Tag: big pharma

The trillion-dollar biotech industry is facing failure – and it’s because of covid injections

The Gene Technology Bill signals a proposed new direction for New Zealand in alignment with and subsidiary to the world’s leading biotechnology nations that will have a radical effect on our food and our health. Yet if we reflect on the results of the biotechnology sector so far, by and large these are meagre, fleeting, unprofitable and unhealthy. We live in an increasingly complicated globalised technological world that is endangering health and life.

The good news last week was the announcement that the Health Select Committee has once again delayed its report on the Gene Technology Bill, this time until 11 October. This was due to the behind-the-scenes concerns of Winston Peters and New Zealand First. Both Peters and Luxon labelled the issue “complicated.” They are right. The delay gives us some more time to make this an election issue that won’t disappear. If you need reminding about the content of the Bill, see HERE. Below, we analyse the latest scientific evidence and the evolving issues for New Zealand.

Excess Deaths Continue

A Japanese study entitled ‘Significant Increase in Excess Deaths after Repeated covid-19 Vaccination in Japan’ provides some further background on the nation with the highest uptake of covid-19 mRNA vaccines in the world. The Japanese had received 3.6 doses per capita by March 2024, compared to 2.5 doses per capita in New Zealand. Around 80% of the population was vaccinated, the average figure equates to a range between 0-8 covid-19 mRNA vaccines per person. 

As we have previously reported in our article ‘The Unthinking Faith in Biotechnology and AI’, Japan now has the highest rate of excess deaths in the world. From January 2020 to March 2024, there have been a cumulative 350,000 excess deaths or 2,730 excess deaths per million. This rate is three times higher than in the USA, where mRNA vaccination uptake was significantly lower, and two times higher than in New Zealand.

mRNA covid-19 vaccination was the flagship product of the vast biotechnology industry designed to cement a biotechnology era of novel medicines, long life and new channels to gain economic prosperity. But the vaccine did not stop the spread of covid-19 infection and its administration has been accompanied by a rate of reported adverse effects unprecedented in history. Initial claims that the vaccine was saving millions of lives have since been debunked. The preposterous 14 million lives saved claim promoted by the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) has now been downgraded by the study of Ioannidis et al. to somewhere around 2.5 million and confined to older people. Even this lower figure is, in turn, now being robustly questioned in the review literature. mRNA vaccination was not just a failure; it was deadly.

Flagship Biotech Companies Are Failing

As a result, it is hard to escape the notion that the global biotechnology industry, with a current market valuation of US$1.74 trillion grossly inflated by speculation, has become a headless chicken, still running around while effectively dead. There are more than 20,000 biotechnology start-ups, mostly funded by governments but also by private investment in the most active biotechnology nations. These include the USA, China, India, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, Singapore, Israel, the UK, Finland, Belgium, Germany, Austria and Japan.

In the US alone, more than 2 million people are employed in the biotechnology sector. Following the dismal and dire results of mRNA technology, the investors, scientists and bio technocrats are being forced to face the reality of failure. Take Arena Bioworks, for example, a company launched in January 2024 with huge fanfare and US$500 million of funding. It included the support of billionaires and the participation of a galaxy of highly credentialed biotechnology scientists. Arena’s announced intention was to become the “Bell Labs” of biotechnology “to simply do nothing but science” to “tackle the [world’s] most daunting problems.”

In March of this year, Arena laid off 10% of its workforce; two days ago, a further 30% were laid off. A spokesperson for Arena confirmed the cuts will mostly affect cell and gene therapy work which was, until the reality of adverse effects began to bite, the flagship programme of biotechnology research around which its supposed health claims revolved.

Keep reading

Big Pharma heir Andre Hoffmann joins BlackRock CEO to drive WEF’s Agenda 2030 overhaul

Following the World Economic Forum (WEF) announcement to appoint interim co-chairs, much of the public focus has been on BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, but not so much on Andre Hoffmann, who is a Swiss billionaire and heir to the fifth largest pharmaceutical company on the planet, Roche.

