A quick look at unemployment in NZ. It’s risen to 5.3% with 160K unemployed. I’m old enough to remember pre-Rogernomics when there was next to no unemployment. Jobs aplenty. Of course they would have us believe that from Rogernomics onwards (4.06 min) everybody just got lazy (the unemployed are typically demonized because it’s commonly assumed that none of them ‘want to work’). No mention of the plebs at the top selling off the family silver … whittling away our sovereignty. All very necessary for the (not) great reset. Owning nothing and being happy.
Meanwhile Luxon and friends (more than 20 MPs) are renting back their own homes at the taxpayer’s expense (some of whom are working two and more jobs to feed their families). Luxon and one other have also purchased offices which they lease back to Parliament for use as an electorate base. Nice. A tax-payer funded accommodation allowance of up to $45K pa and salaries of $3-500K are not enough to survive on perhaps? Let ‘them’ eat cake is it?
Travelling about Enzed of late I’ve had convos with various folk on the state of affairs here. Anecdotal yes, but indicative of what’s happening out there. A rural supermarket checkout cashier told me that as folk leave they’re not being replaced (in commenting on the self serve option which I also noticed is everywhere, Warehouse included). Perhaps, like the pollies, the supermarkets aren’t managing to maximise their profits either? They are doing better than their US counterparts though … apparently.
Another supermarket worker (same supermarket) told me they’d sold up in Auckland and have a freehold rural house now. Driving to and from work in Auckland was too stressful. Now no stress.
Then, a convo with a man at a WOF station … he said the same as the first supermarket woman. Staff are not being replaced as they leave. The day I was there they were two down in staff. ‘Two down’ is not uncommon to hear these days. I’ve heard this from auto repair garages, and the spectacles service I use. “We’re sorry” they say, apologetically, “we’re short staffed at the moment…” Of course folk are away sick aren’t they? Or had you not noticed?
I recently had my first up close observations of the ‘safe & effective’ fallout. One young man in his 30s coerced to drink the Kool Aid was suffering in ICU from Myocarditis, Pneumonia, breathlessness, pain, you name it. Horrific. They also told him regularly that he was dying, until his family asked them to desist. I suppose they don’t teach the white coats about the power of words at Med School? I expect by now that they can confidently tell people they’re going to die having observed for 5 years the slim chances of surviving the ‘safe and effective’?
Then there is the 74 year old I know who has Parkinsons, a formerly fit and healthy guy … who is healthy no more. Consigned now to a care home. There are even more I know of in my smallish circle, but from afar.
So really it’s no surprise is it that businesses are down in staff numbers?
But not to worry, we have AI now remember? Such fortunate timing isn’t it?! No wonder they’re not replacing staff!
I wonder how many of the unemployed are ‘safe and effective’ injured? (Two years back Luxon was insisting cancer patients could work 10 hrs a week).
Buta never mind, they’ll be rolling out robots next. And you folk will be twiddling your thumbs in those tight knit 10 minute (not) smart cities they’re preparing for you. Speaking of, I notice they are springing up like mushrooms on warm humid days. In tiny communities too! Whole blocks of thirty and more houses. Security cams everywhere I’m told.
Meanwhile folk are being laid off world wide and the long talked about monetary crash inches forward day by day.
You may or may not like this satirical video on NZ’s current state of affairs. Warning – strong language you may find offensive. Very much on the nail nevertheless.
A fiery parliamentary hearing triggered an uproar after a CAF veteran testified that more than 20 former soldiers were allegedly pressured to accept euthanasia.
The testimony has sparked fury, disbelief, and demands for answers as citizens question how such a practice could happen under any government.
An alarming testimony before Canada’s House of Commons has blown open grave allegations that the Liberal government is ramping up pressure to euthanize military veterans under the nation’s rapidly expanding “assisted suicide” regime.
The explosive allegations were revealed in a parliamentary testimony from Kelsi Sheren, a Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) veteran.
Sheren told MPs during a hearing before the Canadian Veterans Affairs Committee that she has firsthand evidence showing the practice is far more widespread than officials admit.
She told the nation’s top lawmakers that she has evidence that multiple veterans have been pressured into being euthanized under the government’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) program.
Sheren testified that “over 20 veterans have confirmed being offered MAiD” instead of more expensive treatments.
“I have the proof, and I have proof of more,” she told lawmakers.
The claims follow recent reports that Canada’s socialized healthcare system is now saving $136 million a year by euthanizing patients instead of treating them.
During the hearing, Conservative MP Blake Richards asked Sheren if she was willing to provide evidence supporting her claims.
Sheren confirmed that the veterans have submitted written testimonies or “actual audio recordings” documenting the unsolicited offers of euthanasia.
According to Sheren, many others remain silent out of fear.
“We also have other individuals who are too afraid to come forward because Veterans Affairs has threatened their benefits,” she said.
Sheren, a Canadian combat veteran and artillery gunner, added that some were even offered non-disclosure agreements and “payouts if they were to take it.”
Veterans Affairs Canada told media outlets that its “employees have no role or mandate to recommend or raise (MAiD).”
Yet similar allegations have surfaced before.
Last year, it was revealed that the federal department responsible for supporting Canadian veterans had apparently acted to suppress documentation on euthanasia practices.
It followed reports that caseworkers attempted to railroad struggling former service members into euthanasia.
Slay News previously published a report highlighting bombshell revelations from Sheren on the treatment of veterans.
Sheren explained on a podcast with Dr. Jordan Peterson last year that the drugs used in MAiD essentially waterboard a person to death.
Assisted suicide was legalized in 2016 by the Liberal government of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
A new report from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition shows the devastating scale of the program: Canada has euthanized 90,000 people since 2016.
However, some are still hopeful that the Liberal government’s eugenics agenda can be turned around.
Last week, a Conservative MP’s private member’s bill, which would ban individuals with mental illness from being euthanized, received full support from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.
The revelations point to an alarming reality that Canada’s euthanasia system is no longer confined to edge-case medical situations.
Instead, it is increasingly becoming a state-endorsed “solution” for vulnerable citizens, including those who once served their country.
Expose comment: The conspirators are pushing society towards the Great Reset by creating division, distrust and fear between men and women through controversies over gender, transgender politics and exaggerated campaigns against sexual abuse.
They are also creating divisions by promoting racism accusations, banning national history and culture, and implementing affirmative action and positive discrimination.
The ultimate goal of the conspirators, Dr. Vernon Coleman says, is to break up society and create a New World Order, with the Great Reset being the final objective.
EWNZ comment: the racism card is an old and favourite card used particularly by the British. Read Shashi Tharoor’s Inglorious Empire to see how they used this in India, especially the chapter titled Divide Et Impera. The sight of Hindu and Muslim soldiers united and fighting together alarmed the British says Tharoor. “… dividing the groups and pitting them against one another was the most effective way to ensure the unchallenged continuance of Empire”. And it is still happening as Dr Coleman points out. Since folk left their own shores to bring ‘civilization’ as they claim, indigenous have been second class citizens, seen as entirely disposable. Witness the Australian Aboriginal genocide. Their current favours bestowed after all these years are ploys to divide. Witness Luxon giving air time to the Treaty Principles Bill. Likewise they don’t really care what gender you choose … reproducing less (aka depopulation) is the goal so it’s by hook or by crook basically. This also feeds cleverly into the divide category. By pretending to care about gay folk, they’ve really upped that ante. So in the end the current ’empire’ that seeks to rule over you is the lockstep one that’s been hiding in plain sight all along. Don’t fall for their division ploy – just agree to disagree. What they fear most is a world united against them, they know we carry the greater numbers.
The Conspirators (and to deny they exist is like denying the existence of water) are pushing us remorselessly into the Great Reset. And one of the ways they’re doing it is by destroying a (relatively) civilised society which has taken centuries to evolve.
They have destroyed our lives with the controversies over gender (with insane gender language changes being introduced with the sole idea of creating confusion and destroying human relationships) with transgender politics (also designed to bewilder and create division) and exaggerated campaigns against sexual abuse (“He said my hair looked nice and he liked my dress and my life is now ruined.”) A wolf whistle used to be regarded by most women as a compliment, today it is a criminal offence.
The conspirators have deliberately created division, distrust and fear between the sexes, and the neoliberals who run the global economic system have consistently shown that their aim is not to create more fairness, or to advance the rights of women in those countries where unfairness is commonplace, but to create as many divisions as possible between men and women.
The aim of the neoliberals who make up the Establishment, and who are pushing us towards their beloved Great Reset, is to break up society in as many ways as possible so as to ensure that men and women are too busy fighting one another to worry about the progress towards the New World Order.
It is for this very same reason that national history and national and regional culture are being banished from every aspect of life, and why schools and colleges no longer teach students material which could be construed as patriotic or in any way likely to lead to greater pride.
Then there are the absurdly exaggerated accusations of racism, always popular with communists who see such accusations as a way to break down society, with accusations built on the flimsiest of pretexts (“He couldn’t pronounce my name properly and so he is a racist,” “He didn’t pick me for his team and so he must be a racist.”) A well-known personality had to issue a grovelling apology after people with too much time on their hands found that he had once sent a tweet commenting that he perhaps needed to learn another language when he was in London. Since most people in London aren’t native to England and don’t speak English at all or very well, his remark was well-based and logical. But it was wrongly perceived as being racist because the person who saw it as racist had been encouraged to want it to be racist.
The attempts to outlaw racism themselves produce racism, of course, with affirmative action and positive discrimination being nothing more than racism of another colour. Appointing a black woman to a company board of directors simply because she is black and female, and helps the company hit its diversity quota, is racist, and sexist and just plain wrong. The black woman should be appointed because she is the best candidate and will do the best job for employees, shareholders and customers.
Advertisers who show photos of happy couples or families frequently show a black couple or a black man and a white woman (usually a blonde). It is now uncommon to see any white men appearing in print or television advertisements. This isn’t simple political correctness but is done because it enables the advertiser to avoid any accusations that it might be racist. It is virtue signalling and, in itself, it is actually racist, of course. Some people who do not have white skin will not buy products which are exclusively advertised with the aid of white actors and models. I sympathise. This is about respect and a sense of being excluded. We are supposed to be a multi-racial society but, in their knee-bending servitude to the woke, advertisers sometimes seem to forget this. Attempts by knee-jerk politicians to dismiss concerns about this very real problem are as predictable as they are unrepresentative.
I read of the existence of an “initiative” in the UK called “Black Farmer’s New Face of Farming” with a range of food products called “The Black Farmer.” In the United States, there is an organisation called Black Farmers’ Market. And there are a number of organisations along these lines. There is, for example, a National Black Police Association and in London, there is the Metropolitan Black Police Association. There is a Black Writers Guild, a Black Writers Society and a Black Writers’ Association. And there is a Black Agents and Editors’ Group. I can’t help thinking that by defining a group according to skin colour, these no doubt well-intended people are sustaining and even creating racism. And I wonder what the reaction would be if a group of farmers founded an organisation for white farmers. Or if a group of white policemen founded an association called the White Police Association? I find it difficult to avoid the suspicion that creating racial groups in this way is part of the conspirators’ plan to create disharmony in society.
In the UK, it was revealed that the RAF [Royal Air Force] has practised discrimination against white men. “Discrimination” is, of course, just a polite word for “racism.” If a black man is unfairly treated because of his skin colour, it is racism and there is an uproar, sackings and scandal. If a white man is unfairly treated because of his skin colour, it is discrimination, and no one cares. There seems little doubt that if racism is a serious problem in the UK, it is white men and women who are most commonly the victims.
We see footballers and other sportsmen kneeling in an attempt to show their moral integrity but merely displaying just how easily they can be manipulated. They seem to me to be displaying shallow fake compassion and their own propensity for virtue signalling. When it comes to the crunch, however, the sportsmen seem sadly short of moral courage. At the World Football Cup in Qatar, for example, male footballers bravely announced that they would wear a rainbow armband during the tournament to show their support for homosexuals. For unknown reasons, homosexuals have stolen the rainbow, long a Christian symbol, as an emblem. And homosexuality is outlawed in Qatar. One might have thought that a better and more fitting way of expressing their feelings would have been to refuse to go to Qatar at all. However, when the organisers announced that footballers wearing rainbow armbands would be sanctioned, the footballers all abandoned their enthusiasm and put away their rainbow armbands
The Bank of England (which is responsible for making a mess of the English economy and failing to control inflation) has said that people of any “gender identity” (I think they mean men or women but who knows) can be treated as pregnant. And the Bank is having some gender-neutral lavatories built so that lady bankers and gentlemen bankers who aren’t sure of their gender identity can go to the loo together and share the experience in politically correct harmony. The Bank’s insane pregnancy policies mean that anyone can now be classified as a “birthing parent” and claim family leave from the bank. I bet there are some people facing 7% mortgages who wish the Bank would concentrate on inflation and worry a little more about the economy and a little less about showing how wokey it is.
There are endless attacks on masculinity and femininity with constant pressure towards unisex washrooms and a unisex world. We can only stand and watch the banishing of the family unit and the rise of the State as a central factor in our lives, the prejudice and dishonesty of the corporate media (which now seems to specialise in misinformation and disinformation and rarely, if ever, reports the news without a built-in judgemental commentary), the rise of homosexuality and the remainder of the specialities within the LGBTQIA community. (I tried to find out what the Q, the I and the A stand for but failed in this simple task. No one I spoke to knew the answer, and even the internet was unable to provide an answer.)
It used to be considered polite for a man to offer a co-worker or friend a compliment (“Your hair looks nice,” “That dress suits you” and so on) without anyone being offended. Indeed, if the compliment were a genuine one, the recipient would be pleased and flattered. Today, such remarks are considered to be signs of extreme sexist behaviour and men have been fired for saying such things and branded as sex offenders. It is even now considered sexist for a man to stand up on public transport and to offer his seat to a woman, or to allow a woman to proceed before him through a doorway. (Ironically, men may sometimes be accused of being rude for not doing these things.)
And, of course, those promoting women’s professional sport are insisting that as much attention be given to female football and cricket teams as to the more traditional male teams. Huge amounts of money are being funnelled into female sport even though the evidence clearly shows that there is very little spectator interest in matches played between women’s teams or indeed when individual women play sports (women have been playing professional tennis and golf for decades but the interest in their games has always been minute when compared with the interest in male versions of those games.) The media, as always, has been supine, and some newspapers now give more coverage to women’s sports than to men’s sports with the result that their readers find it nigh on impossible to navigate their pages. A casual reader will see a headline that screams ‘England World Cup Triumph’ and will find themselves reading about the success of a team of 14-year-old girls playing lacrosse or netball.
Once again, there is a hidden agenda.
Promoting and encouraging sexism encourages conflict and confusion – two building blocks regarded as essential for pushing us into the Great Reset. And new rules about “equality, diversity and inclusion” have replaced humanity, goodwill and kindness with statutory obligations, statutory whingeing and statutory recriminations. The rules about diversity, inclusion and equality are doing far more harm than good.
The bottom line is that you cannot regulate for kindness.
Note: The above is taken from `Their Terrifying Plan’ by Vernon Coleman. For details, please CLICK HERE.
About the Author
Vernon Coleman, MB ChB DSc, practised medicine for ten years. He has been a full-time professional author for over 30 years. He is a novelist and campaigning writer and has written many non-fiction books. He has written over 100 books, which have been translated into 22 languages. On his website, HERE, there are hundreds of articles which are free to read. Since mid-December 2024, Dr Coleman has also been publishing articles on Substack; you can subscribe to and follow him on Substack HERE.
There are no ads, no fees and no requests for donations on Dr Coleman’s website or videos. He pays for everything through book sales. If you would like to help finance his work, please consider purchasing a book – there are over 100 books by Vernon Coleman available in print on Amazon.
“This New Zealand film has won 4 international environmental awards – but here in NZ, TV channels refuse to play it. Why? Because if they did, there would be outrage and riots over New Zealand’s use of aerially applied 1080 poison. See for yourself … ” From TheGrafBoys‘ Youtube Channel
In a stunning discussion, Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Jordan Vaughn, alongside clinician Scott Marsland, revealed groundbreaking and alarming findings.
They point to the late Dr. Luc Montagnier, a Nobel Prize-winning virologist, whose final research paper highlighted a terrifying link: the original spike protein contains amino acids that code for PRION DISEASE.
This prion-like mechanism is implicated in causing:
Protein deformations
Amyloid plaque formation in the brain
A “reservoir” of spike protein in the brain that evades normal treatments
The result? Patients are presenting with rapid, atypical neurological decline that conventional doctors misdiagnose as standard dementia, Parkinson’s, or ALS. But the cases don’t fit the classic patterns.
Here’s the HOPE that the medical establishment isn’t offering:
Marsland shares an incredible anecdote of a patient he had referred to palliative care. As a last resort, they tried N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) to cross the blood-brain barrier and clear the spike.
In just 3 WEEKS, she regained the ability to walk, feed herself, and even returned to gardening.
Dr. Kory confirms this, stating that when you treat the root pathology—the spike protein and its microvascular damage—instead of just the symptoms, over 50% of these “hopeless” patients see significant recovery.
The takeaway is urgent:
The system is failing these patients by forcing them into a diagnostic box with no hope. A new paradigm of treatment, focused on the true mechanism of injury, is not just possible—it’s saving lives.
This is the conversation they don’t want you to have.
Multiple people across the globe who stepped forward early to receive the COVID-19 vaccine are speaking about what they say is the debilitating neurological condition they developed after getting the shot. Officials became concerned about potential side effects, even shutting down Oxford-AstraZeneca’s phase three COVID-19 vaccine trials while investigators researched possible links to the shot.
Later, health authorities concluded the disabling condition, transverse myelitis (TM), was coincidental and trials were resumed. However, similar cases emerged in recipients of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines after rollout, raising ongoing concerns about possible connections. Daily Mail can now reveal that thousands of cases of the same neurological condition were reported after all major brands of COVID-19 vaccines were administered.
Orthopedic surgeon Dr. Joel Wallskog, author and Oxford University lecturer Sally Bayley and business owner Rebecca Thommen all received a COVID-19 vaccine — either the AstraZeneca, Pfizer or Moderna shots — and were diagnosed with TM soon after.
TM is primarily an autoimmune condition that causes inflammation of the spinal cord that can lead to sudden weakness, numbness in the limbs, permanent or temporary paralysis, and bladder and bowel issues.
EWNZ comment – this is definitely looming larger I notice in NZ. Folk unable to deposit cash, directed to the machines to do it. Some businesses won’t take cash, gas stations I’ve heard of also … and the machines have been disappearing with banks also with no word. And online, all manner of intrusions into privacy via questions asked etc. Kiwibank (see below) ‘may ask you why you’re making a payment and who exactly to …
Here’s another from BNZ: “BNZ has announced significant changes to its range of Advantage credit cards, effective February 2026, that substantially reduce the value proposition for cardholders, per BNZ’s summary. With rewards devaluing by approximately 26%, interest-free days dropping from 55 to 44, and travel insurance benefits being scaled back, many BNZ credit card customers are reconsidering their options beyond what the BNZ is offering. ” Money Hub Newsletter
keeping us all safe of course ….
We are told it is for our benefit – but this is a lie, he says. “They want to get rid of cash for their benefit and not for our benefit. Removing cash will empower the conspirators and remove, forever, the last vestiges of our independence.”
I’ve been warning about the end of cash for at least three decades, and the conspiratorial authorities have been pushing hard for the introduction of digital currencies since the days before laptops and smartphones.
Today, the bankers (aided and abetted by politicians) are closing banks as fast as they can (arguing falsely that everyone wants to bank online), and they’re making it difficult to take cash out of your bank. Automated teller machines (“ATMs”) are rapidly disappearing, and if you try to take cash out of your account over the counter, you could well end up being interrogated like a criminal.
Once the digital currencies become the only way to earn, save or spend, we will all be slaves. The central banks will be able to control our money. They already plan to limit each person to between £10,000 and £20,000. Anything more than that will simply disappear. Negative interest rates will discourage savings. Money will have a limited shelf life – just as money in mobile phones can disappear after a few months. And the bankers will decide how you can spend your money.
It is worth pointing out, by the way, that the central banks have mostly become “independent.” When this happened in the UK in 1997, the Labour Government misled the country, saying that it was giving the Bank of England its independence and granting it operational independence over monetary policy so that it could be free of government influence. In fact, this was rather disingenuous since all central banks were modified to suit the requirements of the financial elites – who prefer to deal with independent banks. In the European Union, it was the Maastricht Treaty which gave independence to the central banks. The European Central Bank, in the EU, is controlled by Deutsche Bank (which was for a long time controlled by Abs, a former Nazi) and other German and European banks. The EU and its Parliament have no control over the bank or its policy. Monetary policy all around the world is controlled by the world’s leading financial institutions. Governments, remember, have no control.
Everyone, it seems, wants to get rid of cash.
First, companies which accept payment by card have to pay commission to the credit card companies. The commission can sometimes be very high with 5% and 7% commission rates not at all uncommon.
Second, clearing banks don’t like cash because handling it is time consuming and, therefore, expensive. Moving money around simply by pressing numbers on a keyboard is much quicker and cheaper (though, curiously, the length of time required to move money from one account to another seems to have lengthened since such methods became available).
