The Real Cost of Pandemics to Human Health

Who Are The Driving Forces Behind The Pandemic Push? What Is The Objective?

We recently wrote about the structure and function of the World Health Organisation and their ongoing plans to amend the existing International Health Regulations and introduce a new legal framework, abbreviated to WHO CA+.

The intention of these frameworks is to focus global health activities on pandemic responses. This implies that pandemics (and potential pandemic threats, also being written into the legislation) are a common occurrence, with significant risk to human health. Is that perspective justified?

What Threat Do Pandemics Pose to Our Health?

Outbreak: sudden appearance of an infectious disease in a localised population.

Epidemic: sudden increase of an infectious disease in a population, significantly above normal rates.

Pandemic: sudden increase of an infectious disease spreading across multiple national borders (some definitions include severity of disease).

Endemic: a pathogen that is normally circulating within a population.

Epidemics and pandemics are relatively rare occurrences with far less impact on human health and mortality than the myriad of endemic and non-communicable diseases responsible for most illness and death across populations.

According to WHO, in the past century, there were four pandemics prior to Covid-19.

The 1918-1919 Spanish Flu occurred prior to the antibiotic era. It is widely accepted that bacterial pneumonia was the predominant cause of death during this pandemic, as shown in a comprehensive study co-authored by Dr Anthony Fauci in 2008. This is likely why the three pandemics since then, occurring after the discovery and prevalent use of antibiotics, had low mortality with little to no influence on total deaths.

Viruses responsible for outbreaks can be lethal to vulnerable groups with less competent immune systems and localised epidemics occur with relative frequency. However pandemic-level threats are an extremely rare occurrence. 

With modern medicine, the threats are even less, as long as medical practice follows established evidence and ethics, such as “first do no harm”, while avoiding any conflicts of interest which can unduly influence medical recommendations, decisions and care.

If Pandemics Are a Minimal Health Threat, Why Are We Now Being Told Otherwise?

Until 4 May 2009, WHO’s description of pandemic influenza included the words “resulting in several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness”. That day saw the removal of the words “with enormous numbers of deaths and illness”. 

Five weeks later, on 11 June 2009, the Director-General of WHO Margaret Chan, declared H1N1pdm09 influenza (“swine flu”), which at the time was associated with 144 deaths, to be a pandemic. Ultimately in 2009-2010, swine flu resulted in far fewer deaths than the estimated 290,000–650,000 annual deaths caused by endemic seasonal influenza.

Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, a German lung specialist and epidemiologist, recognised early in 2009 that swine flu was not as serious as WHO was claiming. He was instrumental in stopping the corrupted response, but that cost him both personally and professionally. He has spoken frequently of his experiences, including on the Planet Lockdown podcast. 

In its detailed report, Handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed, The Council of Europe subsequently outlined the unjustified fears, distortions of public health priorities, and waste of large sums of public money created by the swine flu response.

At a January 2019 Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Stakeholder Conference in London, Belgium’s Flu Commissioner, virologist Dr Marc Van Ranst, gave a 23-minute presentation called Communication and Public Engagement. He declared numerous pharmaceutical industry conflicts of interest over at least two decades, before jovially describing the various ways in which he had used fear and inflated death data, to scare the Belgian public in 2009 in order to increase vaccine uptake. Spotted in the amused audience of stakeholders was England’s Deputy Chief Medical Officer from 2017 to 2022, Johnathan Van Tam. It’s sobering to remember that GSK’s swine flu vaccine Pandemrix, resulted in at least 1,700 cases of Narcolepsy, a debilitating neurological condition, across northern Europe in 2009-2010.

Dr Peter Doshi’s 2012 article The elusive definition of pandemic influenza discusses the issue of defining a pandemic in detail. A more recent analysis of vaccine industry influence, An Insult to Intuition, outlines the manipulations of data and evidence. It was written by anaesthesiologist Dr Madhava Setty after he attended and witnessed the World Vaccine Congress of March 2023.

Whilst vaccines are being promoted as the solution to pandemics, the fast-moving pace of a new virus in an epidemic phase in fact contradicts the use of vaccines.  Many organisms are not able to be prevented by vaccines, due to the organisms’ rapid evolution: the target antigens change too quickly for manufactured vaccines to keep pace with naturally-occurring adaptations to the environment. HIV is one such example and, as the covid vaccine failures well demonstrate, covid is another. As ‘pandemics’ tend to sweep through populations quickly, it is also extremely difficult to ensure the manufacture of a safe and effective vaccine in time to have any impact, as has been vividly demonstrated by the covid vaccines.

Protecting human health during a pandemic is largely achieved by focusing on vulnerable groups to reduce hospitalisation and death. This would normally be achieved by clinicians trialling repurposed existing drugs, as many doctors successfully did in 2020 (eg Dr Zelenko, Dr McCullough, Dr Kory and others). Because the covid response has been anything but normal, early treatment was aggressively discouraged, costing many lives. Doctors were censored and attacked for their attempts to treat patients and communicate life-saving clinical information to their peers.

