Why The Bioweapons Research Industry Is A Danger to Society
A Midwestern Doctor from The Forgotten Side of Medicine <amidwesterndoctor@substack.com> Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 6:27 PM
Reply-To: A Midwestern Doctor from The Forgotten Side of Medicine <reply+2c257e&doii8&&6e58e5b0f996d6442b477126843d823d3e49cf5da3127c9731aaaf0bfa7a01e8@mg1.substack.com>
To: fchase@gmail.com
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=0875b5ff6e&view=lg&permmsgid=msg-f:1790284643006221678
|
Why The Bioweapons Research Industry Is A Danger to Society
and what the WHO is doing to protect this grift now that the public is wising up to it.
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
Story at a Glance:
•The upper class has gradually shifted to controlling the populace through economic enslavement, the fear of an ecological disaster, and the fear of a disastrous pandemic which must be stopped at any costs.
•An immensely
profitable industry has been built around these fears. Many
notorious career scientists (e.g., Fauci and Hotez) depend upon this grift. Worse
still, those fears have been used to create the justification we need to
perform an endless amount of bioweapons research to
“prevent” the next pandemic.
•That research is extremely dangerous and regularly leads to disastrous lab
leaks which sicken and sometimes kill those exposed to the pathogens. While
COVID-19 was the most consequential lab leak, many more preceded it, and prior
to the pandemic (where everything got censored), the lab leak issue was widely
discussed within the scientific community.
•Rather than acknowledge the problem (and stop
the lucrative bioweapons research), the industry has doubled down on the
importance of their research. This is analogous to how they actually discovered
ways to treat these diseases with existing technologies (e.g.,
hydroxycholoroquine for SARS), but threw all of that to the wayside so
more lucrative therapies could be sold to the public once an actual pandemic
(COVID-19) started.
•Since the public is gradually becoming aware of what COVID cartel has done to us, they are switching to far more totalitarian methods to ensure they can continue their grift. We are at a pivotal moment to stop that, and that is why this series was written.
Recently, I completed a series about the deranged ravings and totalitarian aspirations of Peter Hotez. As I was finishing it, I came across an interview Brett Weinstein did with Tucker Carlson and immediately realized that the purpose of Hotez’s campaign was to pave the way for the WHO’s abhorrent plan for the world.
After seeing it, I discussed this with a colleague who remarked “did you know Meryl Nass has been funding a non-profit to stop the WHO’s pandemic treaty, has been going around the non-stop speaking to parliaments andi [and] is successfully convincing government after government to back out of it?”
I thought
this was remarkable and decided I needed to put together a series about it. Now
that I’ve gone through everything, I have reached three key conclusions about
all of it.
•What the WHO is planning for us is truly horrifying (and simultaneously from a
sociological point quite fascinating).
•Because so many vested interests are tied into the WHO’s pandemic treaty, that
ship has a lot of wind behind its sails.
•The pandemic cartel is in a rather precarious position. Because of this, we
have a unique opportunity to derail their plans, which Nass and others have
thusfar done an absolutely brilliant job of pulling off.
Note: much of this article is sourced
from Meryl Nass’s substack.
Please consider subscribing and supporting her critical work.
The Billionaire’s Conquest
One of the lens I see the world through is “economic feudalism” which posits that the ruling class are trying to enslave the rest of the world by making them so impoverished they have no choice except to comply with whatever instructions their corporate overlords give them (e.g., vaccinate or lose your job and the ability to feed your family).
When you see the world through this lens, it is truly remarkable how methodical the billionaire class has been over the decades in monopolizing the world’s wealth and how many different institutions they’ve propped up who all support their agenda (e.g., consider how much unchecked power their transnational corporations have).
Because of this, there has been a general corrosion of many of the rights and freedoms and functionality we expect from democracies (or democratic republics) in parallel to a tidal wave of destructive corruption which has infested almost every institution. For example, in previous eras, even with sociopathic governments that viewed their citizens as entirely expendable, if corruption ran unchecked to the point it threatened the stability of the country, it would be rooted out. Yet, in the last few years, we’ve seen policy after policy be passed which benefit the billionaire class at the expense of everything else (e.g., our national economy has become much weaker since COVID-19).
As a result, a variety of institutions (e.g., the World Economic Forum) have been established which are controlled by the billionaire class and simultaneously wield a great deal of power throughout the “democracies” of the world but are simultaneously accountable to no one besides the wealthiest members of society. In turn, as you might expect, more and more of the world’s wealth is being hoarded by these oligarchs while everyone descends further into poverty.
For
example, as a result of the COVID response the billionaires championed:
•We witnessed the largest transfer of wealth in history. From 2020 to 2021,
billionaires went from owning slightly over 2% of the global household wealth
to 3.5% of it.
•One third of
American’s small businesses closed. These were often sources of generational
wealth and more importantly, an alternative to corporate serfdom (enslavement).
•There was a “historically unprecedented increase in global poverty” of close
to 100 million people,
and a 11.6% global increase of extreme poverty. The
impact of this is hard to even begin to put into words.
