Prestigious journal Circulation publishes WARNING:
mRNA vaccines dramatically increase risk of a cardiac event
The writing is on the wall for the government mandate policy. We examine how things went so wrong.
“We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”
For four months the health department and the government have resisted calls to improve monitoring of vaccine adverse events. They have ignored multiple flags of unprecedented high levels of serious complications proximate to vaccination. They have hidden behind a statistically untenable excuse that these adverse effects were coincidental medical events unconnected to vaccination. They have failed to alert GPs and hospitals to the dangers. They have mandated universal vaccination putting the whole population at risk of cardiac failure, our second highest cause of death.
How did this happen?
Multiple systemic failures and failures to correctly assess risks:
1) Inadequate Trials
The trials of the Pfizer vaccine were too short (only 2-5 months as compared to the normal 5-8 years). Crucially they did not include the phase which assesses secondary risks which would have picked up cardiac risks. Even these short trials were rushed to the extent that the BMJ has reported that there was some falsification of data.
The expectations surrounding the efficacy and safety of mRNA technology has been ramped up by an international public relations effort which went way beyond any sensible assessment or any completed trials.
mRNA vaccines with their low protection against transmission were never going to be a stand alone approach. There would have to be viable treatment options and protocols alongside it, but the government decided to rely on vaccination as a largely stand alone solution. They did not fund research into treatment options or assess treatment success stories overseas. They did not put the health service on full alert to train in treatment options, but rather bet millions on the prestige associated with the involvement of NZ biotech institutes in the search for vaccines.
2) Ignorance of Safety Protocols
They failed to realise that significant commercial interests were at work. After years of huge investment in biotech, which had yielded few commercially viable products due to safety failures, pharmaceutical interests were ready and primed to bypass traditional testing safeguards.
Starting in 2014 information and data links closely connected to the publicity arms of pharmaceutical interests had been plumbed directly into the governments all over the world through the International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities (ICMRA) of which Medsafe is a member. The effect on government policy was amplified through a well-known network dynamic. Unaware that national medical regulators around the world were receiving and passing on the same information from one source (ICRMA) tied to the pharmaceutical industry, when our government spoke to other governments, it felt reassured that they had similar ideas. This made one source of information appear to be many confirming sources, a very reassuring but entirely false and biased picture.
Medsafe knew full well there were well established pharmaceutical testing procedures which were absolutely necessary for safety under the protocols of The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) to which NZ subscribes. Medsafe failed to advise naive government officials that the abandonment of these protocols by the so called ‘operation warp speed’ vaccine development programme and its ‘emergency’ approval would not just cut corners but leave out critical preventive safety elements whose omittance in the past had led to so called ‘sanitary’ or medical disasters.
3) Mistaken Idea of Science.
The government treated ‘science’ as a monolithic body of knowledge. They thought that they could pick and choose advisors and advice that suited them without losing objectivity. In fact science, especially biotechnology science, contains incomplete understanding and competing perspectives. The assessment of risk is a hotly debated topic within the field. The government decided that adherents of a risk free perspective were to be trusted, while scientists urging caution were marginalised and ignored.
For years governments have been pouring money into education and research in the biotech sector creating a very large professional body of scientists who had great ambitions and highly unrealistic expectations of the technology they had studied and continued to research. These scientists felt duty bound to enthusiastically and publicly endorse biotech vaccines as a miracle cure.
4) Failed Risk Assessment.
Buoyed by the rosy prospect of a 95% effective vaccine with all the prestige and safety that the mere word ‘vaccine’ implied, government and their advisors ignored standard methods to assess and compare short term risks with long term risks. In particular, mandating vaccination was seen as justified because there was an immediate risk of catching Covid. Whilst the overall risk of mortality from Covid is small, the risk to the elderly and the sick was known to be large. The immediate risk of overload of the health service was also judged to be large. The short and long term risk posed by vaccination was judged to be small.
This last was a huge miscalculation. The health department refused to make any effort to quantify the short term risk by improving adverse event reporting, and the as yet unquantified long term risk was deemed irrelevant, completely ignoring the total lack of long term safety data. Taken together these failures created a perfect storm of risk—where the safety of a small number of unwell or elderly people at high risk (which could have been managed adequately by isolation protocols) was offset by putting the whole population at unquantified short and long term risk, which the continuing publication of papers in Viruses, The Lancet, Circulation, Nature, BMJ and others has turned out to be large and serious.
Where to from now?
The public has been led to believe that the mRNA vaccine is completely safe.
The government has spent millions of advertising dollars to get this message across to the public. Media have been encouraged and subsidised to play along with a very one sided and, as it has turned out, faulty message. The government has demonised the unvaccinated as misinformed and even dangerous, thousands of them have been expelled from their professions for following science and being cautious. People who have suffered serious adverse effects proximate to vaccination including strokes, heart attacks, and systemic immune failures have been told that it can’t have anything to do with vaccination. In some cases they have been repeatedly sent home without help or investigation after being dismissed by doctors as merely anxious or hypochondriac.
The information in Circulation points to a previously undetected and very serious mechanism of risk. There are others such as the risk of antibody enhancement of the virus brought on by vaccination, cancers, etc. which are under investigation and will take a long time to assess. Meanwhile it is absolutely clear that vaccination increases the risk of coronary events. Those at risk include not only people who are already at elevated risk of coronary events, but also many apparently healthy people including those who put the heart at strain due to vigorous exercise such as our sports men and women. The public has to be told honestly what the situation is.
It is completely unacceptable for the government to continue to pretend that vaccination mandates do not impose unreasonable personal health risks on individuals and it is completely unacceptable for the government to continue to hide the true extent of the health risks of vaccination from the public.
Government Policy Needs to be Corrected Now.
Dr Guy Hatchard