Michael Baker’s Clown World: Do New Zealanders Want This? from NZDSOS

Rolling out into the headlines again to spread further messages of fear, Michael Baker is a public health physician and Professor in the Department of Public Health at Otago University in Wellington with an ornamental academic record. Most New Zealanders know him as a media spokesperson for the Ministry of Health’s Covid-19 Technical Advisory Group.

November 19, 2023

He appeared in the spotlight in 2020 to advocate for unrealistic virus elimination strategies such as masking and lockdowns. Legacy media continue to give him air time to promote fear and exaggerated claims about disease control including the miracle saviours of medical products such as masks and mRNA injections. He references flawed mathematical modeling to claim tens of thousands of New Zealand lives were saved by the interventions he repeatedly endorses. Curiously he does not mention antibody dependent enhancement or immunoglobulin class switching which explain the repeated infections of greater severity in the vaccinated. Perhaps public heath medicine is not actually medicine?

Claiming to be “passionate about opportunities to organise society in ways that promote health, equity and sustainability“, amongst his many research interests are zoonoses (infectious diseases which pass to humans from animals), and One Health. He has held a number of positions over the years with the World Health Organization (WHO) and been the recipient of many awards, including via public-private partnerships such as the NZ-UK Link Foundation.

His passions and associations are relevant to note as they suggest allegiance to a specific ideology: that of today’s emerging global techno-fascism and intent to impose a centralised biosecurity state via the United Nations (UN) and their agencies. As with all corrupt regimes, adherents to the ideology are rewarded, whilst dissidents are silenced and punished.

Michael Baker has been on a path of many rewards for some years already. The media guarantee him a public voice whilst all opposing views are muted and accused of crimes such as “misinformation” and “disinformation”, which are being specifically legislated against in the new international frameworks.

Human rights, democracy and national sovereignty are in the way of this ideology, in which a powerful few feel the need to control the majority. Dismantling established systems has required persistent propaganda to convince people that those telling them to fear an invisible threat and follow nonsensical rules, have the intent and capacity to protect them with their recommended products.

The most important product of all is the digital health certificate being promoted as a “health tool”. According to the World Economic Forum, this will ultimately become an identity system, able to monitor and control access to all critical services.

This will facilitate the UN One Health policy, based on the ideology that the biosphere is dangerous to human existence, and that human existence is dangerous to the biosphere. Consequently four UN agencies will need to monitor and control the world: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and WHO. The World Bank Group, another UN agency, provide the facility for obtaining and distributing public funds required to implement this and other related policies.

One Health is one of Michael Baker’s passions, alongside the UN concepts of sustainability and equity. These also sound beneficent at face value, and yet on close inspection they likewise relate to implementation of a global control system.

The 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) stem from Agenda 21 (now Agenda 2030) which was written in 1992 under the guise of health and environmental protection. Malthusian ideology is at the core of Agenda 21. This is the belief that with too many humans on the planet, resources will deplete, leading to disaster and misery.

Read more about Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) and the errors in his ideas, in this article. Jeffery Jaxen spoke about Malthus on The Highwire at The Population Control Push. Danish politician Mads Palsvig discusses the myth of overpopulation near the end of his 2022 presentation on How to End Poverty.

The SDGs are a complicated network of interconnected control mechanisms claiming the intent to end poverty and suffering but in fact ushering in global governance and exacerbating human and planetary destruction. Threaded throughout the SDGs, the UN concept of equity is also distorted and flawed. One Health dogma considers that humans are just one species of many equal creatures, as explained by Dr David Bell in his March 2023 article Your Daughter for a Rat?

Dr Meryl Nass discusses equity as perceived by WHO, in her November 2023 article Why is Everyone Concerned About the WHO? Products and services will be made equally available to all, regardless of need. This serves the purpose of maximising profit rather than health protection, and mass production across multiple locations will lead to further abandonment of safety and quality mechanisms.

Mandated advice such as lockdowns and masks will similarly be required by all, as persistently justified by Michael Baker using his concept of ‘equity’. This appears in the mathematical models he references, which incorrectly assume populations are at equal risk from disease. For a public health physician to ignore the basic epidemiological principle of host-agent-environment interactions, is a deliberate and seemingly sinister omission. Whilst many viruses are not associated with disease, those which are only cause harm in specific hosts, and specific environments.

This was seen across the Pacific Rim region in 2020, where Covid was largely absent in multiple nations regardless of interventions. Whilst New Zealand was touted as “lockdown efficient”, the entire South East Asian peninsula below China with loose land borders and extremely limited resources to enforce lockdown measures, was similarly absent of Covid. That only changed once the “vaccines” were introduced. This was true for multiple countries. Read more at COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere for a shocking conclusion: international data is converging rapidly and by various different methods on around one vaccine death per three to four hundred people who take them, or one death per 1000 doses given.

The UN are currently working to implement legislation which will redirect unprecedented amounts of public funding into the pharmaceutical industrial complex via a massive pandemic prevention preparedness and response (PPPR) bureaucracy. To keep the majority unaware and compliant, a low level of ongoing fear is useful. Michael Baker appears to be New Zealand’s primary representative in this regard.

How many know about this legislation, let alone why they should oppose it, and the attempts to do so, such as Kirsten Murfitt’s Petition to Reject the amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005)? At the time of writing there are fewer than 25,000 signatories on the petition. Most New Zealanders would surely oppose such a destruction of democratic process if they were aware.

