A repost from 2018 … and a reminder that you are being poisoned and have been for a good many years… that being the plan …. EWNZ
If you draw one up [an epidemiological study] & obtain funding, you will literally be told no one else at your University will have funding, they will have it taken away and your life will be in danger. This is the absolute truth and happened in NZ … Mary Molloy
Mary Molloy, spokesperson for Farmers Against Ten Eighty ( FATE ) says :
“What is happening in this country? You have just heard that Dr Charlie Baycroft has been threatened by the Health Department for having an opinion which is not supportive of 1080, where else is this influence?
Well numerous farmers are threatened by the Biosecurity Act if they don’t permit the “controls”, poisoning etc by Tbfree. They send in big guys to stand close to you, cut you off and intimidate, this is the norm.
If you say beggar off then you are told that you are the “only ” person with concerns.
Next you are patronised, with you mean well but are not thinking or science based and this is from an organisation which continues to use antiquated testing and fails to declare us Tbfree when we effectively are.
Then a man who came from UK to do a documentary, how many years ago Terry Brownbill? He is unable to sell his doco. to the BBC because our government lied and pressured the BBC – freedom of speech, the press Nada not here for a long time.
Constant persecution of the Graf Boys and refusal to use any of their footage on TV, World recognised films can’t be shown in NZ, why?
Scientists vilified for taking a stance against 1080, called ridiculous names to vilify and destroy their credibillity – their work dries up.
DOC telling lies like 1080 breaks down into salt and vinegar like your crisps really, harmless in water, won’t kill native birds but if it does they will “bounce” back, more crap but believed by most public who live in cities.
Newspaper editors screamed at down the phone by Tb-free propagandists and threatened with the Press Council.
Photographs allegedly produced used by DOC and Tbfree to establish untruths so that people accept insidious poisoning to continue.
1080 dissolves in water, correct but it is not rendered harmless and does not breakdown like DOC and TBfree say, conditions need to be absolutely right temps of 20-30 degrees , in sunlight and still water, where is that in NZ bush?
1080 is biodegradable, rubbish hardly in NZ as organisms that can achieve that (2) are very rare in here.
1080 is safe in water, according to DOC and TBfree but MOH says it is harmful in water.
NO ONE is allowed to do an epidemiological study in NZ to see how this teratogen, class 1a poison may behave in our populations living within the poison and dust zones.
If you draw one up, obtain funding, you will literally be told no one else at your University will have funding, they will have it taken away and your life will be in danger. This is the absolute truth and happened in NZ.
This list is endless and seems hard to fathom, how can this happen in NZ? Well it can and it does, WHAT CAN YOU DO ABOUT IT? “
Note: don’t expect that extensive links can be provided for this information. Clearly it is from the experience & feedback of the writer and in the realm of information that will not be found in the ‘official’ records. I do hear similar information however from people who email me. Remember also the young woman whose Doctor suspected 1080 poisoning, and subsequently whose heart the NZ lab LOST? Say no more. See our page on suspected 1080 poisoning. What can you do about it? For starters educate yourself on the independent research (links at the 1080 pages main menu to that, plus search other articles here by using categories & search box) & spread the word on the truths you find.
NZ house Prices are EXTREMELY overinflated. It is time to let the PONZI collapse once and for all!
In this video I show the just how insane New Zealand house prices have become. They have been manipulated to a price that is so far from reality it can no longer be hidden. It’s obvious that the Ponzi will collapse if immigration returns to normal levels and that’s why Luxon is trying to get as many people into NZ as possible with his fake ‘trade’ deal. Also, this video is for entertainment purposes only…. never take advice from anyone on YOUTUBE!
For the latest episode of Breaking the silence I was extremely delighted to have a conversation with Barry Young who is an Ex-Pat living in New Zealand and worked as a data analyst.
As we initially discuss he is a more than capable and analytical mind and despite a role in organising systems to aid the jab roll out soon smelt a rat. He noticed ‘rare coincidences’ keep on happening (as they seemingly do in 2019-2025) in multiple clusters and decided to raise the flag and whistleblow. This was when the attack on his career, reputation and safety began as he was targeted by the powers that be simply for highlighting such clusters, asking inconvenient questions and raising a red flag. His life hasn’t been the same since which we discuss at length in this episode.
Here is a brief bio of Dr David Cartland
Dr. David Cartland is a fully qualified doctor and GP in the UK. He resigned from his position in February 2022 after taking two injections of the so-called “vaccine” himself. Since then, he has been facing a disciplinary action known as a Medical Practitioner’s Tribunal, which is to take place in October 2024. 13
Dr. Cartland’s outspoken criticism of the so-called vaccines extends beyond injuries he has already witnessed, as he also warns of a future pandemic of “prion disease”. He claims that many behavioral changes witnessed in patients after vaccination correlate with a “prion-like disease” that is “neurodegenerative”. 1
Elections in 2026 that could challenge the European Union’s status quo From Hungary to the United States, and from Sweden to Slovenia, 2026 will be a defining election year with consequences far beyond national borders.As conservative and populist forces challenge entrenched elites, several key votes are set to reshape Europe’s political balance and test the durability of the global right’s recent momentum. (Expose-news.com)
Those of you who are wide awake will have already figured this. It’s so glaringly obvious when you know how they operate. All those years they sent our ‘sons and daughters’ as the first speaker in the clip appeals to … no you give up your sons and daughters … in your quest for a reset and depopulation! EWNZ
Global elites and those who serve them need a large-scale war to distract from the lies they’ve told, the money they’ve taken from you, and the crimes against humanity committed against you. Say no to war. Say no to digital ID.
This is an open letter as it involves all living in New Zealand.
I am writing to you because of your current position as Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, a second term; your earlier position at the OECD responsible for the chemicals program, and prior to that, your former position as a New Zealand politician. You should have considerable knowledge on the subject of 1080.
I believe you should also have considerable influence in wielding authority if and where needed.
Since your early days in the 90’s of being a minister of health or the environment, a great deal of data has become available which contradicts the virtues of 1080. This is a major concern and something I am sure you should be interested in.
I have read some of your presentations and speeches to different organisations and letters to various MP’s on environmental concerns. Also the lack of regulatory infrastructure in place needed to oversee, decide or make recommendations related to the many thousands of chemicals in use today in NZ. That is disturbing and makes me wonder how on earth did 1080 ever get to be accepted to be used in NZ in the first place? It appears NZ has Authorities, NGO’s, government departments such as the EPA or MPI but not one to make immediate approval or refusal decisions on these chemicals – thousands of them in fact.
New Zealand uses 90% of the world supply – tons as opposed to tablespoons by other countries, of a poison with the classification by the World Health Organisation of 1A extremely hazardous, and then drops poison baits out of helicopters over vast areas of land and into water which we drink, to supposedly save our native wildlife. This is the official DOC narrative and is truly astonishing and extraordinary. People wear hazmat suits when around it.
Because no other country uses such quantities or drops huge amounts of 1080 or brodifacoum into the environment and ecosystem there is no scientific evidence available of the sub-lethal and chronic effects on humans, wildlife, insect life, birds, all life except plants and some micro-organisms. How about long-term ecological damage? 1080 is an eco-system poison.
Because of your experience and knowledge, I have questions which I hope you can answer:
Why are reports, books, testimonies by anyone who challenges the DOC narrative ignored? I will mention some below.
Quinn and Pat Whiting-O’Keefe, independent scientists who reviewed more than 100 DOC Scientific Papers say
“There is no credible scientific evidence showing any species of native bird benefits from 1080 drops.” These two have impeccable credentials that cannot be ignored when it comes to evaluating this whole subject. They say a lot more which conflicts with what we are told to believe by our government and related agencies. One of their two reports is immediately below.
There is another report – 89 pages with a great deal more detail as well by these two.
Independent Scientist Dr. Jo Pollard and her website 1080 Science.
Professor Fiona McQueen, a rheumatologist and environmentalist who wrote The Quiet Forest.
Dr. Koen Margodt’s report which was written as a result of the late Dame Jane Goodall being so concerned about the ethics of 1080, she asked that this be written.
At War With Nature – Corporate Conservation and the Industry of Extinction by the late Bill Benfield as well as The Third Wave.
The Killing Nation, aptly called, by Reihana Robinson; as well as other books.
New Zealand’s Changing Diversity by Jim Hilton and Roger Childs; there are more I have not listed here.
Articles by Marc Bekoff, Ph.D., who worked closely with the late Dame Jane Goodall as co-chair of the ethics committee of the Jane Goodall Institute. Marc has written over 30 books and is known for his work on animal research, animal behaviour and emotions and compassionate conservation. He raises the alarm and questions animal cruelty in NZ with our treatment of wildlife. Marc has many awards to his name.
I must also mention the excellent award winning documentary Poisoning Paradise by the Graf Boys – not allowed to be played on our airwaves. Disturbing detail of wildlife dying; hormone/endocrine disruption concerns stated by Dr Sean Weaver, and human health concerns as well, mentioned by the late Dr. Peter Scanlon. Their website TV Wild has excellent information and videos on it.
As NZ has five times the world statistic of motor neuron disease and various cancers through the roof why have no human health studies been carried out?
Anything that challenges the “inhouse science” of DOC is ignored and never acknowledged. Why?
The WHO stated there is NO acceptable amount of 1080 in water, why did NZ govt ignore and change that?
How have NZ Government and users of 1080 been allowed to ignore data on the original Safety Data Sheet in favour of their own? These are Safety Data Sheet violations. Major violations – 1080 found dumped and exposed on Stewart Island in 2018 (covered by Patrick Gower).
1080 found in ground water and traced to a landfill where the toxin had leached out of the baits. Is this not a serious health and safety issue? (Environmental Health Watch April 6 2019 – Is there 1080 in your landfill …) – this website has a great deal of information on this subject. There are other violations as well.
Are these above not State Sanctioned crimes? Acts of Omission by the State?
Peter Notman, an entomologist, Mike Meads, an invertebrate ecologist, and Dr. Valerie Orchard, a microbiologist were all made redundant when they all raised concerns which did not align with what DOC wanted. “Safe science” is preferred by DOC. Chapter 11 of At War With Nature, is called “Conservation Science – Its How We Get The Message Right” – the late Bill Benfield describes in great detail how this “safe science” came to be and not allowed to be challenged.
Why have there not been prosecutions of individuals? Of Companies/agencies concerned?
There are many more questions which need answering. Is the careless and indiscriminate use of a 1A extremely hazardous toxin which is dropped in huge quantities across our land and waters not environmental terrorism?
Is it not ecocide? Where dying carcasses are left which then creates secondary poisoning on a massive scale? Horrific carnage. Where cruelty of a heinous nature is suffered by all which come into contact with and ingest 1080? Deer right now are having their babies – these babies will watch their mothers thrashing around in agony dying and then starve to death themselves. Other young, starving watching their mothers screaming in pain as they die – what sort of country is this where the Department of Conservation which holds responsibility for the welfare of our wildlife is killing it and rare native species are or have become extinct? Killing the basic on the chain, the insect life – which then kills the birds as their food is gone and they starve to death or die poisoned. Vilifying non-natives and calling them pests? In particular, the possum.
Because NZ does not appear to have the technical ability to test for 1080 correctly, or will not, how many humans have been affected in some way as well?
President Nixon banned it in 1972, in the U.S., the country of origin, because of high toxicity, lethal effects, environmental and safety concerns, cruelty and harm suffered by wildlife, targeted and non-targeted. It was approved in very limited amounts later by President Reagan.
The second reason for banning was the terrorism risk. With huge amounts of 1080 being brought into this country, and held in built-up areas in NZ, surely these are major causes for concern? According to Predator Defense in the U.S. “both the FBI and Canadian Security Intelligence Service list Compound 1080 as a substance that may be sought for use as a possible chemical warfare agent in public water supplies”. This threat cannot be underestimated with daily events happening somewhere. If the U.S. has concerns of terrorism potential, with their guns and weapons, is it not absurd that we here in NZ blindly keep using it, dropping it out of helicopters like confetti year after year? Dangerous? Is not the terrorism threat very real? Should this deadly toxin not be locked up with the equivalent of something such as Fort Knox?