•150 million people no
longer had the food they needed. The magnitude of this wave of global
starvation in another thing that is almost impossible to put into words.
Note: these individuals are commonly referred to as “globalists” because they favor global institutions (which they control and thereby bypass the democratic process) having as much power as possible. I also believe the globalists have no loyalty to a specific nation, which helps to explain why they will prioritize their own interests over the national interests.
Peter Hotez
Peter Hotez frequently earned the ire of the vaccine safety
movement because he would publicly insist there was no link between
vaccines and brain damage (e.g., autism) and would be constantly be given an
unchecked platform to air his beliefs. Much of this was based on his claims
that his autistic daughter did not develop autism from a vaccine (even
though his book demonstrates he
missed the classical clinical signs of a vaccine brain injury which coincidentally preceded
her developing autism).
Note: the evidence vaccines cause autism, and the mechanisms through which
they do (which have been used to successfully treat autism) are discussed in
further here.
After he understandably upset a lot of people with vaccine injured children by doing this, Hotez used the animosity he received to justify branding himself as an expert on the antivaccine movement. Before long he embarked on a speaking tour (e.g., that is where his infamous Joe Rogan clip comes from) to argue that anyone espousing antivaccine views needed to be censored from Amazon’s book store and the internet.
Pierre Kory, MD MPA @PierreKory
At the time, I thought he was a clown (e.g., consider the above video) and didn’t put much thought into him. However, not long after his tour, COVID happened and the unprecedented censorship Hotez had called for was enacted across the internet, which in turn lead to the government’s narrative (which was completely at odds with reality) becoming the accepted gospel, while critically important information (e.g., safe and effective treatments for COVID or the innumerable dangers of the vaccines) was kept away from the public.
During Trump’s presidency, Hotez was relatively quiet and most of what he said was critical of the administration’s COVID response (e.g., he testified in front of congress and gave media interviews stating why it was a bad idea to make a rushed coronavirus vaccine). However, near the end of Trump’s presidency, he penned a piece arguing that to convince the public to take the vaccines, the presidential administration would need to appoint a national spokesperson who promoted the national vaccine policy.
Once Biden became president, Hotez became a constant fixture on national television who echoed whatever the current vaccine talking points were (e.g., everyone has to get vaccinated or boosted no matter what) and as many have observed repeatedly contradicted himself (which was somewhat necessary as he was pitching a fraudulent product to the public). In turn, Hotez (who was not at all photogenic) became an object of ridicule by the political right.
Unfortunately,
Hotez then moved beyond simply pitching
products to directly attacking anyone who didn’t want to buy them and began
proclaiming the “anti-vaxxers” were mass murders (as they were preventing
people from getting the “life-saving vaccines”).
Note: most of the evidence for this claim came from the CDC’s decision to classify many
vaccinated individuals who were hospitalized as
“unvaccinated,” which not surprisingly, led to far more of the deaths occurring
in the “unvaccinated” as hospitals were the most common site
of death from COVID-19.
Before long, he moved to claiming criticizing prominent scientists (e.g., Fauci who lied at a similar to Hotez) should become a federal hate crime. Finally, over Christmas 2022, we decided we needed to do something after the W.H.O. put out a professionally produced tweet of Hotez calling for governments of the world to mobilize against the “anti-vaxxers” and neutralize the dire threat we posed. This prompted me to do some digging into Hotez’s background (e.g., we sent out the infamous clip of him Joe Rogan at the time).
In doing
so I found:
•Hotez’s entire career was financed by
the pharmaceutical industry and the most notorious globalists (e.g., The Gates
Foundation).
•He had received over 100 million dollars in grants to
develop “vaccines for poverty” even though after decades that research hadn’t
gone anywhere.
•Hotez constantly used all the classic meaningless buzzwords seen throughout
left-wing academia and frequently espoused their utopian (but delusional)
ideologies.
•While Hotez vociferously attacked anyone who proposed that COVID-19 was leaked
from a lab, prior to COVID-19, Hotez had been the recipient of a 6.1 million NIH grant to
develop a SARS vaccine for the possibility a weaponized SARS virus was
accidentally leaked from a lab. As it just so happened, as part of
that “research” he funded gain of
function (bioweapons) research at the Wuhan lab.
From all of this, I concluded that Hotez’s primary motivation for everything
was similar to what is seen throughout academia (where one’s lifeblood is the
grants they receive)—he just wanted to attract as much funding as possible for
his projects. In turn, by constantly being given the opportunity to plaster
himself on the left-wing networks and brand himself as both the poor scientist
being harassed by the “anti-vaxxers” and a humanitarian struggling against all
odds to produce lifesaving vaccines for the third world, he was sure to attract
rich liberal donors who had no actual understanding of the money pit his
research was.
Note: this is why I believe Hotez rejected Joe Rogan’s offer for Hotez to publicly debate RFK Jr. in return for 2.62 million dollars being given to a charity of Hotez’s choice, as doing so would have required Hotez (who never takes questions from a critical audience) to have exposed himself and jeopardized his far more lucrative grift.