Third, governments and government agencies love to see citizens forced to rely on digital money because it is much easier to keep control of what everyone is earning and spending when all money goes through computers. So, for example, in the UK the tax office (HMRC) easily obtained details of what taxi drivers are doing by looking at the records from companies such as Uber. When drivers apply to renew their licences, HMRC sends out threatening letters suggesting that they may have made an under-declaration or no declaration at all.
And, of course, there are all those people who think that using plastic to pay for everything is clever and modern. They don’t realise that plastic cards and chips under their skin are enslaving them and removing the last vestiges of freedom.
Any business which relies on a financial trail (e.g. one that uses an e-commerce site) can now be easily monitored by all government departments. And, of course, it is much easier for banks or the Government to cut off a person’s access to their own money if everything is done digitally. And when all money is digital, banks and other financial institutions will be able to charge what they like. Tax authorities will take what they like from your account.
In the new world of digital money, anyone who shares what is labelled “hate speech” or “misinformation” will be banned from having an account. (It is, of course, already happening.) All those old tweets, and the time you gave a “thumbs down” to the World Economic Forum (“WEF”), will be marked against you.
Remember how American citizens who gave money to the Canadian Truckers had their bank accounts frozen? If you’ve ever criticised your government, then they will make you pay heavily for your impertinence.
Those people who have already lost their PayPal accounts will probably never be allowed to have digital accounts. And without digital accounts, they will starve.
It’s already becoming nigh on impossible to buy petrol without a credit card. And the number of car parks where cash is still accepted is shrinking fast.
Banks throughout the world are preparing to close down all free thinkers. If you think I’m exaggerating, just check out what has already happened.
It has been made clear (by the Bank of England and other clearing banks) that when cash has been replaced with digital currencies, the banks will control how people spend their money. It will be possible to make broad judgements (for example, no one will be able to buy alcohol) and specific ones (patients with early heart trouble will not be allowed to buy certain foods). It will also be possible for governments, banks and companies to monitor spending habits. So, if there is a shortage of eggs, for example, the authorities will be able to make sure that no one buys more eggs than they are allowed.
Removing cash from society will make life incredibly difficult (for which read “impossible”) for those who are not computer literate, for beggars and for charities who rely on cash. The quality of our lives will be massively diminished by the disappearance of cash. And, of course, getting rid of cash can be used to track where we go and what we do.
Many local councils are now forcing motorists to use an App available only on a smartphone to pay for parking, and in those places, it is impossible to pay for a parking place with cash. The information which motorists are forced to give can be used in many ways (and will be sold to a variety of purchasers so, for example, thieves will know when householders are away from their homes). Forcing motorists to use a smartphone in order to park a vehicle is clearly discriminatory (since it means that those without a smartphone cannot park) and almost certainly illegal.
And, of course, people tend to overspend when they use credit or debit cards for everything they buy. Using cash helps keep people out of debt.
It’s vital to remember that they want to get rid of cash for their benefit and not for our benefit. Removing cash will empower the conspirators and remove, forever, the last vestiges of our independence.
We really are close to the end as far as cash is concerned. According to data provider Merchant Machine, cash is now used in only 1% of payments in the most digitalised economies in the world, including Sweden, Denmark, Singapore and the UK. Every time anyone uses a credit or debit card, or flashes a contactless payment card for a small purchase, they are taking us closer to a digital society and digital enslavement.
The end of cash is now just months away.
And when cash disappears, it will take with it the last vestige of our freedom.
The restrictions on what we can and cannot do with our own money get longer by the day. For example, states within the EU will have to collect information on the ownership of luxury goods such as aeroplanes, boats and cars, and each member state will have to establish a “financial intelligence unit.” Rules in England now make it extraordinarily difficult for citizens to access their own money or even to move it from one account to another.
I recently tried to take some of my money out of my account and was shut in a room and interrogated like a criminal before eventually, and rather begrudgingly, being given an envelope containing the cash I’d asked for.
Even moving from one account to another has become fiendishly bewildering and time-consuming.
I was standing in a bank the other day, trying to move money from one account to another. I was moving my money from one of my own accounts to another of my own accounts. I don’t know if you’ve tried doing this recently but it gets harder by the week. You need to produce a driving licence or a passport, of course. (Heaven help you if you don’t have one or the other, or preferably both.) And you need your bank card. And, depending upon the mental state of the cashier, you may need a utility bill, a tax form and a council tax demand. You may soon need a note from your mother.
And, of course, they now have a veritable litany of questions to fire at you. “Has anyone asked you to make this transaction?” “Are you under pressure to do this?” And so on and so on. They pretend the questions are to protect us, but only the naïve and dim-witted believe that. These stupid questions are devised by very wicked people to delay the whole procedure and to force us all to bank online.
One of the daftest questions is this one: “Is anyone waiting outside for you?”
Standing next to me, at the neighbouring window, stood a little old lady – well, in her nineties. She, too, was trying to move money from one account to another so that she could pay a bill.
“Is anyone waiting outside for you?” asked the bank clerk.
“Oh yes,” said the little old lady naively. “My friend brought me.”
The clerk looked as pleased as if she’d won the lottery. “Oh, well, I can’t help you then,” she said with a big smile and a sense of satisfaction you could have bottled.
The little old lady didn’t understand. “But my neighbour had to bring me,” she explained. “I’m 93. I had to give up my driving licence.”
The poor woman didn’t understand that logic and honesty are no longer relevant.
“But your neighbour might have put you under pressure to make this transaction,” said the clerk, brim full of sanctimonious, self-righteous, box-ticking obedience.
“My neighbour?” said the old lady. “Why would she do anything nasty to me? I’ve known her for nearly 50 years.” She looked around, bewildered. “I’ve been banking here for years. Doesn’t anyone recognise me?”
“That doesn’t matter,” said the clerk, her joy now slightly diluted by exasperation. “I can’t help you if you have someone waiting for you. Those are the rules.” And then she added the killer. “It’s for your protection.”
And so the old lady, puzzled and confused, tottered out of the bank and back to her neighbour’s car.
I swear that happened. And I’m not surprised.
(The banks make a great fuss about our responsibilities and their lack of them. But did you know that Barclays Bank has just been fined $361 million by the US Securities and Exchange Commission? And do you know why? Well, they “accidentally” sold $17.7 billion worth of structured financial products for which they did not have authorisation. The total effect on shareholders (including many pensioners), as a result of this $17.7 billion “accident,” was to help push down net income by 19%. The little old lady’s one mistake was that she didn’t tell the clerk to move $17.7 billion that she didn’t have from one account to another. They’d have done that with a smile and probably given her a free pen and a cup of coffee, too. )
Morons (of whom there are many these days) claim, as they have been told, that the inquisition is for our benefit. That’s yet another lie. The banks want to force us online. And, as a side effect, they want to absolve themselves from blame when they screw up (which they do on a regular basis). If you want evidence that the banks have been politicised, just look at the way that people who dare to stand up and question the system lose their bank accounts. In Canada, citizens who stood up in defence of truckers protesting about vaccine mandates lost their bank accounts. And the same thing is happening with frightening regularity everywhere else. In England, the boss of an independent platform carrying free speech videos lost his bank account and found that no other bank would accept him as a customer. No one could tell him what his crime was. Nigel Farage, the well-known politician, was suddenly told that a bank he had been with for 40 years was going to close his accounts – both business and personal. A man who asked why his local building society was festooned with flags celebrating homosexuality found the cost of free speech when the building society responded to his query by closing his account.
Bank staff seem to have been indoctrinated by the same people who indoctrinated NHS staff, train drivers, civil servants, teachers, council employees and just about everyone else in this increasingly miserable and oppressive world of ours.
(Teachers call what they do “brainwashing in a good cause.” But can brainwashing ever be defended? If the evidence for their claims were solid and honest, they would not need to make stuff up or attempt to brainwash their students. For decades now, school teachers have been indoctrinating rather than teaching their pupils, promoting the myth of climate change, changing history to meet woke demands and altering the balance of history to suit their propaganda. And refusing to allow pupils to question or debate the official version of history.)
Taking cash out of your own account has become an exercise in patience and determination.
I recently went into a branch of my bank wanting to take out some money – a little more than the machine would allow me to withdraw. I had bills to pay and I wanted to buy some presents.
“Are you going to take this money home and keep it there?” asked the clerk.
I thought this was an incredibly stupid question. The woman was a stranger, and she had my address on a screen in front of her. She wanted to know if I was going to take money home and keep it there to be stolen. What an idiot. So, I was a little cautious. As any sensible person would, I said “No.”
“So, why do you want this money?” asked the impertinent bank clerk.
“To buy sweets,” I replied. It has been my standard reply to this question for years.
Bang. I could tell from her eyes that the metaphorical shutters had come down.
You can’t make light-hearted comments any more.
The clerk looked at her screen as if it were telling her something.
“Your request has been blocked,” said the clerk.
In full sight of other customers, I was ushered into a room and the door was closed.
And I was interrogated. I felt like a criminal. Most people would, I think, have found it a humiliating and embarrassing encounter.
Phone calls were made. I was instructed to answer questions put to me on the telephone. (I couldn’t understand the questioner’s accent and so I needed a translator.) To check my identity, I was asked for my date of birth (a piece of information that is about as secret as Prince Harry’s level of affection for his brother).
And eventually, after what seemed like several hours of interrogation, I was, with ill grace and no apology, given the amount of money I had requested.
It wasn’t a loan I was asking for. It was my money.
It is, of course, all part of the scheme to force us to bank online – ready for the digital currency they have ready for us.
Your bank hates you. They want to turn you into nothing more than numbers on a computer.
When cash disappears, you will become a slave of the system. You will have no freedom and no independence. The authorities will be able to turn off your access to your own money. You will own nothing and you will not be happy. You’ve been warned.
Note: The above is taken from `Their Terrifying Plan’ by Vernon Coleman. For details of the book, please CLICK HERE.
About the Author
Vernon Coleman, MB ChB DSc, practised medicine for ten years. He has been a full-time professional author for over 30 years. He is a novelist and campaigning writer and has written many non-fiction books. He has written over 100 books which have been translated into 22 languages. On his website, HERE, there are hundreds of articles which are free to read. Since mid-December 2024, Dr. Coleman has also been publishing articles on Substack; you can subscribe to and follow him on Substack HERE.
There are no ads, no fees and no requests for donations on Dr. Coleman’s website or videos. He pays for everything through book sales. If you would like to help finance his work, please consider purchasing a book – there are over 100 books by Vernon Coleman available in print on Amazon.
This is an older post from Carol Sawyer, a New Zealander researcher and writer who spent many years intensively examining the information on 1080 poison. Information that DoC is not interested in. Here Carol interviews retired GP Kevin Shannon on the 2006 story concerning the loss by a NZ laboratory of the heart of a young woman who was a suspected victim of 1080 poisoning while tramping in the South Island Dr Shannon’s statement explains the reticence of any laboratory that does test for 1080 in disclosing their identity. EWNZ.
Police tested for about six poisons, none of them 1080, and then “had the effrontery” to tell him this was not a death by 1080 poison.
By Carol Sawyer
Last year I met with retired Dunedin GP, Kevin Shannon, still fit and tall and travelling the world at the age of 87. Kevin (who gave a submission at the ERMA Review 2007, on the case of the death of a female tramper in the link below), is of the opinion that:
…some New Zealanders, no-one knows how many, will have died of heart attacks due to undetected Compound 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate).
Kevin added that in this instance the Police tested for about six poisons, none of them 1080, and then “had the effrontery” to tell him this was not a death by 1080 poison.
He told me that no dead body will ever be tested for 1080 in NZ because any pathologist who did so would not have a job for long.
“In case you have any doubt, the MOH and their clerical employees have a great deal of control over our medical professions and they do not take kindly to anyone expressing an opinion that they disagree with. Working Doctors with current practicing certificates have to tread lightly where the MOH and their agendas are concerned.” Dr Charles Baycroft
NB: Exercise the precautionary principle and take extreme care whilst tramping in NZ’s wild places. The Class 1A Ecotoxin 1080 is spread liberally and aerially around NZ’s environment and we are told it is not very harmful to humans. See our page on suspected 1080 poisoning cases.
VAERS has not published any “new” public reports since September 5, 2025. The regular routine has been the first Friday of month, which means they just blew by the second month in a row without a VAERS update. This is unprecedented for VAERS in any year and during any past governmental shutdown. You would think pharmacovigilance would be mission critical especially during one of the worst pandemics ever experienced in modern times. However, it makes total sense if this was a choreographed plandemic with a heavy dose of pharmacofraudulance. Come on man, just take your Ozempic and shut your pie hole! No soup for you, God Bless.
I confirm it looks like reports can still be submitted to VAERS, but I can not confirm if incoming reports are being adjudicated, authenticated, or “processed/finalized” in any way? This is the last available update:
Some of our readers will have seen this post. I’m re-sharing it, and others on topic going forward, as many will not be up to speed on this toxin that our conservation ‘experts’ (DoC) swear is harmless once dissolved in water (hence why they can now dump it in our waterways). They spread it all over NZ like veritable lolly scrambles :
For over 50 years the New Zealand Government has been systematically dropping massive amounts of food, laced with a cruel and universally toxic poison into its forest ecosystems. Enough poison every year to kill the entire population of NZ four times over. No other country is doing, or ever has done, anything remotely similar on such a scale.
1080 is an alias for Monofluoroacetate, a chemical. Monofluoroacetate was originally developed and marketed as an insecticide. It functions primarily by interfering with the citrate step in the Krebs cycle [5]. The Krebs cycle is the major and an essential mechanism by which all air breathing creatures utilize food to produce energy. It is therefore universally toxic to all animals, essentially every living thing except plants and some micro-organisms. The degree of toxicity of 1080 is extreme, but varies somewhat among species. It is categorised by the World Health Organization (WHO) as 1A, their highest rating, “extremely toxic” [1,2]. The PAN pesticide database classifies 1080 as one of the few “PAN Bad Actor Chemicals”, by which it means “highly acutely toxic” [2]. It can kill every air-breathing animal. One hundred milligrams is sufficient to kill an adult human [1]. In theory, one could kill at least 20 million people with the amount being dropped into New Zealand Forests every year. Dr Q Whiting-OKeefe (BA Chemistry, Math), MD, FACMI
“Farmers have hoarded land for too long. Inheritance tax will bring new life to rural Britain,” says the paper.
The following report was first published on winepressnews.com on November 18th, 2024. The following report is by Will Hutton from The Guardian:
One of the baleful dimensions of our times is the way that the conversation about what constitutes the good society is framed by the rich and their interests. A conception of the common good withers; instead it is replaced by the existential importance of private wealth, private interests and private ownership to societal health. Nowhere is this more exposed than in the debate over taxation, and in particular the taxation of inherited wealth – as the debate over the past fortnight has dramatised.
Half a million people die every year. Under the reforms to inheritance tax relief on agricultural land proposed in the budget, about 500 individuals who inherit land worth more than £2m (£3m if they were married to the deceased) will join the rest of society and have inheritance tax levied on their bequest – albeit at half the rate, with an enlarged exemption and 10 years to pay it, concessions not made to the rest of us. How fortunate and privileged are they?
Yet ever since, the National Farmers Union, Historic Houses, the Tory party, the rightwing media and, inevitably, Elon Musk have behaved as if the move represents a new communist dictatorship. Edward Stanley, the 19th Earl of Derby, denizen of Merseyside’s Knowsley Hall where his family has lived since 1385, represented their united view. “Taking 20% of a business away every generation is just a shockingly awful concept for a government that wants growth,” he told the Financial Times. Positioning himself as a wealth-creating small business, he insisted it “would kill off farming and heritage businesses” like his. According to the lobby, a new age of Jacobin terror has been unleashed – production will collapse, rural Britain will be devastated, and all for a trivial amount of money. Rarely have 500 very privileged people got so hysterical – and commanded so much attention.
There is no acknowledgment of the potential wider benefits that go beyond the non-trivial contribution the tax will make to relieving the crisis in public services. The hoarding of land that has gone on since the bung was introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1984, which has so steadily driven up land prices and farmers’ rents, will at last be checked as some of the larger estates are obliged to sell parcels of land to pay inheritance tax, as they did before 1984 without the world falling in, rather than be enabled to own it in perpetuity. Young farmers, now increasingly crowded out of the market, will get a chance to buy land: there is the prospect of a levelling off, even a fall, in farm rents. New life and ideas will be brought to the rural economy as innovative, energetic farmers enter the market – and production even increases.
As importantly, a key principle that has underpinned all human societies – that we have a right to share in the bounty of inherited assets – will be reaffirmed. Whether ancient Rome or feudal Europe, societies have taken the view that just because an individual got lucky and came out of the right womb, they are not entitled to inherit everything without paying some levy or tribute on their inherited wealth. After all, wealth is enjoyed in a societal context and society made a contribution to the existence of the wealth. Of course society should share in the transfer, if only in a minor way, and the principle should extend to everyone, with as few exceptions as possible. Far from a death tax, it is a life tax on undeserved good luck.
Why so much fuss? Part of the problem is that rural Britain has never escaped the cultural trappings of feudalism. It is now largely forgotten, but in 1883 the Conservative party, to fight the rise of progressive liberalism and its emergent outrider socialism, set up the mass membership Primrose League, whose adherents formally accepted the vital role that the “landed estates of the realm” played in an idea of imperial, free-enterprise Britain. It was a direct response to William Gladstone’s creation of “succession duty” in 1881 codifying the longstanding practice of levying a duty on the transfer of landed assets – and the principle had to be fought to the last. Within a decade its members, incredibly, outnumbered trade unionists.
The Earl of Derby speaks to that Primrose League tradition, arguing that his family is less a 650-year beneficiary of the baronial carve-up of England after the Norman conquest and more an employment-generating small business. Selling a little of the estate to pay inheritance tax is off limits; instead, the assumption is that the tax will have to be paid from the business’s cashflow, to preserve the estate in perpetuity – hence the over-egged predictions of devastation. In the wider economy, the creation of perpetual monopolies would be widely criticised as not only unfairly entrenching wealth and power but stifling the process of creative churn that is at the heart of economic vitality. Britain’s landed estates are excused from the same criticism.
It is a political and cultural achievement that must be challenged today with the same energy it was challenged by Liberal leaders in the run-up to the First World War. The Lib Dem leader, Ed Davey, calling for the government to suspend the measure, forgets Gladstone’s succession duty, William Harcourt’s introduction of estates duty in 1894 and David Lloyd George’s imaginative plans to break up the monopoly of land ownership. Yet, while the non-royal dukes might no longer have automatic membership of the House of Lords, they still own as much of Britain as they did then. Davey should not cosy up to Musk and co, inflaming the hysteria, but rather back Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves who, to their credit, are holding the line.
But Labour needs to win the argument, and to be convincing that argument must be made from first principles. Inheritance tax springs from the universally held belief that society has the right to share when wealth is transferred on death as a matter of justice. This is not confiscation, especially if the lion’s share of the bequest is left intact. It is asking for a share. The principle should apply to all estates and to everyone. It is fair. It limits the entrenchment of wealth and privilege. It breaks up monopoly, especially of land. It enlarges the tax base. It gives the next generation a chance. Any other argument is the special pleading of plutocrats – and should be seen as such.
The WinePress News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Subscribe
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
Job 24:2 Some remove the landmarks; they violently take away flocks, and feed thereof. [3] They drive away the ass of the fatherless, they take the widow’s ox for a pledge. [4] They turn the needy out of the way: the poor of the earth hide themselves together.
“Asking to share?” It kind of sounds like, ‘Oh, I’m not robbing people, I’m just asking for people’s money.’ Yes, this absolutely IS confiscation: this has communism written all over it.
The Guardian is nothing but a nutty progressive outlet that peddles all sorts of ridiculous, globalist garbage. What this Hutton guy is promoting is plainly communism. How dare families pass down their generational land and wealth? That must sequestered by the state so only the preferred class can have it and subsidize it, so these types of people think.
Proverbs 13:22 A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just.
Proverbs 19:14 House and riches are the inheritance of fathers: and a prudent wife is from the LORD.
This is a poorly masqueraded propaganda piece to justify the government stealing more of private citizens’ land so the government can consolidate more of it. This is what has been happening in countries such as The Netherlands and Ireland already.
Thanks for reading The WinePress News! This post is public so feel free to share it.
Rebranding, renaming, covering up …isn’t that what ‘they’ do best?This is an essay I consider to be right on the nail. It weaves together the narratives (aka lies) that have been spun to indigenous peoples in order to gain access to their lands and resources. By stealth. These narratives we’ve known in part but stitched together here they give us a view of the whole picture … the intent, the modus operandi and the finished product. The most recent narrative of course being the covid plandemic …
Throughout history, power has perfected a singular deception: creating elaborate narratives to disguise systematic resource extraction as benevolent intervention. From the Irish countryside to Indian provinces, from modern medical systems to digital workplaces, the pattern remains constant. Empire identifies or creates a crisis, offers a solution that requires surrendering autonomy, then extracts resources while victims thank them for their help. These narratives of extraction don’t simply steal physical resources—they colonize time itself, transform health into commodity, destroy reproductive autonomy, and reshape human consciousness to accept exploitation as liberation.