1080 is being dropped in our waters which we drink, by our own government. The hoppers have been filmed spilling the baits carelessly; accidentally, killing farm animals, pets, birds, insects, poisoning the landscape – how can the birds be saved if the insects they rely on for food are poisoned or dead?
The fact that these deadly drops are repeated year after year means a huge failure; on the other hand, if it succeeded then the money supply would dry up and cease as well as the employment of those involved in this cruel activity which is not needed. Is this one reason why after 70 years this practise is still continuing?
Tons of 1080 are being dumped in landfills in and around NZ. Why is it being stockpiled here and then after four years which is the shelf life, it has to be disposed of? How? Where?
With so much government information contradicting testimonies, videos, reports by highly qualified scientists, books written by specialists in their field all following a similar pattern and disagreeing with DOC and related agencies, why have they at the very least not been investigated or shut down? DOC are perpetually being economical with the truth. They even contradict their own data. Do not follow their own policies. What is it going to take to stop this dangerous and failing experiment year after year?
There are alternatives – why are they not being used? Traps, hunters, which are sources of employment – also a possum fur industry.
The possum excuse is that – an excuse; the Tb was from cattle and then possums – thousands were found when tested to have no Tb – (the late Richard Prosser and Nathan Guy – Hansard). Possums made out to be villains by DOC when we are virtually Tb free and children encouraged to kill them? Unconscionable behavior – was that sanctioned? Why not?
Why has a major source of food been taken away from the people? A HIKOI the length and breadth of the country ignored? Thousands of people speaking out against 1080 not listened to. Where is government representation of the people of NZ?
These are some of the many questions that need to be answered as the consequences are unknown and could be deadly.
With daily articles of the threat of war looming in various parts of the world, the public unease at immigrants not embracing NZ values or even an individual living here with a personal grudge, the lack of security and safety involved in storage of this deadly toxin, the large amounts lying around in the open and not buried in NZ, silence by people who should be speaking up and not for fear of consequences like losing their employment, accidents just waiting to happen such as a loaded helicopter crashing into a dam or a truck carrying it falling into a major water supply – millions could die. There is no antidote.
The evidence against the use of sodium monofluoroacetate/1080 and how it is used here in NZ is damning. Why has it not been banned?
How is this not a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE?
I would really appreciate a response from you, and also responses from anyone copied directly into this Open Letter.
Sincerely,
Rowena Kaleopa
Copied to Rt Hons Christopher Luxon Winston Peters David Seymour Shane Jones Mark Mitchell Tama Potaka Andre Hoggart Penny Nelson Penny Simmonds Police: Richard Chambers Mike Pannett
Copied also to –
Brooks Fahy, Predator Defense Mark Bekoff, Psychology Today Dr Jo Pollard Clyde Graf The Whiting-O’Keefes Professor Fiona McQueen Reihana Robinson Jim Hilton Environmental Health Watch NZ
The AI-Powered Kill Chain TIME Magazine just named “The Architects of AI” as their “2025 Person of the Year” — your billionaire tech titans in Jensen Huang, Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and others are being celebrated as visionaries that are transforming our world. But what are the higher-level architects really building while the masses are distracted by AI chatbots and image generators? Let’s take a closer look…
UN/G20/WEF-aligned National Digital ID in Canada being Developed & Implemented, Quebec is the Testbed: Bill 82 passed Of course, most governments will initially sell the idea as an improved means to provide government services in a more inclusive, convenient, and accessible manner. But when one looks beneath the surface, one finds an ambitiously widespread network of control that is being built.So let us have a broad look at the origins, key players, and multi-country interoperable infrastructure being devised and developed to bring about this technocratic network of control
Yes they want us dead, blunt but true as graphically highlighted by Dr Vernon Coleman, and historically documented if you care to trace the history of eugenics parading as ‘family planning’. They are doubling down on depop… EWNZ
A new book for kids as young as five frames abortion as a magical “superpower” that lets people shape their destinies. Bright illustrations hide heavy messages about ending pregnancies. Parents are furious, calling it indoctrination. But why target such young children, and what does this mean for the next generation? The debate is heating up…
Imagine picking up a brightly colored book for your kindergartener, expecting stories about friendship or adventure, only to find pages explaining abortion as some kind of heroic ability. It’s hard to wrap your head around, isn’t it? Yet that’s exactly what’s happening with a new release aimed at children as young as five.
In a world where kids are still learning basic values like sharing and kindness, introducing complex and divisive adult topics feels jarring to many parents. This latest effort has sparked intense debate, with critics arguing it’s less about education and more about shaping young minds in a particular direction. Let’s dive into what’s really going on here.
A Bold Move to Reach Young Readers
The book in question is designed specifically for children aged five to eight, complete with engaging illustrations that draw in little eyes. It uses simple language to describe abortion not as a medical procedure, but as something empowering and essential to human potential.
According to its creators, the goal is straightforward: provide a resource for adults to discuss the topic early on. They argue that with so much political discussion around reproductive rights, kids are bound to hear about it anyway. Why not frame it positively from the start?
But for many, this approach crosses a line. Why rush such heavy subjects when children are still grasping concepts like life and family? In my view, childhood should be a time of innocence, not ideological training.
Framing Abortion as a Unique Human Ability
One of the standout claims in the book is that abortion represents a “superpower.” It ties this idea to our ability to envision the future and make decisions accordingly. The text emphasizes how humans differ from animals because we can plan ahead and choose paths that align with our dreams.
This framing is clever in its simplicity. Bright, playful drawings accompany messages about imagining life seasons ahead. It’s presented as a tool for shaping destiny, something that has influenced the world we live in.
Human beings have the capacity to imagine the future and make choices that lead us towards the life we envision.
While the language is accessible, critics point out what it leaves unsaid. There’s no mention of when life begins or the emotional weight many associate with the decision. Instead, it’s packaged as neutral—or even celebratory.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect is how this positions choice as ultimate power. But power over what, exactly? That’s where opinions diverge sharply.
The Push to Normalize and Destigmatize
The organization behind the book has been vocal about their mission for years. They want to make abortion a regular part of conversation, stripping away any lingering shame or hesitation. Targeting kids is seen as the ultimate way to achieve this culturally.
They claim parents and teachers have been asking for tools like this. With debates raging in politics and media, children pick up snippets. Better to control the narrative early, they argue.
Introduce concepts in age-appropriate ways
Rewrite societal views from the ground up
Empower adults to discuss without fear
Counter negative portrayals elsewhere
It’s a strategic move, no doubt. Start young, and future generations might see the issue entirely differently. But is that education or something closer to indoctrination? Many parents lean toward the latter.
I’ve found that when topics like this enter classrooms or bedtime stories, it often leaves families feeling sidelined. Parents want to guide their children’s moral compass, not have it outsourced.
Critics Call It Premature and Harmful
The backlash has been swift and strong. Commentators from various backgrounds have labeled the book inappropriate, even dangerous for young minds. Why introduce violence-tinged adult decisions to kids who barely understand where babies come from?
Some highlight the hypocrisy in equating abortion with natural pregnancy outcomes like miscarriage. One is chosen, the other isn’t—yet the book reportedly groups them casually.
This isn’t education; it’s manipulation of innocence for political ends.– Concerned commentator
Others worry about long-term effects. If children grow up viewing life-ending choices as empowering superpowers, what does that say about society’s values? It’s a valid question in an era where mental health concerns among youth are already high.
There’s also the religious angle for many families. Teachings about life’s sanctity from conception clash directly with this messaging. Parents feel compelled to counter it at home, turning storytime into battleground.
Broader Context in Society Today
This isn’t happening in isolation. Reproductive rights remain hotly contested globally, with laws shifting in various directions. Some countries tighten restrictions, others expand access—and free speech around the issue sometimes takes hits.
Pro-life advocates face arrests for peaceful protests in certain places. Silent prayer near clinics has led to legal trouble. These stories fuel concerns that one side seeks total cultural dominance, starting with the youngest.
Meanwhile, supporters see efforts like this book as necessary pushback against stigma. They’ve funded procedures, shared information, and built networks for years. Extending to education feels like natural progression.
The divide feels deeper than ever. Families navigate school curricula, media influences, and now children’s literature with growing caution.
What Parents Can Do in Response
Many moms and dads are stepping up their involvement. They’re previewing books, discussing values openly, and seeking alternatives that align with their beliefs.
Stay aware of what’s entering your home library
Have age-appropriate talks on life and family
Choose materials that reinforce positive messages
Connect with like-minded parent communities
Teach critical thinking early on
It’s exhausting sometimes, but necessary. In my experience, proactive parenting makes all the difference when outside influences grow bolder.
Some are even creating their own resources—books celebrating life, family, and responsibility. It’s a grassroots response to what feels like top-down pressure.
Looking Ahead: Cultural Shifts and Generations
Efforts like this book signal ambition for lasting change. If successful, tomorrow’s adults might view abortion as unremarkable, even positive. Stigma could vanish entirely in one or two generations.
But resistance is fierce too. Parents galvanized by these moves often double down on traditional teachings. The push might backfire, strengthening opposing views.
Either way, childhood is changing. Topics once reserved for adults trickle down faster than ever, thanks to media and activism.
What’s the right age for such discussions? There’s no universal answer, but most agree five feels far too young. Kids need space to be kids before bearing ideological weight.
At the end of the day, this controversy reveals deeper tensions about who shapes our children’s worldview. Parents? Activists? Educators? It’s a question worth pondering as similar efforts likely continue.
True empowerment, some argue, comes from protecting innocence and fostering wonder—not introducing division early. Whatever your stance, the conversation matters. Our kids deserve thoughtful guidance in a complicated world.
This article was originally published here in 2023 … EWNZ
“The Ministry of Primary Industries stipulates a withholding period of 4 months for 1080 poison. For brodifacoum it is 3 years i.e. 36 months after poisoning.“
Government use of 1080 poison in New Zealand is controversial and seems to command the headlines ahead of other poisons.
But there is a much worse poison – it is called brodifacoum.
Brodifacoum is widely used by regional councils and government agencies such as the Department of Conservation. Typical of its widespread use is Ulva Island near Stewart Island where the Department of Conservation is currently undertaking rodent eradication.
I have come across brodifacoum poisoning notices in the central North Island when trout fishing, accompanied by my Labrador dog. In one case I asked a farmer why the regional council was using brodifacoum for possums. He didn’t know and added that possum numbers were very light anyhow.
Because of the extreme danger to my dog, I didn’t go fishing. Besides, trout fishing a river into whichever toxic baits will have fallen or on the banks, doesn’t make for an enjoyable day’s fishing!
Such cavalier attitude of regional councils – and the Department of Conservation – belies the lethal nature of brodifacoum.
Comparison
How does it compare to 1080?
Both poisons have a ”withholding period” which means a time must elapse after the toxin’s use before stock can be safely grazed or game animals such as deer, taken for home consumption.
The Ministry of Primary Industries stipulates 4 months for 1080 poison. For brodifacoum it is 3 years i.e. 36 months after poisoning.
The extensive withholding time for brodifacoum is due to its known long-term persistence in the environment and animal bodies.
Brodifacoum warning notices by a King Country trout stream – photo Tony Orman
What is brodifacoum?
Brodifacoum is an anticoagulant, which causes the animal to die slowly and painfully from internal bleeding. As cruel as death over two or three days is by 1080, by brodifacoum it is far more prolonged, in the case of rats within 4 to 8 days and larger animals such as possums, up to 21 days.
1080 requires a user to have a licence to use the toxin but no licence is needed for brodifacoum, for example rat poison sold over shop counters, to anyone, young or adult with no controls whatsoever.
Secondary Poisoning
Brodifacoum and 1080 have another similarity, called “secondary poisoning”. In other words a dead poisoned animal remains toxic and any bird or other creature scavenging the dead body, takes in poison and dies.
Scientists C.T. Eason and E.B. Spurr in 1995 in a study “The Toxicity and Sub-lethal Effects of Brodifacoum said insectivorous birds (e.g. bush robins, fantails) are likely to be exposed to brodifacoum by eating invertebrates that have fed on toxic baits; i.e., they are likely to be at risk from secondary poisoning. Predatory birds (especially the Australasian harrier, New Zealand falcon, and morepork) might also be at risk from secondary poisoning by eating birds, small mammals, or invertebrates that have fed on toxic baits.