The Forgotten Side of Medicine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Hotez et. al
When I looked into Hotez, one thing kept on bugging me. Because he is disheveled, clearly unhealthy and socially awkward, each time he speaks publicly, he doesn’t look good—to the point he appears so uncredible he often succeeds in convincing in people to do the opposite of what he’s proposing (e.g., the previously shown Rogan clip was seen by over ten million people and inadvertently ended up being one of the most persuasive arguments against vaccination in modern history).
This in turn raises a simple question. Why does everyone keep supporting him (to the degree to which the media and scientific profession circles wagons around Hotez is astounding) rather than just finding a better national vaccine spokesman who actually gets people to vaccinate?
As I dug through Meryl’s research, I at last found the answer—there are a lot of other (much less visible) people in prominent positions throughout the medical industrial complex who are just like Hotez. Since these individuals have a massive sway over both academia and the media (including Big Tech), they hold a tribal loyalty to protecting Hotez.
Amongst
other things, these individuals tend to:
•Be neck deep in disastrous gain of function (GoF) research.
•Use meaningless progressive buzzwords
to promote their agenda.
•Be repeatedly reward and promoted by our
institutions despite their poor (and often disastrous) performance. The
last point is important, because we assume our experts are selected on the
basis of their competency, but in reality, much of their selection is a result
of their loyalty to business interests.
For example, the disastrous lockdowns which swept the world
were based upon the dire models a prestigious epidemiologist (Neil Ferguson)
from a prestigious (Gates funded) institution put forward, which argued that
millions would die were harsh lockdowns not implemented. In reality, Ferguson’
projections were wildly inaccurate (as it was later shown they
overestimated the risk of death by between 298% to 1798180%),
Ferguson had a long history of making wildly
over the top projections about upcoming infectious diseases, and
when exposed [to] a basic degree of scrutiny, it was clear his COVID
lockdown model was nonsensical.
Nonetheless, no one who raised clearly valid objections against his model’s
shortcomings was listened to, and in many cases people who proposed alternative
(and much more sane options) were instead relentlessly attacked by both the government and
the press. However, unlike Hotez, since Ferguson didn’t plaster himself in
front of the media, most people aren’t aware of him or the fact he’s done
far more damage to the world than Hotez ever did.
Since no clear term exists for these “progressive” grifters who will happily sell out their country to the medical industrial complex, I’ve decided to refer to them as Hotez et. al (especially since many of them are friends and they frequently co-author paper together).
Perpetual Wars
Over the
decades, I’ve read document after document allegedly written by an elite think
tank (policy planning group) which argued that the most effective way to
control a population is with a war. This is because war causes the economy to
be shifted to wartime production (which is very profitable for those positioned
to take advantage of it) and the population can be easily led to unify behind
fighting the [their] own war rather than focusing upon their own interests (e.g.,
saying no to the government exploiting them).
The issue with this approach was that because war technology has become so much
more powerful (e.g., nuclear weapons) it’s
simply not possible to wage large scale wars anymore without them being
catastrophic for both sides. As a result, the general approach taken was
to switch from real wars to abstract wars, as these could get all the benefits
of a sustained war without jeopardizing the ruling class’s interests.
Over and
over, the three candidates I saw proposed for this war were:
•An illness or disease (typically one which was infectious).
•Terrorism.
•An environmental disaster.
Note: while I never saw “racism” or “bigotry” proposed in those documents,
given the cultural push for DEI, I suspect it
may have since become a serious consideration. Conversely while drug
prohibition and preventing illegal immigration meet the necessary criteria to
become a pseudo-war, I don’t believe
they have been because the billionaires profit too much from them continuing.
Throughout my entire lifetime, the media has worked day in day out to stoke the fears of an environmental cataclysm or a deadly plague sweeping the world, while more recently (after 9/11) it worked to do the same thing with terrorism.
From watching each of these, it became very clear to me the goal was never to solve the problem, but rather the [to] define it as vaguely as possible so that it could morph into whatever the ruling class needed to fulfill their agenda. For example, as discussed previously, legitimately environmentally friendly energy technologies have existed for decades which could easily give the world access to clean and affordable energy. However, each of those technologies has been stonewalled, and instead a variety of expensive (and environmentally damaging) technologies have instead been relentlessly promoted by our institutions.
Note: this is analogous to how countless effective (and proven) treatments for still “unsolved” diseases have been ruthlessly suppressed by the medical established, while innumerable lucrative (but unsafe and ineffective) therapies are expedited through the approval process. While I’ve called out “Hotez” (and his compatriots) for grifting, the reality is that there are far larger grifters within our current economic system.
Doublespeak
George
Orwell’s classic 1984 describes
the totalitarian nightmare he foresaw from communism merging with modern
technology that made unparalleled mass surveillance possible. Within that
society, the citizenry were constantly required to believe with
absolute conviction things they had to know were false.