With last April’s departure of Klaus Schwab from the board of trustees of the organization he founded over 50 years ago, the WEF briefly appointed former Nestle CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe as interim chairman.

Fast forward four months to August 15, 2025, and the WEF introduced two new interim co-chairs, billionaires Larry Fink and Andre Hoffmann.

“We believe the Forum can serve as a unique catalyst for cooperation, one that fosters trust, identifies shared goals, and turns dialogue into action.” — Larry Fink & Andre Hoffmann, WEF, August 2025

With an estimated net worth of $1.3 billion, Fink is the CEO of the largest asset management company in the world, BlackRock, managing some $11.6 trillion in assets.

And with an estimated net worth of $8.13 billion, Hoffmann is the vice chairman of F. Hoffmann-La Roche, the fifth largest pharmaceutical company by revenue in the world, just behind Pfizer.

Together, Fink and Hoffmann issued a statement saying that “the need for a platform that brings together business, government, and civil society has never been greater,” and that they “believe the Forum can serve as a unique catalyst for cooperation, one that fosters trust, identifies shared goals, and turns dialogue into action.”

The WEF leadership page says that in their work on the board of trustees, “members do not represent any personal or professional interests.”

However, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the business dealings of the new interim co-chairs align with multiple WEF agendas, from net zero and ESG to stakeholder capitalism and the U.N. Agenda 2030.

Keep reading

Minneapolis Murder – When Will Investigators Reveal Mental Health and Drug History of Shooter?

How many times will the nation have to suffer through another senseless mass murder and listen to the same lame excuses for the attacker’s motives? Twenty-three-year-old Robert Westman, aka Robin, killed two kids and wounded many others at an early morning attack on Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis yesterday and already we are being overloaded with the same blather.

We’ve seen these attacks and heard the same old tired arguments against guns and the “trans” status of the shooter. What we don’t hear, what is never discussed, is the mental health history of the shooter and, of course, the psychiatric drugs that may have been prescribed that could account for the murderous behavior. Why?

That’s easy. The mainstream media isn’t going to raise the issue of mental health and prescription psychiatric drugs because that’s how the salaries of the talking heads are paid. One only needs to turn on any of the cable or mainstream media sources and it takes minutes before the pharmaceutical commercials begin. Let’s face it, how would Sean Hannity, for example, be paid his enormous salary without the millions in advertising paid to Fox News by the pharmaceutical industry?

But of course, it’s much more sinister. The nation is addicted to a failed mental health model of diagnose and drug. In fact, after every mass shooting, there are cries for the need of “more mental health funding!” What most people don’t understand is that the entire mental health model, that has been used for the last fifty years, is built on fraud. That’s right, fraud.

There is no science to any psychiatric diagnosis. There is no abnormality in the brain that is any alleged psychiatric disorder, and the alleged “chemical imbalance” was, thankfully, completely debunked in 2022 by Dr. Joanna Moncrieff as a myth that was never supported by scientific evidence.

Making the fraud of the psychiatric diagnosis worse is that the pharmaceutical industry jumped on board with psychiatric drugs sold as “treatment” for the alleged mental disorders. The problem with selling the antidepressants, stimulants, antipsychotics and anti-anxiety drugs as “treatment” is that the pharmaceutical companies admit that they have no idea how the drugs “work” as “treatment” for the alleged disorder. Will the drugs change behavior? Yes, but so will illegal drugs.  What people need to understand is that yes, they are depressed, suffering from anxiety and wiggling in their seat, but that doesn’t mean there is an abnormality. There isn’t an abnormality, and these drugs don’t treat one.

The drugs sold as “treatment,” however, come with an ever-expanding list of possible adverse events. First, for example, antidepressants that “treat” depression carry a black box warning (the most serious warning issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before a drug is pulled from the market) for suicidality. That’s right, the drug taken to “treat” depression can cause the patient to commit suicide. The drug also can cause depression, the very behavior the drug is prescribed to “treat.” You can’t make this up. But there are other possible dangerous, life-threatening adverse events associated with antidepressants, including aggressive reaction, aggression, agitation, anxiety, depersonalization, mania, paranoia, abnormal dreams/thinking, psychotic disorder and psychosis to name a few. And similar devastating possible side effects are attached to all the other categories of prescription psychiatric drugs, too.

