‘Sir’ Ashley Bloomfield, formerly Director General of Health and the public face of COVID-19 in New Zealand, has taken to the media to warn us that another pandemic will be flying our way courtesy of Bird Flu.
Listen to Guy’s audio version here.
An article in Stuff newspaper reports that Bloomfield wants us to ‘prepare for the worst in the not too distant future’. Apparently, Bloomfield thinks that the main lesson of the COVID-19 pandemic five years on amounts to being ready for the next virus to jump from animals to humans. The interviewer, TFN host Paddy Gower, inexplicably forgot to remind Bloomfield that we now know that COVID-19 escaped from a biotech lab, not an animal. Thereby pushing us Kiwis once again into the outer reaches of a deliberate information blackout, while the rest of the world is waking up to the zoonotic scam.
Meanwhile, the Gene Technology Bill is wending its weary way through our Parliament with the intention of deregulating biotechnology here in New Zealand, thereby freeing mad scientists from any last vestige of responsibility. Kiwis face a stark reality—millions dead world wide through biotech experimentation and our government is giving the green light for more of the same. So today at GLOBE, we will summarise the key lessons of the pandemic from the perspective of human consciousness and suggest a path to a better future. It will take bravery and fortitude, but the alternatives on offer from a failed Parliament do not bear thinking about.
Firstly, the huge gaping hole in our knowledge about life is staring us in the face, but remains unacknowledged or kept well hidden by those who have seized positions of power and responsibility. No one knows how human consciousness is supported by our genetics. The source of our refined capacity to think, remember, reason, decide, judge, love, excel and empathise remains a mystery to the same biotech scientists who are telling us they have discovered the secret of life. They are going about the process of debasing the physiological and genetic basis of life like a child without any developed sense of conscience pulling the arms off their treasured doll, wanting to see what might happen.
Twenty years ago I had a meeting with Lockwood Smith, MP for Rodney and Minister of Education. He laughed at my concern about the risks of genetic engineering, deriding me as a person who worries about crossing the road. Short sighted at the time, but now after the pandemic, his laughter has a hollow ring. The responsibility lies jointly on his shoulders and all those many thousands of other decision-makers around the world who ignored early warnings.
We have written at length about the risks of crossing the cell membrane with gene scissors randomly rearranging, deleting and adding to a genetic command and control system so complex and precise that it puts all the world’s supercomputers to shame. But you may ask, are we wrong to question the forward march of science and the relentless rise of technology? Isn’t our consciousness independent of the body? After all, even if we are ill in bed we can still think. Seeking to mend the body cannot be wrong, can it?
Transplants and genetic chimerism
A few years ago, scientists uncovered something so unexpected, it seemed to defy explanation. Chris Long was working at the Sheriff’s Office in Reno Nevada when he took a DNA test and found out that the DNA in his body had been replaced by the DNA of a man living five thousand miles away in Germany. Long had undergone a bone marrow transplant and now the DNA of his donor had taken over his body, right down to the semen in his testicles. Long had become what is known as a Chimera.
Not all recipients of this transplant are affected to the same extent. 50,000 people a year receive bone marrow transplants, also known as haematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT), which are used to treat various blood disorders and cancers by replacing damaged or diseased bone marrow with healthy blood-forming stem cells. The procedure is not without risk to life, the survival rate ranges from 35% to 90% depending on the prior health of the recipient and the genetic match, whether sibling or unrelated.
In a 2019 interview with the NY Times, Andrew Rezvani, the medical director of the inpatient Blood & Marrow Transplant Unit at Stanford University Medical Center sought to reassure recipients: “The average doctor does not need to know where a donor’s DNA will present itself within a patient. That’s because this type of chimerism is not likely to be harmful. Nor should it change a person. Their brain and their personality should remain the same.” But Rezvani actually misspoke, as this 2023 article entitled “Monitoring chimerism after transplant is critical to good health” details. Rejection of the foreign DNA of the donor is a critical risk factor that needs to be controlled through monitoring and immune suppressant medication.
From our perspective, there is a further significant risk to the patient. Research shows that chimerism through HSCT is associated with a change in the recipient’s consciousness. A 2021 article in the World Journal of Transplantation is entitled “Psychosocial aspects of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation“, it reports that the psychiatric comorbidities of HSCT include anxiety, depression, sleep and sexual disorders, delirium and post-traumatic stress disorder. In other words, HSCT chimerism results in serious psychiatric confusion and illness in as many as 35% of patients.
The history of biotechnology experimentation and gene therapies reveals a gradual but relentless escalation of risk.
Each time serious side effects become evident, there is a short pause and then the industry pushes ahead further into the unknown. In September 1999 18 year old Jesse Gelsinger agreed to enter a gene therapy trial to overcome his metabolic disorder known as ornithine transcarbamoylase (OTC) deficiency, a metabolic disorder that affects 1 in 40,000 newborns by impeding the elimination of ammonia. Gelsinger died within four days of receiving the injection. Gelsinger was given an infusion of corrective OTC gene encased in a dose of attenuated cold virus, a recombinant adenoviral vector; it was injected into his hepatic artery. At the time, his death was ascribed to a severe allergic reaction to the gene therapy.
According to a 2001 article in the Canadian Medical Journal entitled “Death but one unintended consequence of gene-therapy trial“: “The major question surrounding his death involved informed consent. A lawyer retained by his family said Gelsinger was not told that several other patients had experienced serious side effects from the therapy, or that 3 monkeys had died of a clotting disorder and severe liver inflammation after being injected.” The account is a substantial echo of the stories of COVID-19 vaccine injury and early trial findings that accumulated in vast numbers across the globe.