For example, their country’s government controlled the population by constantly
being at war with one of the two neighboring superpowers (which in turn
necessitated them having a seething hatred towards their enemy), but
frequently, their nation would switch to being at war with the other country
(while their previous enemy became their ally). In turn, the citizenry had to
legitimately believe “we have always been at war with Eastasia” once they were
told to.
Note: this is similar to how so many people still trust Hotez or Fauci
despite the fact both individuals have clearly lied to them throughout the
pandemic, or why some are still vaccinating despite the vaccines having failed
to do everything they were promised to (which remarkably, many now deny was
never promised despite the fact they had previously pushed the exact same lies
on their peers).
A key aspect of doublespeak was for phrases to mean the opposite of what they said, and for the subconsciousness of each speaker (or listener) to grasp the actual meaning (so they could do what the government needed) without them consciously realizing what they were doing.
Over the
last few decades, we’ve seen progressively evolving discourse (which was
originally known as “postmodernism”)
infect academia and gradually diffuse into the broader culture. Like
doublespeak, this dialectical style uses a variety of nice sounding (and hard
to understand) buzzwords to conceal a variety of depraved ideas (e.g., the
traditional social structures which have long protected us must be abolished,
traditional Europeans and Americans are a scourge upon the world, and that much
of the human population must be culled for the greater good).
Note: one of the many harmful “doublespeaks” we are now stuck with is bioweapons
research being euphemistically referred to as gain of function research.
To enshrine this modern form of double speak, the billionaire class has put a lot of working into buying out academia and the media. For example, most of the world’s media is owned by six corporations (whose CEOs belong to the billionaire’s globalist organizations) and likewise, as researchers recently discovered, all the major medical information resources (like the journals who continually refused to published lifesaving information throughout the pandemic) are under the influence of the WEF.
These
assets in turn have been leveraged to create construct after construct that
firmly established their utopian form of double speak upon the world. For
instance, when I began reviewing the work of Hotez et. al, I kept on noticing
they used similar terminologies and often referenced each other to establish
the validity of these terms.
Note: until recently, those assets likewise made it possible to ensure no
dissenting narrative which threatens the legitimacy of this new doublespeak
could ever be presented to the public.
In short, “Public Health” has transformed into a global racketeering operation where it is very difficult for legitimate science which advances humanity to see the light of day (hence why groundbreaking innovations in science have largely disappeared despite us now spending far more on our scientific apparatus). The public face of this operation are Hotez and his compatriots, while the private (and actual) face of this operation are the oligarchs that fund it. Beyond being the largest of its kind in history, what makes it so unique is the fact that it’s very hard to see because it’s been meticulously cloaked behind a lot of doublespeak that seems like something only a good person would support (e.g., who doesn’t want poor people to healthy?).
One Health
In 2004, an
international (globalist) conference was held which stated public health needed
to be integrated with environmental management (termed “One Health). The key
theme of this conference was that given the dire urgency of the environmental
and biological threats we faced, all major “One Health” decisions would need to
be made by a panel of multidisciplinary experts.
On the surface (especially given the utopian
language they used) this sounds like a great idea. However, given how
easy experts are to buy off (as we all saw throughout the pandemic), it was
clear to any seasoned observer that One Health was simply an attempt to merge
the war on infectious diseases with the war on future environmental catastrophe
and have “One Health” usurp the ability of the common people to speak out
against it—as under the incredibly broad
definition of “One Health,” almost every aspect of our
lives was something which could be regulated under it (e.g., you can’t live
here because it might increase the chance of you coming in contact with a wild
animal that could spark a pandemic).
Since that time, more and more efforts have gone into propping up the W.H.O’s One Health brand and the term has gradually infested all the “elite” publications. One of the saddest things about this is that this corruption has made a lot of the “charitable” non-governmental the world relied transform into ones that harm the people they serve.
For
example:
•The Gates Foundation (and many other similar organizations) have attempted to
“fix” global hunger by replacing their
traditional (and sustainable) forms of agriculture with chemical heavy GMO
based farming. This frequently leads to food shortages (as those products are
far more expensive) but makes a lot of money for the American corporations
pushing these products by transferring the wealth to them that previously would
have gone to local community farmers.
Note: this is similar to how traditional (and environmentally sustainable
forms) of food production such as grass fed beef and even home gardening have
been relentlessly demonized by the globalist publications while far less
healthy (and simultaneously more environmentally costly) approaches like bugs
and or soy are continually promoted.
•As
friends working at the WHO shared, the WHO used to provide a variety of
important public health measures to the third world (e.g., mosquito nets or
clean water). However, after globalist money entered the organization (e.g.,
Bill Gates is now their largest sponsor) that focus has been transformed into
providing as many vaccines as possible to the third world while simultaneously
neglecting numerous other critical public health strategies.
•The UN was originally created for the purpose of providing an international
body which could facilitate dialog (and policies) that would prevent future
wars. However, rather than fulfill its actual role (e.g., the UN green-lighted
the fraudulent invasion of Iraq, while more recently the UN repeatedly ignored
Russia’s pleas for Ukraine to stop conducting actions which directly threatened
Russia’s national security—which eventually led to Russia starting a war to
stop those actions), the UN has instead focused on advancing a variety of
“progressive” ideals (e.g., forcing One Health upon the world) which have
nothing to do with why it was originally created.