The question that needs to be answered in the case of the Minneapolis shooter, and all the others, is what is the mental health history, what is the prescription drug history, and, in the case of “trans” shooters, one would want to know at what stage of the transition the shooter is in. The adverse effects of mixing psychiatric drugs and hormone drugs are still not fully understood and could contribute to the state of mind of the shooter.

Keep reading

RFK Jr. investigating if drugs taken in Robin Westman’s transition played ‘a role’ in Minneapolis mass shooting

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. revealed Thursday that he has ordered an investigation into whether drugs that transgender shooter Robin Westman was taking during his transition could have played “a role” in his depraved violence.

“We are doing those kind of studies now,” he told “Fox & Friends” when asked if it was possible drugs taken during Westman’s transition played “a role” in him shooting up his former Catholic school’s first Mass of the year Wednesday.

“We are launching studies into their potential contribution,” he said in a response to a question noting that another recent school shooter, Audrey Hale, was also transgender.

The Health and Human Services secretary did not reveal if it was known what drugs Westman or Hale had taken, if any.

However, he noted a wider concern about Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) used to treat depression.

“Some of the SSRI drugs and some other psychiatric drugs might be contributing to violence,” he warned.

“Many of them have black-box warnings that warn of suicidal ideation and homicidal ideation. So we can’t exclude those as a culprit, and those are the kind of studies we are doing,” he said.

Such studies had been slowed by strict patient confidentiality rules, he noted — while stressing that his department had authority to go around them to investigate possible links between such medications and mental diseases

“There was no time in the past when people would walk into a church or a classroom and start shooting people,” he said. “It’s not really happening in other countries, it’s happening here. And we need to look at all of the potential culprits that might be contributing to that.”

Keep reading

Mass Killers May Be Telling Us Something — But Are We Listening?

In the wake of yet another mass killing—the tragic event at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis on August 27, 2025, where two children were murdered and 17 others injured—the public discourse often zeroes in on guns, manifestos, and societal failures.

But amid the clamor, a critical question seems to have faded from view: What role might legal and illegal drugs, and toxic exposures play in the volatile mix that drives some individuals to violence?

For years, reporters routinely probed the medical histories of perpetrators, revealing patterns of psychiatric drug use. Today, that line of inquiry has largely vanished, even as evidence mounts that certain medications carry warnings for suicidal thoughts and aggressive behavior, and environmental toxins disrupt brain function. Ignoring these factors not only overlooks potential triggers but also misses opportunities to prevent future tragedies through better data collection and analysis.

When Medications Were Front and Center

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, mass killings prompted immediate questions about the perpetrators’ mental health treatments, including any prescribed drugs. This was partly because many suspects exhibited clear signs of mental illness, and their medications often came under the microscope.

For instance, in the 1999 Columbine High School shooting, where Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 13 people, Harris had been prescribed the antidepressant Luvox (fluvoxamine), an SSRI known for potential side effects like agitation.

Similarly, in the 2005 Red Lake Senior High School shooting, 16-year-old Jeff Weise, who killed nine others before taking his own life, was on Prozac (fluoxetine), another SSRI.

Kip Kinkel, the 15-year-old behind the 1998 Thurston High School shooting in Oregon that left two dead and 25 injured, had also been prescribed Prozac.

These cases weren’t anomalies.

A compilation by advocacy groups like AbleChild lists over a dozen similar incidents, including the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, where Seung-Hui Cho, who killed 32 people, had a history of mental health treatment and was prescribed antidepressants, though details on his actual compliance history was spotty.

In the 2012 Aurora theater shooting, James Holmes, who murdered 12 and injured 70, was under psychiatric care and had been prescribed sertraline (Zoloft), an antidepressant linked to manic episodes in some users.

Reporting at the time often highlighted these details, fueling debates about whether the drugs—intended to alleviate depression, anxiety, or bipolar disorder—could instead exacerbate violent impulses in vulnerable individuals.