Predators are greatly at risk. Both poisons are very slow to kill, and especially so with brodifacoum. An animal be mouse, bird or insect, on taking the poison, slowly dies and in its distressed, weakening state, naturally and quickly attracts the attention of predators among them native birds such as bush falcons, hawks, moreporks, pukekos and wekas.
Bush robins are at risk from brodifacoum – photo Tony Orman
Ecological history is littered with instances following poisoning. For example scientists Eason and Spurr said the “entire weka population on Tawhitinui Island, Pelorus Sound, Marlborough Sounds was exterminated mainly by direct consumption of rat bait (Talon) intended for ship rat control.”
The two scientists said “indigenous New Zealand vertebrates most at risk from feeding directly on cereal-based baits containing brodifacoum are those species that are naturally inquisitive and have an omnivorous diet (birds such as weka, kaka, kea, and robins). The greatest risk of secondary poisoning is to predatory and scavenging birds (especially the Australasian harrier, New Zealand falcon, southern black-backed gull, morepork, and weka)”
The duo added “the risk from brodifacoum will be at its greatest when saturation baiting techniques, such as aerial sowing, are used in eradication programmes.” Such as Ulva Island where DoC is “aerially sowing” brodifacoum.
Seven years later in 2002, Spurr and Eason along with two other scientists produced a study “Assessment of risks of brodifacoum to non-target birds and mammals in New Zealand”.
The quartet of scientists described brodifacoum as “highly toxic to birds and mammals” and listed victims such as the Australasian harrier (Circus approximans) and morepork (Ninox novaeseelandiae), other native birds such as the pukeko (Porphyrio melanomas), weka (Gallirallus australis), southern black-backed gull (Larus dominicanus), and kiwi (Apteryx spp.) and introduced mammals, including game animals e.g. deer.
Dead Dotterels
Other studies have identified the lethal nature of brodifacoum.
Landcare Research scientist Penny Fisher said “because brodifacoum persists in the environment, other birds may suffer secondary poisoning from eating animals that have ingested poison” and cited “a high mortality of New Zealand dotterels following an aerial brodifacoum operation at Tawharanui Regional Park in North Auckland, in 2004. At least 50% of the dotterels in the area at time of operation disappeared or were found dead. Sand-hoppers-common food item of NZ dotterels —ate baits and accumulated brodifacoum and provided a potential route for transmission of the toxin to dotterels.”
Two dead eels found in a Southland waterway had brodifacoum in the gut contents of one and that “suggests the eel had recently ingested food containing brodifacoum, probably through scavenging the carcass of a poisoned possum.”
Freshwater Residues
Brodifacoum similar to 1080, leaves residues.
In 2005 a paper in the New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, Volume 39, told of freshwater crayfish (koura) with significant 1080 concentrations and 1080 residues in eel tissue that were on average 12 times higher than the PMAV (provisional maximum acceptable level).
The INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY Health and Safety Guide No. 93 said of brodifacoum “as a technical material — is highly toxic for fish”.
Processing poisons for wild animal control/eradication is Orillion a State Owned Enterprise governed through a Board of Directors appointed by the New Zealand Government. Orillion’s safety data sheet for brodifacoum says “may cause long lasting harmful effects to aquatic life.”
Therein lies a threat to not only valued sports fishes such as trout and juvenile salmon migrating downstream to sea, but also native fish such as eels and galaxids.
Sodium fluoroacetate, also known as compound 1080, is the poison around which controversy swirls. Brodifacoum is little known but is surreptitiously used by the Department of Conservation and councils.
1080 is ecologically destructive and damaging to the ecosystem – but brodifacoum is far worse.
Footnote: Environmentalist Tony Orman has spent a lifetime in the outdoors and has had some two dozen books published among them “New Zealand the Beautiful Wilderness”
The minister in charge of a new government app promises it will be “more secure than almost anything else you could think about”.
Minister for Digitising Government Judith Collins has launched the Govt.nz app this week after several years of development.
“It’s to enable people, say if there’s a life event, a baby’s born, go into the app and click on ‘we’ve got a new baby’ or something and it will come up with all the things you need to do around registration, services that you might want to be linked to,” Collins explained to Morning Report.
“It basically brings a lot of the government services into one place for people to link through to.”
The Govt.nz app as seen in the Apple app store. Photo: Supplied
In its current form, the app only included some public services.
“[Wednesday’s] launch was the very first iteration of the app, and it’s going to be changing and added to as we move on. Every six-to-eight weeks you’ll see changes,” Collins said.
“The idea is that it will become a one-stop shop for people who want to use it, and that’s the other important message: this is not compulsory, this is entirely voluntary. It’s for people, like, me who love to have apps and want to do all my work on them.”
An anticipated feature to be added to the app next year was digital driver’s licences and other identity credentials.
“[To do that] we need to change the law and we have that law change going through … That’s due to go through parliament in completion of the legislation early next year,” she said.
“We expect to have that digital driver’s licence uploaded third quarter of next year.”
Collins said the app would be backed by the government’s digital security system and be secure against hackers.
“Well they [can] get access now to people’s filing cabinets and everything else. [It’s] more secure than almost anything else you could think about because it’s backed up by the government’s digital security,” she said.
“If you were to go and rent a house … The first thing the real estate agent’s going to say is ‘where are all your identity documents,’ so you end up handing over a copy of your passport, driver’s licence, birth certificate, photo-copied and put into someone’s filing cabinet.”
“You’ve got no control over that and it’s a massive honeypot for someone who is trying to steal identity. This is so much more secure.”
Collins also confirmed that the app had no means of tracking users.
Palantir has operated & had office in Wellington Aotearoa since 2012. Jonkey brought this here and Judith Collins is expanding the deals.
Scary stuff. Palantir has operated & had office in Wellington Aotearoa since 2012. Jonkey brought this here and Judith Collins is expanding the deals. https://t.co/trF9Z18jaBpic.twitter.com/BFR4TDCU7D
— JO – #ToitūTeTiriti Aotearoa!❤️🤍🖤 🇳🇿 🇵🇸🇺🇦 (@JOMcFadyen) December 7, 2025
A separate Digital ID for high school kids 13 years+ has been launched in schools throughout the country, ahead of NZ Verify!! Called MyMahi, the D/ID’s digital credential as proof of identity is a Digital Student-School ID. The ID has a CBDC digital wallet attached enabling the kids to use the Social Credit System linked to a digital bank called Emerge, created by a NZ Tech Co (a part of the worldwide Central Bank). MyMahi founder and Emerge CEO said they have so far identified at least 50,000 kids without a bank account, and this can be easily solved, “without the need for parental approval”!! I found a photo of an example of the ID – there’s a “wallet” tab on the top, and I also noticed an “expiry date”. What’s the bet when that happens, and to keep the ID current, the student will have to upload a digital Vaccine ID/Health Pass or similar, or else they will be locked out of their smartphone. Watch all the kids comply!!
School principals are praising this initiative, because MyMahi, they say, is also a highly valuable “educational platform” for students who already has a bank account, as the app is also their School App, linking the kids to all sorts of school info, updates, grades, and activities/events etc!! The goal for MyMahi/Emerge is they want all high school kids to sign up, and be totally ENSLAVED to the system!!
In the photo is MyMahi founder Jeff King and Nats MP Andrew Bayly giving the thumbs up 😒
Teenagers as young as 13 can now open a transaction account remotely using a digital ID, and they don’t even need their parents’ permission.
School tech entrepreneur Jeff King was so frustrated at how many teens did not have bank accounts, and how hard banks made it for them to sign up for one, he embarked on a mission of change.
That took him into the head offices of the banks, and even to Parliament but, having drawn a blank with the big banks, he has signed up digital-only banking provider Emerge to accept the verified MyMahi Digital ID so teens can open accounts remotely.
However you do (or don’t) celebrate this season, here’s a beautiful reminder from TJ Taotuaof the origin of Christmas… sung and played from the heart.
Thank you to all who’ve kept up with my site this year, in spite of the silent gaps! … who have contributed financially, commented and shared links, who’ve contacted me, encouraged me and also shared their stories. All so appreciated.
Stay safe these holidays and care for one another. There is little enough caring in the world. As I frequently remind myself, appreciate your loved ones, they may not be here tomorrow. And appreciate what you have, there are many tonight who won’t eat, who have nowhere to sleep and nobody to care for them. We can each make the world a better place. As is becoming increasingly evident, there are darker times ahead. Educate yourself via independent media, the only place you’ll discover what is really happening, and prepare. ‘They’ intend for you all to own nothing. They intend to own everything.
“We are a coalition founded by active and veteran members from the New Zealand Defence Force, police, and emergency services. We are united by a shared commitment to service, to our communities, and to defending the core values that define our nation.”
These documents were used in a training exercise conducted in November 2025 for a Junior Non Commissioned Officer Course in Burnham Army Base in Christchurch. I was sent what was deemed the most concerning pages, and all are shown below.
PLEASE NOTE: I am not ex-military. I am a civilian woman with no personal ties to the NZDF.
“General Idea, Company Opord and Platoon OPORD. The General Idea and Company Opord will both be general and apply to the whole training course most likely. They provide the big picture and a fictional framework for the exercise to occur. This is where they’ve chosen to define the enemy as Christian Extremists. The Platoon OPORD is the specific detail for what they’re going to be having to do right now or over the next couple of days. They will have received a few of these during their course for different exercises etc. This is just a sample of one of them.” – From source
A Nokia CEO said at Davos in 2022, cell phones will be built directly into our bodies within a decade. (Davos where the not-elite jet every year ignoring their ‘carbon footprint’ in aircraft piloted by unjabbed pilots). The linked article tells how Schwab’s offsider Yuval Harari describes humans as ‘hackable animals’. Nice. We’ve been hearing it frequently haven’t we as they ramp up the big slide into digital ID? For our convenience of course. Not. We know it is all about control. They are obsessed with tracking and tracing each one of us to the nth degree (those of us left that is). So here we have the Co-operative bank giving you options with your iPhone. Some of you will think, yay this makes banking even easier. Some of you will think, just another step down the slippery slope. Depends whether you are reading lamestream or independent.
Awake Christians will be alerted by the scenario of phones being built into their bodies (witness the scriptures and Revelation 13:17). And even moreso at the recent revelations about who is being targeted by the NZDF in their practice drills.
Go here to read about passports: “Apple Watch and iPhone owners in the United States will now be able to carry a copy of their U.S. passport on their device, which they can then use at TSA checkpoints across more than 250 U.S. airports when traveling domestically.”
Is ‘owning nothing & being happy’ ringing any bells for you? 15 minute cities? Mandatory this that and the other thing including medical procedures ? … EWNZ
These three things the Government is saying about digital ID…❌Don’t add up (Big Brother Watch)
These three things the Government is saying about digital ID…❌Don’t add up (Big Brother Watch).
Digital I.D. is the gateway to zero privacy, zero freedoms, just total mass surveillance and control. Apart from paying for prison infrastructure, you will have still have to fork out for the smartphone to connect you to the prison.
Popular Information is powered by readers who believe that truth still matters. When just a few more people step up to support this work, it means more lies exposed, more corruption uncovered, and more accountability where it’s long overdue.
If you believe journalism should serve the public, not the powerful, and you’re in a position to help, becoming a PAID SUBSCRIBER truly makes a difference. Alternatively you can support by way of a cup of coffee:
A New Zealand-based PhD qualified researcher and author, an international advocate for food safety and natural medicine, formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a global food safety testing laboratory, and the author of Your DNA Diet, widely known for his analysis of the covid injections and public health policy.
FreeNZ (Liz Gunn) speaks with Michael Yon (must watch … especially the NZDF issue is at 30 min in then at the end at 1:54:54) It’s highly recommended you listen to the entire interview as Michael has an expert overview of the big picture globally. He is ex US military.
The idea that life was better `then’ than it is now is widely derided as merely an example of nostalgia winning over reality.