In short,
there is a lot of money and power behind the One Health Agenda. For
example, American’s 2023 National Defensive
Authorization Act contained a provision to advance the “One
Health Approach” and provided at least one billion a year to support in
alongside a few related globalist organizations.
Sadly, as we will discuss in the second half of this series, most of “One
Health” is a series of deceptive promises wrapped in doublespeak which simply
serve the billionaire class and do anything but promote health.
Bioweapons Research
When World War 2 ended, the US chose to “pardon” many Nazi and Japanese scientists in return for them working for us. In this process, we brought over many notorious bioweapons specialists (e.g., there was a Japanese unit that regularly experimented upon Chinese prisoners) that gave birth to an American bioweapons program.
Eventually Nixon decided an international treaty needed to be created to outlaw the use of bioweapons (which may have been a product of wisdom on his part, or as others argue because biological weaponry was the one area where the USA did not have an edge on the rest of the world so it was to our detriment if the technology became widely used). Unfortunately, The Biological Weapon’s Convention had a major loophole—it permitted the bioweapons work to continue if it was for “prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes.”
As a result, the US never stopped researching bioweapons (e.g., we have a military facility dedicated to it). Eventually, modern genetic engineering made it possible to create much more advanced bioweapons (e.g., genetically targeted ones) and the process become complex enough for us to regain technological superiority in the area which led many (e.g., Hotez et. al) to receive the funding to begin explore every possible way a pathogen could harm others and how they could be genetically modified to become even more dangerous.
A major
problem with this approach was that since the bioweapons research community
often conducted their experiments in a fairly reckless fashion, again and
again, what they made would either reach the general population or a major
catastrophe would be only narrowly averted. For example:
•In 1950, the US Navy
covertly sprayed what they considered to be a harmless bacteria at test sites
through the San Francisco Bay Area to see how easy a bioweapons agent was
to deploy against a population center. It was then discovered that the bacteria
was not harmless, and caused a variety of fatal infections. It has since become endemic to the area (e.g., it thrives in warm and moist
environments like hot tubs). In 1977 (since
infections from it were still occurring) a Senate hearing was conducted where
it was discovered that between 1949 and 1969 the US military had conducted 80
open air tests of bacteria that at the time were believed to
be harmless.
•In 1966, a leak
of a less dangerous smallpox strain from an English biolab infected one person
who went on to infect 65 more. Twelve years later,
another leak occurred from that same lab and killed someone working above the
lab. Similarly, in 1971,
weaponized smallpox escaped a Soviet lab killing three.
•In 1975, Lyme disease emerged in
the immediate vicinity of a US government facility which was working on
weaponizing the same bacteria which caused the disease.
Note: the case Lyme disease was a lab leak is quite strong.
•In 1977, the
H1N1 flu virus that was blamed for the devastating 1918 Spanish flu pandemic
reappeared in China and swept across the globe. Scientists sourced this
outbreak to an escape of a reconstituted Spanish Flu from a laboratory freezer
in the southern USSR or northern China.
•In 1979,
weaponized anthrax spores were accidentally released from a Soviet military
research facility. At least 68 civillians died, although the total number of
deaths will never be known since the government covered it up.
•In 2001, letters
laced with Anthrax circulated the US, killing 5 and sickening 17. When the
pathogen in those letters was examined, it was discovered to be a
weaponized strain which only existed in a few US bioweapons labs.
•Numerous SARS lab leaks have happened since it first emerged in 2002
(e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 6), some of which turned into broader outbreaks.
Note: coronaviruses (like SARS) are one of the easiest viruses to perform
GoF research on, and hence one of the most commonly modified pathogens.
•A case can be made that
the devastating 2014 and 2016 Ebola outbreaks leaked from a CDC lab in Africa
which studied these pathogens.
•A case can also be made monkeypox
originated from a lab as it was found to be 99.9% identical from Israel’s 2018
lab strain.
Furthermore, devastating leaks we are still affected with to this day also
occur outside of bioweapons research. For example:
•Between
1955-1961, the cancer causing SV-40 virus spread throughout the
population from contaminated polio vaccines. However despite the
government receiving warnings about this, it still chose to release the
vaccine (as they were fully committed to the vaccine
program). Once SV-40 entered the population, many physicians observed a
significant increase in solid tumors (e.g., sarcomas) and renal diseases.
Note: a strong case can also be made that HIV emerged through contaminated
vaccines given in Africa and Haiti (the London Times even wrote an
article about it).
•In 1956, RSV (the virus we are now seeing the vaccine industry move to monetize) emerged. The previous year, a respiratory virus outbreak occurred in a chimpanzee colony at a military research facility that infected a labworker with a new respiratory virus he transmitted to other personel there. Shortly after, the human disease RSV emerged, and was largely indistinguishable from the initial infection a year before.
•In 1967, simultaneous lab leaks from African green monkey colonies in Germany and Serbia caused local outbreaks of the highly lethal Marburg Virus (which is very similar to Ebola).