The genius of these narratives lies in their moral inversions. Starvation becomes a population problem rather than food theft. Poverty becomes underdevelopment rather than systematic impoverishment. Disease becomes individual failure rather than manufactured illness. Women’s exhaustion becomes oppression by motherhood rather than capitalism’s demand for doubled labor. Each narrative transforms resistance into pathology, making those who refuse the “solution” appear backward, ignorant, or dangerous.
What makes modern extraction narratives particularly insidious is their totalizing nature. Where colonial powers once had to use visible force, today’s systems of extraction operate through manufactured consent.
Note: Lest you doubt the ongoing war first peoples have always been up against “Three hundred thousand are forecast to be Indigenous, continuing a centuries-long cycle of state-sanctioned extermination masked as “care.” ” EWNZ
More than 14 million Canadians, according to the data, will be culled by Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) instead of receiving palliative or mental health care.
From Baxter Dmitry via Exposing the Darkness @ substack
According to a recent publication in the Journal of Death and Dying, Health Canada has unveiled a plan for “savings” that is as brutal as it is unprecedented. As detailed by Kelsi Sheren, the analysis reveals that from 2027 to 2047, the government is projected to save a staggering $1.273 trillion—not through innovation or improved healthcare—but through death.
More than 14 million Canadians, according to the data, will be culled by Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) instead of receiving palliative or mental health care.
Let that number sink in: 14.7 million human beings put to death by the state.
The breakdown exposes the raw cruelty beneath the bureaucratic language.
Over nine million are expected to be the elderly—our parents, grandparents, the generation that built the country. Another four million are projected to be those struggling with mental illness or suicidal thoughts—people who should be receiving compassion and treatment, not a government-funded lethal injection. Three hundred thousand are forecast to be Indigenous, continuing a centuries-long cycle of state-sanctioned extermination masked as “care.” The remainder are the forgotten—the addicts, the poor, the homeless. Those who once fell through the cracks are now being deliberately pushed through them.
What we’re witnessing is not compassion—it’s a depopulation agenda dressed up as healthcare reform. For years, the elites have spoken in euphemisms about “sustainability,” “resource allocation,” and “reducing human impact.”
But behind the sterile language lies the same philosophy that drove eugenics programs in the last century: that some lives are no longer worth the cost of keeping alive. This is the new face of population control—clean, clinical, and taxpayer-funded.
This is what Bill Gates spoke about years ago when he calmly explained that “death panels” will be necessary to keep healthcare systems “sustainable.” The idea was dismissed as a dystopian conspiracy at the time.
But today, we’re seeing those exact mechanisms quietly installed—committees, guidelines, and cost-benefit analyses that decide who lives and who dies in the name of fiscal efficiency. The architects of this system call it mercy. In truth, it is the economic rationalization of death.
And it’s not stopping with Canada. Similar conversations are happening across the West, from the UK’s National Health Service to U.S. think tanks advocating for “end-of-life cost optimization.” The narrative is spreading—one that frames euthanasia as empowerment, while burying the fact that the system itself created the despair in the first place. When people are crushed by inflation, isolation, and mental collapse, the state arrives not with help, but with a syringe.
The data is there for anyone to see. The SAGE Journal and the Journal of Death and Dying make it clear: this isn’t about compassion—it’s about control. The great reset of humanity doesn’t always come with wars or pandemics. Sometimes it comes disguised as kindness, whispered in the language of “choice” and “dignity.”
But make no mistake—what is being built for Canada, and soon the rest of the world, is a system of managed decline, where human life is reduced to a line item on a balance sheet.
The elites have declared open season on the vulnerable. And unless we speak up, they’ll call it progress.
For over a century, vaccination has been repeatedly linked to severe neurological injuries including brain damage — with many modern studies showing a 3 to 7 fold increase in common chronic illnesses
To dodge this massive liability, all research into vaccine injuries (and many other catastrophes like Agent Orange) was suppressed so that health authorities could claim there was “no evidence” of vaccine harm
Another scheme was to redefine the brain injury as “autism” rather than encephalitis (which the U.S. government was legally required to provide injury compensation for)
Previously, children with significant vaccine brain damage were referred to as “mentally retarded.” However, after a multi-decade campaign cancelled “retarded” they were instead diagnosed as autistic — a vague term which blurs severe and minor disability together, thereby effectively concealing the severe cases from the public’s awareness
This article will reveal the manipulative techniques and wordplay that have been used to conceal vaccine injuries from the public’s awareness, as now is the time when we can at last end this atrocity
I’ve long believed that public relations (propaganda) is one of the most powerful but invisible forces in our society. Again and again, I’ve watched professional PR firms create narratives that most of the country believes, regardless of how much it goes against their self-interests.
What’s most remarkable is that despite the exact same tactics being used repeatedly on the public, most people simply can’t see it. When you try to point out exactly how they’re being bamboozled by yet another PR campaign, they often can’t recognize it — instead insisting you’re paranoid or delusional.
That’s why one of my major goals in this publication has been to expose this industry. Once you understand their playbook — having “independent” experts push sculpted language that media outlets then repeat — it becomes very easy to spot, and saves you from falling into the traps most people do. The COVID-19 vaccines, for instance, were facilitated by the largest PR campaign of our lifetime.
One of the least appreciated consequences of this industry is that many of our cultural beliefs ultimately originate from PR campaigns.1 This explains why so many widely believed things are “wrong” — if a belief were actually true, it wouldn’t require a massive PR investment to instill in society. Due to PR’s power, the viewpoints it instills tend to crowd out other cultural beliefs.
In this article, we’ll take a deeper look at what’s behind one of those implanted beliefs: “vaccines don’t cause autism.”
VIDEO: HOW AUTISM LABELS HID BRAIN INJURY (click on the image to watch at odysee.com
The Frequency of Vaccine Injuries
When vaccinated and unvaccinated children are compared, chronic illnesses are 3 to 7X as common in the vaccinated individuals. Because of this, there is a longstanding embargo on ever conducting this type of research (allowing the status quo to remain that “no evidence exists” between the vaccine and the injury).
Recently, Senator Ron Johnson revealed that a robust study comparing vaccinated children to unvaccinated had been conducted at a premier medical institution in 2020, but due to the results it showed, despite previously committing to publishing the paper, its authors chose not to, due to how much it violated the medical orthodoxy.
It’s important to note that beyond these results being earth-shattering, they are also entirely in line with every other long-term comparative study that has ever been done on vaccines — all of which I synopsized here (along with the characteristic signs that allow one to identify the frightfully frequent vaccine-injured children).
Erasing Encephalitis
A key theme of George Orwell’s book 1984 is that language defines a culture. If ideas aren’t present in language, the populace can’t conceive of them (which is why 1984’s ruling party eliminated words like ‘freedom’, ‘rebellion’, and ‘justice’ from the new language).
Another way language controls the public consciousness is through the use of ambiguous terms which are not clearly defined, so that depending on the needs of the situation, the audience can be steered towards the desired interpretation of it, even if those interpretations sometimes overtly contradict each other (effectively allowing the PR firm’s client to “have their cake and eat it”).
For example, Fauci was a master of using slippery language to constantly get whatever he wanted with no accountability through implying but never explicitly stating his desired conclusion (which the media would then run with).
A classic example is having everyone in lockstep assert vaccines are “safe and effective” without ever defining what that actually means, thereby allowing that meaningless statement to be treated as “vaccines are 100% safe and effective,” yet simultaneously, having no accountability for lying as those who repeat it never actually said that.
This was best demonstrated when Fauci (who continually told us the vaccine would definitely prevent us from getting COVID) was grilled at a recent Congressional hearing,2 where in response to:
“But we knew from the trials that people who got vaccinated still were subject to getting COVID, so was the COVID-19 vaccine 100% effective?”
Fauci stated:
“I don’t believe any vaccine is 100% effective.”
Note:In a recent article I also highlighted how the ambiguous phrase “brain death” was created to make people believe unresponsive individuals were in fact dead, thereby both removing the societal cost of perpetually caring for them and securing a reliable supply of donor organs.
One of the most widely recognized side effects of vaccination is neurological damage (particularly to the cranial nerves and brain). Prior to the censorship which took over our medical journals, reports of vaccine brain and nerve injuries (e.g., encephalitis) were extensively reported throughout the medical literature — including many identical to what are seen in modern-day autism.
Furthermore, it used to be widely recognized that vaccines could make you “mentally retarded” or “severely retarded.” Consider for example, the language at this 1983 debate between doctors which took place on the Donahue Show (which at the time was the largest talk show in America) — that to my knowledge was the last time a publicized debate on vaccines was allowed to happen:
Given the taboo around “retarded” that exists now, it is quite noteworthy how nonchalantly it was used there. This shift resulted from disability groups in the late 1990s and early 2000’s campaigning against “retarded,” an extensive 2008 campaign (ending the “r-word”)3 and in 2010, Obama signing a law which effectively outlawed the term by removing “mentally retarded” from all federal laws and statutes and replacing it with “intellectual disability” (something which has never been done with any other word).4
As such, the vaccine brain injuries, which made children mentally retarded were re-labeled as “autism,” while in tandem, autism was given an extremely broad and vague definition that swept over all the concurrently occurring neurological injuries.
Because of this, the stark and unmistakable impression of a severe vaccine brain injury (e.g., “you know Sue’s son became severely retarded after their 2 month vaccines”) was displaced with a much more amorphous term that was easy to write off because it was too complex and vague to think about — hence providing easy mental escapes from this uncomfortable topic, thereby making it easy to write off and close one’s mind to.
Note: The mechanisms through which vaccines cause autism are explained here.
Anytime something injures human beings (unless it’s highly lethal), less severe reactions will be much more common than severe injuries (e.g., far more were disabled than killed by the COVID vaccines5).
As such, individuals with minor neurological injuries from vaccination have changes that lightly overlap with those seen in severe injuries.
Because of this, “autism exists on a spectrum” with many of its characteristic changes being seen to lesser extents in individuals who are not severely disabled (e.g., Elon Musk has characteristic autistic traits and has admitted as such6).
Yet, rather than recognizing that the rise in autistic-like traits signals something is profoundly changing in the population — and that a smaller group may be developing severe brain damage and more extreme versions of these traits — the prevailing narrative claims the autism surge is simply due to people who were otherwise basically normal (aside from a few “autistic quirks”) being re-diagnosed as autistic.
As such, the autism epidemic is dismissed as an illusion, attributed to “selective data interpretation by anti-vaxxers” — a convenient explanation that allows many to avoid grappling with an uncomfortable possibility.
Likewise, whenever “autism” is equated to brain damage, a large chorus of people can be relied upon to denounce them by saying their (highly functional) autistic child is not brain damaged, thereby silencing and ending the actual debate (e.g., Elizabeth Warren has repeatedly done this to RFK7).
Similarly, once the societal conception of vaccine brain injuries was shifted from “mentally retarded” or “autism,” a push began to normalize autism (e.g., with terms like neurodiversity), thereby making it even more taboo to criticize the complications of this illness.
Fortunately, independent voices are beginning to sound the alarm over this issue. Gavin de Becker (a longtime advocate for vaccine safety), in an excellent newly released book points out that:
1.There is no clear definition for autism or a definitive way to diagnose much of it.
2.The same people who whitewashed the link between autism and vaccines by claiming there is “no evidence” also did the same for many other controversies, such as:
“Promoting their work on vaccine safety, an IOM spokesperson said, ‘We looked very hard and found very little evidence of serious adverse harms from vaccines. The message I would want parents to have is one of reassurance.’
Since that’s the same ‘very little evidence’ the Government found with Agent Orange, burn pits, the anthrax vaccine, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, breast implants, and Gulf War Syndrome, I’m not sure how reassuring it ought to be to parents.“
Note: At this point, one of the primary obstacles we are facing in ending detrimental vaccine mandates is not a lack of data, but rather finding a way to reach people who are resistant to the idea that vaccines could be harmful. De Becker’s book (Forbidden Facts8) was specifically written to provide the rhetorical tools that could bring about this shift.
Autism Data
Given all of this, there are two critical, but almost never discussed data points to consider. First, one of the primary studies cited to support the argument that the rise in autism actually is due to diagnostic reclassification is a 2009 study from California9 (conducted when the word retarded was being banned). Rather than show minor traits were being relabeled as autism, it showed 26.4% of children who had previously been diagnosed as “mentally retarded” became “autistic” (as did another commonly cited study10).
Second, while the general public has been conditioned to believe in the amorphous autism label, since this is untenable for those actually working with severely disabled children (vs. those on the spectrum), within the autism field, the two are differentiated by the terms “profound autism” and the far less severe “non-profound” autism. CDC data11 in turn, shows that roughly 26.7% of autistic children have “profound autism,” and that it is continually increasing (although at a much slower rate than non-profound autism):
However, since clarifying what autism is defeats the purpose of the label (having it be an ambiguous term that ultimately sweeps everything under the rug), this distinction is rarely if ever mentioned, and folks outside the autism community are seldom even aware of the term “profound autism” — they simply know “vaccines do not cause autism.”
The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act
The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act had a large number of supporters in Congress due to a recent public recognition (made possible by the mainstream media of that era not habitually censoring pharmaceutical injury stories) that the original DPT vaccine frequently caused brain damage and severe disability.
Because of that, the act was created with the intention of fixing many of the major safety issues with vaccines and providing for injured parents to have an easier time obtaining compensation (by having the government rather than vaccine manufacturers pay for injuries), with the industry, in turn, agreeing to the act as they needed a way to be shielded from injury lawsuits that were bringing them to bankruptcy.
However, while well-intended (e.g., it put into place many critical provisions we rely upon now, like VAERS), give or take, every key provision in the act was implemented at the H.H.S. Secretary’s discretion. As such, once it passed, most of the things it was intended to do never happened and the overall situation instead became much worse as vaccine manufacturers no longer had any legal liability for making injurious products, hence allowing a flood of them to enter the market.
Note: This was also enabled by a 2011 Supreme Court ruling, which erased a critical provision of the act that had previously allowed the public to sue manufacturers for defective products.12
As the act was structured:
•If someone was afflicted with a condition that was agreed to be linked to vaccination shortly after vaccination, the Federal government was responsible for paying compensation to them, and to do so through a “vaccine court” designed to be much easier to handle than the hostile court system parents of DPT-injured children had navigated.
Note: DPT brain injuries were so prevalent that after I posted an article on them, along with another on SIDS (a common complication of DPT), many readers shared they had witnessed the exact injuries I described following that vaccine — which, in short, is why DPT injury lawsuits were bankrupting the vaccine manufacturers.
•In the original act, after intense negotiation, a series of vaccine-linked injuries were put into it (forming the initial vaccine injury table), along with a stipulation requiring continuous research to identify other complications that could be linked to vaccination.
Since much of that was at the H.H.S. Secretary’s discretion, there was an incentive to never allow future research which could unveil additional injuries requiring compensation. As such, despite twelve new vaccines being added to the schedule and decades of science since 1986, virtually no additional neurological injuries have been added to the table.13
Likewise, at the time the original act was written, brain damage (encephalopathy) was a widely recognized complication of vaccination.14 Hence, this was one of the few neurological conditions for which it stipulated that coverage was required.
As such, replacing encephalopathy with “autism” (which vaccines “do not cause”) made it possible to exempt the federal government from the massive liability it faced for these ever-increasing vaccine brain injuries.
Note: One of the things many people do not realize is that most of what RFK is trying to do with vaccines (which has provoked so much hysteria from the politicians and the media) is simply what the 1986 Act required the H.H.S. Secretary to do, but none ever have.
Conclusion
Despite endless attempts by the CDC to gaslight us about the COVID vaccines, more and more of the public is now awakening to the fact that they are, in fact, killing people. This was best shown by a recent poll that found 56% of American voters believe the COVID vaccines have caused mass deaths16 along with previous ones that showed:
•Two years ago 49% believed the vaccines had caused a significant number of deaths,17 while a year ago, 53% did.18
•That 34% of vaccine recipients had minor side effects19 and 7% had major side effects.20
•Four years ago, 32% believed public health officials were lying about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines,21 and two years ago, 57% wanted Congress to investigate how the CDC handled assessing vaccine safety.22
Note: The earliest poll I’m aware of — conducted on stage by Charlie Kirk at a large December 2021 event — found that nearly everyone in the audience either had personally experienced or knew someone who had suffered a severe adverse reaction to the COVID vaccine and that almost all attendees knew someone they believed had died as a result of the vaccine.
Similarly, while they’ve buried the link between vaccines and autism for decades, too many have now been affected that it can’t be swept under the rug anymore. Fortunately Trump’s recent historic press conference on Autism marked a turning point many parents have waited decades for.
There, the President stated he strongly believed vaccines caused autism, correctly identified simple measures to reduce this (e.g., spacing vaccines out) and emphasized that ending this tragedy was his top priority, after which RFK Jr. stated:
“Some 40 to 70% of mothers who have children with autism believe that their child was injured by a vaccine. President Trump believes that we should be listening to these mothers instead of gaslighting and marginalize them, marginalizing them like prior administrations.
Some of our friends like to say that we should believe all women. Some of these same people have been silencing and demonizing these mothers for three decades because research on the potential link between autism and vaccines has been actively suppressed in the past. It will take time for an honest look at this topic by scientists.”
Now that real change is on the table, the vested interests will fight much more fiercely to protect their status quo and it is upon each of us to do all we can to work together to protect humanity’s health.
Author’s Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article which goes into greater details of the points mentioned here. That article, along with additional links and references can be read here. Additionally, a companion article on how vaccines cause Autism can be read here.
A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author
A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.
As the scale of what has been done to humanity continues to evolve, the mind may struggle. In becoming increasingly distressed, many people run and hide under a psychological rock of denial or willful deaf-, dumb- and blindness. This may be fine for them, briefly, even as their peers start to suffer ‘befuddling’ health collapse or even die suddenly or horribly around them.
But one solution for those of us trying to navigate the enormity of this crime against humanity, or even working to stop it, is to focus on understanding the various elements of the crime, one aspect at a time. Clearly, to us anyway, ‘public health’ has been taken over by very dark interests and is being used to advance biowarfare on a large segment of the global population.
Superficially, the military and medicine may seem to be the antithesis of each other. One sends people to kill and be killed, and the other uses doctors and nurses to save lives. But there are plenty of clues that they can be bedfellows.
The same labs, researchers, investors and grant money work on ‘dual purpose’ innovations, for instance the souped-up pathogen and its own vaccine. Public Health is often called the 4th Service, having legislated authority to invade people’s homes and bodily autonomy in some circumstances, defined (and ideally limited) by health orders. Its leaders have military titles like Director-General, even uniforms in some countries.
Quasi-militarisitic staff can quarantine and forcibly test and administer treatments against people carrying, or merely at risk of, some diseases – even at the point of a gun.
Largely we accept all this, for the ‘greater good’, based on historic infectious disease outbreaks, and a deep primal fear of contagion. But the covid era has seen gross abuses of state power, led by bureaucrats suffering a lethal combination of fear and power craziness, and medical ethics have gone down the toilet. Worse still, the public health system has been the vehicle of choice to administer biowarfare against the people who trusted it.
What is Biowarfare?
Biological warfare (BW) is defined as the intentional use of harmful biological organisms, such as bacteria, viruses, and fungi, or their products, to inflict damage on humans, animals, or plants during warfare. It is categorized as a form of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) due to its potential to cause mass casualties.
A euphemism for biowarfare research, “gain-of-function research” is defined as scientific studies undertaken “to increase the pathogenicity and transmissibility of microbes“. Pathogenicity means the severity of disease that an organism can cause. Transmissibility means the capacity of an organism to transmit between individuals.
Alongside covid-19, we have written about biowarfare in relation to a number of other scenarios being marketed to the public recently, including Mpox, Bird Flu and Disease X.
Recent Biowarfare History
The Biological Weapons Convention was ratified by multiple nations in 1975, prohibiting the “development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling and use of biological and toxin weapons“. The convention was immediately violated by many nations and lack of enforcement has allowed biowarfare research to proceed unhindered, renamed ‘gain-of-function’ to obscure the industry and its criminal activities from public attention.
As early as 2002 Dr Anthony Fauci, as Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), admitted to his involvement in biowarfare research, including collaborations with Soviet Union defectors.
(Click on the image below for the video)
Biowarfare activities proved highly profitable for Dr Fauci and his partners at universities, health agencies, military agencies and research institutes worldwide. The business model is creation of engineered viruses which are then patented so that resulting countermeasures (diagnostics, vaccines, therapeutics) can generate profit to the patent owner. Learn more about the history and evolution of biological weapons from biowarfare experts Professor Francis Doyle (Part 1) and Dr Meryl Nass (Part 2).
NIH owns hundreds of vaccine patents and often profits from the sale of products it supposedly regulates. High level officials, including Dr. Fauci, receive yearly emoluments of up to $150,000 in royalty payments on products that they help develop and then usher through the approval process. ~ The Real Anthony Fauci, 2021, Robert F Kennedy Jr
A Rotten Pipeline
RFK Jr and other authors have followed the last decade’s biowarfare links between China and the US.
Although the modern use of pathogens as weapons goes back a while, spawned from cruel experiments on captives of Germany and Japan in World War 2, Dr David Martin explains here how for hundreds of years quarantine and the fear of conatgion have been used to control the masses and as an economic weapon.
The escalating emphasis on biological weapons by the world superpowers since the early Cold War was illuminated further by a large whistleblower release (into private hands) late last year. After successful decryption, this treasure trove of data, contracts and confidential reports was used to make a series of short documentary essays by our friends at Pure Media Australia.