But you don’t have to look through the retrospectoscope while wearing rose tinted spectacles, to realise that things really were better 50, 60 or even 70 years ago. The older I get the more bewildered I become by the contrast between then and now. A year or two ago I decided that health care was at its best in the 1970s when GPs, often pastoral in style, visited patients in their homes and were available on call day and night for every day of the year, including Christmas Day.
But it isn’t just health care that was better back in the 1970s.
Everything was better then.
Today, we live in persistent and unremitting (and often terrifying) chaos. To the naïve and innocent the chaos is a result of incompetence, greed and indifference.
But the chaos isn’t accidental. It is, rather, a result of the malignant aspirations and lethal actions of conspirators who want to control our lives.
The 70s were better than today. But so were the 60s. And the ‘50s.
I am now convinced that life in the 1950s was safer, kinder and in every way better than life today. As we head into the second quarter of the 21st century. I can’t remember when I last heard a politician tell the truth. And I can’t think of anyone in public life whom I admire.
We live in a world of chaos and misery and fear but none of the chaos and misery is happening in isolation or by accident. The old are persuaded to hate the young. The young are persuaded to hate the old. Men and women are put at loggerheads. Racial tension is deliberately created. And so on and so on.
It’s all part of a plan. The plan. As I’ve been saying for decades, nothing is happening by accident. There are no coincidences.
Whenever a government does anything which seems strange or inexplicable all you have to do is ask yourself: `How does this fit in with the Agenda?’ or `How does this benefit the conspirators?’ You will quickly find yourself understanding exactly what is happening and why. We are in a race to Net Zero and from there into the inhumane, unimaginable horrors of the Great Reset. And we’re already half way there.
The clue is that everything bad is happening everywhere – in every country. Digitalisation, social credit schemes, euthanasia, re-wilding, food shortages – all are happening all around the world. Economies are crashing everywhere. Politicians all around the world seem incompetent or crooked or both (I find it impossible to name one leading politician in the world who doesn’t match that description). Undemocratic organisations, led by unelected individuals, are taking more and more power. Fear is being used as a tool to create obedience and compliance. New laws are being introduced to limit our freedom though we are, of course, told that they are being introduced to protect us, in some curious way from some imagined or created threat. The EU (created by World War II’s left over Nazis don’t forget) and the UK are desperate for the third world war to start. They are doing everything they can to stop the peace process in Ukraine. They want more war. They know that a nice big war is the quickest way to kill a few hundred million. They claim that Russia wants to invade Europe and Britain. Why? Why on earth would Russia want to invade countries which have massive debts, too many immigrants and no natural resources worth stealing? What do Britain, France and Germany have that Russia could possibly covet?
The new laws are introduced so fast that the police cannot keep up with them, and victims of wrongful arrests have been paid big chunks of money. Tax legislation is now so absurdly complicated that even tax inspectors don’t understand what the rules are.
And Britain is in the vanguard of countries being pushed remorselessly into the Great Reset. It is clear to me that Britain is being run by a cabinet of sociopaths who care nothing for the people who elected them (and pay them) but put all their effort into pleasing the conspirators who now control everything.
And yet at least 95% of the population have no idea what is happening to them – or how the future is going to look.
If you live outside the UK you should get down on your knees and give thanks that you don’t live in the UK. Even Canadians and Australians are better off than the British. Even the French are better off than the British.
In the UK, where I am unfortunate enough to live and work, I feel as though I’m living in France in the 1940s – a member of the Resistance, fighting bad people who have taken over my country. The evidence that we are living in a constructed nightmare is unavoidable. The people pretending to run the country (but themselves being run by manipulative conspirators) make Joe Biden and Boris Johnson look like saints – and that takes some doing.
The recent Labour Government budget, announced last week, proves to me without a shadow of doubt that the Labour Party’s plan is to destroy Britain. The budget was, it seems to many, based on a fraud. Reeves and Starmer knew that it wasn’t necessary to take another £26 billion in tax. But they took it anyway. Was it, I wonder, the biggest financial fraud in history?
Labour’s policy is to tax everyone who works, and give billions away in benefits to skivers and immigrants. It seems to me that the Labour Government exists solely to waste taxpayers’ hard earned money, to create bankruptcies and unemployment. To destroy the economy. To destroy people’s lives.
Rachel Reeves’s budget gave so much money to out of work skivers that a working family would need to earn £71,000 a year to beat the income of a family on benefits. Immigrants with ten children are £20,000 a year better off after the Labour Budget. The people organising small boats to bring in immigrants will have to buy bigger boats. When does the invasion end? When Britain is standing room only?
So families who don’t earn £71,000 (roughly twice the average wage) would be better off if they gave up work and sat at home watching TV and playing video games. There is now a real incentive to give up work and become a professional layabout. Jobless mothers, rejoicing in a budget which will give them thousands and thousands of pounds of free money every year, have sworn to have more children so that they are given more tax free money. And how much of that money will be spent on the children and how much will be spent on Netflix, etc?
The long term plan is obviously to bring in Universal Benefit whereby everyone receives a small weekly payment from the State and stays at home and watches TV – totally dependent upon the State for everything. The only people with jobs will be the politicians and the civil servants. Everything else will be done by computers and robots as the population is cut by 90%.
Everyone with an interest in finance (except for politicians and, in particular, those politicians involved in managing a nation’s money) knows that if you increase taxes too much the resulting amount of money raised will fall rather than rise. This is shown in something called the Laffer Curve. `Every time we have raised taxes on the rich,’ said economist Arthur Laffer, `three things have happened: the economy underperformed, the share of tax revenues from the rich fell and the poor got hammered. When we cut taxes the reverse happened.’
When chancellors get too greedy and push up taxes to unacceptable levels taxpayers respond in a number of ways. Sometimes they simply work less, refuse overtime or take on fewer contracts. And sometimes they emigrate. The end result is the same: the tax raised will fall when taxes rise too much.
Britain’s net migration figures show that trained, educated tax payers are leaving Britain in bigger numbers than ever. As illiterate immigrants pour in, demanding free money and accommodation, so the taxpayers disappear. The only people campaigning for more immigration are the far left cultists who have no jobs, pay no tax and are intent on the destruction of the country which feeds them. They shout `racist’ and `fascist’ at those who oppose them but in truth they are racists and fascists.
Britain’s faux Government, a Vichy Government for the conspirators, must know this. Surely, no one can be as stupid, as incompetent or as dishonest and amoral as Starmer and Reeves appear to be.
On 26th November 2025, Reeves delivered a budget which many believe was based on a lie. Reeves stole £26 billion from taxpayers on the basis that the £26 billion was needed to balance a black hole in the accounts. The £40 billion she took a few months ago was not, we were told, enough. But things were more complicated than they appeared. It seems that the budget was designed to appease back bench Labour Party MPs who were worried that their jobs were at risk. They wanted a far left wing budget to save them.
And Reeves, worried about her own job, presented a budget which appeared designed to save those MPs from the contempt in which the country holds Prime Minister Starmer and, more importantly, to save her own job.
And so Reeves took another £26 billion in a bizarre smorgasbord of taxes even though it seemed clear that the tax grab would push hundreds of thousands of companies into bankruptcy and millions into long term unemployment. The suicide rate (already high) will rocket as depressions spread. If the evil euthanasia bill is pushed through and becomes law the anxious and the depressed will be queuing up outside the government `kill by doctor’ clinics.
It was a budget designed to destroy. And to delight the conspirators.
And having grabbed the £26 billion, ostensibly to fill a hole in the budget, she proceeded to give away a huge chunk of it in more benefits payments for the shirkers, the immigrants and the layabouts whose greed and laziness is already ruining the country. She gave billions of pounds of taxpayers money to families (many of them uninvited visitors) who had loads of children. Doesn’t giving away the money that was raised prove that there was no big black hole in the accounts?
Reeves claimed, of course, that she was merely playing at Lady Bountiful with other people’s money. But how much of the money she collected and then distributed to the shirkers will be used to improve the lot of children and how much will be spent on Netflix subscriptions and bigger TV sets?
Immediately after the budget, single mothers cheerily announced that they would immediately get pregnant and have more children.
Astonishingly, when Kemi Badenoch MP, the leader of the opposition in the British Parliament dared to go off piste and dared to criticise Reeves (in one of the most excoriating, honest and captivating speeches seen in the House of Commons for decades) she was widely attacked in the mainstream media. This was a perfect example of the power the conspirators exert over the media. No one dare criticise anything the conspirators want.
The bottom line is that if it was as unnecessary and fraudulent as I suspect then the latest Reeves budget should be cancelled and Reeves should be sacked and arrested. The best word to describe her is shameless. It is scarcely believable that she has the gall not to resign. She raised 26 billion in taxes and produced a budget which will cause millions of job losses and much distress and despair – seemingly to please back bench Labour MPs and ensure she keeps her own job.
But I think there was more to this budget. I think it was part of the conspirators’ plan to destroy the British economy – and to destroy Britain.
It seems possible that the budget was based on a fraud that would have put an entrepreneur in court. Britain doesn’t have a big black financial hole after all.
Naturally, when confronted, both Starmer and Reeves denied everything. Deny, deny, deny. They weren’t there at the time. The dog ate the accounts. It wasn’t Rachel Reeves who delivered the budget, it was some AI fake.
No one in politics takes responsibility anymore. They deny, deny and deny again even though they must know that no one believes the denials.
There have been loud calls for Reeves to resign (and for Starmer to go with her).
But if Reeves had any sense of decency she would have resigned when the truth about her dodgy CV was published. She should have resigned after the fiasco with the rented house and the paperwork she somehow didn’t complete. (Check out those stories online.)
But now there is a bigger reason for Reeves and Starmer to go.
If last week’s budget in the UK was based on a lie the consequences are disastrous.
This is worse than the self serving nonsenses that came before. A budget built on a lie doesn’t just affect the reputation of a Chancellor without much of a reputation for integrity – it affects everyone and will cause great misery and distress.
If it is really true that Reeves and Starmer both knew that there was no big black hole in the UK’s accounts then the huge tax rises weren’t necessary. They were introduced so that Reeves could give billions to scroungers and the work shy. Were the tax rises political rather than financial? Did Reeves want to please economically illiterate back bench MPs so that she could keep her own job? If so, £26 billion is a big price to pay for one woman to keep her job.
But the fake budget was also designed, I believe, to please the conspirators.
The end result of the Labour Government’s budget is to transfer billions from hard working strivers to skivers and immigrant families. Government and private debt is doomed to rise. Inflation will go up. Growth will go down. Companies will go bust. The unemployment figures will soar. The bond markets aren’t going to like any of this (though it seems the banks were bribed to applaud quietly as reward for no new bank tax). The truth is, as always with modern governments, is pushed into a cupboard under the stairs but this budget will lead not to a recession but to a bigger depression than was seen in the 1930s.
How long can Starmer allow Reeves to keep her job? Maybe he’ll make Lammy Chancellor. Or his chum Angie Rayner will get the job. After all she had to resign after a misunderstanding over her own tax affairs so she has some experience of the tax system. Or maybe the International Monetary Fund will take over.
You’d have to have had your brain taken out and put back in the wrong way round not to realise that Starmer, Reeves, Lammy and co are operating on behalf of the conspirators who want to destroy everything and drag us into the Great Reset. The lies never stop coming. Just a little while ago Kinnock, a health minister, claimed that vaccines are 100% safe and ignored my challenge for a debate.
Hidden behind the Budget horror was the news that Lammy, who is the Minister of Justice (and who posed for pictures wearing a judge’s wig and a silly grin) has decided that jury trials are a nuisance and should be abolished.
He wants government appointed judges to decide who is guilty and who isn’t. The automatic right to appeal will be lost if Lammy gets his way. If that doesn’t reek of WEF influence then what does? Abolishing juries and replacing them with selected judges fits in exactly with the conspirators’ plans.
Here are some things you might not know about the appalling Lammy – Britain’s Minister of Justice, and the man who wants to change the traditional right of defendants to be tried by a jury of their peers.
Lammy (who has no medical qualifications) was an enthusiastic supporter of the covid-19 vaccine. Just what the conspirators wanted.