As each of the above cases indicate, lab leaks aren’t isolated events. Sadly, as many official sources show, lab leaks are quite common, but rarely reported (e.g., a recent Lancet paper looked at papers in a few languages published between 2000-2021 and was able identify reported 309 documented lab infections, 16 lab escapes and several deaths).
To quantify the magnitude of this problem, the Cambridge Working Group estimated in 2014 that potentially dangerous lab leaks occur, on average, two times each week in the US alone and by 2018 this number had risen to an average of four times per week. Meryl Nass concisely communicates the point with this slide:
Note: prior to COVID-19, the scientific community was well aware of how dangerous GoF research was, and after a few prominent (and admitted) lab leaks happened over a short period of time, the scientific community petitioned President Obama imploring him to stop this research. Obama listened and in 2014 paused all federal funding on GoF research (and further highlighted the danger of GoF on the SARS virus). Fauci (who was likely profiting from performing the research for the DoD) got around this issue by outsourcing the research to Wuhan. Remarkably, the media has now made most of the world forget that prior to COVID-19, lab leaks were viewed as a frequent and legitimate problem.
Finally, it should be noted that (as we saw with COVID-19) this disastrous research often has widespread geopolitical consequences. For example, prior to beginning the most consequential war in the last 50 years, Russia repeatedly raised three major concerns to the United Nations. I hold the belief Russia was fully aware of how costly it would be to invade Ukraine, but ultimately did so because the Russians felt there was no other option to protect the national security of the country.
One of
Russia’s concerns was the presence of US bio labs in Ukraine which Russia asserted were
exposing Ukraine and Russia to harmful infectious diseases. While
this was initially vehemently denied, the State Department later
inadvertently admitted there were biolabs in Ukraine, and later,
still confirmed the presence of these
“peaceful” facilities (that it admitted were handling
dangerous microbes) in a formal response to the accusation we were violating
the bioweapon’s treaty.
While most of the debate on this subject focused around the idea this was all
either Russian war propaganda to justify their invasion, or the even more
speculative claim that the US was deliberately making bioweapons on Russia’s
doorstep to covertly attack them, a third
rarely considered (and more plausible) possibility also exists. The same
disastrous “peaceful” research we’ve seen conducted throughout the world was
also being conducted in Ukraine, and since the regulation was more lax there
(as it was an out of sight out of mind location) accidental leaks were also
happening.
The Bioweapons Indutry
All of this in turn begs a fairly straightforward question. If this research is so dangerous, why do people keep on doing it?
Presently,
I believe it comes down to money. Since
the scientific establishment (in lockstep with the media) has created a great
deal of fear around these diseases, there is always a lot of funding for
research to “protect” us from them.
Note: This is akin to how the CDC (with the help of the media) scares
Congress each year about the next flu season to justify again receiving its
bloated budget—even though, year after year, the CDC consistently fails to do
anything which reduces the impact of the flu season.
In turn, since so much money has been invested into creating the facilities (and training a generation of scientists to perform the research there) there is a large community with an intrinsic self-interest in continuing this research as long as possible (and coming up with the justifications for why their employment is still necessary). Furthermore, a much broader industry has also been created to create countermeasures to those biological agents (e.g., there is a large contingent of people whose careers revolve around this in the Department of Defense—who amongst other things, prior to COVID-19, were responsible for the disastrous and completely unnecessary anthrax vaccines which permanently disabled around 250,000 servicemen).
In a previous article,
I tried to expose the dangers of the statin drugs. To
summarize it:
•There is actually very little evidence cholesterol causes heart disease.
•There is very little evidence statin drugs prevent heart disease or extend
your life (e.g., assuming you “trust” the heavily biased industry trials, at best,
lifelong statin use extends your life span by a few days).
•Since cholesterol is an essential nutrient, statin drugs frequently create significant side
effects such as heart damage, muscle pain, weakness, loss
of sensation in the body, and most importantly, cognitive impairment which can
be a prelude to dementia.
Given all of that, it is quite remarkable that regardless of
the criticisms raised, statins have remained as one of the most profitable drug
franchises (as they are one of the most frequently prescribed drugs). One of
the best explanations I’ve seen to explain this state of affairs is that
because so much money (and time) was spent to create the mythology cholesterol
causes heart disease, the medical industry will never let that investment go. I
believe this is identical to the situation we now have within the pandemic
industrial complex as so much money has been invested into its mythology over
the decades. Consider that at this point how many people subconsciously believe
a deadly plague may soon emerge from nature which will wipe humanity out, a
belief which is what I believe ultimately persuaded many uninformed world
leaders to comply with locking down their country to prevent the disastrous
predictions of Ferguson’s nonsensical COVID-19 models.
Note: This situation is also encapsulated by the phrase no industry
(or cause) can be depended upon to actually produce a solution for a problem it
is tasked with solving. Instead, they simply come up
with reason after reason to justify being given lots of resources to enact a
piecemeal approach to “improving” (but never solving) the problem (and often
instead make it become a bigger problem).