They chart the path from an early Soviet program to attack the blood of the enemy using microbes all the way forward to designing the Wuhan bioweapon and it’s wicked icing on the cake, the covid-19 genetic injections. In particular, they lay out the sequence of the various open reading frames (sequences of DNA and RNA that encode for specific proteins) discovered, extracted or designed by the bioweapon researchers in the US, Communist China and the former USSR which all make their way, via SARS and MERS, into the world’s best known Coronavirus and its misnamed vaccines.
Of particular use to the Americans was the flood of Russian bioweapon workers who transferred their knowledge on the collapse of the Soviet Union beginning in 1989.
To further zoom in on some specifics, patents expert and bioweapons investigator Dr David Martin has reported on a 2011 collusion between Dr Fauci’s NIAID, the Wellcome Trust, the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The group established a mandate that by 2020 the world would ‘accept a universal vaccine’.
Dr Martin quoted bioweapons researcher Peter Daszak who claimed at a 2016 workshop on Developing Medical Countermeasures (MCMs) for Coronaviruses, that:
“Until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine.
A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process.“
Dr Martin alleges that as far back as 1966 the Wellcome Trust began funding research on Coronaviruses. It is no coincidence that Jeremy Farrar left the Wellcome Trust to take his position as Chief Science Officer at the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2023.
In a display of remarkable prophesy, the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board, a collaboration between WHO and the World Bank, warned in September 2019 that public money must be channeled towards preventing the threat of “a lethal respiratory pathogen (whether naturally emergent or accidentally or deliberately released)“.
Recent incidents involving smallpox, anthrax and bird flu in some of the top US laboratories remind us of the fallibility of even the most secure laboratories, reinforcing the urgent need for a thorough reassessment of biosafety.
Covid as a Biowarfare Weapon of Mass Destruction
Dr Fauci’s status gave him the means to circumvent this moratorium. NIAID and USAID collaborated with bioweapons researchers Dr Peter Daszak at EcoHealth Alliance and Dr Ralph Baric at University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, to transfer Dr Fauci’s coronavirus research to Dr Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
As early as January 2020 the late Professor Francis Boyle, an international law professor and biowarfare expert, warned that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a genetically modified biowarfare agent. Thankfully, despite appropriating many billions of taxpayer dollars, gain-of-function research remains extremely crude and the overall mortality rate of Covid-19 sits within the realm of influenza, mainly harming the already infirm and dying.
Not only was Covid treatable, but at least 50% of people had sufficient immunity from a previous common cold to prevent noticeable illness. It can also be said that Covid was not unusually lethal, since the mortality burden was only as bad as a normal flu season.
In an infamously fraudulent paper published in Science in March 2020 The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2, scientists collaborating with Anthony Fauci tried to discredit the evidence for laboratory manipulation. Dr Fauci has since been accused of directing the deletion of official government records, apparently hoping to erase evidence of his leadership in gain-of-function research.
One of the earliest scientists to identify laboratory manipulation of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 was friend and colleague of NZDSOS, esteemed London oncologist/immunologist/vaccine developer Professor Angus Dalgleish. Medical journals refused to publish his findings in what was at that time, a bewildering act of censorship. We have since learned that censorship and propaganda are a necessary feature of the biowarfare program, without which the world cannot be convinced that naturally occurring viruses are an existential threat, and patented products the only solution.
Shortly before his untimely death in January 2025, Professor Boyle signed a legal affidavit asserting that “COVID-19 injections, also known as “COVID-19 nanoparticle injections” and “mRNA nanoparticle injections,” are “biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction“.
Many thousands of virologists, vaccinologists and other scientists are engaged in highly lucrative biowarfare research through programs funded via collaborations between military, pharmaceutical, non governmental and medical research agencies.
Although easy to detect by often bizarre and deceitful behaviours, few will admit to biowarfare involvement openly. No doubt buoyed by the impunity of their funders Dr Fauci, Jeremy Farrar and Bill Gates, two key players in the biowarfare industrial complex have made public admissions:
Dr Ralph Baric from University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, known as the “coronavirus hunter”, published in 2016 that his gain-of-function research on SARS-like coronavirus was “poised for human emergence“. His laboratory has been implicated in multiple laboratory acquired infections (lab-leaks).
Speaking to New York University virologist Professor Vincent Racaniello in 2020, zoologist Dr Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance admitted to collecting hundreds of SARS-like viruses from bats in China, and manipulating their spike proteins to improve their ability to infect humans.
Meanwhile, evidence is now overwhelming that this narrative supports criminal activity, aimed at driving up profit and shifting power into the hands of those responsible. Population health is collateral damage at best, or deliberately harmed at worst. A September 2025 article in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons summarises the evidence, including:
Origins of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-2 Modified mRNA Biologics/Vaccines
Suppression of Information and Early Vaccine Development
Defense Medical Epidemiology Database Abnormalities
Autoimmune and Immunological Dysfunction
Hypersensitivity and Cytokine Storms
Cardiovascular Adverse Events
Reproductive and Pregnancy-Related Risks
VAERS Safety Signals and Vaccine Contamination Concerns
Surge in Aggressive Cancers
Aberrant Protein Production
Biopsychosocial and Ethical Considerations
The Future of mRNA Biologics: Promise, Risks, and Ethical Imperatives
Violations
In conclusion the authors state:
“The COVID-19 pandemic response violated core principles of public health, medical freedom, and bodily autonomy, amplifying the devastating effects of SARS-CoV-2 and its modified mRNA biologics/vaccines.
The overwhelming evidence of SARS-CoV-2’s gain-of-function origins, coupled with the catastrophic health impacts of modified mRNA COVID-19 biologics/vaccines and the unchecked expansion of next-generation mRNA biologics, paints a chilling picture of deliberate design and systemic harm. Engineered viral features and vaccines that devastate immunological, cardiovascular, reproductive, and neurological systems have driven staggering morbidity and mortality, with effects unlikely to be accidental.
Coordinated efforts to obscure these truths, enabled by liability shields and legislative failures, have worsened a global health disaster. The surge in autoimmune diseases, aggressive cancers, pregnancy losses, cardiovascular fatalities, societal fragmentation, and the looming risks of advanced mRNA platforms demand an immediate halt to mRNA vaccine and biologic use, comprehensive investigations into the motives behind this unprecedented violation of public trust, and robust measures to restore safe therapeutics and ethical public health practices.
Humanity deserves accountability, transparency, and a resolute commitment to preventing such engineered calamities in the future.“
On 2 September 2025, the Florida Chapter of NZDSOS partner, the World Council for Health, declared mRNA injections to be weapons of mass destruction. They endorse the mRNA Bioweapons Prohibition Act written by Dr Joseph Sansone and introduced to the Minnesota State Legislature in April 2025 recognising that mRNA products “violate existing state bioweapons and weapons of mass destruction laws“.
As predicted by Dr Joseph Sansone, momentum is building as the public become increasingly aware that they have been terribly harmed by the criminal activities of a small cartel posing as “experts”. Evidence is also now clear, even as the Pfizer contract remains unavailable for public scrutiny, that New Zealand authorities acted unlawfully in approving, let alone mandating, the dangerous Pfizer product for use on the population.
However, much of the above focuses only on the mad scientist-modified RNA aspect of the designer bioweapons. There is the now-obvious contamination with DNA plasmids (and probably other things) in the completely different product to the one trialed briefly on humans before the worlds’ regulators approved it en masse, and the widespread embalmers white clots, of which a thorough scientific analysis is currently in peer review.
It would seem the last thing Medsafe and its overseas equivalents were interested in was ensuring any safe product, let alone turning a seeing eye to Pfizer’s obvious bait and switch of Process 2 for Process 1. So they allowed – mandated even – a completely untested product onto the world’s population. Not a single Western public health entity called this out.
As within other elements of the military and intelligence apparatus, deception is a clear technique of the biowarfare-public health complex. With more than half the planet potentially having been genetically altered, it is up to us all not to get fooled again.
Note: NZ is equally silent on this topic Kiwis. Up and down ‘Clean and Green’ folk are resisting the fascist installation of this so called ‘option’ into their water supplies. It really aint rocket science. If folk want fluoride they can add it themselves. Instead we are all forced to purchase expensive filters to get rid of the poison … that is if we can even find a filter that does this. (See our Fluoride pages at the main menu)… EWNZ
In 2024, American researchers can sequence DNA from single cells, track neuron firing patterns in real time, and detect chemical signatures on distant exoplanets. The National Institutes of Health funds over 50,000 research grants annually, investigating everything from rare “genetic” disorders affecting dozens of people to the optimal spacing of highway rest stops. Yet in the seventy-nine years since America began adding fluoride to public water supplies, not one published study has examined whether this practice affects American children’s intelligence.
This absence becomes more peculiar when you consider the context. Researchers in Canada, just miles from our northern border, recently found that children exposed to fluoridated water during fetal development scored 4.5 IQ points lower than unexposed children. Mexican scientists documented similar deficits. Chinese researchers have published dozens of studies on fluoride and cognition. The 2024 National Toxicology Program review identified 72 human studies examining fluoride’s impact on intelligence—52 found harmful effects. None were conducted in the United States.
The silence isn’t accidental. It’s architectural.
What first caught my attention wasn’t the Canadian findings themselves but a footnote in the NTP review: “No studies evaluating IQ were conducted in the United States.” A simple statement of fact that raises profound questions. The country that pioneered water fluoridation, that exports this practice as public health gospel, has never checked whether it affects our children’s cognitive development. We’ve been running a population-wide “experiment” for nearly eight decades without measuring one of its most crucial potential outcomes.
This essay examines that structured absence and the shape of the silence itself. Why do certain questions become unaskable within scientific institutions? How does a research blind spot this large persist for this long? And what does this tell us about how public health orthodoxies protect themselves from empirical challenge?
The answer involves more than fluoride. It’s about how scientific communities develop collective blind spots, how research priorities get set by non-scientific forces, and how certain questions become professionally dangerous to ask. The absence of American IQ studies isn’t a gap in our knowledge—it’s a feature of how that knowledge gets produced.
Fifty-two studies found that fluoride exposure lowers children’s intelligence. Studies from China, India, Mexico, Canada, Iran, Egypt, and other nations have tested thousands of children, measuring their cognitive abilities against their fluoride exposure levels. The results follow a remarkably consistent pattern: higher fluoride, lower IQ.
The National Toxicology Program spent eight years reviewing this evidence. Their 2024 monograph runs 296 pages, examining studies dating back decades and including sophisticated recent research using individual-level biomarkers and prospective cohort designs. Their conclusion: “moderate confidence” that fluoride is associated with lower IQ in children. In the cautious language of systematic reviews, “moderate confidence” is significant—it means the available evidence indicates a real effect.
Here’s what makes the American absence extraordinary: we have ideal conditions for conducting such research. We have fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities side by side. We have sophisticated research infrastructure, from university laboratories to the Centers for Disease Control. We have detailed health records, standardized testing data, and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey that already measures fluoride levels in Americans’ bodies. Everything needed for rigorous studies exists—except the studies themselves.
The recent North American research makes “foreign studies don’t apply here” arguments untenable. The MIREC study in Canada found that a 1 mg/L increase in maternal urinary fluoride was associated with a 4.49-point decrease in boys’ IQ scores. The ELEMENT study in Mexico found nearly identical results. These weren’t ecological studies comparing different regions with potential confounding factors. They measured individual fluoride exposure using biomarkers, controlled for numerous variables including maternal education and socioeconomic status, and used standardized IQ tests administered by trained psychologists.
The Canadian study is particularly relevant because it included both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities, used the same water fluoridation levels as the United States (0.7 mg/L), and studied a population demographically similar to Americans. When the study was published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2019, the editor took the unusual step of including an editor’s note about the extra scrutiny it received due to its potential impact on public health policy. The study withstood that scrutiny.
American health agencies haven’t ignored this research entirely. The NTP review itself represents years of work by American scientists. But they’re reviewing everyone else’s data. The systematic exclusion of American populations from fluoride-IQ research isn’t explicable by ordinary scientific priorities.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences funds research on countless chemical exposures—air pollution, pesticides, heavy metals, flame retardants, phthalates. Many affect far fewer Americans than fluoridated water, which reaches over 200 million people. Major American universities conduct sophisticated studies on neurodevelopmental toxins. When they study fluoride, they analyze data from other countries. Dr. Philippe Grandjean of Harvard co-authored the influential 2012 meta-analysis of Chinese fluoride studies. American researchers are clearly capable of this research—they just don’t conduct it on American children.
Section 2: The International Findings
The evidence from outside America’s borders tells a consistent story. Of the studies the NTP reviewed, the majority found inverse associations—higher fluoride exposure, lower intelligence scores. Not a single well-conducted study found that fluoride improved cognitive function.
The Chinese studies, which comprise the largest portion of this literature, have been dismissed by some as poor quality research from rural areas with industrial pollution. This criticism held more weight before recent high-quality studies from North America confirmed the same pattern. Many Chinese studies compared populations with different naturally occurring fluoride levels in drinking water, eliminating concerns about industrial contamination. A 2003 study by Xiang and colleagues tested 512 children, controlling for lead exposure and parental education. They found a clear dose-response relationship: each 1 mg/L increase in water fluoride corresponded to a 2.5-point decrease in IQ.
The Mexican ELEMENT study brought methodological rigor that should satisfy any skeptic. Researchers followed 299 mother-child pairs, measuring fluoride in maternal urine during pregnancy and in children’s urine at age 6-12. They tested children’s cognitive abilities using multiple validated instruments, including the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. The results showed that a 0.5 mg/L increase in maternal urinary fluoride predicted a 2.5-point lower IQ in children.
What makes ELEMENT particularly compelling is its location. Mexico City doesn’t fluoridate its water, but fluoride occurs naturally in the groundwater and residents consume fluoridated salt. This creates a range of exposures similar to what Americans experience through water fluoridation plus dietary sources. The mothers’ urinary fluoride levels (0.90 mg/L average) were comparable to those found in pregnant women in fluoridated U.S. communities.
The Canadian MIREC study addressed one of the last refuges of skepticism—that perhaps these findings only applied to developing countries or populations with unusual fluoride sources. The Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals study followed 512 mother-child pairs through pregnancy and early childhood, measuring fluoride in maternal urine during pregnancy and testing children’s IQ at ages 3-4. Canada’s water fluoridation program is essentially identical to America’s. The same companies provide the same chemicals at the same concentrations to communities on both sides of the border.
MIREC’s results were striking not just for their magnitude but their sex-specific pattern. Boys appeared more vulnerable than girls to prenatal fluoride exposure. This aligns with known patterns of male vulnerability to various neurodevelopmental toxins and suggests a biological mechanism rather than confounding. The researchers measured fluoride in drinking water, maternal urine, and children’s urine, allowing them to examine different exposure windows and routes. If fluoride affects Canadian children’s intelligence, there’s no biological reason American children would be immune.
The consistency across diverse populations suggests something fundamental about fluoride’s biological activity. Whether the exposure comes from naturally high groundwater in China, fluoridated salt in Mexico, or treated municipal water in Canada, the association with reduced IQ persists. The effect sizes vary—from 2 to 7 IQ points depending on exposure levels and study design—but the direction remains constant.
The NTP review found adverse effects at water fluoride levels of 1.5 mg/L and above, with some studies suggesting effects at lower levels. The U.S. recommended level is 0.7 mg/L, but this considers only fluoride from water, not total exposure from all sources. When researchers measure total fluoride exposure using urinary biomarkers, many individuals in fluoridated communities exceed levels associated with cognitive effects in studies.
Fluoride crosses the placenta and blood-brain barrier. It accumulates in brain tissue. Animal studies document altered neurotransmitter levels, increased oxidative stress, and structural changes in brain regions crucial for learning and memory. The biological plausibility strengthens these epidemiological findings.
Section 3: The American Silence
The absence of American fluoride-IQ studies doesn’t result from oversight or incompetence. It emerges from a complex interplay of institutional, economic, and political forces that make such research professionally hazardous and practically difficult.
Start with the timeline. The U.S. Public Health Service endorsed water fluoridation in 1950, before the first controlled trials were complete. This premature endorsement created institutional momentum that became self-reinforcing. By the time questions about cognitive effects emerged, thousands of communities had fluoridated their water, dental organizations had staked their credibility on the practice, and opposition to fluoridation had been successfully branded as anti-science conspiracy thinking.
The dental establishment plays a central role in maintaining this research void. The American Dental Association, which generates significant revenue from its Seal of Acceptance program for fluoride-containing products, has long promoted fluoridation as one of the “ten great public health achievements of the 20th century.” Questioning fluoride’s safety challenges not just a policy but a professional identity built over seven decades.
Federal agencies face their own constraints. The CDC’s Oral Health Division promotes water fluoridation. The same agency that would normally investigate potential adverse effects has an institutional commitment to the intervention. This conflict of interest isn’t hidden—it’s structural. Research funding reveals clear priorities. The National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research had a 2023 budget of $516 million with numerous studies on fluoride’s dental mechanisms but none on cognitive effects.
Individual researchers face powerful disincentives. Dr. Phyllis Mullenix discovered this in the 1990s when her research on fluoride’s neurotoxicity in rats led to her dismissal from the Forsyth Dental Center. Those who question fluoridation risk being labeled anti-fluoridationists, grouped with conspiracy theorists, and potentially damaging their careers.
The immediate threat of litigation creates a formidable barrier. Any researcher proposing to study fluoride’s cognitive effects must consider the legal ramifications. If their study finds harm, they could be subpoenaed in lawsuits against water utilities and municipalities. Their methodology would be scrutinized by armies of lawyers. Their personal communications could become public record. The prospect deters even well-intentioned scientists from entering this minefield.
Grant reviewers and journal editors operate within this same framework. A research proposal to study fluoride’s cognitive effects in American children would face skeptical review. Why study something already deemed safe? Even if funded and conducted, publishing such research would prove challenging. Journal editors, aware of the political implications, would subject it to extraordinary scrutiny.
The precautionary principle, typically applied to environmental chemicals, inverts when it comes to fluoride. Usually, we demand proof of safety before widespread exposure. With fluoride, we demand proof of harm before questioning the exposure. This reversed burden of proof makes sense only when you understand fluoridation as public health orthodoxy rather than scientific hypothesis.
The absence becomes self-justifying. Health agencies cite the lack of American studies showing harm as evidence of safety. But they don’t fund such studies. When pressed about international findings, they emphasize differences between American and foreign populations, different fluoride sources, or methodological limitations. The solution—conducting rigorous American studies—remains unmentioned.
Section 4: The Cost of Not Knowing
Every day, approximately 200 million Americans drink fluoridated water. If international findings apply here—and there’s no biological reason they wouldn’t—we’re accepting a population-wide IQ reduction of 2 to 5 points. The implications ripple through every aspect of society.
A 5-point IQ reduction shifts the entire bell curve leftward. The number of people with intellectual disabilities (IQ below 70) increases by 57%. The number of gifted individuals (IQ above 130) decreases by 43%. These aren’t abstract statistics—they represent real children who struggle in school, adults who can’t reach their potential, innovations that don’t happen.
The economic implications are staggering. Economists estimate that a 1-point IQ increase corresponds to roughly 2% higher lifetime earnings. A 5-point decrease means 10% lower earnings across an entire population. For a median household, that’s $6,000 less per year, $240,000 over a working lifetime. Aggregated across millions of affected individuals, the economic loss reaches hundreds of billions annually.
Educational systems bear immediate costs. Children with lower IQs require more educational support, more remedial instruction, more special education services. School districts in fluoridated communities might be spending millions on special education services that could be prevented by addressing a single environmental exposure.
The competitive implications extend internationally. China, which has extensively studied fluoride’s cognitive effects, has been reducing fluoride exposure in affected regions. European countries that rejected fluoridation decades ago may have been protecting their populations’ cognitive capacity while Americans accepted gradual impairment. In a knowledge economy, even small differences in population-level cognitive ability translate to significant competitive advantages.
Environmental justice adds another dimension. Low-income families can’t afford bottled water or sophisticated filtration systems. They depend on tap water for drinking and formula preparation. If that water contains fluoride at levels that impair cognition, poverty becomes self-perpetuating through biological mechanisms.
The prenatal window of vulnerability identified in recent studies raises particular concerns. Pregnant women receive no guidance about fluoride consumption. Women conscientiously avoiding alcohol and limiting caffeine unknowingly expose their developing babies to a potential neurotoxin through ordinary tap water consumption.
The uncertainty itself carries costs. Parents who learn about international fluoride studies face an impossible choice: accept potential cognitive risks or spend thousands on bottled water and filtration. The absence of American research leaves everyone guessing.
Like fluoride, lead was once considered beneficial at low doses. Like fluoride, lead’s neurotoxicity was dismissed until evidence became overwhelming. The difference is we eventually studied lead’s effects on American children. The research led to action that prevented millions of cases of cognitive impairment. Without American studies, we’re making population-level decisions based on assumptions rather than evidence.
Section 5: Breaking the Silence
The path forward doesn’t require abandoning water fluoridation tomorrow. It requires something more radical: actually studying its effects on American children. The research design isn’t complicated. The funding, compared to other public health initiatives, would be modest. The primary obstacle is will.