He was a vociferous opponent of the British people’s referendum to leave the EU. Just what the conspirators wanted. Like many other Labour MPs he was not afraid to stand shoulder to shoulder with Goldman Sachs in opposing the will of the British people. Immediately after the referendum, Lammy called on Parliament to vote against the people’s clear decision to leave the European Union. He claimed that the referendum was advisory and not binding, implying that he and other MPs knew better than 17.4 million Britons. In the weeks and months that followed, Lammy, a keen tweeter, became an increasingly hysterical opponent of the decision by the British people and an enthusiastic proponent of a second referendum. (Since he had claimed that the first one was not binding he was presumably demanding a second chance for the British to vote and to be ignored.)
Lammy claimed that he was raised in a family dependent upon tax credits. However, tax credits were not introduced until he was 31-years-old.
On a radio programme, Lammy said that it is possible for someone born male to develop a cervix.
Lammy (always quick to use the `race’ card) attacked the BBC for wondering about the colour of the smoke likely to appear from the Vatican when the cardinals met to choose a Pope. The BBC had reported that the smoke would be white or grey and Lammy appeared to regard this as potentially racist. The Vatican has, of course, recorded the choosing of a new Pope with this smoke signal for some time.
Lammy claimed (in 2012) that absent fathers were a key cause of knife crime. He said that most young people who have stabbed someone to death come from single parent families. In 2019, he was outraged when a newspaper columnist suggested that the absence of fathers might be associated with the stabbing epidemic in London.
Lammy suggested that the British government should send letters to all black British people apologising for slavery. There was no suggestion that the British government should send letters to all white British people thanking them for abolishing slavery.
Lammy appeared on a programme called Mastermind on British television. When asked for the name of the Nobel Prize winner for Physics in 1903, the former Minister for Higher Education and Skills suggested Marie Antoinette. He did not, however, mention her work for the cake industry. On the same programme he claimed that the large prison in the middle of Paris was called Versailles and said, in response to another question, that Henry VII came after Henry VIII.
In March 2016, Lammy was fined £5,000 for making 35,629 nuisance calls (via a computer).
And in 2025, Lammy went fishing and forgot to buy a licence. He wasn’t taken to court or fined – though you or I would probably be prosecuted if we `forgot’ to get a licence. Instead, a spokesperson said that there had been administrative oversight. And that was that.
Do you think Lammy came up with the idea of getting rid of juries all by himself? No, nor do I. It all sounds the sort of thing that fits in with the `you will own nothing and be happy’ philosophy. If Lammy’s plans are implemented then ordinary people will be removed from the justice system and will become mere prison fodder for carefully appointed and selected judges.
Juries provide some protection against tyranny and miscarriages of justice. Juries are rarely criticised but judges often are. The really odd thing is that not long ago Lammy argued that juries are a `fundamental part of our democratic settlement’. Suddenly his view has changed completely. It stinks.
I don’t think Lammy is a suitable person to be an MP, let alone Minister of Justice. But then there is no one in Government who has any sense of decency. These are not good people. From the moment when Starmer accepted £100,000 of freebies (and other Ministers did the same) it was clear that these people are amoral. I can’t help wondering how many members of the Labour Government would be classified as sociopaths. None of them seems truly human, do they?
Starmer, Reeves, Lammy et al are the people ruining Britain. They have already taken us a good way into the Great Reset. Britain is heading for bankruptcy. There is no real health care. The transport system has collapsed. The justice system has been destroyed. Farming is finished. Our seas and rivers are full of sewage. Britain’s absurd and cruel energy crisis has been deliberately created by the sanctions on Russia, the closure of North Sea exploration and the utterly wicked net zero policy. Most old people on the British State pension receive £176.45 per week and NOT the much higher figure quoted by politicians and journalists. That’s the full State Pension for people who have worked all their lives: £176.45 per week. It is actually impossible to live on that and yet millions are forced to try. Our streets and parks are full of rats. Our hotels are full of asylum seekers. Our skies are Gatesian grey with the stuff they are spraying into the stratosphere to dim the sun. Nothing works any more.
The Labour Government is shameless, greedy and self-serving and ministers seem to consider they are entitled to do whatever they like to the country which has given them power. These are the people we are expected to trust. I wouldn’t trust any one of them to clean a car without stealing the wing mirrors.
If Starmer and Reeves stay in control much longer then Britain will find itself under the management of the International Monetary Fund. Believe me, that won’t be fun. The pavements of our towns and cities will be packed with sorry looking individuals clutching small pieces of cardboard upon which are scrawled begging messages. They will starve to death because there won’t be anyone left with any money to put into their begging bowls.
Please don’t think I’m kidding. I’m not. (And please remember all the other predictions and forecasts I’ve made. Over the last few decades, no one has issued more accurate warnings.)
And, of course, we must remember that Starmer, the worst political leader any country has ever had, seems desperate to unravel Brexit and take us back into the EU – an organisation which I have proved was created by Nazis and is, with the exception of the United Nations, the most dangerous, oppressive and undemocratic organisation in the world.
NOTE To find out what sort of future we all face please read `They want your money and your life’ by Vernon Coleman. You can buy a copy via the bookshop on www.vernoncoleman.com Time is rapidly running out for those of us who do not want to disappear into the Great Reset.
Former MEP Rob Roos and ex-UK MP Andrew Bridgen engage in a candid discussion on the deep-rooted corruption infiltrating Europe, covering rigged elections, questionable vaccine contracts, net zero policies, uncontrolled mass migration, escalating excess deaths, and the deliberate provocation of war with Russia. They explore grassroots resistance and what ordinary people can do to halt the erosion of freedoms and prevent full-scale tyranny.
“Well, you might enjoy it for a while. But when you finally wake up, it will be too late. And you will wake up from this fake paradise. Why? Because it is going to be exactly that: FAKE…it will feel bad. “
The replicator, our artificial future
Imagine a household in the near future. Everything you can possible desire is available to you. From furniture, to clothing, to your every day meals. All provided to you by a replicator.
A replicator is a device that rearranges energy particles into a specific sequence, thereby creating everything you desire. As long as the replicator knows the sequence and has the right amount of molecules to work with, it can create endlessly and abundantly.
Let’s see what it looks like, shall we?
Sounds like utopia, doesn’t it? Combined with all the benefits of AI, your life will be like… Well, like that of a spoiled child. It occurs to me that every time new technological devices are ‘sold to’ us, we are treated like little children. And most of humanity falls for it.
I’ve said it before: humans have a lazy side. Humans prefer not to work or use their energy on anything. Their paradise looks like something like this:
On topic with Christmas shopping in full swing. One to boycott is Nestlé whose ‘good neighbour’ policy deems that human beings don’t have a right to water. You can read more articles on Nestlé here. It features in the article below also.
These examples of successful boycott calls show the big impact this campaign tactic can have.
Campaigners have long used boycotting as a tactic to help them achieve their goals. It’s helped create progress around issues like racial justice, human rights and fair treatment of other animals.
This list contains examples of companies changing their practices following a boycott campaign. However, it’s worth noting that companies rarely confirm whether their decisions to change their activities were a direct result of campaigners’ efforts.
Historical boycotts
Boycotting as a campaigning technique has a long history.
One of the earliest examples of a successful campaign was the boycott in England of sugar produced by slaves. In 1791, after Parliament refused to abolish slavery, thousands of pamphlets were printed encouraging the boycott. Sales of sugar dropped by between a third and a half. By contrast sales of Indian sugar, untainted by slavery, rose tenfold in two years. In an early example of fair trade, shops began selling sugar guaranteed to have been produced by ‘free men’.
Perhaps the most famous boycott was against South Africa in opposition to the apartheid. South African exiles and their supporters called for a boycott of products from South Africa in 1959 – in protest against the racial segregation enforced by white colonial politicians and discrimination and violence against Black people in the country. The boycott initially focused on fruit and vegetables, but later targeted chains like Marks & Spencer and Next – causing some companies to pull South African products from their shelves. For the next 35 years, the boycott was a central part of the anti-apartheid campaign. After decades of grassroots organising – as well as pressure from international leaders – apartheid was ended in 1994.
The Alabama bus boycott is another famous historical example. In 1955 Rosa Parks refused a bus driver’s order to leave a row of four seats in the “colored” section and move to the back of the bus after the white section had filled up. Her defiance sparked a successful boycott of buses in the area, with residents instead carpooling, riding in Black-owned cabs, or walking, some as far as 20 miles. It caused the bus company’s profits to crash, as dozens of public buses stood idle for months. The company lost between 30,000 and 40,000 bus fares each day during the boycott.
Recent examples of successful boycott campaigns
The boycotts listed below are presented in reverse chronological order, with the most recent first.
In the US, the brand Sabra hummus was owned 50/50 by PepsiCo and The Strauss Group. The Strauss Group is Israel’s second biggest food company and according to the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (BDS) movement it “provides financial support to the Israeli Defense Forces. Palestinian rights campaigners called for a boycott of Sabra since at least 2011. In November 2024 following an intensified period of campaigning against the brand, it was announced that The Strauss Group was selling its stake in Sabra, leaving PepsiCo as the sole owner of the Sabra hummus brand.
This appears to be a significant milestone/ partial boycott campaign success. However, PepsiCo also owns Sodastream which is subject to a BDS boycott too. It’s worth noting that in the UK Sabra was not owned by Sabra/PepsiCo, but instead by Osem Ltd, an Israeli company which is ultimately owned by Nestle. As Nestle faces several boycott calls, Sabra hummus still features on our list of active boycotts.
AXA boycott success – August 2024
The Stop AXA Assistance to Israeli Apartheid coalition called for a boycott of AXA over its investments in Israeli banks and Elbit Systems (Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer) since at least 2019. According to the BDS movement, over 10,000 people and 230 organisations have signed the pledge to boycott AXA. Among the campaign’s activities include holding an AXA Global Day of Action on 25 April 2022, seeing supporters globally contacting AXA Customer Services to demand the company end its complicity in Israeli apartheid.
On 21 August 2024 the Stop AXA Assistance to Israeli Apartheid coalition shared the news that AXA had sold its investments in all major Israeli banks and Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest military company. While a major milestone for the campaign, it continues to call for a boycott of the company until it fully divests from other complicit companies, and as such AXA still features on our list of active boycotts.
Barclays boycott success – June 2024
Barclays invests over £1bn in arms companies supplying Israel with weapons and military technology. The company’s sponsorship of major music festivals including Download, Latitude, and Isle of Wight was cancelled in June after protests by artists and fans. A spokesperson for Barclays told the Guardian, “Barclays was asked and has agreed to suspend participation in the remaining Live Nation festivals in 2024.
Pret boycott success – May 2024
According to the UK activist organisation Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), in 2022, coffee chain Pret signed a franchise agreement with Israel-based companies and committed to opening 40 stores in Israel over the next decade. In 2024 PSC threatened a boycott of Pret, arguing that “to invest in Israel as it conducts a genocide in Gaza and operates a system of apartheid over all Palestinians was unjustifiable and reprehensible.”
In June 2024 the Grocer reported that Pret has gone back on this agreement, worth millions of pounds, and would not open stores in Israel. Pret cited as the cause for its cancellation of the contract “ongoing travel restrictions” preventing it from conducting the checks and training needed to set Pret up in a new market.
Baillie Gifford boycott success – May 2024
Scotland-based investment firm Baillie Gifford was dropped as a sponsor by multiple arts and literary events in May over concerns that its activities are linked to Palestinian human rights abuses. In 2023 the firm was listed as one of the top 50 European investors in illegal Israeli settlements. Baillie Gifford has investments in companies linked to the Israeli state and illegal settlements, including a travel company, construction company, and US tech company that has Israeli subsidiaries.
Over 700 authors, from Naomi Klein to Sally Rooney, signed a statement by Fossil Free Books (FFB) demanding that Baillie Gifford cease its investments in fossil fuels and companies that profit from “Israeli apartheid, occupation and genocide” and calling for a boycott of the company until that happened. The company’s sponsorship of several literary festivals including the Hay Festival, Edinburgh International Book Festival, and book festivals in Borders, Wimbledon, Cheltenham, Cambridge, Stratford, Wigtown, and Henley festivals were cancelled.
Russia boycott success – April 2024
The Russia boycott gained faster brand buy-in than perhaps any boycott campaign in history. To date, over 1,000 brands have curtailed operations in Russia, from Airbnb to Blackrock and Sainsbury’s.
Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, on March 7th 2022 Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called for an international “boycott of Russian exports, in particular the rejection of oil and oil products from Russia.” Subsequently, Ukraine’s Culture Minister called for a boycott of Russia in December 2022. The Yale School of Management continues to track companies that are still operating in Russia.
Twitter/X boycott success – January 2024
Twitter/X has lost half its advertising revenue since Musk’s takeover in 2022, with over 500 advertisers stopping spending on the platform. In 2022, the coalition ‘Stop Toxic Twitter’, composed of around 60 organisations, wrote an open letter asking Twitter’s top 20 advertisers to “cease all advertising on Twitter globally” while the platform failed to take the increase in harmful and inaccurate content seriously, for example by moderating more thoroughly to reduce the amount of these posts on the site.
The Boycott Puma campaign was launched by Palestinian athletes in 2018 after 200 Palestinian sports clubs sent a letter to the company urging it to end its sponsorship of the Israel Football Association (IFA). The IFA includes teams based in illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian territories. In December 2023, Puma announced it would not renew its sponsorship of the Israeli Football Association. According to the BDS movement, “Over the course of the 5-year campaign, groups around the world participated in numerous global days of action and occupied PUMA offices and shops. Sports teams, athletes, artists, ended contracts with PUMA and retailers removed its products from their stores… We thank the many groups around the world that worked tirelessly and relentlessly to force PUMA to end its complicity with Israel’s apartheid regime and in its Gaza genocide.”
The BDS campaign against G4S was launched by Palestinian prisoners’ rights and human rights organisations in 2012. G4S provided services to prisons that held Palestinian political prisoners without trial, who were subject to torture. It also provided various types of services or support to illegal Israeli settlements, the apartheid wall, the Israeli military and police academy.
The campaign pressure led to high profile divestment from G4S by the Church of Sweden, the United Methodist Church, the world’s largest philanthropic organisation Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a Kuwaiti investment fund, UN agencies, trade unions, universities, restaurants and more.
According to animal rights group Peta, House of Fraser decided to ban the sale of fur across all its brands including Flannels and Sports Direct in October 2022. The campaign group had called for a boycott of the brand, which used fur including from racoons and rabbits, since 2020. Four Paws UK and Humane Society International also supported the campaign, and examples of campaign activities include activists singing “12 Days of Cruelty” outside a store front at Christmas and over 150,000 people calling on the company to drop fur.
Animal rights campaign group Peta announced that Air France would ban the transport of monkeys as soon as its existing contract ended, following a campaign that spanned 10 years. Peta began the boycott call in 2012, and it continued up until 2022 when Air France was the only known major European airline still shipping monkeys to laboratories for experimentation, on journeys that could last over 30 hours.
The campaign involved demonstrations around the globe, on-flight protests, discussions with the company’s leadership, shareholder activism, disruption of executives’ speeches, and bold advertisements like billboards at airports. Celebrities from Dr Jane Goodall to Peter Gabriel got behind the campaign.
This info is from the Dr. Richard Day Tapes recorded in 1969 from a private meeting and summarised below.“Dr. Day not only worked as a professor at a Pittsburgh medical University, he also practiced medicine at several prominent hospitals in the United States. In 1969 he gathered 80 of his fellow medical doctors together for a compassionate meeting in Pittsburgh, regarding the social engineering changes that were coming over their lifetimes and the lifetimes of their children. All 80 doctors were told not to bring any recording equipment or paper etc, simply because if anyone officially transcribed what Dr. Richard Day was saying, his life would most likely be in jeopardy.”
In no particular order…. and remember this confession by Dr. Richard Day was spoken in 1969.
1. That doctors were going to become paid assassins and that doctors who didn’t conform to “remove their patients“, on the say so of the government, would no longer be doctors. This of course happened during COVID en masse, as doctors and nurses killed their patients on cue.
2. That 9/11 would happen in the US. The actual date and location weren’t mentioned. This act of terrorism was mentioned against the US in 1969 and so was the reason that the US would be attacked in this way. The US was attacked on 9/11 by “the order”, which Dr. Day referred to during his 1969 confession.
3. There was a vow to destroy the family unit and to open endless restaurants, making family mealtime (one pillar of family strength) irreverent. At our modern time today, child-less families/individuals plus rising divorce are now the norm. We’re being depopulated, which was also spoken to as one of the cult’s primary agendas, in the Dr, Richard Day Tapes.
4. That the music would become progressively worse, in order to destabilize the people who listened to it. I think this became obvious when “wet ass pussy” was declared song of the year by NPR (National Public Radio) in 2020. NPR is a government funded organization. Both government and big corp are hunting the public together as one mega predator. Overly sexualizing the female, the destructions of the family unit and the destruction of morality was also high on “the order’s” list of priorities……according to Day.
5. That change would be purposely accelerated to the point where seniors would want to die via state euthanasia, because they could no longer keep up with how fast the world was changing. This is why state sponsored medical suicide is coming above ground all around the world, at the same time that world change is purposely accelerating at breakneck speed.
6. There would be numerous changes of road names, in order to dilute historical continuity and cultural strength. This is now coming above ground around the world, as Toronto (for example) erased some of its famous Younge Street, renaming it “Little Iran“. Diluting the race and race mixing are big on the cult’s priority list, to dilute cultural strength and historical morals, values and customs.
7. Dr. Richard Day also said that there are always two reasons for each agenda they put in play. One reason is the “made for public reason“, AKA the lie they tell the public, as to why the ruling group is destroying the people. Then there’s the real reason. Dr. Day went on to say that if people are stupid enough to believe the lies they’re told by their governments and media (like COVID, 9/11, taxation, poison as medicine etc) then they deserve to die. I find this form of gas lighting extremely devilish.
8. That Christianity was a major impedance to the installation of the NWO order concept (a worldwide communist state) and that destroying Christianity was (and is) one of their primary objectives. Today we see this openly in Canada with over 100 church burnings and/or mass church vandalism.
9. That science was now going to be faked, in order that the population follow their false science religion into the sacrificial volcano. COVID was a prime example of this; all the science was faked, as is clearly stated here. There wasn’t even a COVID virus. It was all faked science. These cons were set up hundreds of years old, as is stated here in this other document, which is very similar to what Dr. Richard Day recounted.
10. That homosexuality would be socially engineered, and encouraged, in order to collapse morality and to also to bring about the depopulation numbers desired by the ruling group. Homosexuality is up 300% in the last decade, so this isn’t genetic. Homosexuality is no longer described as depopulation-based sodomy or a depopulation-based pleasure pursuit. It’s now described as love, equality and inclusion. It’s all about how you market the agenda and what buzz words are used. This is all courtesy of the ruling group of course, who can arrange any goal they wish…..as Dr, Day clearly stated. Yes, we’re being tricked to destroy ourselves, our communities and our species while believing that we’re in full control of our decisions and that our behaviors in life are organic to us. Naturally gay is very different than socially engineering a mass adoption of gay.
If you want to learn about the Dr. Richard Day Tapes and listen to them yourself, just click here.
As someone studying this material constantly, I know what’s coming, so I know how to pivot appropriately. I teach everything a person needs to know, in order to sidestep these socially engineered and secret society-based assaults on us, our children and our communities. Come work with me LIVE, started Jan 11th, 2025. You’ll be glad you did. Click here to learn more or click the image below. I will see you on opening day. Make sure your 2026 is safe, secure and successful. My priority is to you and your family.
A peer-reviewed reanalysis of the Henry Ford Birth Cohort Study, published on 9 December 2025, shows that vaccinated children had significantly higher rates of chronic diseases compared to unvaccinated children.
The reanalysis, authored by John W. Oller, Jr., PhD; Daniel Broudy, PhD and Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, asserts that the original study’s statistical methods obscured large proportional differences in the data.
According to the reanalysis, vaccinated children were sicker across all 22 chronic disease categories listed, with autism-associated neurodevelopmental conditions occurring at 549% higher rates and childhood cancer at 54% higher rates in the vaccinated cohort.
The study followed 18,468 children between 2000 and 2016 from birth until 31 December 2017 to evaluate the health outcomes of vaccinated compared to unvaccinated children.
The study, referred to as the Lamerato et al study, has never been published in a journal. However, at the Senate hearing, Attorney Aaron Siri, who had received a copy of the study in early 2020, revealed data from the study: (view the X item at expose-news.com)
Siri testified at the Senate hearing, “The study began by explaining it set out to reduce vaccine hesitancy by assuring parents the CDC vaccine schedule is safe. Instead, these researchers found that the vaccinated children have 4.29x the rate of asthma, 3.03x the rate of atopic disease, 5.96x the rate of autoimmune disease and 5.53x the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders, which included 3.28x developmental delay and 4.47x speech disorder. All of these findings were statistically significant.”
“There were also other conditions for which there were numerous cases in the vaccinated group but zero in the unvaccinated group, hence a rate cannot be calculated, including brain dysfunction, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities and tics,” Siri added. “for example, there were 262 cases of ADHD in the vaccinated group and none in the unvaccinated group.”
Related: Aaron Siri’s written submission to ‘How the Corruption of Science has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines’, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 5 September 2025
On 9 December, John Oller, Daniel Broudy and Nicolas Hulscher published their reanalysis of the data collected by the Lamerato et al study. The difference between the two studies is the way the data is analysed. The Lamerato et al study used odds-ratio modelling, a statistical approach that masked large disparities. Oller et al used a comparison of proportions per cohort approach. The same data analysed in different ways produced dramatically different results.
The abstract of the Oller et al study said:
Of the 22 chronic disease conditions studied, proportional contrasts always favour the unvaccinated. The most dramatic contrasts occurred in asthma, autism, autoimmunity, ADHD, brain dysfunction, mental health disorders, behavioural disability, developmental delay, learning disability, intellectual disability, speech disorder, motor disability, tics, other disability disorder, neurological disorder, and seizure disorder. At ten years of follow-up, 57% of the vaccinated cohort had at least one chronic disorder, compared with 17% in the unvaccinated.A Peer-Review of the Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study Discussed at the Senate Hearing on September 9, 2025. (2025). International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research , 4(1), 1609-1646. https://doi.org/10.56098/vse7qq65
The following is Joel Smalley’s summary of Oller et al’s reanalysis. Smalley also posted a short video on Substack to explain the difference between the original study and the reanalysis. We are unable to embed videos uploaded onto Substack. You can watch the video by following THIS link.
Key Results
A peer-reviewed reanalysis of the Henry Ford Birth Cohort Study (18,468 children, 2000-2016) comparing vaccinated (16,511, median 18 vaccines) vs unvaccinated (1,957) children found:
Headline findings:
All 22 chronic disease categories showed higher rates in vaccinated children
Autism-associated neurodevelopmental conditions: 549% higher in vaccinated group
Childhood cancer: 54% higher in vaccinated group
By age 10: 57% of vaccinated children had developed at least one chronic disease vs only 17% of unvaccinated
Most elevated conditions included:
Autoimmune disease: 12× higher
Neurodevelopmental disorders: 13.5× higher
Speech disorders: 9× higher
Asthma: 6.5× higher
Several conditions appeared only in vaccinated children: ADHD, diabetes, brain dysfunction, behavioural disability, learning disability, intellectual disability, and tics.
Hulscher argues that the original study’s statistical methods (odds-ratio modelling) masked these disparities, particularly where the unvaccinated group had zero cases.
Thanks to Tim Shey for this link. Blistering truths from Paul Weston exposing the monetary rewards (aka blood money) that kept the ‘treatment’ going … and still is going …
Paul Weston is a British political commentator, concentrating on the various factors involved in the relentless war against Western civilisation.
He has written a book titled: Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime which can be found here.
I do know of one NZ primary school being visited earlier this year by a ‘Health’ team administering the ‘treatment’. And of parents who had not consented being visited at home asking why. How many other schools are still being visited and coerced? We would be keen to know.
Whistleblower Barry Young when he first disclosed the deaths he was seeing post treatment, displayed charts with child deaths on them. Likewise, the NZDSOS doctors published a long list of deaths reported post treatment, that also included children.