This scrutiny aligned with emerging FDA warnings. In 2004, the agency mandated black-box labels on antidepressants, alerting users to increased risks of suicidal thoughts and behavior, particularly in young people. Some experts, like psychiatrist Peter Breggin, have long argued that SSRIs can induce violence and mania in a subset of patients, citing akathisia—a state of severe restlessness—as a potential trigger. A 2015 Swedish study of over 850,000 people found that antidepressants were associated with violent crime in 11,225 cases, though causality remains debated.

Keep reading

AAP Received Tens of Millions in Federal Funding to Push Vaccines and Combat ‘Misinformation’

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), which is suing U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and has called for the end to religious exemptions, received tens of millions of dollars in federal funding in a single year, according to public records.

AAP, which represents 67,000 pediatricians in the U.S., received $34,974,759 in government grants during the 2023 fiscal year, according to the organization’s most recent tax disclosure. The grants are itemized in the AAP’s single audit report for 2023-2024.

Documents show some of the money was used to advance childhood vaccination in the U.S. and abroad, target medical “misinformation” and “disinformation” online, develop a Regional Pediatric Pandemic Network, and highlight telehealth for children.

However, not all of the money could be tracked through public records.

The federal grants are in addition to financial contributions the AAP receives from several major pharmaceutical companies, including Eli Lilly, GSK, Merck, Moderna and Sanofi.

Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedInfo and co-founder of Stand for Health Freedom, said the joint funding that the AAP receives from taxpayers and Big Pharma “reflects a troubling alignment between its policy positions and the interests of its largest funders — both federal agencies and pharmaceutical corporations.”

Keep reading

What ACIP Wasn’t Shown

In June 2025, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) held its first meeting under the new leadership appointed by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The public expectation was clear: that this newly appointed committee would restore rigor, independence, and critical examination of evidence before recommending routine use of new pharmaceutical products.

One of the most significant items on the agenda was whether to recommend Merck’s new RSV monoclonal antibody, Clesrovimab, for routine use in healthy newborns. Though marketed as a new product, it is nearly identical in structure and function to Sanofi–AstraZeneca’s nirsevimab, approved in 2023.

The committee ultimately voted 5 to 2 in favor of the recommendation. That vote followed a CDC presentation, which framed the safety data as reassuring, leading most members to conclude there were no outstanding safety concerns. 

But was that reassurance justified? And on what exactly was it based?

The Seizure Signal, and How It Was Presented

During its June 2025 meeting, ACIP members were shown a safety slide from the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), focusing on seizures after administration of nirsevimab. The data were split into two age groups: infants aged 0-37 days and those aged 38 days to under 8 months. Each group showed elevated risk ratios for seizures (3.50 and 4.38, respectively), but both were labeled “not significant.” No pooled analysis was displayed.

However, as Dr. Maryanne Demasi later reported, combining the two groups into a single cohort yields a very different picture: a nearly four-fold increase in seizure risk (RR 3.93, 95% CI 1.21–12.79, p=0.02), a result that is statistically significant. That consolidated signal was never presented to the committee.

The decision to stratify at 38 days – precisely the point in US schedules when routine infant vaccinations begin – had no clear biological justification, and by dispersing the signal across two smaller groups, it effectively erased the statistical significance.

A second design choice compounded the problem. The CDC’s analysis applied a self-controlled risk interval with only the first 7 days designated as “risk” and days 8-21 treated as the “control” period. Any seizure occurring on day 8 or later was thus counted against the background rate, even though such timing could plausibly reflect a product-related effect. Standard pharmacovigilance practice calls for testing multiple windows, not a single narrow cutoff.

These analytical decisions mattered. The vote to recommend clesrovimab passed 5-2. Had members been shown the pooled seizure risk alongside the consistent trial-level imbalances in nervous system events, shifting just two votes would have changed the outcome.

Finally, as Demasi emphasized, the concern is not confined to one brand. Given the structural similarity between nirsevimab and clesrovimab, the seizure risk is likely a class effect. This means the omission of the pooled analysis did not just obscure a statistical detail. It withheld information with direct implications for every RSV monoclonal antibody now in use.