Of the
lab leaks which have occurred, there was probably the strongest evidence tying
COVID-19 to the Wuhan lab in China. For example, there had been many warnings (such as 2018 US State Department
diplomatic cables) that a leak was likely to happen there, the
outbreak emerged next to the Wuhan lab (which had a series of suspicious
accidents prior to the outbreak), the virus had numerous characteristics that
were not natural, a 2018 proposal was sent to the DoD
to do coronavirus GoF research in Wuhan, numerous papers had
been published by the lab [and US researchers tied to the lab] describing the
creation of the exact same unnatural mutations which were later found in the
virus (e.g., see here and here).
Note: much of this was well-known and was then compiled by independent
researchers just a few months after COVID-19
began. One of the most recent (and detailed summaries) I have
found of this can be found here (but it
likewise doesn’t include everything as there is so much data tying COVID-19 to
the Wuhan lab).
Unfortunately, due to the political implications of acknowledging US funding had created the most devastating pandemic in history, unlike the previously admitted SARS leaks, there was every incentive to deny this one originated from a lab.
One of
the critical narratives the biosecurity agenda depends upon is the existential
threat we face from animal diseases jumping to humans as this threat justifies
paying them a lot of money to capture (and then experiment upon) animals from
the most isolated places on earth (e.g., the leader of Wuhan’s lab would often travel to almost
inaccessible caves in the middle of nowhere to collective
coronaviruses from bats) and most importantly to perform endless GoF research.
This for example is why we have seen all the globalist institutions and the
mainstream media continually warn us about the dire threat we face from
“Disease X,” and the extraordinary lengths “brave” researchers are going to in
order to scour the Earth for where that
virus might be living.
All of this in turn is predicated on the idea that we are at high risk of
animals humans encounter transferring a deadly pandemic to them. However in
reality, there is very little evidence
natural zoonotic transmissions happens, rather as shown
above, that transmissions typically is the result of (inevitable) lab
accidents. However instead of coming clean about this problem, we are
constantly bombarded with messages like this:
Note: I fully agree environmental destruction and habitat loss is a huge issue. However once people start to lie by claiming it will lead to a plague, it’s inevitable that they will also use their lie to violate basic human rights (e.g. arbitrarily deciding what food you are allowed to eat in the name of “One Health” or deciding where you can live).
Decades of Failures
As mentioned before, since the billionaires gained control of our medical apparatus, there has been a gradual trend towards individuals being selected for their position on the basis of their loyalty to business interests rather than competency to do the job well. So as you might expect, despite all the money they’ve received, they haven’t done their jobs very well:
However during COVID, we saw something remarkable. No [Not] only did the pandemic prevention perform poorly (e.g., they receive tons of money to survey potential pandemics, but still were telling America in February [as COVID was tearing through Europe] that COVID was not something for us to be concerned about), worse still, they actively sabotaged attempts to appropriately address it.
For example, it is well known that the best way to handle a pandemic is to repurpose an existing (FDA approved) drug, as unlike a new drug or vaccine, the [a] repurposed drug:
•Doesn’t
require a lengthy approval process.
•Doesn’t require a large investment from the manufacturer before it can enter
the market.
•Is already known to be safe so testing can focus on efficacy.
•Its critical drug interactions are already known.
•An available supply of it already exists
•Is easy to mass produce since the production capacity already exists.
•Its affordable.
Note:
prior to going public about the dangers of the vaccines, Robert Malone was
heavily involved in working with the existing pandemic preparedness
infrastructure to have a repurposed drug become the standard of care for
COVID-19.
Fauci’s agency (NIAID), for example, was well aware of the value of repurposed
drugs. Likewise, this is what Fauci shared in a December 2011 Washington Post
article that was written to justify GoF research:
In addition, determining the molecular Achilles’ heel of these [GoF] viruses can allow scientists to identify novel antiviral drug targets that could be used to prevent infection in those at risk or to better treat those who become infected. Decades of experience tells us that disseminating information gained through biomedical research to legitimate scientists and health officials provides a critical foundation for generating appropriate countermeasures and, ultimately, protecting the public health.
Fauci’s agency (and the NIH) in turn had extensively researched which drugs to use for a SARS outbreak (remember that prior to COVID it was well known it was impossible to make an effective vaccine for SARS) and eventually, they concluded hydroxychloroquine was an ideal candidate to treat SARS.
Yet, once COVID started, Fauci did everything he could to conceal his agencies past research while simultaneously trying to cast doubt on each piece of data which emerged showing it treated COVID-19. Eventually, on March 19, 2020, Trump (whose administration was continually being pushed away from the drug by Fauci) decided to speak to the public about it, at which point the entire public health establishment begun a crusade to keep hydroxychloroquine [HCQ] from disrupting their grift (as were COVID to have become treatable, the trillions the billionaires received throughout the pandemic would never have been available to them).
