How can we wake up the comatose political process?

A new paper should alarm our newly elected politicians and galvanise them into responsible action.

A newly published paper from the Netherlands entitled “Suppressed IgG4 class switching in dupilumab- and TNF inhibitor-treated patients after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination” illustrates a nightmare scenario that is unfolding around us and threatening our future well being.

The paper further confirms the phenomenon of immune imprinting following mRNA vaccination and reports “Repeated mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to induce class switching to IgG4, a non-inflammatory human antibody subclass linked to tolerance.” IgG4 is a subclass of gamma globulin, a medical term that essentially means antibody, that rises with repeated antigen exposure. In a sense it turns down the immune system response. 

As we have previously discussed, this involves our immune system learning to ignore Covid infection, thus exposing those who are highly vaccinated to repeated Covid infections. This is similar to the effect of bee sting allergy shots which are designed to condition the body to ignore bee venom.

The authors reported that the exact mechanism of IgG4 switching following mRNA vaccination is poorly understood. Despite this, the study aimed to find out if the use of Dupilumab, MTX (Methotrexate), and TNFi (Tumour Necrosis Factor inhibitor) drugs could mitigate IgG4 switching by blocking IL-4 receptors thought to play an intermediate role. The study successfully demonstrated reductions in IgG4 switching and concluded that their findings:

“..may benefit future mRNA vaccine strategies, humoral tolerance induction [immune unresponsiveness], as well as treatment of IgG4 pathologies”

All well and good you may say, medical science marches on, but you would be wrong. Dupilumab, MTX, and TNFi drugs have very serious side effects and are contraindicated for some of the conditions that Covid infections and Covid vaccines induce. 

The Mayo Clinic lists some of these for Dupilumab here. The list is far too long for me to reproduce but contraindications include bronchial and heart problems. Severe adverse effects include chest pain, severe sudden headache, slurred speech, sudden loss of coordination, sudden severe weakness or numbness in the arm or leg, trouble breathing and trouble swallowing.

The American College of Rheumatology says of TNFi: “The most significant side effects for all of the TNF inhibitors is an increased risk for all types of infections, including tuberculosis (TB) and fungal infections. Some of these infections may be severe. TNF inhibitors increase the risk of certain types of skin cancer.”

Official US government site MedlinePlus says of MTX: “Methotrexate may cause very serious, life-threatening side effects. You should only take methotrexate to treat cancer or certain other conditions that are very severe and that cannot be treated with other medications.”

Let’s just step back for a minute. As we have been reporting throughout the pandemic, studies have confirmed that mRNA vaccines do very little if anything to prevent Covid infection or mitigate its severity including the risk of death. In any case, any minor benefit is short lived. The above study confirms that after a few weeks and/or repeated shots the recipient is left with not a decreased but an increased risk of Covid infection. 

At the same time, recent studies we have reported confirm that adverse effects are severe and very common. These include but are not limited to heart disease, neurological conditions, stroke, acute kidney infection, seizures, reproductive issues, immune suppression, mental illness and cancers. Excess death rates are at record levels among highly vaccinated nations around the world. 

The very generalised nature of these effects point to the disruption of fundamental genetic and epigenetic mechanisms which underpin our health. These mechanisms are poorly understood, a fact that is widely noted in the scientific literature.

So mRNA vaccines don’t offer any useful prophylactic benefit and they pose high risks. Now ask: what should be the response of medical authorities? No doubt you would suggest at the very least a pause in the use of mRNA vaccines if not an outright ban. You would be wrong. The scientists in the above study apparently think they will make progress mitigating just one of the multiple adverse effects of mRNA vaccines by co-administering some other highly risky drug.

Therein you see the focus of the medical pharmaceutical caucus, if a drug, or in this case a vaccine, doesn’t work and harms the recipient, add another drug or component on top. It is essentially a profit-driven system. All this is well known, but the pandemic has driven this philosophy to new heights of harm and madness. There have been millions of excess deaths worldwide, but the need to halt gain of function research and mRNA vaccine development just simply hasn’t sunk in.

Instead the concept of risky experimentation on human populations has become entrenched in the medical lexicon and associated government policy. Governments are pouring money into biotechnology experimentation. Some participants like the authors of the above study might be simply focused on a small part whilst ignoring the implications of the big picture of generalised adverse effects, but some others have embraced a different perspective to push ahead with biotech innovation regardless. A perspective that seems to be devoid of ethical value.

No doubt the conflicts going on in the Ukraine and the Middle East are causing horrific casualties on both sides, but the sad truth is that their extent is dwarfed by those of the pandemic and its aftermath. Moreover pandemic casualties appear to be persisting. The extent of long term vaccine injury is only recently becoming apparent. It may get worse, no one is sure, but one thing is clear—governments and medical authorities are determined to ignore the situation or rather suppress public knowledge about it. UK MPs walked out of the chamber last week rather than hear a speech by MP Andrew Bridgen about excess deaths. Most NZ politicians are denying their existence against all evidence.

In the lead up to the first world war, Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty, founded an institution called ‘The Other Club’. Its purpose was to enable politicians from across the broad political spectrum to meet together over lunch outside of parliament with leaders of business and industry, the media and renowned thinkers to discuss pressing issues in need of novel solutions. The existence of The Other Club is credited with the swift formation and efficient operation of the cross party coalition that Churchill formed soon after his appointment as Prime Minister in 1940 to win WWII.

Today we are in the midst of a very different kind of conflict. Not a war on want or a war of weapons, but a fight to maintain public health in the face of unprecedented and little understood man-made threats to our immunity, health and longevity. Continuing to advocate experimental biotechnology in the face of persistent record excess death statistics amounts to turning a blind eye to atrocity. 

The psychology of the pandemic era has been marked by an inability to change gear even when faced with irrefutable fact. Anyone in the government, medical establishment and media dragging their heels in the face of overwhelming and concerning evidence, is sowing the seed for even greater harm to public health. This is not a theoretical risk, but one that involves human health, wellbeing, and life itself. Decrying the slaughter in the Middle East and the Ukraine whilst ignoring that at home amounts to delusion. Such policy is already precipitating dire consequences. 

Modern parliaments are very much divided along artificial ideological lines, independent thought is discouraged. These divisions are often irrelevant to the management of policy, no more so than that concerning health. There is now a compelling imperative to get to the bottom of the crisis that has engulfed our health service. 

Churchill successfully founded an informal institution which drew upon talent and ideas outside of sharp political differences. Our nation needs an institution similar to the one Churchill created. There is now no better time or more urgent need to allow open and robust debate especially on the topic of public health. The next election season is probably a few years away. Right now, the establishment of a novel political forum which crosses party lines and engages the major talents of our nation can be a focal point to create applicable safe solutions and potentially fruitful policy initiatives.

I would like to think that by now there are successful people of means and influence, deep thinkers, politicians from all parties and media personalities who have reached the conclusion that we took a wrong turn on pandemic health policy formation. People who wish to contribute to its correction. I would very much like to hear your thoughts on this.

Guy Hatchard PhD was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID a global food testing and safety company (now known as FoodChain ID). You can subscribe to his websites HatchardReport.com and GLOBE.GLOBAL for regular updates by email.

He is the author of ‘Your DNA Diet: Leveraging the Power of Consciousness To Heal Ourselves and Our World. An Ayurvedic Blueprint For Health and Wellness’.