A comprehensive American study would follow pregnant women and their children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities. Researchers would measure fluoride exposure through multiple pathways—water, dietary sources, dental products. They would assess children’s cognitive development using validated instruments at multiple ages. They would control for confounding factors like socioeconomic status, parental education, and other environmental exposures. The MIREC and ELEMENT studies provide proven templates.
The National Children’s Study, despite its cancellation, demonstrated that large-scale longitudinal research on environmental influences is feasible in the United States. Its planned methodology could be adapted for a focused fluoride investigation. For a fraction of what was spent planning that study, we could definitively answer whether fluoride affects American children’s cognitive development.
Independent funding would be essential. Neither dental organizations nor anti-fluoridation groups should control the research. A consortium of foundations concerned with children’s health and environmental justice could provide neutral support. The study design should be transparent, pre-registered, and subject to external oversight. The results, whatever they show, should be published without interference.
Congress could mandate such research through the reauthorization of environmental health programs. The NIH could designate fluoride as a priority for neurodevelopmental research. The EPA, which regulates fluoride as a contaminant, could require cognitive assessments as part of its regulatory review. Multiple pathways exist if institutional will emerges.
The research should examine not just whether fluoride affects IQ but which populations are most vulnerable. Do certain genetic variants increase susceptibility? Are there critical windows of exposure? What levels, if any, are genuinely safe for neurodevelopment? These aren’t anti-fluoridation questions—they’re basic public health inquiries that should have been answered decades ago.
Beyond individual studies, we need institutional reform. The separation between dental and public health agencies on fluoride research must end. Environmental health researchers should have the freedom to study fluoride like any other chemical exposure without political consequences. Journal editors should evaluate fluoride research based on methodology, not politics.
The broader lesson extends beyond fluoride. When public health interventions become orthodoxies, when questioning them becomes professionally dangerous, science stops functioning. The absence of American fluoride-IQ studies represents a failure of scientific culture as much as specific institutions. Recovering that culture means creating space for uncomfortable questions, even about practices we’ve long considered beneficial.
Other countries provide models. The European Food Safety Authority conducts ongoing reviews of fluoride exposure and safety. Several nations have implemented biomonitoring programs that track population-level fluoride exposure. These approaches treat fluoride as a chemical requiring continued vigilance rather than a solved problem requiring only promotion.
The cognitive stakes demand urgency. Every year without American studies means another cohort of children potentially exposed during critical developmental windows. If international findings apply here, we’re accepting preventable cognitive impairment on a massive scale. If they don’t apply, we should have evidence showing why American biology differs from Canadian or Mexican biology.
The scientific method offers a way forward: form hypotheses, test them rigorously, follow the evidence. The hypothesis that water fluoridation at current levels doesn’t affect American children’s cognitive development is eminently testable. The fact that we haven’t tested it after 79 years reveals more about our institutions than our science.
Yet even if we had the perfect study design, independent funding, and institutional support, one question remains: Why would institutions that benefit from the current arrangement ever allow such research to proceed? The answer requires examining not just the barriers to research, but who profits from maintaining them.
Section 6: The Unasked Question
The lead industry knew for decades that their product damaged children’s brains. Internal documents from the 1950s show company scientists discussing cognitive impairment while their executives funded studies designed to obscure these effects. Government agencies, dependent on industry information and reluctant to challenge a major economic sector, avoided asking obvious questions until the evidence became undeniable. By then, millions of children had been exposed.
The fluoride situation follows a disturbingly similar pattern, with one crucial difference: instead of industry adding a neurotoxin for profit, government adds it for public health. This reversal doesn’t eliminate the structural dynamics that perpetuate potentially harmful exposures. It intensifies them.
Consider what the Canadian and Mexican studies mean if their findings apply to American populations. A 4-point IQ reduction shifts millions of people from one cognitive category to another. The person who might have become an engineer becomes a technician. The potential teacher becomes a clerk. The would-be entrepreneur becomes a lifetime employee. These aren’t dramatic impairments—affected individuals still function, work, vote, consume. But multiply these subtle shifts across 200 million people and you’ve transformed a society.
Modern governance depends on extraordinary complexity that favors those who design systems over those who navigate them. Tax codes run thousands of pages. Financial regulations require advanced degrees to understand. Healthcare policies bewilder even educated consumers. A population with reduced analytical capacity struggles to challenge these structures, not through conspiracy but through cognitive load. The complexity becomes its own protection against reform.
The economic implications align troublingly well with institutional needs. Researchers have documented that lower IQ correlates with increased impulse purchasing, higher debt accumulation, and reduced savings rates. A 2019 Federal Reserve study found that a 1-point IQ decrease corresponds to roughly 2% more credit card debt. Scale that across a population and you have billions in additional consumer spending, financed through debt that generates massive profits for financial institutions.
Political scientists have observed similar patterns in civic engagement. Lower cognitive capacity correlates with decreased political participation, increased reliance on partisan cues over policy analysis, and greater susceptibility to emotional manipulation. These aren’t moral failings—they’re predictable outcomes of reduced processing power applied to complex decisions.
Every institution needs some highly capable individuals to design and manage systems, but too many critical thinkers create friction. A workforce where most people can follow procedures but fewer can evaluate them might be economically optimal from a management perspective. Nobody plans this distribution, but policies that slightly reduce population-wide cognitive capacity create it naturally.
The information ecosystem reveals another alignment of interests. Social media companies have perfected algorithms that exploit cognitive limitations—shortened attention spans, emotional reasoning, confirmation bias. These manipulations work better on people with reduced analytical capacity. Educational institutions face their own perverse incentives. Schools receive additional funding for special needs students requiring remediation but not for gifted programs that challenge high performers.
Federal agencies demonstrate through their behavior what they actually prioritize. The EPA regulates thousands of chemicals, often based on limited evidence of potential harm. Yet fluoride, added deliberately to water supplies, receives special deference. Research funding reveals priorities more honestly than policy statements. The NIH funds thousands of studies on environmental neurotoxins but none on fluoride’s cognitive effects in Americans.
Here’s where the liability dynamic becomes systemic rather than merely financial. The fear of lawsuits doesn’t just deter individual researchers—it shapes entire institutional cultures. Water utilities don’t merely avoid funding cognitive research; they develop organizational blindness to the question. Municipal lawyers don’t just defend against lawsuits; they advise against any action that might acknowledge uncertainty. Insurance companies don’t just calculate risks; they create incentive structures that reward ignorance over investigation.
This dynamic—where ignorance protects against liability—perverts normal scientific incentives. In most fields, researchers compete to make discoveries. With fluoride, institutional survival depends on not discovering. The potential damages from millions of children with documented IQ loss could reach hundreds of billions. Under these circumstances, not knowing becomes an institutional imperative, embedded in hiring practices, research priorities, and organizational culture.
None of this requires conscious conspiracy. Each actor pursues their institutional interests within a system that happens to reward cognitive impairment. The banker profits from impulsive borrowers. The bureaucrat benefits from compliant citizens. The educator receives funding for remedial programs. Nobody has to coordinate because the incentives align naturally.
The self-concealing nature of cognitive impairment makes this particularly insidious. A population with reduced analytical capacity is less able to recognize and articulate that reduction. They can’t identify patterns they can’t perceive. They can’t question complexities they can’t grasp. The system becomes self-perpetuating, not through suppression but through incapacity.
The historical parallel with lead is instructive but incomplete. With lead, once the cognitive effects became undeniable, society mobilized to remove it. With fluoride, the cognitive effects documented internationally trigger no similar response. The difference might be that lead exposure was largely corporate-driven while fluoride exposure is government-driven. Admitting error becomes exponentially harder when the error is official policy rather than corporate malfeasance.
The absence of American fluoride-IQ studies isn’t a mystery—it’s a choice. A choice made by institutions that prioritize orthodoxy over inquiry, by researchers who value careers over questions, by agencies that confuse promotion with protection. The international evidence demands American verification or refutation. The stakes demand immediate action. The silence has lasted long enough.
Seventy-nine years into this experiment, it’s time to check the results.
References
Bashash, M., Thomas, D., Hu, H., Martinez-Mier, E. A., Sanchez, B. M., Basu, N., … & Téllez-Rojo, M. M. (2017). Prenatal fluoride exposure and cognitive outcomes in children at 4 and 6–12 years of age in Mexico. Environmental Health Perspectives, 125(9), 097017.
Bassin, E. B., Wypij, D., Davis, R. B., & Mittleman, M. A. (2006). Age-specific fluoride exposure in drinking water and osteosarcoma (United States). Cancer Causes & Control, 17(4), 421-428.
Choi, A. L., Sun, G., Zhang, Y., & Grandjean, P. (2012). Developmental fluoride neurotoxicity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environmental Health Perspectives, 120(10), 1362-1368.
Green, R., Lanphear, B., Hornung, R., Flora, D., Martinez-Mier, E. A., Neufeld, R., … & Till, C. (2019). Association between maternal fluoride exposure during pregnancy and IQ scores in offspring in Canada. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(10), 940-948.
National Research Council. (2006). Fluoride in drinking water: A scientific review of EPA’s standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Toxicology Program. (2024). NTP monograph on the state of the science concerning fluoride exposure and neurodevelopment and cognition: A systematic review. Research Triangle Park, NC: National Toxicology Program. NTP Monograph 08.
Xiang, Q., Liang, Y., Chen, L., Wang, C., Chen, B., Chen, X., & Zhou, M. (2003). Effect of fluoride in drinking water on children’s intelligence. Fluoride, 36(2), 84-94.
Yu, X., Chen, J., Li, Y., Liu, H., Hou, C., Zeng, Q., … & Wang, A. (2018). Threshold effects of moderately excessive fluoride exposure on children’s health: A potential association between dental fluorosis and loss of excellent intelligence. Environment International, 118, 116-124.
While Kiwis celebrate on November 5th a personage few even really know about now (Guy Fawkes) others remember the long concealed invasion of peaceful Parihaka in the Taranaki. GF has been replaced it would appear, by Halloween going by more recent hype.Here is a post on topic by historian, Vincent O’Malley focusing on the South Island’s involvement in this particular government land grabbing operation ..
SEE ALSO … Art Exhibition ‘The Art of Passive Resistance’ (Wgtn 2001). Click on the various links to see the individual art works and read the commentaries. It was this exhibition that awoke me to the govt land grabbing of the 19th Century. It’s happening now you may have noticed?.. EWNZ
Parihaka & Waipounamu: Remembering the Anniversary of the Invasion of Peaceful Parihaka
The invasion of the pacifist settlement at Parihaka on this day in 1881 is a pivotal moment in Taranaki history. What’s less well known are the southern connections to the conflict, as historian Vincent O’Malley explains.
It’s often assumed that the 19th-century New Zealand Wars fought between the Crown and various groups of Māori were exclusively a Te Ika-a-Māui (North Island) story. But, in addition to the violent clash that took place at Wairau, Marlborough, in June 1843, there is a much deeper, if largely unknown, history of southern engagement with these conflicts.
Military settlers were recruited from Te Waipounamu (South Island) goldfields to fight in the Waikato and elsewhere during the 1860s in return for a share of the confiscated lands. And Ōtautahi (Christchurch) politicians such as Henry Sewell and James Edward FitzGerald were members of colonial governments that were responsible for directing the later military campaigns and land takings, even while they expressed doubts about the justice of what was unfolding.
There is another aspect to this story with a particular focus on Taranaki. Beginning at Waitara in March 1860, Taranaki Māori were subjected to a relentless series of invasions and attacks that continued to play out more than two decades later.
As successive governments sought to implement a policy of “creeping confiscation”, it was, at different points, considered useful to remove Māori from the area. The Chatham Islands had previously been used to imprison Māori from the Tairāwhiti (East Coast) region. When it came to Taranaki Māori, Te Waipounamu was selected instead.
In November 1869, a group of 74 men from the Pakakohi tribe in Taranaki, convicted of treason for resisting the confiscation of their lands under the leadership of the prophet Riwha Tītokowaru, were sent to Ōtepoti (Dunedin).
They were sentenced to hard labour and put to work constructing roads, school playing fields, and even improvements to the Octagon. But in the harsh and unfamiliar climate, many of the group became ill; 18 men had died during their captivity in the south before the government finally agreed to commute the sentences of the survivors in 1872.
Returning north again aboard the government steamer Luna in March of that year, the party of survivors made a stopover at Ōhinehau (Lyttelton). More than 50 of their number travelled by train to Christchurch, where their appearance was said to have startled several shopkeepers and “caused considerable speculation amongst the citizens”, despite their “modern civilian attire”.
Seven years later, another group of Māori political prisoners from Taranaki was sent south.
In 1879, the government pushed through with a survey of lands that had been nominally subject to confiscation 14 years earlier, but were in practice occupied and used by Māori. That May, the people of Parihaka began ploughing up surveyed lands in the area, in an act of non-violent resistance led by prophets Te Whiti-o-Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi.
They had founded the settlement of Parihaka in the 1860s as a place of refuge for all those affected by war and confiscation and soon attracted supporters from Taranaki and beyond. But the actions of the Parihaka ploughmen drew an angry response from settlers in the area, and, by June, the government began arresting them. Denied trials, the prisoners were instead sent to Dunedin.
The people of Parihaka remained undeterred. By June 1880, the ploughmen had been replaced by fencers. They, too, were promptly arrested and imprisoned in the South Island without trial. This time, there were too many to send to Dunedin alone. While some were taken south to Otago, around 40 were imprisoned at Hokitika.
An aerial view of Ripapa Island. (Photo: V.C. Browne & Son, undated.)
And, in September 1880, approximately 160 of the prisoners were taken to Whakaraupō (Lyttelton Harbour) and imprisoned on the small island of Ripapa. In December, it was reported that many of the prisoners had been punished for being “unruly and defiant” by having their daily rations reduced to bread and water.
Meanwhile, within weeks of their arrival, at least one local firm was advertising special excursion trips down the harbour designed to “afford persons an excellent opportunity of viewing the Maori prisoners at Ripa Island”. Māori misery had become a Pākehā spectator sport. The price was 1 shilling and 6 pence per passenger.
It’s not known exactly how many Taranaki prisoners died during their captivity on Ripapa Island. Buried on Ōtamahua (Quail Island), where there were hospital facilities, they were later reinterred at Rāpaki by members of local Ngāi Tahu hapū Ngāti Wheke.
For them, Ripapa Island (which had been used by the government as a quarantine station since 1873) was a wāhi tapu because of the many people killed there during the Musket Wars of the 1830s. In January 1881, the remaining 149 prisoners were moved from Ripapa to Lyttelton Gaol in order to “subject them to more rigid restriction”.
Small groups of prisoners were released in batches over the following months, and by June, the last of them had been freed.
Images of Tohu and Te Whiti by John Patrick Ward in 1883. (Alexander Turnbull Library)
Back home at Parihaka, prophets Te Whiti and Tohu were no more willing to end their campaign of non-violent resistance to the confiscation of 1.2 million acres of Taranaki lands.
The Crown’s response came on November 5, 1881, when, led by Native Minister John Bryce riding a white charger, nearly 1,600 members of the armed constabulary and volunteers (including some from Christchurch) invaded the settlement.
One journalist who witnessed proceedings reported that: “The whole spectacle was saddening in the extreme; it was an industrious, law-abiding, moral and hospitable community calmly awaiting the approach of the men sent to rob them of everything dear to them.”
Te Whiti, Tohu and several others were seized without resistance and the remainder of the population forcibly dispersed. Many women were raped, and the settlement was pillaged and destroyed.
After an inconclusive trial in Ngāmotu (New Plymouth), where Te Whiti and Tohu were accused of “wickedly, maliciously, and seditiously contriving and intending to disturb the peace”, it was decided to send the prophets south to Christchurch.
They arrived at Lyttelton on April 26, 1882, to a large crowd of spectators, and were immediately transferred to Addington Gaol, where they were held in the women’s section. Plans to put the prophets on trial again in Christchurch were soon jettisoned. Instead, the pair were held under what one historian describes as “a form of honourable restraint” and another as “a gentlemanly kind of house arrest”.
An Australian-born Irishman named John P Ward, who’d served in some of the most brutal campaigns in Taranaki and picked up some ability in te reo Māori during his time in the north, was appointed as interpreter and personal jailer to Te Whiti and Tohu (though he never told them of his military service). Ward subsequently wrote Wanderings with the Maori Prophets, a colourful, if unreliable, narrative of the 11 months he spent accompanying the two men before they were finally permitted to return home to Taranaki in March 1883.
Accompanied by Ward, Te Whiti and Tohu were taken to multiple sites across Christchurch and Canterbury, each designed to impress upon them the wonders of western civilisation. One of the first places visited was Canterbury Museum, where the prophets were met by curator Julius von Haast. From there, they travelled across to Christ Church Cathedral, ascending the tower as far as the bells to take in a panoramic view of the settlement below them.
Both men were said to have gazed longingly towards the sea, visible at a distance. Visits to the Kaiapoi woollen factory, to the theatre, Addington railway workshops, Hagley Park, and elsewhere, followed. Later asked to name a favourite place visited, Te Whiti opted for somewhere simpler, calling the Ōtākaro (Avon River) the highlight of his stay.
Te Whiti and Tohu happened to be in Christchurch during the International Exhibition, a three-month-long showcase of science, technology, commerce, art and civilisation that attracted an estimated 226,000 visitors.
There, and elsewhere in their travels, the pair attracted a large and often admiring crowd of their own, many following the men as they inspected the art gallery, waxworks, “Ladies Court”, “Maori Court” and other exhibits. At least one report noted that some of those who had turned out to see the rangatira were Māori. The warm reception they were receiving prompted the New Zealand Herald to complain that “Christchurch people are having the gratification of lionising Te Whiti and Tohu, all at the Government expense”.
The two Māori prophets travelled much further afield during their stay in the South Island — including journeys to Hakatere (Ashburton), Temuka, Timaru, Oamaru, Dunedin, Tāhuna (Queenstown), Waihōpai (Invercargill), and around to Te Tai o Poutini (the West Coast) on steamer, followed by six months housed in Whakatū (Nelson). But it seems doubtful that Te Whiti and Tohu came away from their extended stay in Te Waipounamu with any sense of the supposed superiority of Pākehā culture.
On their return to Parihaka, the two men immediately threw themselves into rebuilding the settlement into the vibrant and thriving place it had once been, before te rā o te pāhua (“the day of the plunder”) in November 1881.
Te Whiti and Tohu had never rejected western technology or ideas — Parihaka went on to become one of the first settlements in New Zealand with electricity and street lighting — and in this respect their detention in Christchurch and elsewhere in the South Island had not fundamentally altered their outlooks. But it was a compelling chapter in the story of the New Zealand Wars in Te Waipounamu.
The Parihaka monument at Rāpaki urupā, Te Whaea Whakamomori – The suffering of mothers. The southern connections to Parihaka are acknowledged by Ngāti Wheke and the wider community with annual remembrance services at Rāpaki each November 5 — near this memorial to those who were held and imprisoned on nearby Ripapa. The memorial was unveiled in March 2000, when a 300-strong hīkoi from Taranaki travelled to the settlement.
This is a lightly edited version of a piece which was first published in Bulletin by Te Puna o Waiwhetū Christchurch Art Gallery. The original, fully-referenced version can be read here.
Vincent O’Malley is a Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington writer and historian, born and raised in Ōtautahi Christchurch.
Thank you for reading E-Tangata. If you like our focus on Māori and Pasifika stories, interviews, and commentary, we need your help. Our content takes skill, long hours and hard work. But we’re a small team and not-for-profit, so we need the support of our readers to keep going.
If you support our kaupapa and want to see us continue, please consider making a one-off donation or contributing $5 or $10 a month.
RELATED
In 2024, The National Library site featured a blog post on topic titled ‘Remembering Parihaka’, by Dylan Owen.
“For Taranaki Māori, 5 November 1881 is known as ‘Te Rā o te Pāhua’ or the ‘Day of Plunder’. The invasion of Parihaka — te pāhuatanga — involved 1500 armed constabulary and volunteers led by the Native Affairs Minister, John Bryce.”
Jamaica is moving toward becoming a UN-backed smart city under its Vision 2030 development plan, a long-term blueprint running from 2009 to 2030 that aims to make the island “the place of choice to live, work, raise families, and do business.”
Aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the initiative integrates Artificial Intelligence, Central Bank Digital Currency, and carbon pricing policies.
The Weirdest Storm Path of any Hurricane in Recorded History
This Alt Media platform has been closely watching Hurricane Melissa since its very inception. From the beginning, even before it was classified as a tropical depression, Melissa possessed all the signatures of a highly geoengineered frankenstorm.
Quite predictably, NOAA has removed the entire trajectory of this transparently manufactured superstorm from the National Hurricane Center website. Because of Melissa’s absurdly manipulated path from the very start, they really had no choice as geoterrorism investigators and weather warfare researchers would have easily exposed the plot by its very odd behavior.
As it stands at 6:30 AM this morning, Tuesday, Oct. 28, this deliberately slow-moving weather weapon has been stationed right over the island to Jamaica to inflict maximum damage (see the following screenshot). And so it is.
Here’s how Melissa was tracking on Sunday, October 28th before the murderous geoengineers executed a 90 degree angle to slam her right into the center of the southern Jamaican coastline.
Now we see that Melissa has mysteriously produced the “driest tropical eye ever recorded”.