These findings emerged only through independent reanalysis. Without Dr. Demasi’s work, they may have remained unknown – not only to the public, but even to ACIP members casting their votes.

Keep reading

Uncovering Medical Establishment Dark Secret Operations for Your Health Protection!

Medical establishment is one entity; and remember, you have to identify the real problem to be able to focus your attention on the solution. When seeing the “big picture” in relation to how the medical establishment operates (refer to image), you’ll have a definite vantage point when you would have uncovered its coordinated dark secret operations. 

From your research, the listed harsh realities from what you would have gleaned will serve as a launching point towards finding the solution for your health protection: Remember, the white hat you’re looking for is in the mirror!

The corruption and how it works

The money trails, the corrupt entanglement, dirty dealing, interlocking directorates married into unholy alliances… have been well-documented, but many fail to make the connections between the different cause and effect relationships and how they are affected. 

This can  be  likened  to the analogy of looking at separated pieces of jigsaw puzzle and not having the realization that they are somehow all connected and therefore not carrying out the task of joining up the pieces to see the big picture. 

This is how the corruption still continues and why the villains are allowed to get away with it undetected. 

In order to see how the corruption works, it is necessary to make the interlocking connections so that we can step back and see the ‘big picture’ of what’s really going on and why certain things occur. 

For example, covid was a lie. There was no covid, but it can only be seen as a massive medical fraud for power, profit and political gains when its pieces of the jig-saw puzzle are interlocked and you are able to see the big picture.

Bear in mind, a variation on a theme of the fake disease “script” with all its common-patterns could be ran again by scoundrels wanting to enforce mandates on us, as, for example, in the ongoing push for the global pandemic treaty by the WHO (World Death Organization) which has not been opposed by many countries. 

The sad thing is that Operation Warp Speed has still not been taken down… Don’t call the mRNA shots vaccines because that’s not what they are. They are, in fact, military industrial grade weapons…

After doing your research and seeing the “Big Picture,” refuse the masking, fake tests and so-called vaccinations at all costs.

Keep reading

50 Bizarre Side Effects of Common Medicines

Medicine saves lives every day, combating everything from infections to chronic pain. But the little-discussed reality is that adverse drug reactions are the third leading cause of death in the US, claiming over 250,000 lives annually.

Even more insidious, side effects can emerge months or years after starting—or stopping—a medication, long after you’ve forgotten about it, as seen with delayed tendon damage from antibiotics or bone issues from osteoporosis drugs.

These delayed reactions highlight how drugs can ripple through the body in unexpected ways, affecting organs and systems far beyond their intended target.

From hormonal havoc to bizarre behavioral shifts, here are 50 peculiar side effects that remind us: while medicine helps, it can also unleash chaos we never saw coming.

Keep reading

An Evidence-Driven Critique of the Allegedly Reassuring Study on Aluminum-Adjuvanted Vaccines

Yesterday, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. published a sharp and comprehensive critique of the recent study by Andersson et al., which was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The study made headlines for claiming that aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered in early childhood are not associated with increased risks of autoimmune, allergic, or neurodevelopmental disorders.

Kennedy did not mince words. He described the study as “so deeply flawed it functions not as science but as a deceitful propaganda stunt by the pharmaceutical industry.” Among the many questionable features he identified, one stood out to me in particular. Kennedy wrote:

“These sleights of hand magnify the potential for allowing the authors to reach their absurd suggestion that higher aluminum exposure is somehow protective against asthma, allergies, and neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism.”

This sentence stopped me in my tracks because I had noticed the exact same thing. While Kennedy voiced this concern from the standpoint of public health advocacy, I approached the same issue from an academic and data-driven perspective. What I found not only aligns with his observation but adds further empirical grounding to it. In fact, this very point was at the heart of a formal comment I submitted to the Annals of Internal Medicine. The authors of the study responded — but, in my view, did not adequately address the core contradiction. In this short article, I lay out the full story, supported by the data, to show why this implausible pattern of protective effects cannot be ignored.

Keep reading