied renowned leaders of the twentieth century like Gandhi and Mandela who sought freedom for their people and peace in the world. The New Zealand government is tossing aside this fundamental of humanity. It is proposing to deregulate biotechnology, the very thing that has for the last five years plunged the whole world into disease, uncertainty and economic distress.
To quiet legitimate concern and outcry, governments from America to New Zealand and everywhere in between have been promoting biotechnology as the gateway to an era of health and longevity which will also transform our quality of life via theorised future biotechnologies producing an abundance of synthetic food, mitigating the climate and unlocking energy sources. In contrast, it should have been abundantly clear from the experience of the last five years and earlier research findings conveniently swept under the carpet by profit hungry corporations, that the reverse is the case. As a number of eminent scientists warned right from the start, the true outcomes of biotechnology medicine and food include cancers, immune deficiency, inflammatory illness, environmental bio-pollution and early death. Moreover, self-replicating genetic structures like viruses, bacteria, GM crops and animals spread without limit and can never be recalled.
This is quite a different future from the biotech dream being sold to the public as the key to the golden age. But neither will our future be the sinister but stable dystopian world order imagined by Orwell and Huxley where people slave under the control of an exploitative state. The report in the UK Telegraph reveals a quite different picture. If the biotechnology era is allowed to continue unchecked with its gain of function experimentation and self amplifying RNA technology, people will be too sick to work for the state or themselves and civilisation will collapse.
So what is actually causing MPs to ignore the continuing trend of excess mortality in the United Kingdom and New Zealand, walking out of the debating chamber or heckling if it is mentioned? In many ways, if not in all ways, the government is a reflection of the collective consciousness of the nation. The beliefs and prejudices of the national population find their expression in the mouths and actions of parliamentarians. The collective consciousness of the nation is the unseen governor of the nation and something wicked has polluted our collective thinking and health.
Hitler would never have succeeded in setting the world on fire without the support of his people. He didn’t act on his own. Fortunately, Hitler’s vision of total war and repression also had its contradictions, which ultimately led to the defeat and downfall of the Third Reich. All such totalitarian outlooks will eventually fail because they are completely out of step with the power of natural law, the real governor of life everywhere. The structure of natural law is such that the entire power of all the laws of nature—gravity, quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, etc. is fully available in every point of creation. Whether we recognise this as God’s Will or natural law, it is the same nourishing, evolutionary power.
If you follow international news sources, you will know that along with ill health, conflicts are rising to form a continuous back drop to life. There are proxy wars where the weapons and funding on both sides are often supplied by bigger powers with global ambitions. The expression “endless war” is gaining currency.
So what is at the basis of increasingly polarised rhetoric and conflict? Clearly opposing sides each want peace on their own terms. This means that neither side understands peace. War is a failure of intelligence and peace is not just the absence of war, it is something far more than that. Calamities, crises, conflicts and catastrophes in any country or community arise when stress and negativity accumulate in collective consciousness as a result of the wrongdoing or inhuman behaviour of a large percentage of the population. A high concentration of negative forces, without positive life supporting behaviour to balance the situation inevitably ends in suffering and the destruction of life.
As you know, the Hatchard Report endorses natural preventive strategies for health. We also endorse preventive strategies aimed at peace. The military is tasked with protecting peace but they are failing to do so. My book Your DNA Diet discusses a strategy to create a prevention wing of the military based on the revitalisation of collective consciousness. It is supported by research findings of reduced conflict and well worth investigating.
We offer this today not just as an interesting idea, but as a necessity. Global conflicts and misinformed government biotechnology policy cannot be easily shifted by talk and persuasion without also healing the collective consciousness of the nation. The healing power of nature will have to be enlivened in our consciousness to achieve this. Without this, old habits, outdated ideas and prejudice will continue. It took many years after the discovery of the bacterial origin of cholera and typhoid before this understanding and appropriate hygiene practices were accepted and adopted.
With the growth of unsafe biotechnology experimentation and the proliferation of sophisticated weapons, we do not have years available to us to prevent disaster. We must act now.
To register your concern about the safety of genetic engineering view the International Genetic Charter. Its simple terms spell out in a few sentences 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. Lobby your representatives to inform themselves fully of the risks inherent in biotechnology.
Dr Guy Hatchard is a former senior manager at Genetic ID, food testing and certification company. This article was first published HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.