“NOAA Hurricane Hunter aircraft measured the driest eye ever recorded at –4.75 °C (23 °F), which is a sign of a perfectly ventilated eyewall. This is one of the most efficient Hurricanes we’ve ever sampled with modern technology!”
That data point alone proves that this act of catastrophic geoterrorism is the product of the most advanced DARPA-directed weather warfare technology on the planet today.
Furthermore, let’s not ignore these incriminating data points pointing to a full-blown weather attack and geoterrorist operation being perpetrated against the people of Jamaica and Cuba (as usual).
As for “WHY NOW?”, it ought to be obvious to everyone at this late date that whenever these NWO geoterrorists fabricate such a captivating weather drama like Melissa, there is a great need for the globalist cabal to distract US from something very BIG that’s going on under the radar. Incidentally, the following UPDATE #1 is not that “something”.
To be continued —
UPDATE #1
“There is a lot of speculation within the global intel community that the main purpose of this calamitous geoterrorist attack is to completely monopolize Mission Barrio Adentro, which is the name of the program involving Cuba’s medical professionals assisting Venezuela. In this way, those doctors and nurses and med techs will not be available to help Maduro’s military in the event of an unprovoked attack of naked aggression by the U.S. Armed Forces at the direction of the warmongering President Trump.”
— A Veteran Intelligence Analyst & Former U.S. Military Officer
N.B. What follows are the usual MSM reports that are hyping the 175 mph winds just prior to landfall. If this wind speed is accurate, then Mega Hurricane Melissa is practically a hurricane-tornado just like weather weapon Hurricane Michael when it devastated a large swath of north Florida in October of 2018.
Prime Minister Andrew Holness of Jamaica issued dire safety warnings and ordered mandatory evacuations as Hurricane Melissa, a Category 5 storm channeling 175 m.p.h. winds and enough moisture to drop nearly three feet of rain, made a turn toward his country’s southern coast and its 2.8 million people on Monday.
Speaking on CNN, Mr. Holness offered a grim outlook, saying that he did not believe there was “any infrastructure within this region that could withstand” a storm that powerful.
This statement is made within correspondence in 1994 by an Eltham resident (NZ) to a US manufacturer of 1080 (details supplied in the document at the end of the article). The person was trying to ascertain the level of risk to environment and health regarding an imminent drop of 1080 poison into a Taranaki National Park.
It is interesting to note that the replies to all the risks the person raises in their questions are risks that are now deemed quite safe & have become normalized (to the authorities at least that is – many people are now very concerned, witness the recent hikoi & continual NZ wide protests going on).
Here are the questions and answers enlarged for reading:
Nowadays we are told that 1080 targets pests and we are given the impression that little if any other form of wildlife is affected. In fact nothing could be further from the truth. A person told me recently in the Manawatu that she was told no birds would die in the bush nearby when it was 1080ed however to her surprise she found a dead bird after the area was treated. Of course we now know that this is a common occurrence by the testimony of many people who find multiple dead birds after drops, photograph them & post them online. And of course we have the various documentations that we’ve published here of multiple finds, with latterly the estimate by a Landcare scientist of 10,000 birds in a South Island drop. Just search ‘birds, 1080’ in our search box to find more.
We are regularly told that 1080 breaks down to harmlessness in water. A scientist told me the other day it is so diluted it isn’t a problem, repeating the cup of tea mantra we hear so regularly. We also learned recently it was added to water to poison ships rats and we heard from the former Greens co-leader that there are question marks over the official testing on 1080 concentrations in water.
This is very enlightening. No wonder the data sheets tell us not to allow it into waterways. However NZ it seems makes up their own rules on that one. No research to prove their point, they just tweaked the rules. Here is a link to the information regarding the development of 1080 by Germany for use as a chemical weapon in water supplies.
Not approved in the US! “Very very restricted & controlled areas” only. And here it is chucked around like a veritable lolly scramble. The baits aren’t picked up off public walkways & neither are the poisoned animals collected & disposed off, frequently left to rot in the water where eels and other meat eaters can feed off them (Watch Poisoning Paradise on that one).
Remember the Hunua Ranges drop recently? A Court injunction to stop that one failed & during the proceedings DoC lawyers asked (and were granted) that the opposing lawyers not be allowed to question the DoC scientist. Now doesn’t that say something? Let’s not forget Bill Benfield’s revelation either that a drop in the Hunuas in the ’90s left the water filters packed with 1080 pellets. Good one DoC. And none of the public ever got to hear about it.
Previously I’ve noted the frequent discovery of pellets on tracks, drops going on around tourists, pellets dumped near people fishing, on it goes. The veritable lolly scramble again.
Water & wildlife contamination. Something we are repeatedly told does not happen. The manufacturer’s data sheet warns users not to drop into waterways. NZ has tweaked the rules of course so they can.
You may need to make your own decisions on all of that & make your own plans for non-contamination if necessary. It does not look like anybody else is going to.
Here are the whole pages of the documents with addresses & contact details:
NZ’s Dept of Conservation would have us believe 1080 targets pests only. One aerial drop in Otago in the South Island in 2002 revealed an officially estimated 10,000 native bird deaths! Search Kea in the search box (right of page) for further info on Kea deaths due to aerial 1080 poisoning … EWNZ
Dr Jo Pollard, BSc (Hons), PhD
Posted by Carol Sawyer
(Published in the Greymouth Star, 10 March, 2020)
In 1979 scientist Eric Spurr warned that wide scale poisoning of New Zealand with compound 1080, intended to kill introduced mammals, was actually killing kea and many other animals. It took decades before NZ’s Department of Conservation (DoC) finally began to monitor kea deaths from 1080 poisoning.
Now, using DoC’s own data, we can estimate that each poisoning operation will kill an average 12% of kea.
During the most horrific example DoC managed to kill 78% of the tracked kea population (7 of 9 kea monitored at North Okarito). Last month, in the Matukituki Valley, 50% of DoC’s monitored kea died after a 1080 drop.
Disturbingly, two myths have again been rolled out in an attempt to soothe public anger over the destruction of these now rare, iconic birds.
Myth 1. Kea are only likely to eat baits if people have conditioned them through providing food previously. DoC’s own research shows that this is not true. 9% of monitored kea (2/22) died at Kahurangi, a site chosen by DoC precisely because of its remoteness.
The fallacy of this claim is clear to anyone with experience of kea. They are curious to examine and pull anything new apart – as motorists will often attest after even the briefest of encounters with these inquisitive creatures. Scientists consider that this trait is likely an adaptation to living in a harsh environment, where food can be very hard to find, especially in winter (when 50% or more of kea juveniles are likely to die of starvation). Before the advent of DoC, helicopters and a toxin designed to kill everything from microbes to mammals, a willingness to try a new food source undoubtedly played a key role in the birds’ survival.
Myth 2. Kea nests need protection from stoats and 1080 poison provides that protection. Two studies have shown that the presence of stoats does not bother kea (in 1969, then again in 1999). Even if stoats were a problem for kea, 1080 would not fix the situation, quite the reverse. Scientists found that stoats became more likely to eat birds after 1080 drops. Why? Because rats, a primary source of food for the stoats, have been almost wiped out.
Mice do not usually eat 1080 baits so, in the absence of hungry rats, their numbers boom in the aftermath of a 1080 drop – a fact easily established by a review of the literature. Rat numbers, usually low immediately after 1080 operations, rebound strongly within months – often peaking at figures far higher than were present pre-drop. The population booms of mice and rats that are caused by 1080 drops are never highlighted by DoC, although they are easily seen in many studies. Those booms are likely to fuel stoat plagues as a new generation of mustelids arrives to find a larder overflowing with rodents.
Journalist Dave Hansford last year made the dubious claim that because of the “benefit” of 1080 to kea breeding, up to 22% of kea could die before there would be a net loss (Spinoff, August 2019). A 50% death rate would surely be tragic then, even to a journalist with an extreme pro-1080 bias!
Nature lovers should be very concerned because the monitoring of kea throughout 1080 drops is unique. No other native species: microbe, plant, insect or bird has been given even a tiny fraction of the attention or resources that have been used to monitor kea. 1080 is broad spectrum, highly toxic, spreads rapidly, travels up food chains, binds to cellulose and has extreme, unexpected effects. What is happening to everything else that lives in our forests, wetlands, grasslands and mountain tarns?
1080 poison may have a dual function for DoC. Not only does it attract an enormous amount of government funding, its use may help divert concern away from other ways in which vital habitat is being lost through poor management and financial interests. Examples are DoC’s approving high quotas for tourist helicopter flights (80 per day were planned for the remote Darran mountains) and the continued mining of conservation land (despite government promises to curb it).
The public needs to wake up to the fact there is no “science” behind DoC’s aerial poisoning. Mast-driven rodent plagues, often used to justify aerial poisoning, have been around since the time of the kiore. They are part of a general, short term increase in productivity including bird breeding. Effects are not something DoC needs to try to control with aerial poison, it should follow the evidence and stop blindly interfering in a process that it is simply not equipped to control.
Healthy populations of native birds, such as mohua and kakariki, lived in many places around the South Island until DoC started “helping” them by interfering with nests and trapping out the main rat predator (stoats). Rat numbers escalated, bird numbers plummeted, then broad spectrum 1080 poison was applied.
DoC’s science-less management shows a complete lack of respect for NZ’s ecological heritage and the legal mandate it holds to conserve it. Kea, much loved and admired, seem destined for the same fate as other species that have suffered from DoC’s “helping hand”. DoC needs to leave them and everything else alone, now.
“We have a population that has been poisoned for at least 100 years straight, on an ever-increasing scale, with the end goal being the complete theft of all public assets, or as many assets as the ruling group can get away with. “
The great weakening is something I’ve written and talked about extensively. The great poisoning is something Catherine Austin Fitts has talked about extensively. They’re both basically the same concept. We’re all living inside what’s often referred to as 5th generation warfare, which is a major advancement above conventional warfare strategy.
For anyone who doesn’t understand 5th generation warfare, please allow me to explain. In regular warfare (from 4th generation warfare backwards), we would see an invading force (usually motivated by theft) coming into an area they don’t yet govern, with the intention of enriching themselves via the resources of that invaded area. Within old style conventional warfare, the assets that the invading force were targeting to steal, often get destroyed. That’s the big drawback of conventional warfare. If you’re going to start a war and steal other people’s resources, which aren’t rightfully yours (and you’re going to risk everything involved with that) you certainly don’t want those prized resources getting destroyed as you’re invading.
Obviously, this older method of war isn’t so profitable in many situations, where the war itself destroys the assets that you’re trying to steal. That’s where 5th generation warfare comes into play and why it’s so popular today.
In 5th generation warfare, you use psychological manipulation, mind control, brainwashing and behavior modification to trick the people you’re targeting….to destroy themselves and destroy every form of strength they could ever use to resist your invasion. After that (which can often take decades to accomplish), with the public’s wealth and assets intact, you send in the cleanup crew to fully take over the area. You make the people too weak, too dumb, too fat, too addicted and too apathetic to fight back…..even if their full enslavement is implemented right in front of them.
Just an FYI update…. you’re now living in the last stages of a 5th generation warfare takeover attempt. In conventional warfare, you would always know that you were being invaded because of the bombs, the infantry, the barbwire, the missiles, the tanks and the explosions. With 5th generation warfare it’s the ever-growing number of Starbucks stores, the Coca-Cola trucks, the vaccine clinics, the chemtrails, the toxic beauty care products, the Teflon pans, the fluoride toothpaste, the mercury teeth fillings, the mammograms, the pesticide laden nonorganic food everywhere at the grocery store etc. With 5th generation warfare, it’s all about a gradual slow-motion slide into a full-spectrum weakening operation of the human body, mind, soul, spirit and bank account.
The great weakening is a government and media endorsed living model…..based on perpetual pleasure seeking, self-gratification, gluttony and hedonism. The vast majority of people in the Western world today (especially in Canada, Australia, the UK and the United States) are excessively overweight, brain damaged, weak, diseased and financially broke. (living pay cheque to pay cheque, where one small financial emergency could wipe them out completely) This is all by design.
No human can end up this broken if they live within their natural habitat. This is all socially engineered. This is the result of “the mind control based great weakening”. Well over 50% of Western populations are too overweight, sick, broke and apathetic to defend themselves……as is the goal of any 5th generation warfare operation. The overweight, wheel chaired, handicapped, brain damaged, toxic and addicted population isn’t natural. What we see in our cities today is the result of 5th gen warfare.
Oddly enough, this 5th gen warfare model has been applied more to the United States population than any other country, simply because the US contains the most asset wealth to steal. 70% of US adults are now obese or overweight. 50% of US children are now in the same boat. Most are addicted to cycles of perpetual self-destruction, using their bodies as disposable fun factories from which they extract max perpetual pleasure……using a very wide array of the state and media sponsored fun chemicals. (caffeine, alcohol, junk food, narcotics, medical narcotics, sugar, tobacco, screen entertainment etc.)
But that’s not the only way “the great weakening” has been implemented, upon a completely uninformed population. Most people genuinely believe that they’re just living a great, sedated, fun and distraction-based lifestyle. Most folks equate their absolute destruction via poison as “the good life“. The person poisoning themselves the most on social media is adored and admired. The public poisoners who celebrate their love of poisons get the most likes, comments and shares…..via their never-ending alcohol selfies. The average person (especially in the US) doesn’t know that the cleanup crew is about to be sent in.
The US government (for example) isn’t sending the national guard, to many major American cities, to fight crime. That’s the easily digestible excuse, handcrafted so that the average TV watcher cheers on and endorses what was always planned to occur. The complete collapse (financial to begin) is coming and that’s when the national guard in the US will take full control of everybody, regardless if democrat or republican. This isn’t a blue vs red political party issue either. A population this unhealthy can’t survive and was never intended to survive. The US is the most asset laden country on the planet and its population is 70% obese and overly medicated. What did you think was going to happen and do you really think this is all one big accident? Please, people…….it’s no accident. The great poisoning is now about to transform into THE GREAT TAKING…..as is clearly outlined in the documentary of the same name. The asset theft has been going on a long time and is about to accelerate dramatically. It will be like taking candy from a baby, literally.
As I review where we all sit right now, please keep in mind that this is a) all by design b) was purposely socially engineered over the last 100 years and c) is now too severe to fix or remedy. What’s coming is coming. Solutions and safe positions will only be available to people who know what’s happening and why it’s happening.
Let’s quickly review. We have a population that has been poisoned for at least 100 years straight, on an ever-increasing scale, with the end goal being the complete theft of all public assets, or as many assets as the ruling group can get away with. The younger the person is, the sicker they are in general. (mostly because they’ve received the most injected poison of our population) The school system has purposely dumbed down the children, where many have lost their will to live, their genetic self-preservation mechanisms are almost extinguished. Seniors are being purposely euthanized in our hospitals. Canada’s MAID program (Medical Assistance in Dying) is expanding its reach. MAID is now being offered to more and more people, as they simply enter Canadian hospitals looking for basic medical care. If you’re weak and poisoned (and are still walking above ground), the system is being continually engineered to flush you right down the toilet. Saying that, there are obvious solutions that will end in you making it through all this with flying colors.
Logically, if the ruling group’s agenda is poisoning and weakening….the solution is health and strengthening. Simple stuff. What’s really important to understand is that most people are poisoning and weakening themselves because they’re under mind control. Now, if you think that’s far-fetched, please consider this, If you click here, you can watch a mind control expert brainwash 75% of the people he was targeting, to murder another person……….LIVE on camera. If you click here, you can watch another mind control expert brainwash another person to forget his own name. If you click here, you can watch another mind control expert brainwash a lady named Carol, to believe she’s a man named Bob. Brainwashing you to poison yourself is a snap.
The mind control experts cited above use the same brainwashing tactics that your social engineers use to trick you to poison and weaken yourself. This is why it’s so hard for most people to stop poisoning themselves and why their addictions seem so strong……..because we’re all being brainwashed and mentally manipulated to poison and weaken ourselves every day.
This way, as we take ourselves out, we believe that there’s something personally wrong with us. We believe our dysfunction and failure in life is organic to us. We blame ourselves and think we’re broken. Blaming ourselves is perfect for the mind control experts who puppeteer our addictions and failures into us from behind our screens. The truth is that there’s nothing wrong with us whatsoever. If we succumb to the media mind control and become weak, addicted, overweight and broke……we’re actually working as designed.
Free will, determination and self-control have very little to do with becoming stronger and healthy. The first thing you’ll need to know, in order to break free, is to fully understand how mind control works. With this key knowledge you can brainwash yourself into a better life……as your social engineers try to continually brainwash you into a terrible life. You can indeed win the mind control battle, which most people don’t even know is raging all around them.
That’s where your new life starts. Their agenda is weakening and poisoning. Your personal agenda will now be strengthening and health. It’s that simple. But again, you need to learn the basics of mind control, brainwashing, psychological manipulation and behavior modification……before you begin your journey upwards into the stronger and healthier version of you. This is all I teach. All my programs and writings are dedicated to making my students stronger and healthier, on all levels. Let me tell you how I will do this for you.
I’ll make you stronger financially by showing you everything you need to know to start your own business, as a Certified Overcoming Self Sabotage Coach. I know that scares you. That’s why I’ll first teach you how to brainwash that fear out of you. It’s easy. All our beliefs are programs, and you can change your programs at any time. I’ll make you super strong with your health as well. You’ll lose weight, tone up and get in super shape. I have diets, exercise programs and healthy living guides all ready to go for you. I know that scares you too. That’s why I’ll first brainwash that fear out of you as well. I’ll make you strong on all levels. Even though I know all that’s really scary, to change into a super powerful version of yourself in a very short amount of time, I actually have a very large brainwashing library….so you can reprogram yourself into any super strong version of yourself that you desire. You can use mind control for positive changes as well. That’s what I do and teach. That’s what I’ll teach you to do as well. After that, you’ll go out and teach others how to do the same. We strengthen the world as a team. That’s how we win.
Are you ready to step into a strong and healthy version of yourself…….and have someone like me guide you every step of the way? If you said yes, just click here or email me at info@jchristoff.com. This one-of-a-kind program starts this Saturday (Oct 25th 2025) and we’re already 81% full, with only 19 spots left of the 100 we offer. It’s close to opening day and I would love to see you in our opening day online ceremony. Anyone can afford to join because of our new payment plan. This program is rapid, effective and super entertaining. Come work with me LIVE online from anywhere in the world. I hope to see you this Saturday. Let’s get better together.
It had been an unusually busy day in the hospital last weekend— far busier than expected for Fall. The kind of day that makes you think ahead to winter and wonder how intense it’s going to get!
There was nothing particularly special about the day itself. Just another long hospital day filled with patients, decisions, and the usual challenges of hospital medicine. But as always, one thing stood out above everything else: the powerful difference made by loved ones who stay at the bedside.
And I will never stop imparting this crucial advice for anyone dealing with a loved one in the hospital.
Being the best advocate you can be for your loved one is LIFESAVING.
And having a great advocate at your bedside is a true BLESSING.
I see this over and over again.
In some rooms, you can feel that energy immediately— a spouse, a daughter, or son, or other family member— cheering their loved one on and watching every detail. Family members asking questions and making sure everything is on track. In others, there was silence. A patient alone for hours, monitors beeping, no familiar faces around.
That contrast hits me every single time.
And so here’s my golden tip— something I cannot emphasize enough after years on the frontlines:
If you ever have a loved one in the hospital, be the best advocate you possibly can. Be there. Watch over them like a hawk. Ask questions. Never assume everything is being handled.
This isn’t being overbearing or difficult (which you must NEVER think). It’s being life-saving.
Dr. Suneel Dhand Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Why This Matters So Much
Hospitals may be full of some hard-working and dedicated professionals who work long hours. But they are also complex, high-stress, fast-moving environments. Even with the best systems in place, mistakes happen. It’s simply the nature of such a demanding environment.
Studies suggest that medical errors contribute to over 250,000 deaths every year in the United States, making them one of the leading causes of death. This may even be an underestimate! Countless more patients are harmed by preventable complications or breakdowns in communication.
Nobody sets out to make mistakes— but fatigue, time pressure, and human error are unavoidable realities. That’s why a vigilant, caring family member at the bedside can make all the difference in the world.
What Being an Advocate Really Means
Being an advocate doesn’t mean you need to know medicine or have a healthcare background. It means you are paying attention. Closely.
You’re the one who notices that a medication hasn’t arrived, a dose looks different, or a symptom is changing. You’re the one who asks when the next test is scheduled, whether results have come back, or what the plan is for the next step. The ill person lying in bed often cannot do these things.
You don’t need to worry about “bothering” anyone. This isn’t the time to be overly polite or worry about hurting feelings. If something doesn’t seem right, speak up— clearly and firmly.
This is not being pushy. It’s being responsible. It’s imperative. The reality is, when a patient has someone at the bedside keeping an eye on everything, they’re safer. Period.
I always make it a point (and it’s a delight to walk into a room and see loving family at the bedside)— to say thanks for coming in and how wonderful it is too see them! No doctor worth their salt should ever think differently.
The Emotional Impact
Aside from safety, there’s also the emotional side, and it’s enormous. The presence of loved ones can transform a hospital stay. Seeing a familiar face, hearing a reassuring voice, knowing someone truly cares— it changes everything. Patients feel calmer, more hopeful, and more determined to recover.
