Almost every year, it seems a pandemic is hyped up. I would argue that’s because:
•They give federal agencies (e.g., the CDC) a way to justify their necessity and get Congressional funding.
•The media thrives off of hooking the public through fear and appeasing its sponsors (e.g., the pharmaceutical industry).
•It sustains a biodefense industry that uses fear to get a lot of money (e.g., 27.7 billion dollars in 2023) to “prevent” pandemics.
•Tackling many of the real health issues facing our country requires confronting the vested interests responsible for them and addressing the underlying causes of chronic illnesses in the country. In contrast, going to war against a disease is far easier and receives minimal pushback but allows the government to present the facade of safeguarding our health.
As such, we will frequently see a myriad of dubious pandemic preventatives be pushed on us (e.g., the mass slaughter of livestock, the newest “emergency” vaccine, or ineffective and unsafe antivirals like Tamiflu). However despite the pandemic failing to materialize or the preventatives failing to work, no one remembers, and before long the cycle begins anew.
Biodefense
In a previous article, I discussed how the biodefense industry regularly cultivates bioweapons in labs to “protect” us from them. Before COVID-19, this industry had been under great scrutiny as many within the scientific community were worried its risky actions could lead to a catastrophic lab leak. However, once SARS-CoV-2 leaked, the entire scientific establishment chose to double down on this research and label any insinuation lab leaks could occur “a conspiracy theory” or “a danger to science.”
Note: this characterizes Peter Hotez, who in 2012 secured a 6.1 million grant from the NIH to develop a SARS vaccine with the stated aim of responding to any “accidental release from a laboratory,” some of which was then used to fund gain-of-function research conducted by the leader of the Wuhan lab in 2017, but after people became aware of the 2019 lab leak, Hotez switched to denying lab leaks and attacking those who discussed them.
These leaks are alarmingly common and remarkably, the industry has not addressed it, as its funding is contingent on a threat continuing to exist (rather than it being eliminated).
Furthermore, many of these lab leaks are quite consequential such as:
- In 1950, the US Navy covertly sprayed “harmless” bacteria in the San Francisco Bay Area, causing infections and fatalities. Those bacteria then became endemic in the area.
- The Cambridge Working Group estimated in 2014 that potentially dangerous lab leaks occur, on average, twice each week in the US alone, and by 2018 this number had risen to an average of four times per week.
- Numerous fatal lab leaks involving smallpox and anthrax occurred in the US, UK, and Soviet Union.
- Lyme disease emerging next to a US government facility that was weaponizing the same bacteria.
- The 1977 H1N1 influenza pandemic being traced back to a lab leak.
- The 2001 Anthrax attacks in the US being linked to a weaponized strain found only in bioweapons labs.
- Numerous SARS lab leaks occurring since 2002, some of which led to broader outbreaks (and hence why Hotez applied for his vaccine grant).
- Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) actually emerging from chimpanzee research activities.
- Numerous disastrous veterinary pandemics have emerged from leaks.
- Some evidence suggests the current bird flu pandemic originated from a USDA lab leak.
Note: a more detailed list of consequential lab leaks can be found here.
Vivisection
One of the major sources of extreme and unnecessary animal cruelty is the animal research industry, which sacrifices over 100 million animals each year, frequently in horrific ways that have no scientific value whatsoever.
Vivisection (first used in 1707) describes the practice of cutting open animals with a central nervous system and has been integral to biomedical science. Since this was quite cruel, divided opinions emerged. One school believed medical science must be objective, rational, and dispassionate so it was unethical to be squeamish or sentimental about hurting conscious animals if that “advanced medical science,” while the other believed there was no ethical justification for knowledge gained from vivisection—highlighting the divide in medicine between doctors being technicians who inflicted “necessary treatments on patients” regardless of the suffering it caused and doctors being compassionate healers who made an effort to connect with their patients and their values.
While vivisection gained prominence in the 1800s, its advocates were so cruel they caused a widespread movement against it to emerge and numerous animal welfare laws to be passed. Nonetheless, vivisection persisted (with many of its medical advocates holding the same contempt towards the “anti-vivisectionists” as we see now directed at “anti-vaxxers”) and the opposition to it has become a forgotten chapter in our history.
This in turn touches upon one of the most important points those activists raised—many of the cruel (and often unnecessary) practices in modern medicine arose from the mentality that gave rise to vivisection, so a good case can be made it is in our own interest to eliminate this malignant foundation modern medicine rests upon.
Dangerous and Wasteful Spending
Following the COVID-19 lab leak, the White Coat Waste Project (WCW) discovered an effective way to stop vivisectionist practices by highlighting not only the cruelty involved but also how much money was being wasted on that risky research. As a result, WCW has repeatedly gotten many stories to go viral (e.g., Fauci spending millions on studies where beagles were restrained so they could be eaten alive by sandflies).
WCW’s work touches on a key point—the primary reason much of this research occurs is so that everyone can feed off the grants for it, not because it offers any value to society. For example I recently covered:
•A Colorado University constructing a bat lab to study dangerous infectious diseases which has been widely protested by the community (as they do not want a Wuhan in their backdoor—particularly since FOIA documents showed accidents happened there one to three times a month). However, since that University has received 393 million dollars from the NIH since 2014 and a 6.7 million dollar NIH grant for the lab, Colorado’s government has shut down all attempts to stop the lab.
•Hawaii (particularly Maui) deploying billions of lab-modified mosquitos (that leave unpleasant bites) to reduce mosquito populations, despite there being no evidence this approach works or is safe for the ecosystem. Like Colorado, despite widespread protest (and lawsuits) against it, Hawaii’s government has shut down all attempts to stop the program as over 33 million dollars in federal grants are financing it.
Fortunately, now that D.O.G.E. is auditing the U.S. government’s spending, many of these wasteful (or fraudulent) grants are being exposed, and it is quite likely this dangerous research will greatly decrease (particularly since the NIH just stopped sponsoring Universities from being able to pocket most of the funding for themselves).
Pumping and Dumping Vaccines
The annual flu vaccines have a rather poor track record as:
•It is frequently for the “wrong” strain, which beyond it not working, impairs the immune response to the circulating strain as the immune system is already locked onto the non-existent strain. As such, studies have shown flu shots make you more likely to catch colds and flus.
•The existing (and likely biased) evidence shows you have to vaccinate around 100 people to prevent one minor case of influenza, while the vaccine does not prevent influenza transmission, and does not affect influenza hospitalizations or deaths.
•At best, it has prevented influenza rates from increasing alongside a growing population:
Given this poor efficacy, the real risk of side effects from the vaccines (e.g., one large study found 37.8% of influenza vaccine recipients with an existing heart condition had an adverse reaction and 1.1% of recipients had a severe reaction), it’s quite questionable if America is making a good investment buying 150 million influenza vaccine doses each year.
Unfortunately, one of the most common grifts in this industry is to hype up the danger of a new disease, then have a new biotech company present a “cure” (or vaccine) for the disease and offer a large number of shares that investors eagerly buy up (spiking the price).
Once this spike happens, the original owners of the Biotech company will liquidate their existing shares (making a lot of money), after which, the stock typically crashes (as the product does not work).
Note: many of the deaths attributed to the flu are likely due to other causes, and as I show here despite flu having been the main focus of the CDC for decades, no one actually knows how deadly the flu is.