One of
the most remarkable ways this happened was by the WHO (and its related
entities) conducting clinical trials which were designed to hurt (or kill) the
subjects who volunteered for them. This was accomplished by:
•Only giving patients HCQ once they
were severely ill (e.g., at the hospital). This was done
because it was well known the primary benefit of HCQ occurred when it was given
early in the illness, not late. So by “proving” it didn’t work late in the
illness, that could be used to disingenuously argue it didn’t work at all, and
hence was “unethical” to give early in the illness (which sadly worked).
•Give patients much higher HCQ doses (at
levels were already known to be toxic), so patients receiving the drug not only
didn’t benefit from it, but also did worse than the placebo group. This in turn
was used to successful argue HCQ was extremely dangerous and hence not
appropriate to give to patients (even though it was widely used for other
conditions and long considered to be extremely safe).
Note: running
deliberately botched clinical trials is a longstanding practice to discredit
alternative therapies which threaten the more lucrative forms of treatment. Sadly,
this was an issue long before COVID-19.
For example, Paul Marik was able to demonstrate giving IV vitamin C dramatically reduces the chance of
dying from sepsis (which is one of the top causes of death
globally). However, this only worked if it was done in the first 6-12 hours
after arriving at the ER, so as you’d expect, whenever trials are performed, IV
vitamin C was instead given long after that critical time point, which in turn
was used to argue it did not work. Because of this, most hospitalists believe
there is no evidence IV Vitamin C treats sepsis, and hence refuse to use it
(even when specifically asked to by patients) so as a result, a lot of people
have unnecessarily died from sepsis.
Similarly, in the 1970s, a promising alternative cancer therapy, laetrile
attracted a great deal of controversy (to the point the FDA banned experiments
from being performed with it). Eventually when enough public pressure forced
studies to happen, Sloan-Kettering chose to use 1/50th
of the dose that had been previously demonstrated to work,
concealed the dose, and then relentlessly promoted that their laetrile trial
had failed to demonstrate benefit (which was followed by using a variety of
other tactics to conceal the positive results of laetrile once outside protest
forced them to use the correct dose).
As we all know, the HCQ hit job was successful, and like many other therapies which proved themselves, patients (at least those who trusted the medical system) were never able to get them. One of the saddest illustrations of this came from lawyer Ralph Lorigo who filed 80 lawsuits on behalf of patients who were hospitalized and expected to die from the existing COVID treatment protocols so compel the hospitals to give them ivermectin. In 40 of the cases, he won, and 38 of those patients survived, whereas in the 40 cases he lost, 2 survived—which sadly demonstrated that suing a hospital was amongst the most successful medical innovations in human history.
In turn, since (at least on paper) there was no effective treatment for COVID-19, this paved the way for the mRNA spike protein vaccines to enter the market, despite having innumerable safety and efficacy concerns which continued to grow the long they were on the market. This chart for example illustrates just how bad of an idea this was, especially when you consider that we spent almost 200 billion dollars getting them to everyone:
Additionally, in the same way the longstanding practice of utilizing repurposed drugs was abandoned for COVID-19, many other guidelines the WHO had put into place were as well. For example, consider this guidance they had put together in 2019:
Note: a
more detailed discussion on the value of using UV light to mitigate the spread
of COVID-19 can be found here.
Eventually, the WHO was forced to evaluate how their policies had performed and
made a rather “remarkable” discovery. The better a job a country did of
following what the WHO told them to do (e.g., spend lots of money on their
COVID-19 grift), the more people died.
These incriminating results prompted the WHO to investigate themselves, and as you might guess, they failed to hold themselves accountable for the greatest public health disaster in history.
Conclusion
Since the pandemic industry had remained mostly out of sight and out of mind, no one really paid attention to the fact they were taking the public’s money and failing to produce results. However, since COVID-19 affected everyone and the public was forced to listen to their lies over and over while simultaneously not being allowed to challenge them, this motivated many people to begin looking into what was really going on.
In turn, a vast network of independent journalists (funded by citizens who were understandably concerned about what was happening) gradually unearthed all the evidence which showed just how dangerous and unethical the pandemic grift was. The public (who were thirsting for the truth) listened, and gradually, the trust that industry had long depended upon was broken.
As a result, much of what had initially been project[ed] to occur (and a lot of money was spent to ensure) never came to pass. For example, the plan was to always have everyone take annual COVID boosters, yet three years out, only a small fraction of the population is continuing to boost.
This loss
of trust is a huge problem for the industry as so many of their future plans
are depended upon the public retaining their trust in them. In turn, I would
argue that if the pandemic industry wants to regain the trust of the people it
needs to demonstrate it will actually do its job and prevent future pandemics.
This for example could be accomplished by:
•Banning GoF research.
•Committing to utilizing repurposed drugs to treat emerging pandemics and
providing a way to protect the rights of doctors and patients to opt to use
them.
Unfortunately, doing either of those will require the industry to give up its grift—so as you’d imagine, neither is being entertained. In the second half of this series, we will discuss what is instead being done and the heroic work individuals like Meryl Nass have been doing to stop it.
The Forgotten Side of Medicine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
This post is public so please share it with those who can benefit from it