Of course not everyone is the same. Some people may not want relatives nearby or be happier alone. That’s fine, but most people realistically are not like that.
The human body responds to connection. Healing is faster when people feel supported. I see it every single week.
That’s why it’s heartbreaking when a patient lies alone for days on end. Sometimes it can’t be helped— families live far away, or life circumstances make it hard to visit. Not everyone is blessed to have loved ones nearby, especially at the extremes of age. But there’s no question: loneliness in hospital is one of the saddest things to witness.
If it were up to me, there would be no strict visiting hours at all— as long as sleep and privacy are respected. The benefits of human presence far outweigh any “inconvenience”.
How to Be the Best Advocate Possible
If someone you love is ever in hospital, here’s how to make a real difference:
Be there as much as you can. Your presence alone improves safety and morale.
Keep a written log. Jot down medications, test results, and what doctors say (as well as the names of doctors). You’ll be surprised how often it helps clarify things later.
Ask questions— lots of them! Understand the plan of care. Know what’s being done and why. Don’t let a doctor turn his or her back until you’ve got your answers.
Be firm if needed. Don’t shy away from speaking up. This is too important for hesitation.
Stay observant. Notice every change, every symptom, every delay.
One Day, It Could (And Probably Will) Be You
One day, any of us could find ourselves in that hospital bed— sick, anxious, vulnerable, or not in our full capacities. In that moment, having someone who loves you watching over things, asking questions, and refusing to let anything slip through the cracks could literally save your life.
Medicine has advanced in many ways over the last 100 years, but the most powerful force of all is still human presence. Machines can monitor your vitals, but they can’t care for your soul. Algorithms can alert staff, but they can’t notice the small things only someone who knows you can see (feel free to share your stories with us down below!)
So if a loved one ever ends up in the hospital— don’t just visit. Be there. Stay alert. Ask questions. Protect them.
Whether you are a spouse, child, parent, sibling— or even a trusted friend.
Because sometimes, that’s the difference between recovery and tragedy.
That’s one of the most lifesaving pieces of advice I could ever give you.
“As the world teeters on the verge of nuclear war and economic collapse, remember that in times of war and economic downturns, food is more valuable than gold.”
EWNZ Note: Remember Kissinger’s statement:
If you control the food, you control a nation. If you control the energy, you control a region. If you control the money, you control the world.
The following report was first published on October 10th, 2022, on winepressnews.com.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is encouraging people to legally register their community and backyard gardens into a national registry, where anyone can join.
The initiative is called the People’s Garden Initiative, which was created to build a “more diverse and resilient local food system to empower communities to address issues like nutrition access and climate change,” the USDA says.
“The simple act of planting a garden can have big impacts – from building a more diverse and resilient local food system to empowering communities to address issues like nutrition access and climate change.”
The USDA says there are 5 types of gardens that qualify for this project:
Food – indoor and outdoor gardens, “to increase access and consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables in urban and rural areas.”
Wildlife Habitat– Areas designed to increase the number of animals and insects, namely pollinators such as bees.
Conservation – preservation of natural resources like soil, water, air, and so on.
Beautification – an objectively pretty garden, by “rethink[ing] the planting of seasonal annuals and instead design a space with native species of flowering plants to enhance the biodiversity of your community and build a healthier ecosystem.”
Education and Training – gardens can fall under on the previously mentioned 4, but solely created for teaching and internship.
The USDA clarifies that these gardens can be any shape or size.
“You can plant a home garden in your yard or in a small space like a windowsill or balcony.”
Every garden registered can currently be publicly viewed online, per an interactive map that displays all gardens around the nation.
Each dot can be clicked on to learn more specifics about a registered garden, such as the type and pictures of the garden.
According to a press release from the USDA published on September 9th, those who register will also be featured in USDA communications, and sent a swanky sign showing their registration.
Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said:
“We welcome gardens nationwide to join us in the People’s Garden effort and all it represents.
“Local gardens across the country share USDA’s goals of building more diversified and resilient local food systems, empowering communities to come together around expanding access to healthy food, addressing climate change and advancing equity.
“We encourage existing gardens and new gardens to join the movement. Growing local food benefits local communities in so many ways, and we offer technical resources to help. Also, it’s a great way to connect with your local USDA team members.”
The press release notes that this project actually began in 2009. So, it would appear the USDA is attempting to make a renewed effort for this project. “It’s named for the “People’s Department,” former President Abraham Lincoln’s nickname for USDA, which was established during his presidency in 1862,” the USDA added.
But not everyone is on board with this idea.
Matt Agorist of The Free Thought Projectis pessimistic about this initiative, explaining that the USDA has never been in favor of people’s health. He cites an example of a group of physicians in 2020 who sent a whopping myriad of evidence to the USDA in a bid to reduce their recommended levels of sugar intake – levels these doctors thought was too high already, but settled on a reduced rate. In short, the USDA did not consider it and rejected the plea.
Agorist wrote,
“Now, this same organization is claiming that it wants you to register your vegetable garden so it can place you in a database and put your healthy food source on a map — for your health, of course. You also get a cool sign for your front yard too.
“While a handful of folks inside the USDA may have well-meaning intentions behind this program, the behemoth organization’s track record and history clearly indicate that the overwhelming majority of them do not care about your health. Not only do they not care about your health but most of their farm and food budget goes toward subsidizing products that directly harm your health.
“So, skepticism over a national garden database run by this organization is entirely warranted. As the world teeters on the verge of nuclear war and economic collapse, remember that in times of war and economic downturns, food is more valuable than gold.”
The WinePress News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
Please don’t do this. I, like Agorist, am quite pessimistic about initiatives such as this.
WinePress readers already know that the government and tech giants love to database our info already, and now registering your garden – even down to your windowsill plants (!) – they want to have on record. Absolutely not. But this type of thing certainly fits right in line with the coming CBDCs, social credit scores, carbon calculators, food IDs, and so forth. Right now it’s optional. But how long before it becomes mandatory?
With the food shortage narrative in play, it certainly could present an opportunity for the government to try and craft a narrative as to why Americans need to register their gardens, as to know who is buying what, what food crops are which, whose hogging up too much water, who is impoverished in nearby towns, how much excess you have, and on and on.
In the early days of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, many nations were already racing to get these very same types of agendas in place for the time they wish to roll them out. I suspect that when the famine gets to be a legitimate and obvious problem to the broad masses, coupled with a grand economic collapse – something I have been warning about for some time – that is when they might roll this type of thing out. Admittedly, some of this is speculative on my end.
Do you realize that most states still to this day still ban the commercial sale of raw milk and dairy products? I cannot go to the store and eat and drink what I want: I need the government’s approval, as they are “all-knowing.” And those that do want to sell raw milk and dairy, for example, if they are allowed to do it, have to have their practices registered, inspected, and datalogged, but still cannot sell it on the grocery store shelves in most states, but through these convoluted backdoor channels and red tape, most consumers will never notice and realize. And the states that do allow the commercial sale of raw milk and dairy, had to lobby and plead with the government to be allowed to do it!
So, lest anyone think that I am not a “patriot” and whining about nothing, then I suggest you chew on that apple and think about what I just said… And that is just one example. If you cannot eat and drink what you want, and plant and pasture whatever you want, without the government’s permission, then you do not have freedom. PERIOD. No president, governor, politician, or media tell-a-vision prophet will admit this truth to you, on either side.
Ecclesiastes 5:18 Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for it is his portion. [19] Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God. [20] For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart.
But you see, that is not part of the new paradigm. America has an odd fusion of communism and fascism for a puppet government. This will be the framework for this “Great Reset.” “You’ll own nothing, and be happy” – as the masses live in these smart cities, packed in like sardines, physically connected to the grid; where everything is serviced and run through by the major corporations working in tandem with the government.
The bottom line is this: do NOT EVER register your garden with the government. Simple as that.
Note: I’m taking the liberty of adding here the NZ info on population decline first, given this blog is a Kiwi one. Prof Crispin Miller has gathered together the global evidence on the population free fall happening in plain sight. He has done this with a global team of folk who daily document the instances of ‘sudden death’ and injury post covid jab … down to that taking place within various people groups and professions. What you are seeing individually (many of us now have several people we know who have suffered death or injury) is actually global. EWNZ
The authors of the ongoing democide believe that it will make the world a better place for THEM. We who really want the world to be a better place must stop them, break their power, and indict them.
“ABV” stands for “anything but the ‘vaccine.’” We use it to refer to articles whose authors strain to name some other “factors” causing this unprecedented cull..
What better way to preface this apocalyptic overview than to revisit Bill Gates’ (in)famous 2010 Ted Talk, in which he proposed “our” lowering the global population by “10 or 15%,” through “vaccines, health care [sic] and reproductive health services” (i.e., lots more abortions). He cast this project as an urgent one, because “CO2 is warming the planet.”
News from Underground by Mark Crispin Miller is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
The segment with Gates making that “humanitarian” suggestion, as well as the whole talk, was on YouTube, which disappeared it early in the “COVID crisis.” So here’s Gates’ whole performance, still accessible on Rumble: (click on the vid image to watch at Rumble.com)
The video is also in this article, along with a full transcript:
First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent. But there, we see an increase of about 1.3.
Later, early in the COVID-19 panic, Gates, interviewed by Stephen Colbert, indiscreetly tipped his hand (and Colbert quickly urged him to use different wording, lest “the conspiracy theorists” seize on what Gates really said):
OOPS THE VIDEO HAS ALREADY BEEN ‘DISAPPEARED’
It now appears that Gates—and his towering cohorts in the eugenics movement (guided by the likes of David Rockefeller)—have got their wish; only Gates was shrewdly lying when he lowballed the number of those marked for non-existence. (The cantankerous Ted Turner, a eugenicist fanatic like Bill Gates, didn’t hesitate to come right out and say that 90% of the human race must go.) Thanks to them, and their multitudinous accessories, what we’re now living through (if we’re lucky) is a catastrophic global population crash—which will do, is now doing, vastly graver harm to all the rest of us than “overpopulation,” COVID and CO2 combined.
Brace yourself, and read the evidence; then do all you can to spread the word about this democide, and that it’s the responsibility of all who can still think to bring the authors of the most destructive crime in history, and all their accomplices, to justice.
World fertility rates in ‘unprecedented decline’, UN says
June 10, 2025
United Nations Population Fund [UNFPA] surveyed young adults and those past their reproductive years. “The world has begun an unprecedented decline in fertility rates,” says Dr Natalia Kanem, head of UNFPA. “Most people surveyed want two or more children. Fertility rates are falling in large part because many feel unable to create the families they want. And that is the real crisis,” she says. In all countries, 39% of people said financial limitations prevented them from having a child. The highest response was in Korea (58%), the lowest in Sweden (19%). In total, only 12% of people cited infertility – or difficulty conceiving – as a reason for not having the number of children they wanted to. But that figure was higher in countries including Thailand (19%), the US (16%), South Africa (15%), Nigeria (14%) and India (13%).
New Zealand’s fertility rate hits record low as births fall
February 19, 2025
New Zealand’s fertility rate slumped to a record low in 2023, official data shows, as the total number of births also dropped. The fertility rate tracks the average number of births women will have in their lifetime. New Zealand, along with many countries around the world, has seen this number drop as factors like education, participation in the workforce, and access to contraception contribute to women having fewer children. Statistics NZ data released on Monday found there were 1,932 fewer babies born in the year ending December 2023 than in the year before, the lowest number of registered births in 20 years. The drop was despite a 3% increase in the number of women between 15 and 49 years old, the ages at which most children are born. The combination of fewer births and more women in the population led to the fertility rate hitting a record low of 1.56 births per woman. In 2022, the rate was 1.66, and it remains far below the 2.1 needed to replace population numbers in the long term.
Japan Confirms Over 600,000 Citizens Killed by Covid ‘Vaccines’
September 21, 2025
Chilling news is emerging from Japan as the nation’s leading experts have uncovered explosive evidence linking skyrocketing excess deaths to Covid mRNA “vaccines.” A grassroots coalition, United Citizens for Stopping mRNA Vaccines, has forced the release of official vaccination records for 21 million Japanese citizens through a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The records include vaccination dates, batch numbers, and post-vaccine death reports. The results are devastating.
Professor Murakami of Tokyo Science University, a respected scientist, analyzed the data and uncovered a consistent, alarming pattern:
• A surge in deaths occurred 90–120 days after injection.
• Those who received multiple doses saw earlier and steeper death spikes, suggesting cumulative toxicity.
•Murakami estimates that 600,000–610,000 Japanese citizens have been killed by the “vaccines.”
This figure is eerily consistent with Japan’s excess death statistics. Because these deaths typically happen months after the jab, doctors rarely connect them to the shots, allowing health officials to hide the carnage in plain sight.
Covid ‘Vaccines’ Triggered Global Turbo Cancer Crisis
September 24, 2025
Devastating alarm bells are emerging from Russia as the nation’s leading experts warn that chilling new evidence proves that the global turbo cancer crisis was caused by Covid mRNA “vaccines.” An alarming new review has confirmed the link between mass mRNA “vaccination” and skyrocketing cancer cases and deaths recorded around the world. The study was led by renowned Russian researcher Angelina Alekseevna Seliverstova and Dr. Oleg Germanovich Makeev, Professor of Biology and Biotechnology at Ural State Medical University in Yekaterinburg. Their findings confirm that the worldwide rollout of Covid mRNA shots triggered unexpected long-term safety risks. Most damning of all, the study exposes how Western institutions have downplayed, censored, or outright concealed these risks. The authors accuse global health officials of keeping the public in the dark about what could be the most devastating medical cover-up in modern history.
Unlike many Western studies, this review declared no financial conflicts of interest, no outside funding, and no pharmaceutical ties, underscoring the independence of its conclusions. The warning from Russia is clear, as the world is now grappling with a medical ticking time bomb unleashed by the mRNA experiment. Meanwhile, the establishment is doing everything it can to silence the truth.
The evidence is mounting and shows that mass mRNA “vaccination” has not only failed to stop Covid but may be fueling an ongoing surge in cancer, chronic illness, and unexplained deaths. The warnings from Russian and Western scientists now converge on a single reality, revealing that humanity has been subjected to a reckless experiment with catastrophic consequences. Yet, the cover-up may be as dangerous as the injections themselves.
US population decline sooner than expected as deaths to outpace births in America by 2031
September 19, 2025
The US population is approaching a critical demographic milestone as deaths are now projected to exceed births as early as 2031, two years earlier than previously expected. This shift signals a trend toward near-zero population growth, raising concerns about the country’s economic future and social support systems. In conclusion, the convergence of lower birth rates and aggressive immigration enforcement signals a turning point in U.S. demographic dynamics. Policymakers face the urgent task of addressing this population slowdown’s economic repercussions while balancing immigration regulations and social welfare needs.
Puerto Rico ranks among world’s fastest-shrinking populations
April 21, 2025
Puerto Rico is the fourth jurisdiction with the highest population decline in the world, according to recent statistics showing the island’s population shrank by 1.2% in 2024 compared to the previous year. The Cook Islands in the South Pacific, American Samoa, and Saint Pierre and Miquelon experienced greater population declines — at 2.24%, 1.54% and 1.21% respectively — Statista reported. Of the 20 countries with the highest rate of population decline, the majority are island nations, where emigration rates are high, particularly to Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. mainland, or they are in Eastern Europe, which suffers from a combination of high emigration and low birth rates, according to Statista. Puerto Rico’s population is forecast to decline steadily between 2024 and 2029, dropping by 100,000 people, or 3.13%, to little more than 3.1 million in 2029 — reaching its lowest level since 1977. The island’s population peaked at 3,827,000 in 2004, according to World Bank and U.S. Census Bureau data.
Canada’s population growth slows to historic lows as temporary residents decline
September 25, 2025
Canada’s population stood at an estimated 41.65 million on July 1, 2025, rising by just 47,098 people, or 0.1%, over the previous quarter. According to Statistics Canada, this is the lowest second-quarter growth rate since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, when border closures nearly halted migration. Excluding that year, it is the slowest pace for a second quarter since comparable records began in 1946. From July 2024 to July 2025, Canada’s population expanded by 389,324 people (+0.9%), sharply lower than the 1.21 million (+3.0%) added a year earlier. Much of the slowdown came after the federal government introduced policies in 2024 to reduce temporary migration.
MEXICO
ABV:
Birth rate in Mexico declines, mirroring a global phenomenon
October 2, 2024
Mexico’s birth rate fell to a three-year low in 2023, with 1.8 million births recorded, marking a significant decline in fertility, according to a report by the National Institute of Statistics and Geography. This decline will have important implications for the country’s labor market, healthcare, and economic growth, signaling an urgent need for policy adjustment to address the evolving demographic landscape. Several interconnected factors have contributed to the decline in birth rates, including rising living costs and economic pressures, as reported by Al Jazeera.
CUBA
ABV:
Cuba gets older: The island reports its lowest birth rate since the Revolution
March 10, 2025
A group of Cuban officials has confirmed what has been obvious on the streets of Cuba for some time: that the country has much fewer people than it did three years ago. Fewer births are being registered and only older adults are increasing as a demographic group. The latest official figures from the National Statistics and Information Office (ONEI) show that the latest exodus of Cubanshas emptied the country out; that women are reluctantto have children in the midst of an endless economic crisis, and that young people are leaving while the elderly remain behind. Authorities have said that this population aging should not be “dramatized,” but researchers insist that it should not be underestimated either. In any case, they say that the problem is not aging per se, but the conditions in which Cubans are getting older.
Latin America’s Fertility Decline is Accelerating. No One’s Certain Why
January 5, 2024
Among demographers, 2023 will be remembered as the year Brazil “shrank” by almost 5 million people. A new census put the country’s population at 203 million people—well below the 208 million previously estimated by Brazil’s national statistics institute, and even further from the 216 million calculated by the United Nations. Those missing people didn’t vanish or emigrate—they were never born. The 2022 census, delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic, showed that Brazil’s population grew during the 2010s by just 0.52% per year—half the rate seen throughout the 2000s, and the lowest such percentage since 1872. Brazil is not alone. For half a century, fertility rates around the world have been drifting downwards thanks to a confluence of rising education levels, greater labor force participation by women, strengthened reproductive rights, and wider access to contraception. But in several Latin American and Caribbean countries, this decline has recently accelerated to an unexpected degree that even experts are struggling to explain.
UNITED KINGDOM
ABV:
Fertility rate hits record low in England, Scotland and Wales
August 27, 2025
The fertility rate for England and Wales has fallen for the third year in a row to reach a record low, figures show. The total fertility rate across both countries, meaning the average number of live children women can expect to have across their child-bearing life, stood at 1.41 in 2024, down from 1.42 in 2023, the lowest since comparable data was first collected in 1938, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This is despite a 0.6% increase in live births last year, with a 14% increase in the number of babies born to fathers over 60, according to figures published last month. Bernice Kuang, a demography researcher at the University of Southampton, said the fall in fertility rates could be a temporary result of people postponing having children.
Birth rate in France: The decline under the microscope
July 10, 2025
The birth rate in France is declining, and the trend has been observed under the microscope by the Académie Nationale de Médecine and INED (French institute for demographic studies), which have each recently published a report on the subject. The decline recorded can be analysed through different factors. The total number of births has been steadily falling since 2010 in mainland France. At that date, the number of births was 832,000. In 2024, a historic low was recorded with 663,000 babies. To understand these figures, the post-war record was achieved in 1971 with 916,000 births. These raw figures should also be compared with the size of the population. Indeed, the size of the population bears an obvious link with the total number of births. The INSEE (National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies) defines the birth rate as the number of births during the year relative to the total mean population for the year. The rate has been falling almost constantly for several decades. from 14.8 in 1982, it has dropped to 9.9 in 2023. Many analyses have been put forward in order to understand the phenomenon. Among the explanatory factors, the social and professional status of women is important. Women are undertaking longer studies, and a much higher proportion of women have a salaried income.
After decades of growth, Brussels’ population is set to decline
June 20, 2025
The Brussels region is expected to see a slight population decline to just under 1.25 million by 2034 after two decades of steady growth, the Brussels Institute for Statistics and Analysis said in a new report. Between 2004 and 2024, the region’s population grew from 1 million to 1.25 million, with international migration being one of the main drivers. Non-Belgians accounted for 37.2% the population data from last year shows – the French are topping the list, followed by Romanians and Italians. But the next decade isn’t expected to see any further growth, as residents are leaving for other parts of the country and birth rates are declining. By 2034, the numbers are expected to drop to just under 1.25 million, the Brussels Institute for Statistics and Analysis (BISA) estimates in a new report. The municipalities of Brussels are projected to lose 2,400 inhabitants between 2024 and 2034.
In 2024 Germany‘s population rose by 0.1% which is a drop from the 0.4% growth witnessed the year before, according to preliminary figures released by the Federal Statistical Office on Friday. As a result, the population for the EU’s largest economy now stands at 83.6 million. The figures showed that, as in previous years, more people died than were born in Germany, but the population growth came about due to immigration. Population growth concentrated in Germany’s western states, which saw an increase of 0.2%, while the eastern states, excluding the city-state of Berlin, recorded a decline of 0.3%. The largest increase for a state came in Bavaria, with population numbers up by 73,000. The biggest population losses occurred in the eastern states of Thuringia (down 15,000 or 0.7%), Saxony (down 12,000 or 0.3%), and Saxony-Anhalt (down 9,000 or 0.4%).