Yet everyone knows of Michael Baker’s warnings about a fifth wave of Covid-19 and recommendations to take even more boosters and don face masks again. This is confusing given that Professor Baker is on record* stating, with the implied authority of “settled science”, that face masks were of no use!  WHO admitted they changed their initial advice against mask wearing, too, due to “political pressure”. Our own MoH acknowledged masks were primarily to gain compliance and ‘remind’ people there was a pandemic on. [* Specific thanks to Coronavirus Plushie for his video documentation.]

More egregiously yet, recommending boosters of a product manufactured without adequate quality control processes, with inadequate and dishonest clinical trial data, known to be contaminated, which is causing population-level health harms and results in increased infection rates is in no way, shape or form, “public health”.

As the specialised health agency of the UN, WHO pose as a public health entity but in fact, have evolved into an arm of the pharmaceutical industry. A significant proportion of UN/WHO member nations, who each have a vote at the World Health Assembly, make no pretense of being democratic or upholding human rights. For example, New Zealand’s Dr Ashley Bloomfield co-chairs the Working Group on Amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) alongside Saudi Arabia’s Dr Abdullah Asiri. Dr Asiri’s draconian views on restriction of individual liberties in the name of the next pandemic, which he is very confident will occur, can be heard in this short clip.

Under the WHO-led Covid-19 response, record increases occurred across the world in indicators of population health deterioration such as poverty, food insecurity, unemployment, loss of education, and child trafficking. Not to mention a breakdown in health systems which were once high functioning, such as New Zealand. This corresponded with unprecedented increases of wealth to a concentrated minority, many of whom are in highly influential positions which can, have and continue to, manipulate the world view of how pandemics should be managed.

Proclaimed measures relating to surveillance and restriction of entire populations is an extremely lucrative business model which contradicts established public health evidence. DA Henderson et al’s 2006 key article Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza specifically states “The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme … that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration.”   That all changed in 2020, strangely.

Interestingly, Henderson’s co-authors Thomas Inglesby and Tara O’Toole have been involved in pandemic simulation exercises such as Dark Winter (2001) and Event 201 (2019). Co-author Jennifer Nuzzo is an epidemiologist at John Hopkins Center for Health Security who coordinated Event 201, financed by the Gates Foundation. Parroting the same ideologies as Michael Baker, they now promote the idea that we are at risk of ongoing pandemics which will be resolved via mass compliance with rules and administration of pharmaceutical products.

Repeated at least annually for 20 years, pandemic simulations have practiced the militarisation of public health crises and promotion of expensive pharmaceutical “solutions”. Bill Gates precociously referred to vaccination as “the final solution” to Covid-19 in April 2020.

Page 3 of the World Health Organization’s own 2019 systematic review of the evidence includes Table 1: Recommendations on the use of non pharmaceutical interventions by severity level in which contact tracing, quarantine, border screening and closures all come under the category of “not recommended in any circumstances.“

So why do people trained to know better, such as Michael Baker, contradict the established evidence of their own profession? Dr David Bell describes the phenomenon of pandemic control as it manifests throughout the various public health professions complying with nonsensical policies and implementing harmful practices, in this captivating interview with James Patrick.

Public health can be pretty boring … and the idea of a pandemic excites a lot of people … A lot of people want this. It’s inappropriate if you look at disease burden and what actually kills people. But it’s not odd in that people like excitement and people are funding that area, so people want to work in it.

It’s not criminal to be excited by something. It’s bad for the health of others if you’re diverting money from stuff that’s killing and harming a lot of people, to something which is not going to do that, but which is something interesting for you to work on. ~ Dr David Bell

It would be ludicrous to assume they won’t do it again, or to think that the international legislation being established is not associated with plans for ongoing pandemics. It would be equally ludicrous to assume, given his multiple conflicts of interest and his dishonest prescriptions for public health, that Professor Michael Baker is motivated by anything other than self interest and dangerous ideologies.

Just this week, on the slightly more independent internet channel The Platform with Michael Laws, Baker is asked about the People’s Letter, an initiative by Voices For Freedom to opt us out of a default opt-in to dramatically worsened human rights and threats to sovereignty being driven by the WHO. As we have written about extensively, the new regulations:

• become compulsory
• consider removing referral to human rights and dignity (why would they do that?), and
• allow WHO to impose heinous controls on member countries just on the potential threat of, or merely planning for, a WHO-declared pandemic – categorised into microbial, climate, disinformation or any other classification of it’s choosing. 

Yet during the interview Michael Baker played down the implications of the International Health Regulations being set up through the WHO. He completely misrepresents the power grab that (his old and perhaps current employer) the WHO is undertaking as it radically revamps its International Health Regulations. What they are aiming for is hair-raising and yet Baker summarises simply by saying, “There is absolutely nothing new about this… The last major amendment of the IHR was in 2005… It’s not at all going to compromise our sovereignty”.

He is lying or completely mistaken. Either way, he is doing far more harm than good and we, representing New Zealand in a growing global resistance, call him out.

Something is killing us in record numbers. Even the press and various officials around the world acknowledge “befuddlement” over the fact that this is happening.  People like Michael Baker are being paid to keep us in the dark while the whole pharma gravy train ploughs on through our population, carnage be damned.

We recommend that New Zealanders analyse all recommendations coming from Michael Baker with this context in mind.

SOURCE: https://nzdsos.com/

Martin comments: One would think that NZ must have few epidemiologists, and if you get your news from mainstream media, you’d think we only have one. In fact New Zealand has more epidemiologists per head of population than any other nation. Yet both government and media appear to trust and convey the word of only one. I think the article above does a pretty good job of explaining why.