This interview was recorded approximately a year ago, but nearly every word remains valuable. Since then, the predictions made have proven disturbingly accurate. Ozempic has been approved for expanded use and is now widely reimbursed by insurance companies.
The pharmaceutical industry has created a system where every major institution—medical schools, research organizations, professional societies, media, and even civil rights groups—profits when Americans get sick and stay sick. These companies pay doctors directly to prescribe their products, fund the research that claims their drugs work, control the medical education that teaches doctors what to prescribe, and buy off the news media that should be investigating these practices.
The result is that 80 percent of American adults are overweight or obese, rates of diabetes and prediabetes continue to climb, and the proposed solution is a drug that costs $20,000 per year, must be taken for life, causes severe gastrointestinal problems in many patients, and doesn’t address the root cause of the problem. The fact that this drug was fast-tracked for government funding while metabolic disease continues to worsen reveals the moral bankruptcy of the system.
With grateful thanks to Tucker Carlson and Mr. Means, here is their interview. It was edited for readability.
Obesity is not an Ozempic deficiency. This simple fact exposes the fundamental corruption at the heart of the pharmaceutical industry’s latest blockbuster drug. When 80 percent of American adults are overweight or obese due to environmental factors—subsidized junk food, corrupted dietary guidelines, and a food system designed to addict—the answer is not a $20,000-per-year injectable drug that must be taken for life.
Yet that is precisely the solution the pharmaceutical industry has sold to America. Through systematic manipulation of medical research, regulatory capture, and direct payments to doctors and institutions, drug manufacturers have positioned Ozempic and similar GLP-1 drugs to become the most expensive medical intervention in U.S. history. The predictions made when this strategy began have proven disturbingly accurate. The drug received expanded approval, widespread insurance reimbursement, and government funding. Lawsuits over severe side effects have materialized. The corruption has continued. And obesity rates keep climbing—because the system profits from managing disease, not curing it.
If you clean a dirty fish tank, you clean the tank—you don’t drug the fish. In America, the tank is filthy. Fifty percent of teens and 80 percent of adults are overweight. This happened in one generation. Americans didn’t systematically become lazier over the past 40 years. Something in the environment changed.
The Medical Problems
Novo Nordisk, the Danish company that makes Ozempic, surpassed LVMH to become the most valuable company in Europe. European regulators do not allow Ozempic as a first-line treatment for obesity, so almost all of its revenue comes from exploiting the broken U.S. healthcare system, as American insurance companies now widely reimburse for it.
The drug works by paralyzing the stomach, preventing proper digestion. This mechanism causes severe gastrointestinal problems in many patients. Nearly 3,000 lawsuits have been consolidated in the Pennsylvania federal court alleging gastroparesis, intestinal blockages, and ileus. The FDA has updated Ozempic’s warning label multiple times since 2023—adding warnings for ileus in September 2023, severe gastrointestinal reactions in January 2025, and pulmonary aspiration during anesthesia in November 2024.
Even patients who receive the drug for free through insurance coverage cannot tolerate it. 30% discontinue use within 3 months despite full reimbursement. The gastrointestinal side effects are that severe. Those who stop the drug regain the weight—a fact Novo Nordisk acknowledges. The company markets Ozempic as a lifetime drug precisely because patients regain weight after stopping. This creates the perfect business model: a drug that never cures the condition it treats, ensuring permanent revenue.
Vision loss is one of the most serious complications. Multiple studies published in 2024 and 2025 link semaglutide use to non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), a condition causing irreversible blindness. Patients with obesity taking semaglutide for weight loss face more than seven times the risk of developing high rates of NAION compared to those not using the drug. Diabetic patients on semaglutide face four times the risk. The World Health Organization issued a warning about this in June 2025. Hundreds of patients have filed lawsuits claiming permanent vision loss from these drugs.
The European Union launched an investigation into suicidal ideation caused by Ozempic. This connection is not surprising. Ninety-five percent of serotonin, which regulates mood and contentment, is made in the gut. A drug that paralyzes gut function disrupts serotonin production. When you interfere with the gut and serotonin simultaneously, mental health problems follow. Reports of increased depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts from Ozempic users continue to accumulate.
Research published in January 2025 revealed additional side effects beyond gastrointestinal and vision problems: kidney stones, arthritis, fainting, and drug-induced pancreatitis. Nearly 40 percent of hypoglycemia cases and 15 percent of gastrointestinal cases required hospitalization. Studies have also linked GLP-1 drugs to reduced bone density when used without exercise, raising concerns about long-term musculoskeletal damage. An aging population taking a medication that weakens bones while simultaneously causing balance problems from blood sugar fluctuations represents a fracture epidemic waiting to happen.
Patients suffer severe side effects. Many cannot continue taking the drug. Those who stop regain the weight. The drug does not address why Americans got fat in the first place. It manages a symptom at astronomical cost while the underlying dysfunction continues.
How the Corruption Works
The pharmaceutical industry has refined a systematic approach to corrupting medicine over the course of decades. This playbook operates at multiple levels, involving doctors, researchers, medical societies, civil rights groups, and media organizations. Understanding this system is essential to understanding how Ozempic became the preferred solution to obesity despite its problems.
Pharmaceutical companies pay doctors directly to prescribe their drugs. Studies show that 94 percent of physicians have some relationship with the pharmaceutical industry. These relationships include payments for continuing medical education, speaking fees, consulting arrangements, and research grants. The payments influence prescribing behavior without making doctors feel bought. The industry frames these payments as compensation for expertise, not bribes. Research demonstrates that physicians who receive industry payments are two to three times more likely to prescribe name-brand drugs than their peers who don’t receive payments.
Beyond individual doctors, companies engage in “ghost management” of medical research. In this process, company representatives design studies, collect data, analyze results, and write research papers. They then pay prominent academic physicians to add their names as authors. Industry-sponsored research masquerades as independent academic work, borrowing the (supposed) legitimacy of medical science while serving corporate interests. When studies are funded by the company that sells the drug, the outcomes are substantially more favorable for that drug than in trials run by independent researchers. This systematic bias doesn’t come from poor methodology that traditional quality measures would catch—it comes from the funding itself.
Pharmaceutical companies fund the majority of continuing medical education for doctors, which is required to maintain medical licenses. By controlling this education, companies introduce bias toward their products while maintaining the facade of objective medical instruction. Studies of company-funded educational sessions consistently show bias toward the sponsor’s products.
Professional medical societies, which have statutory authority to set standards of care, receive substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies. The organizations that determine which drugs doctors should prescribe are funded by the companies that profit from those drugs. This obvious conflict of interest goes unaddressed because the arrangement is so pervasive that it’s considered normal.
Novo Nordisk is the largest spender on foundational obesity research, the largest funder to medical groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics, and one of the largest funders of civil rights groups. The company paid the NAACP to frame opposition to Ozempic funding as a civil rights issue, and the NAACP is now a registered lobbyist for Ozempic. It argues that not supporting government funding is racist because obesity disproportionately affects specific communities. When a pharmaceutical company can pay civil rights organizations to accuse critics of racism, the corruption has reached a new state of depravity.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommended Ozempic as a first-line treatment for obese teens based on a 68-week study. This study led the AAP to recommend that every obese or overweight teen—50 percent of American teenagers—receive weekly injections for life. The study duration was just over one year. No long-term safety data existed, yet the medical establishment recommended universal adoption.
Pharmaceutical companies are the largest spenders on television news advertising—approximately $4.8 billion per year on direct-to-consumer advertising alone. This spending does not primarily aim to convince consumers to request drugs from their doctors; it is bribery for the networks. Media outlets that depend on pharma advertising dollars do not investigate pharmaceutical industry practices or report critically on new drugs. When 50 percent of television news funding comes from pharmaceutical companies, journalists do not ask hard questions about those companies’ products.
Dr. Fatima Stanford, head of obesity research at Harvard, has received tens of thousands of dollars in direct funding from Novo Nordisk, as well as millions in research grants. She appears regularly on major media outlets—including CBS’s 60 Minutes—advocating for Ozempic without disclosing these payments to viewers. On 60 Minutes, she stated that people should “throw willpower out the window” because obesity is a brain disease, not a food problem. She told viewers to take Ozempic and not worry about what they eat.
The NIH awarded 8,000 research grants to university professors who had direct conflicts of interest with the topics and drugs they were studying. This practice isn’t discussed because it’s so universal that it’s considered normal. These grants compromise NIH’s entire research program.
The opioid crisis is the template for this corruption. In 2012, a panel of outside experts convened to recommend guidance on opioids. The head of that panel was Dr. Philip Pizzo, dean of Stanford Medical School. At the time of his appointment, Stanford received a $3 million grant from Pfizer, a major opioid maker, for pain research. Dr. Pizzo appointed 90 percent of the panel members, who also received direct research and personal consulting fees from opioid makers. They released relaxed “non addictive” opioid standards that had a major impact on the opioid epidemic. This exact pattern—conflicted panel members making recommendations that benefit the companies paying them—is now repeating with obesity drugs.
Major pharmaceutical companies have paid billions in criminal and civil settlements for fraud, bribery, and misleading research. GlaxoSmithKline and Merck, two of the largest vaccine makers, settled some of the biggest criminal penalties in American corporate history for bribing doctors and producing false research. Yet these companies continue to operate with minimal oversight and maintain market dominance. The fines they pay represent a cost of doing business, not a deterrent.
The Food Stamp Connection
The food industry operates the same corruption model as the pharmaceutical industry. It spends 11 times as much on foundational nutrition research as the NIH. By controlling the research, food companies generate studies that support their products while appearing to be independent science. This corrupted research then influences government dietary guidelines, medical education, and public perception of nutrition.
The USDA has thoroughly corrupted the guidelines that set nutrition standards. Food companies fund 95 percent of the members of the guideline committee. These corrupted guidelines state that a two-year-old can consume 10 percent of their diet from added sugar. Agriculture subsidies in America send more money to tobacco than to vegetables. Ninety percent of subsidies go to highly processed foods that cause obesity.
Nearly 15 percent of Americans—roughly 50 million people—depend on food stamps for nutrition. Ten percent of all food stamp funding goes to soda. That’s over $10 billion per year flowing from the federal treasury to soda companies. The United States is the only country in the world that allows food assistance dollars to purchase this, and sodas are the number one item purchased with food stamps in America.
Calley Means worked as a consultant for Coca-Cola early in his career. The company paid the NAACP and other civil rights groups to frame proposals to limit soda purchases with food stamps as racist. They rigged the debate through systematic payments to these trusted institutions. The government subsidizes the products that cause obesity, then proposes a lifetime pharmaceutical solution that costs $20,000 per year. This is the business model.
The Financial Projections
Wall Street openly celebrates this corruption. As Ozempic gained momentum, food stocks dropped, and pharma stocks surged. Analysts openly project that obesity rates will continue to increase. Novo Nordisk became the most valuable company in Europe based on growth projections that assume higher obesity rates over the next decade. The financial models underpinning pharma stocks assume Americans will get fatter and sicker.
Medical centers seeking financing for new obesity treatment facilities base their loan applications on projections of increasing obesity. The largest and most expensive buildings in American cities are new pediatric obesity and cardiology centers. If these medical centers projected declining obesity rates, they couldn’t secure financing. The entire healthcare industry profits from worsening disease rather than improving health.
Medicare now covers Ozempic for diabetes and kidney disease. In November 2024, the Trump administration announced an agreement with Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly to expand Medicare and Medicaid coverage of GLP-1 drugs. The manufacturers reduced prices to $245 per month in exchange for access to millions of new patients. This government funding boost was predicted years ago and has now materialized exactly as expected.
The numbers are staggering. Medicare spent $5.7 billion on GLP-1 diabetes drugs in 2022 alone. Total U.S. spending on GLP-1 drugs in 2023 reached $71.7 billion across all payers, including private insurance, Medicare, and Medicaid. With 80 percent of American adults overweight or obese and expanded coverage being implemented, treating tens of millions of Americans at even the reduced price of $245 per month would cost over $1 trillion per year.