A disappearing country. Moldova on the verge of a demographic catastrophe
August 1. 2025
Moldova is one of the fastest depopulating countries in the world. Since it gained independence in 1991, the population of its right-bank region (the territory controlled by Chișinău, excluding the separatist region of Transnistria) has shrunk by approximately 35%. This is primarily due to mass labour migration driven by economic conditions, involving over one million citizens of a country with a current population of 2.4 million. Other significant factors contributing to Moldova’s declining population include a dramatic drop in fertility rates and high mortality associated with low life expectancy, which is ten years below the EU average. Consequently, Moldovan society is ageing rapidly; in 1991, the average age of a resident was 29, compared to 38 at present.
Croatia is facing a serious depopulation crisis, with many young people leaving in search of better opportunities. In an effort to reverse this trend, the government has pledged €700 million in 2024 to support returning Croatians, tax relief, and affordable housing. But will these measures be enough to keep people in the country? Experts warn that financial incentives alone won’t solve the problem, HRT writes. The biggest challenge for young families remains securing a place to live. Croatia is implementing projects aimed at reducing the cost of housing construction, yet it still ranks among the most expensive EU countries in terms of property prices.
No one left to live, let alone work: Serbia faces a major demographic crisis
June 23, 2025
The saying “The further south you go, the sadder it gets” perfectly applies to the story of demographic changes in certain parts of Serbia, which are now heavily influencing the labour market. In essence, in some regions, depopulation has reached alarming levels, threatening not only to reshape the local economy but also to alter the structure and even the nationality of the workforce. While this may sound overly pessimistic, data from both national and international institutions indicate that the country and its leadership face serious demographic challenges. If left unchecked, these challenges could significantly reshape the economy – not only in southern and eastern Serbia, where the problem is most pronounced – but in the entire country. The bleak reality is underscored by World Bank data, which ranks Serbia 13th globally for the fastest population decline. Jakup Berisha, UNDP’s Resident Representative in Serbia, also reminds us of this status. “The census shows that Serbia has 6.65 million inhabitants, 496,000 fewer than in 2011. Due to a low birth rate, an ageing workforce, and emigration, the number of young people entering the labour market is decreasing, while the number of pensioners is rising faster than we can replace outgoing workers. At the same time, emigration disproportionately draws away highly educated professionals, further worsening labour shortages in key industries,” Berisha told NIN.
Bulgaria Among EU’s Most Declining Populations as Demographic Shifts Intensify
August 7, 2025
Over the past two decades, Bulgarians rank among the top three populations in the European Union that have experienced significant decline. Across the EU, the share of children in the population has fallen, marriages are increasingly rare, and one in four newborns last year had a mother from an immigrant background. The latest European statistics shed light on these demographic trends. Eurostat data shows the EU population grew by 4% over 20 years, concentrated mainly in five countries: Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and Poland, which together account for nearly 70% of the total. Smaller populations include Malta, with around half a million inhabitants. Bulgaria’s population stands at approximately 6.4 million, placing it 15th in size among EU member states. Within this timeframe, 19 countries saw population growth while 8 experienced decline. Luxembourg’s population doubled, followed by Malta and Ireland, which increased by about one-third. Bulgaria saw a notable 17% reduction, equivalent to a loss of roughly 1.3 million people, second only to Latvia’s 18% decrease. Immigration remains a significant factor shaping the EU’s demographic landscape.
Greece announces €1.6bn relief package to tackle population decline
September 7, 2025
Greece has announced drastic measures, including tax breaks and other financial incentives, to address a population decline that is on course to make it the oldest nation in Europe. The prime minister said the €1.6bn (£1.4bn) relief package had been dictated by one of the biggest challenges facing the Mediterranean nation: a demographic crisis of unprecedented scale. Greece’s near decade-long crisis has been widely blamed for the alarming drop. This is partly because younger people were among those hardest hit by austerity measures required in return for international rescue funds that kept bankruptcy at bay and debt-stricken Athens in the EU.
Low Birth Rates, Brain Drain, and Living Conditions Drive Greece’s Population Down by Half a Million
August 23. 2025
The latest report by the Laboratory of Demographic and Social Analyses of the University of Thessaly paints a grim picture of the current state and future demographic outlook of Greece, as the country’s population continues to age disproportionately and decline sharply. Data shows that the total population of Greece has declined by half a million over the last thirteen years, while the birth-death ratio is projected to remain negative until at least 2050, pointing towards a shift in the migratory flows balance as the most imminent solution to the problem. According to the report, the reasons for this significant decline in population are not only related to demography but more generally to the social challenges that Greece has faced in recent decades and the worsening living conditions for both native Greeks and migrants.
Poland records EU’s largest population decline for second year running
July 15, 2025
Poland’s population fell by over 123,000 in 2024, the largest overall decline among all European Union member states for the second year in a row. In relative terms – taking account of the size of countries’ population – Poland had the EU’s joint-third-largest drop of 0.34%. The data for 2024 mark the sixth consecutive year that Poland’s population declined amid a demographic crisis that the country’s statistical agency has forecast will continue in the coming decades. Last year saw the number of births in Poland fall to a new postwar low. It was the 12th year in a row in which deaths have outnumbered births. Poland’s fertility rate – the average number of children that are born to a woman over her lifetime – also fell to a new record low of 1.099, which is among the lowest in the world.
Population Decline in the Czech Republic: 27,000 Fewer Residents in the First Half of 2025
September 11, 2025
The population of the Czech Republic decreased in the first half of 2025. By the end of June, 10.88 million people were living in the country, 27,200 fewer than at the start of the year. This is due to both the negative birth-to-death balance and emigration abroad. According to data from the Czech Statistical Office (ČSÚ), 57,700 people died in the first six months – almost 2,000 more than in the same period last year. In contrast, only 37,400 children were born, a decrease of around 12 per cent compared with the first half of 2024. Nearly half of all births occurred outside marriage, and most children were born to women aged 30 to 32.
Albania, with the strongest population decline in Europe in the last decade
July 14, 2025
Throughout Europe, especially in developing countries, people are moving in search of a better life. Globalization, the opening of markets, the easing of movement and work permit criteria by aging developed countries are opportunities that, naturally, many will try to take advantage of, especially young people who today have higher expectations from life. But no one is leaving at the rate that Albanians are leaving. The latest Eurostat data, processed by “Monitor”, show that Albania’s population has been reduced by 18.2% at the end of 2024, compared to 2011, a period that includes the development of two censuses. In Albania, the strong population contraction is related to two factors. First, the slowdown in natural increase, which turned negative during the pandemic and is now at minimal levels, with only 1.2 thousand people plus in 2024, from over 60 thousand people in the early 90s. The second and most important factor is emigration, which saw a new wave after 2016, mainly from the young population. In 2024, according to Eurostat, net emigration was 28.8 thousand people.
In six, months, 102 new cases of childhood cancer were reported in Ceara
September 23, 2025
The data are from the Albert Sabin Children’s Hosptial and refer to the number of visits performed in the state public health system in the first six months of 2025. [paywall]
Portugal grapples with accelerating demographic decline
August 28, 2025
Portugal is confronting a deepening demographic crisis, as recent data from the National Statistics Institute (INE) highlights a marked decline in its younger population and a significant increase in the elderly. The Portugal News reports that in 2023 only 12.8 percent of the Portuguese population was aged between 0 and 14, positioning the country as the third in the European Union with the lowest proportion of young people, surpassed only by Italy and Malta. This trend is attributed by the INE to decades of consistently low birth rates combined with a rise in life expectancy. Analysis reveals that between 1970 and 2024, the proportion of young people in Portugal decreased from 28.5 to 12.6 percent. The INE projects that if current demographic patterns persist, Portugal’s resident population will decline to approximately 8.2 million by 2080. This forecast further accentuates the urgencyfor policy interventions designed to stimulate birth rates and facilitate the integration of young people and migrants into the labour market.
Italy’s demographic crisis worsens as births hit record low
March 31, 2025
Italy’s demographic crisis deepened in 2024 as the number of births hit a new record low, emigration accelerated and the population continued to shrink, national statistics bureau ISTAT said on Monday. Italy’s ever-falling birth rate is considered a national emergency, but despite Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her predecessors pledging to make it a priority, none have so far been able to halt the drop. There were some 281,000 more deaths than births in 2024 and the population fell by 37,000 to 58.93 million, continuing a decade-long trend. Since 2014, Italy’s population has shrunk by almost 1.9 million, more than the inhabitants of Milan, its second-largest city, or of the region of Calabria in the country’s southern toe. The 370,000 babies born in 2024 marked the 16th consecutive annual decline and was the lowest figure since the country’s unification in 1861. It was down 2.6% from 2023, ISTAT said, and 35.8% lower than in 2008 – the last year Italy saw an increase in the number of babies born. The fertility rate, measuring the average number of children born to each woman of child-bearing age, also fell to a record low of 1.18, far below the 2.1 needed for a steady population.
Unprecedented Crisis in Italy, Population Decreasing to 54,8 Million by 2050
April 1, 2025
Italy is facing an unprecedented demographic crisis that will have profound economic and social repercussions in the coming decades. According to data presented by the president of Istat, Francesco Maria Chelli, during the hearing at the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on the effects of the demographic transition, the Italian population continues to decline, reaching 58,9 million inhabitants in 2025, with a decrease of 37 thousand people compared to the previous year. The forecasts for the future are even more worrying: by 2050 the population will drop to 54,8 million, with a loss of over 4 million inhabitants compared to current levels.
Turkey sounds alarm over declining birth rates amid economic concerns
May 27, 2025
Turkey’s birth rate has plunged to its lowest level in modern history, prompting warnings from officials and experts, who say the country is facing a demographic crossroads. Recent data from the Turkish Statistical Institute (TÜİK) show that the total fertility rate in 2024 fell to 1.48 children per woman, well below the population replacement level of 2.1 and a steep decline from 2.38 in 2001. The number of live births in 2024 stood at 937,559, with boys accounting for 51.4 percent and girls for 48.6 percent. This marks a continuation of a trend that demographers and economists say is increasingly linked to economic hardship in Turkey, particularly among young adults of childbearing age.
Despite exhortations from ruling clerisy to be fruitful, and pro-natal policies intended to prop up birth rates, fertility in Iran is slumping once again. Earlier this month, the Tehran Times reported that annual births in Iran fell below the million mark. According to the Civil Registration Organization in charge of Iran’s vital statistics, just under 980,000 births were recorded between the Iranian calendar year coinciding with 21 March 2024 through 20 March 2025. It has been a very long time since so few babies were born in Iran. By the reckoning of the United Nations Population Division, we have to go back seventy years—to 1955—to find a time when Iranian annual birth totals were lower than today. The current birth level, as we see in Figure 1, is less than half as high as it was forty years ago, in 1985.
Grim warning: Writer warns of declining population in Saudi Arabia
February 8, 2025
A Saudi writer has raised alarms about the country’s declining birth rates, warning that Saudis could face extinction. In an article published in the Saudi newspaper Al Watan, Mansour Al Daban referenced UN data that shows a worrying drop in Saudi birth rates. The figures indicate that births in Saudi Arabia fell by 67 per cent in 2023 compared to 1950, when the birth rate was 53.34 per 1,000 people. By 2023, the rate had plummeted to 15.7, marking a 2.88 per cent decline from the previous year. Al Daban also cited a study titled Epidemiological Decline in Human Fertility Rate in the Arab World, conducted by researchers from the University of Sharjah in the UAE. The study, which analysed fertility rates in the Arab world from 2011 to 2021, found a similar decline in most Arab countries.
Russia’s attempts to boost its flagging birth rate — through policies promoting “traditional values,” tighter abortion restrictions and officials’ encouragement of larger families — appear to be falling short, as the number of births has fallen to its lowest level in centuries. According to data released by the state statistics agency Rosstat, 195,400 children were born in Russia during January and February 2025 — a 3% drop compared to the same period in 2024. The decline was even steeper in February alone, with births falling 7.6% year-over-year to 90,500 — 7,400 fewer than in the same month last year. Some regions saw even sharper drops. Births fell by 18.7% in Arkhangelsk, 19.4% in the republic of Karelia, 18.6% in the Oryol region, 21.6% in Kostroma and 26.6% in Smolensk. According to demographer Alexei Raksha, the first quarter of 2025 likely saw the lowest number of births since the early 1800s, with February marking the lowest monthly figure in over 200 years. Based on preliminary registry office data, he estimated that 95,000 to 96,000 children were born in March, bringing the total for the first quarter to around 293,000-294,000.
Some parts of India have been forced to shut down schools amid the country’s declining birth rates. Economist Sanjeev Sanyal, who was previously the principal economic adviser in India’s finance ministry and a member of the Economic Advisory Council to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has spoken about this happening and called for it to occur “more routinely.” “Our population is only growing now because we are living longer, we are not having enough babies,” he told the Indian financial newspaper Mint on Monday. “So our problem is already the case that in parts of the country we have to shut down schools.” “We should be shutting them down,” he added. “We are doing them slowly. But we need to do them more routinely. Because whenever I mention that we need to shut down schools, people get very emotional about this issue.”
Rethinking Thailand’s Population Crisis through the Lens of a “Reluctant Economist”
September 23, 2025
Many of us are already aware of Thailand’s growing demographic crisis. The country is now experiencing “more deaths than births,” and the Thai population is steadily shrinking. Within approximately 50 years, the population is projected to drop by half—from over 60 million to just over 30 million. The country will be filled with elderly citizens. Working-age individuals will become rare, and the number of children and youth will decline dramatically. All of this stems from one key issue: Thai people are having fewer children. This is undeniably a major issue that many sectors are trying to address with the best possible solutions. In our article, “Integrated National Strategic Plan: Turning Thailand’s Population Crisis into Future Opportunities,” we presented macro-level strategies for dealing with this issue. However, in this article, we want to invite everyone to “rethink” the problem through the perspective of the “Reluctant Economist”—a concept developed by Professor Richard A. Easterlin. This lens, which is rarely seen (or perhaps never seen) in Thai discourse, may help us better understand the root cause of the population crisis—and possibly lead us to better solutions. Thailand’s declining birth rate poses the core of the population crisis. From the perspective of the Reluctant Economist, the central question is, why are people choosing to have fewer children? [Hint – It’s not lower fertility.]
Why Vietnam’s Demographic Decline Will Reinforce Its Non-Aligned Foreign Policy
August 26, 2025
Demographic decline is causing multiple headaches for Vietnamese policymakers. According to the latest statistics, Vietnam’s births per woman in 2024 declined to 1.91 from 1.96 in 2023, which is slightly below the replacement rate of 2.1. Vietnam’s population is aging rapidly. The number of people over the age of 60 increased from 11.4 million in 2019 to 14.2 million in 2024 out of a population of approximately 100 million. This cohort is projected to reach 18 million in 2030. An aging population and a declining workforce will put pressure on Vietnam’s nascent welfare system and its ambitious growth target of becoming a high-income country by the 2040s. The Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) is encouraging births by handing out a one-time cash payment to women having two newborns before the age of 35 and not punishing party members who have a third child. This year, Vietnam also ended its two-child policy and allowed families to decide for themselves how many children they can have.
Chinese kindergartens in crisis as enrolments plunge 25% in 4 years
July 26, 2025
The number of Chinese kindergartens has fallen by a quarter in four years, prompting the closure of tens of thousands of schools in the country as a precipitous drop in births hits the education system. Enrolments in China’s kindergartens have declined by 12mn children between 2020 and 2024, from a peak of 48mn, according to data from the country’s ministry of education. The number of kindergartens, serving Chinese children aged 3-5, has also fallen by 41,500 from a high of nearly 295,000 in 2021. Falling enrolments are now “baked into the system and that’s not going to change”, said Stuart Gietel-Basten, director of the Center for Aging Science at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He added that compared with five or 10 years ago, the decline in births was “huge”. The contraction of China’s pre-school system is a foretaste of the challenges to come for business and policymakers from China’s demographic decline, which is expected to be one of the most rapid in the world. China has recorded three consecutive years of population decline to 2024 following the decades-long policy, ended in 2016, that limited many couples to one child. While the number of births rose by about 520,000 last year to 9.3mn, following a record low in 2023, they were still outpaced by deaths and have declined by nearly half since the peak of 17.9mn in 2017.
China to offer $500 per child in move to boost birth rate
July 28, 2025
The Chinese government will offer parents subsidies of 3,600 yuan ($500, €429) per child under the age of three per year, Beijing’s state media said Monday. China‘s population has declined for three consecutive years, the world’s second most populous nation — after India — is facing an emerging demographic crisis. The number of births in 2024 — 9.54 million — was half as many as in 2016, the year that ended its one-child policy that was in place for more than three decades. Marriage rates in China have also hit a record low. Young couples put off having babies due to the high cost of raising children and career concerns.
China’s population falls for a third consecutive year
January 17, 2025
China’s population fell for a third consecutive year in 2024, with the number of deaths outpacing a slight increase in births, and experts cautioning that the trend will accelerate in the coming years. The National Bureau of Statistics said the total number of people in China dropped by 1.39 million to 1.408 billion in 2024, compared to 1.409 billion in 2023. Friday’s data reinforces concerns that the world’s second largest economy will struggle as the number of workers and consumers declines. Rising costs from elderly care and retirement benefits are also likely to create additional strains for already indebted local governments. The high cost of childcare and education as well as job uncertainty and a slowing economy have also discouraged many young Chinese from getting married and starting a family. Gender discrimination and traditional expectations for women to take care of the home exacerbate the issue, demographers say.
Taiwan sees 18th consecutive month of population decline
July 10, 2025
Taiwan’s population declined for the 18th consecutive month as of the end of June, according to data released Thursday by the Ministry of the Interior (MOI). In total, 55,375 babies were born in the first half of 2025, down 8,499 from the same period last year, when 63,874 births were recorded. Meanwhile, 16,554 deaths were reported in June, equivalent to approximately one death every 2.6 minutes. That figure represents an increase of 1,172 from May and 1,632 more than in June 2024. The crude death rate for the month stood at 8.63 per 1,000 people. The natural population decrease – the difference between births and deaths – was 7,586 for June.
New South Korea Data Reveals Scale of Population Decline
September 5, 2025
Marriages in South Korea have dropped by nearly half over the past three decades, while annual births have fallen to just one-third of 1995 levels, according to newly released data. The numbers show what officials consider a looming population crisis. South Korea‘s fertility rate—the lowest in the world—stood at 0.75 births per woman in 2024, well below the 2.1 needed to sustain a population. The same year, the share of South Koreans aged 65 and older passed 20 percent. The demographic shift could drag on the country’s economic prospects and strain its pension and health care systems, with fewer young workers supporting a growing elderly population. Analysts have cited high housing costs, an unforgiving workplace culture and unequal burdens of child care as key reasons young South Koreans are deciding to delay or forgo children.
South Korea’s Military Personnel Plummet 31% as Male 20s Drop 16%
September 23, 2025
This year, the male population in their 20s stood at approximately 3,024,000, a 15.8% decrease compared to the male population in their 20s in 2010, 15 years ago. Meanwhile, South Korea’s military personnel, which numbered 650,000 (based on the Defense White Paper) in 2010, plummeted to 450,000 over 15 years, a 30.7% drop. The reduction in military personnel has outpaced the natural decline in the population eligible for service. Analysis suggests that populist policies aimed at shortening military service periods to appeal to younger voters have accelerated the military’s crisis more rapidly than the decline in conscription resources due to low birth rates.
The Philippines’ annual population growth rate (PGR) is declining, according to data from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has officially declared the country’s latest population count at 112,729,484, based on recent data. This marks an increase of 3.69 million people since the last nationwide census in 2020, when the population stood at 109.03 million.
A table showing the increase in the Philippines’ population since 1960
The population and the population growth rate (PGR) are two different things. The population refers to the total number of people, while the PGR measures the rate at which that number increases over time. Despite an increase in the overall population size, the PGR has declined, from 1.63% between 2015 and 2020, to 0.80% between 2020 and 2024. The country’s PGR has been generally declining since 1960 to 1970, when it was recorded at 3.01%.
A table showing the decline in the Philippines’ population growth rate since 1960
“The slowdown in the growth rate may be driven by several interrelated factors such as but not limited to declining fertility and birth rate, elevated mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic, and subdued migration activity,” the PSA said.
Australia’s birth rate hits rock bottom with severe consequences for economic future
October 16, 2024
There are warnings that Australia’s birth rate — having hit a record low — is now at a critical level. Bureau of Statistics figures show 286,998 births were registered in Australia in 2023, resulting in a total fertility rate of 1.50 babies per woman. Australian National University demographer Liz Allen said the nation’s birth rate is perilously low. “We’ve hit rock bottom,” she said. The Total Fertility Rate, or TFR, over the past 30 years has slowly dropped from 1.86 in 1993 to 1.5 in 2023. The birth rate for girls and women aged 15 to 19 has fallen by more than two thirds over that period. There’s also been a large decline for women aged 20 to 24 years. She described a “deep-seated attitudinal problem” facing millions of younger Australians. Many, the demographer said, lack enthusiasm about the future, and that relates to their views on climate change, housing affordability and gender equality.
You must be logged in to post a comment.