Prior to Gelsinger’s death, no one had realised that the genetic vector itself might pose a risk. There had been several other deaths subsequent to gene therapy interventions which had been attributed to unrelated causes. Gelsinger’s death was the first to be actually connected to gene therapy. This led to a pause in gene therapy trials and a lot of discussion of risks. Investigations concluded there were financial conflicts of interest and deliberate hiding of information about risks. There were calls for stricter regulations.
As a result, there was a realisation among the scientific community that gene therapy initiates a damaging immune response that is difficult to ameliorate, insertional mutagenesis, virus-like infection, off-target gene editing and unwanted clinical outcomes (ranging from illness to death of participants in clinical trials). After Gelsinger’s death, biotechnology research and experimentation continued, but mostly this did not directly involve gene therapy of human subjects. Instead the industry consolidated its control of the food chain via GM crops, food processing procedures and ingredients.
Twenty years after Gelsinger’s death, the biotech industry declared itself ready to start over. An article in Frontiers in Oncology entitled “Gene Therapy Leaves a Vicious Cycle in April 2019, declared “Now, thanks to advancements in gene editing and recombinant viral vector development, the interest of clinicians and pharmaceutical industries has been rekindled. With the advent of more than 12 different gene therapy drugs for curing cancer, blindness, immune, and neuronal disorders, this emerging experimental medicine has yet again come into the limelight.”
CRISPR gene editing has failed to live up to the hype
The note of optimism struck in this article was misplaced. CRISPR gene editing, whilst more accurate than earlier procedures, was not any more safe or precise, nor was it free of off target mutative events. Nor could it be efficiently directed to specific areas of the body, as this article entitled “Evaluation of subretinally delivered Cas9 ribonucleoproteins in murine and porcine animal models highlights key considerations for therapeutic translation of genetic medicines” admits. In other words, any application in humans was likely to have system wide adverse effects. Precisely the problem we now know has plagued COVID-19 vaccines.
CRISPR therapeutic technology is so problematic that some among the most highly funded prestigious start ups have started failing. For example, Spotlight Therapeutics, a high profile offshoot of the University of Southern California and Berkeley with $65 million of funding and 40 employees has just announced its closure because it faced insurmountable difficulties in its efforts to design a safe and effective delivery system for CRISPR based gene therapies (you can read a summary of the media coverage and published science here). This is the same technique that our government has promised will deliver an economic and health miracle for New Zealand, all funded by our taxpayer dollars. Ha Ha.
We now know that by 2019, often working in secret, biotechnologists had already restarted risky gene research that was to lead not just to another death, but to millions. But this time, the financial and administrative side of the biotech industry had acquired a very thick skin. They weren’t going to allow a simple matter of patient deaths to hold up research ever again. In fact, they had carefully planned to ensure that any suggestion that biotechnology might be at fault could be deflected using all the power of public relations experts and mainstream media links that they had gathered to their cause. Alarmingly, this included bias in scientific journal policy as this 2025 article entitled “COVID-19 advocacy bias in the BMJ: meta-research evaluation” demonstrates. The pandemic of biotechnology was upon us and bats were set up to take the blame.
We now stand on the threshold of unfettered biotechnology experimentation and we the public are already set up as the unwitting subjects courtesy of our tax dollars. We are being constantly bombarded with advertisements for processed foods and medical procedures manufactured using heavily contaminated biotech processes whose so-called benefits are fabricated lies and whose risks are kept well hidden and unexplored. Read the Hatchard Report article “Major Health Alert: the Extraordinary Genetically Modified Invasion of Our Supermarkets by Stealth” for more information. This is all happening with the full approval of legislators and medics around the world who are living in a dream with no substance. A dream that has become a deepening nightmare.
Fortunately some people are waking up, but not enough to hold back a tide of genetic debris which is overwhelming public health, filling hospitals and morgues.
As we have pointed out, you can avoid some of the effects of biotechnology contamination by sticking to whole unprocessed foods. There are other principles that can be applied to everyday life which have healing effects. These include exercise, meditation, traditional herbal medicine, truthfulness, fresh air, clean water, yoga, natural building materials, worship and sunshine.
The ultimate lesson of the pandemic lies in the close relationship between genetics and consciousness. In this, consciousness is primary and genetics secondary. As we have reported, studies show that methods to enhance consciousness beneficially affect genetic function and expression. They enhance longevity and reduce the incidence of disease. They are free of side effects, easy to learn, simple to practice and low cost to implement. To learn more read “The failure of the parliamentary process in the age of biotechnology.
It is apparent that government support for biotechnology has become a runaway juggernaut, an almost unstoppable mindless rush to failure. In this situation, it is our responsibility to do all we can to wake them up. Governments are now controlled by the ignorance of the population that they themselves created. Even if Parliament woke up to the dangers of biotechnology, they might be too scared to admit it in case they lose votes. A miserable indictment of the modern political process. That is unless we remind them of our wishes. Even if the medical profession woke up to the dangers inherent in biotechnology, they would be too scared of being blamed for the pandemic to admit it, unless their patients are demanding action. There is a need for consciousness based institutions, open debate, community based initiatives for food purity and self-sufficiency. The ball is in our court.
Guy Hatchard, Ph.D., was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a food testing and certification company (now known as FoodChain ID).
Guy 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.