That $1 trillion annual cost would manage a symptom, not address the root cause. The environmental factors causing the metabolic health crisis—subsidized processed food, food stamp programs paying for soda, corrupted dietary guidelines, and a healthcare system that profits from chronic disease management—remain entirely unaddressed. Ozempic does nothing to fix the poisoned food supply. It doesn’t reform agricultural subsidies. It doesn’t stop the government from paying people to drink soda. It manages the consequences of these policies through lifetime pharmaceutical dependency.
The COVID Comparison
The scale of this financial disaster dwarfs previous pharmaceutical interventions. Total U.S. government spending on COVID vaccines from 2020 to 2023 was approximately $30 billion for development, manufacturing, and distribution. The per-dose cost to the government was $19.50 to $39 for negotiated bulk purchases. Treatment duration was 2 to 4 doses per person. The total cost per person was $40 to $160.
Ozempic is on an entirely different scale. Total U.S. spending in 2023 alone was $71.7 billion—more than twice the entire three-year COVID vaccine program. Medicare spending on GLP-1 drugs grew from $57 million in 2018 to $5.7 billion in 2022. Projections suggest spending could exceed $13 to $26 billion annually on Medicare alone if only 10 percent of eligible beneficiaries use these drugs. If usage increases beyond that modest 10 percent, costs will multiply accordingly.
Per patient annual cost runs $11,000 to $20,000 at list price, though the negotiated government rate is $245 per month, or roughly $3,000 per year. Treatment duration is lifelong, for patients regain the weight when they stop the drug. The total cost per person over 20 years ranges from $60,000 at the negotiated rate to $400,000 at the list price. The target population is 80 percent of American adults, roughly 200 million people.
If Ozempic receives full government funding for the 80 percent of Americans who are overweight or obese, even at the reduced price of $245 per month, annual costs would exceed $600 billion. At list prices, yearly costs could reach $1 to $2 trillion. This equals 20 to 60 times the entire COVID vaccine budget every single year, forever. The COVID vaccine program cost taxpayers roughly $100 per person, including the whole series. Ozempic would cost $3,000 to $20,000 per person per year for life. A person on Ozempic for 20 years would cost taxpayers 600 to 4,000 times more than their entire COVID vaccination series, depending on the price point.
These numbers do not include the downstream medical costs from Ozempic’s side effects: treating gastroparesis, managing vision loss, addressing mental health crises, dealing with kidney stones, treating fractures from reduced bone density, and managing the metabolic chaos when millions eventually go off the drug. The true cost will be substantially higher than the drug price alone.
The Long-Term Unknowns
The visible costs and side effects represent just the beginning. The gastroparesis, vision loss, mental health issues, and astronomical financial burden are what we can document in the first few years of widespread use, but terrifying unknowns remain.
What happens to gut microbiomes after decades of paralysis? The gut microbiome manages immune function, produces vital nutrients, and impacts mental health. Decades of pharmaceutical-induced stomach paralysis will disturb these systems in ways we can’t predict. The gut-brain axis links digestive health to cognitive well-being. Disrupting this connection over a lifetime may lead to mental and neurological effects that won’t become apparent for years.
What are the long-term neurological effects of disrupted serotonin production? Serotonin not only regulates mood; it also affects memory, learning, sleep, and appetite. Decades of disrupted serotonin signaling in the gut could influence brain development in adolescents and accelerate cognitive decline in older adults. No studies of this exist.
What are the combined effects on bone density and muscle mass in aging populations? Osteoporosis and sarcopenia already affect older Americans. Introducing a drug that worsens both conditions could lead to an epidemic of fractures and disability. The healthcare costs for treating these issues could surpass the drug costs themselves.
How will Ozempic interact with the many other medications people take? The average 65-year-old American takes seven prescription drugs. These medications interact in complex ways that are poorly understood, even without adding Ozempic into the equation. As more people develop multiple chronic conditions and take multiple drugs, these interactions become exponentially more complicated and unpredictable.
Yoho comment: Drugs are never studied together.
What happens when millions stop using the drug—whether because of cost, side effects, or supply issues—and quickly gain weight along with metabolic chaos? The rebound effect after stopping Ozempic is well-documented. Weight returns swiftly. However, we don’t know what occurs physiologically when someone cycles on and off these medications over decades. The metabolic stress from repeated weight cycling is likely worse than never taking the drug at all.
Making a population of 200 million Americans depend on a single drug class gives manufacturers extraordinary power. Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly would be destroying the metabolic health of half the American population. The pharmaceutical companies would hold more sway over American health than anything else.
The ongoing pharmaceutical dependency makes it impossible to address root causes because everyone is already on medication. Once 100 million Americans depend on weekly Ozempic injections, the political will to reform the food system disappears. Why change agricultural subsidies or restrict food stamp purchases of soda when everyone is medicated? The drug becomes the accepted fix, and the real problems are never addressed.
Every major pharmaceutical disaster follows the same pattern: initial enthusiasm, widespread use, then long-term disasters. Opioids took 15 years to show their full damage. Thalidomide caused birth defects before anyone made the connection. DES led to cancer in the daughters of women who used it. Vioxx caused heart attacks after years of use. The pattern is always the same: by the time we realize the full harm, millions are already affected.
We are conducting a mass experiment on metabolic intervention with a lifetime drug that paralyzes digestive function. The five-year data is already alarming. The 20-year data does not exist. We are asking Americans to trust pharmaceutical companies that have paid billions in criminal settlements for fraud and deception. We are asking them to ignore the corrupted research, the paid doctors, the captured regulators, and the obvious conflicts of interest. We are asking them to take a drug for life based on 68-week studies.
A Different Path
The metabolic health crisis did not exist one generation ago. Environmental factors created it rapidly, which means that environmental changes can reverse it rapidly. The president could issue executive orders tomorrow that would fundamentally change the landscape without spending a dollar.
The FDA could ban pharmaceutical advertising on television news, which no other developed country allows. This advertising does not influence consumers—it is used to bribe the news media. Eliminating this spending would remove part of the financial leverage that prevents critical reporting. Journalists could investigate pharmaceutical companies without risking their employers’ revenue. The policy would cost nothing and would immediately improve the information environment.
The NIH could stop giving research grants to investigators with conflicts of interest. This seems like common sense, but it would trigger screams of being anti-science from the corrupt establishment. 8,000 NIH grants go to conflicted researchers.
Agricultural subsidies would ideally shift from processed foods to vegetables. The government spends more on tobacco subsidies now than on vegetable subsidies, and ninety percent of agricultural subsidies go to highly processed foods. Redirecting even a small share of these subsidies to fruits and vegetables could change the economics of farming and make healthy food more affordable than junk food.
The revolving door between academia and industry has turned medical schools into research-and-development labs for pharmaceutical companies. Requiring disclosure and restricting financial ties would help restore some independence to academic medicine.
Medical groups with statutory authority to set standards of care—the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association—must be prohibited from taking pharmaceutical funding. These organizations determine which drugs doctors prescribe. They should not be funded by companies that profit from those prescriptions.
Americans respond to incentives. The healthcare system could reimburse doctors for prescribing exercise and nutrition interventions instead of drugs. These interventions are proven to reverse metabolic dysfunction. Changing the reimbursement policy would immediately change behavior.
A child with prediabetes often has obesity, hypertension, and heart problems. That child becomes a lifelong customer for multiple drugs, none of which cure anything. One medication leads to another as side effects cause new conditions, requiring more prescriptions. This corruption wastes human potential and strains the federal budget. Healthcare is the largest and fastest-growing industry in America. If trends continue, it will be 40 percent of the federal budget in 15 years. As costs rise, health outcomes get worse. This is unsustainable.
The Verdict
Everything predicted about Ozempic has come true. The drug received expanded approval and government funding. Lawsuits over severe gastrointestinal injuries appeared. Cases of vision loss surfaced. Mental health problems emerged. The corruption continued exactly as expected. Stocks rose on Wall Street. Obesity rates keep climbing, and the healthcare system profits from managing disease rather than creating health.
We are watching a pharmaceutical disaster unfold in real time with full knowledge of how it will end. The pattern has been repeated many times before.
Selected References
1. Calley Means’ website: calleymeans.com
2. Novo Nordisk financial reports and investor presentations documenting U.S. revenue concentration and obesity growth projections, available at novonordisk.com/investors.
3. Multiple studies linking semaglutide to non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), including research published in JAMA Ophthalmology and other peer-reviewed journals in 2024-2025 showing 4-7 times increased risk.
4. FDA label updates for Ozempic documenting warnings for ileus (September 2023), severe gastrointestinal reactions (January 2025), and pulmonary aspiration during anesthesia (November 2024), available at accessdata.fda.gov.
5. Consolidated multidistrict litigation in Pennsylvania federal court (MDL No. 3:24-md-03094) documenting nearly 3,000 lawsuits alleging severe gastrointestinal injuries including gastroparesis from GLP-1 drugs.
6. Sismondo, Sergio. “Epistemic Corruption, the Pharmaceutical Industry, and the Body of Medical Science.” Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 2021, documenting ghost management of research and systematic bias in industry-funded studies.
7. Medicare spending data showing GLP-1 drug expenditures growing from $57 million (2018) to $5.7 billion (2022), with total U.S. spending reaching $71.7 billion in 2023, available through CMS and industry analyst reports.
8. USDA agricultural subsidy data and food stamp spending patterns, including documentation that 10 percent of SNAP funding ($10+ billion annually) goes to soda purchases, the highest single category.
9. European Medicines Agency regulatory decisions on GLP-1 drugs for obesity treatment and European Union investigation into suicidal ideation associated with Ozempic use, launched in 2023.
10. American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation for GLP-1 drugs as first-line treatment for obese teens based on 68-week studies, along with documentation of Novo Nordisk funding to the AAP and other medical societies.
11. Historical case studies of pharmaceutical fraud settlements, including GlaxoSmithKline’s $3 billion settlement (2012) and Merck’s $950 million settlement (2011) for bribing doctors and producing misleading research, representing some of the largest criminal penalties in U.S. corporate history.
Yoho wrapup:
As of December 2025, nearly 3,000 lawsuits have been filed and consolidated into multidistrict litigation in the Pennsylvania federal court. These lawsuits allege serious gastrointestinal injuries, including gastroparesis, intestinal blockages, and ileus. The FDA has updated Ozempic’s warning label multiple times since this interview—adding warnings for ileus in September 2023, severe gastrointestinal adverse reactions in January 2025, and pulmonary aspiration during anesthesia in November 2024.
Multiple studies published in 2024 and 2025 have linked semaglutide use to irreversible blindness caused by non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). The World Health Organization issued a warning about this risk in June 2025. Hundreds of patients with it have filed lawsuits.
Research published in January 2025 revealed additional concerning side effects beyond what was discussed in this interview. The study found increased risks of kidney stones, arthritis, fainting, and drug-induced pancreatitis in patients using GLP-1 drugs. Nearly 40 percent of hypoglycemia cases and 15 percent of gastrointestinal cases required hospitalization. Studies have also linked GLP-1 drugs to reduced bone density when used without exercise, raising concerns about long-term musculoskeletal health.
The prediction that this would become “the highest-funded drug from the US taxpayer in history” is also coming true. We’re conducting a mass experiment on metabolic intervention with a lifetime drug that paralyzes digestive function. The 5-year data is already alarming; the 20-year data doesn’t exist.
I know; I copied the other guy’s homework. And although I shortened it, it was too long. I got so much out of this that I felt compelled to share it. I do not know how anyone still trusts the Pharma motherf*****s with another poison shot, but I guess there is a sucker born every minute.
Thanks to Steve for this video. It really makes sense now. Why the store bought bread disagrees with the gut. This goes right back to medieval days and the origins of bread ingredients. EWNZ
There’s a significant issue with the bread we consume today. While bread was once a fundamental part of civilizations, sustaining families and armies, modern bread often causes gut issues, blood sugar spikes, and leaves us feeling unsatisfied. This food history explores how the bread industry has changed, contrasting today’s offerings with the traditional bread that nourished our ancestors. We conduct a food industry case study, examining how the history of bread, including ancient grains and sourdough, shows a stark difference from what we find on shelves now.
So you’ve decided to switch to Linux. But what’s wrong with Windows, anyway? And isn’t it hard to make the switch? Joining us today to walk you through the switch to Linux is Rob Braxman, aka The Internet Privacy Guy.
You must be logged in to post a comment.