Hilary's Desk

Just when you thought it couldn't get worse for WHO, it has. Perhaps they looked at the amount of money Bill Gates was slinging around at vaccines over the next ten years, and thought..."Well, if he gets that much from selling computers, then think how much we can rake off people who USE his computers, however they use them!!?!!"  Voila. Brilliant... What an idea. Let's tax every email, all internet use, etc, as described neatly, by James Corbett at Global Research. Read Full Blog

New uber expensive cancer drugs like Taxol, Tarceva (the price was increased because it worked better than expected) Avastin, (at a cost of $100,000 for a year in 2006) , and Herceptin (costing $NZ100.000 for a year in 2007), have one thing in common with Gardasil.  Read Full Blog

At a recent annual provaccine conference, it is reported that delegates expressed remorse at “strong arm” tactics. Could it be that the MenZB vaccination campaign, and the latest Gardasil efforts, have seriously backfired in their faces? People are sick of being emotionally blackmailed with drama-queen DVD’s about “How you will die if you don’t” or “Vaccination is the right thing to do, because everyone else does it.” And “You are irresponsible if you don’t!”  Read Full Blog

Everywhere we look, we see nothing but pictures of coloured surgical masks as if these have some paranormal ability to “protect” the wearer. These, we presume, work. Right? After all, they are part of the “national plan” to stop the spread of flu viruses right? We’ve been told that the two main means of infection are contact: as in shake someone’s hand, put hand in mouth; picking up droplets from furniture (fomites), or being directly coughed or sneezed over. Right? Masks supposedly are to contain what the infectious people cough out, to protect others, so wearers also assume that masks protect them from the “environment” around them. Why else would people on the streets of Mexico, and doctors, be wearing them? Right? Wrong, actually, on both counts.  Read Full Blog

According to IMAC “In New Zealand cervical cancer is the third most common cause of cancer in women aged 25 - 44 years.” As usual, no reference. (pdf of IMAC page uplifted here, see page one)  Really. That’s very interesting, because the Auckland District Health Board’s March 2009 4 mb “Nova” Newsletter  says differently. (1st 4 pages uplifted here, because they remove it when the next one comes out.) It says, “for Maori women cervical cancer is the third most common cancer and it is often only caught in the later stages. For New Zealand women overall, it is the ninth most common cancer.” Read Full Blog

The Health Department Gardasil poster for parents takes the Goebbel’s propaganda award to brain-wash parents. (You might want to click on “Gardasil Poster” and print this out before you read the rest of this blog). It should surprise no-one that the Health Department has learned nothing from the MenZB campaign. As usual, we don’t need to know anything other than their “desired” messages.  Read Full Blog

In the Escape section of Sunday Star Times, March 1, 2009, journalist Karen Tay, who admits to viewing beauty and skincare products as sacred miracle potions, was researching their true cost to her body, and the environment. “While researching this story, I learnt many unpleasant truths about my beauty products…” Read Full Blog

I sit here looking at the latest Ministry of Health HE2013 taxpayer funded propaganda for the "Cervical cancer Vaccine", Gardasil.  It's a 21 board-page 'quick flipchart', which tells you nothing more than the two websites mentioned in the last blog. Read Full Blog

Apparently, the inability of the Government, or Gardasil's manufacturer CSL to proceed with a full-on advertising campaign to promote Gardasil, is considered by the Herald to be an "attack on Democracy". Incredible. Mike Taylor of CSL biotherapies says “that there is a certain amount of risk" in the CSL planned advertising campaign. You bet there is, when huge sums money are involved. Most of CSL's planned propaganda, using newspapers, magazines, TV and radio advertisements has been deferred in case it is said to support the Government's pre-election campaign. That's what the Herald would like you to think. But there is another, more important story here. The failure of the Herald to discuss the real issues isn’t so much an attack on democracy, as an attack on readers and taxpayers.  Read Full Blog