The largest sponsor of WHO, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is associated in a labyrinth of ways, with their so-called ‘partners’, in establishing and sustaining the pandemic industry. Some of these partners are introduced below, by way of describing the structures that are being put in place under the guise of ‘protecting public health’. The unstated intent is the continuance of the unprecedented profiteering generated through the mechanisms of the covid response.

Centre for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation (CEPI)

CEPI is a Norwegian association founded at Davos in 2017, by the governments of Norway and India, the Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust and the World Economic Forum. They plan to spend US$3.5 billion “to mitigate or dramatically reduce the threat of future pandemics and epidemics”, including a mission to reduce vaccine development time to 100 days.

The standard time for vaccine development is ten years (Mumps took four years and was fraught with safety and efficacy issues, while Polio took four decades). Reducing the time for vaccine development to 100 days equates to removing all clinical standards for trials, safety and efficacy testing, and regulatory processes. This is already happening, as shown by the myriad poor manufacturing practices of the covid vaccines. For example, the new bivalent booster being offered to New Zealanders since 1 April 2023 was tested on eight mice and zero humans, prior to approval for use by the FDA last year.

CEPI consists of scientific advisors from the pharmaceutical research industry. Two advisors are George Gao of the Chinese Communist Party’s Centre for Disease Control and Christian Drosten of Charité Hospital in Berlin.

George Gao is considered a world expert in coronaviruses. He attended Event 201 in New York in October 2019, where there was a simulation of a coronavirus pandemic scenario. This event was hosted by Johns Hopkins Centre for Biosecurity in partnership with the Gates Foundation and World Economic Forum. US intelligence agencies now believe that SARS-CoV-2 began circulating in Wuhan in late September of 2019, which was very likely known by Gao during his attendance at Event 201. During the exercise, Gao focussed on how to suppress rumours that the [simulated] coronavirus epidemic had leaked from a laboratory.

Christian Drosten works as a virologist and is known for having developed the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test protocol based on sequencing information provided by China (presumably with Gao’s consent). This occurred in record time, under dubious circumstances, as exposed by a team of independent scientists in 2021.  Problems with the test include, but are not limited to, multiple design flaws resulting in a high false positive result rate, including a lack of controls to evaluate the specificity for SARS-CoV-2 virus and a lack of negative controls to exclude the presence of other coronaviruses.

The paper, co-authored by Drosten, which describes and recommends the test protocol, was peer-reviewed in less than 28 hours before being published on 20 January 2020 in the public health journal Eurosurveillance and immediately adopted by WHO. Drosten sits on the editorial board of Eurosurveillance, a conflict of interest that he did not disclose at the time. Peer review involves submission of the paper, review by an editor, selection of reviewers, review by peers, questions, suggestions and edits, approval, article composition and publication. The process normally takes months, and a 24-hour turnaround time for such work is implausible.

The second author on Drosten’s paper was Olfert Landt of German biotech company Tib-Molbiol, who produced the first SARS-CoV-2 PCR test kits, which earned him billions of dollars. Multiple other scientific flaws and conflicts of interest have been identified, and many questions raised, as described by Dr Simon Goddek in this Twitter thread.

GAVI The Vaccine Alliance

GAVI was founded in 1999 with a $750m donation from Gates Foundation which holds a permanent seat on the GAVI board. Gates Foundation has given over US$4 billion to GAVI so far, which has attracted over $16 billion in donations from governments and private donors. Their work funds useful vaccination programs, but their focus does not prioritise disease burdens, which differ across populations, and it completely ignores other useful interventions.

As detailed in The Real Anthony Fauci, Robert F Kennedy Jr’s bestselling book, Fauci’s NIAID laboratories develop new vaccines funded by American taxpayer dollars to the tune of over $6 billion. Fauci sends the new products to principal investigators, based at universities and pharmaceutical companies, who then conduct the clinical trials. Those products are presented to the Food and Drug Administration, which receives over 50% of its funding from the pharmaceutical companies they are supposed to regulate.

Once the products are approved, Gates facilitates bulk sales to poor countries. Wealthy nations, who once funnelled their foreign aid through traditional non-governmental organisations, now donate to poor nations largely through GAVI, which dictates the use of funds and diverts the money to the pharmaceutical industry via this arrangement.

Gates, Fauci and his NIAID researchers hold patent privileges, ensuring personal gain for approved products. They also buy shares in vaccine manufacturing companies. For example, in September 2019 the Gates Foundation made a US$55 million investment in BioNTech, which had never brought a single product to market until a few months later when it was awarded a US$2 billion contract, via the US Government’s Warp Speed program, to develop and distribute the BioNTech/Pfizer Covid vaccine.

By January 2023 Gates’ $55 million investment was worth more than $550 million.  Gates sold a significant number of these shares before publicly admitting the failures of the vaccines.

Another conflict of note is the fact that Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus served on the boards of both GAVI and the Global Fund which he chaired. The Global Fund is another beneficiary of Gates Foundation largesse. In his book, RFK Jr states the following about Tedros’ selection in 2017 as Director-General of the World Health Organisation:

“By 2017, Gates's power was so complete that he handpicked his deputy, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, as the WHO's new director general despite complaints that Tedros would be the first director general to the WHO without a medical degree and despite Tedros's dubious background. Critics credibly charge Tedros with running a terror group associated with extreme human rights violations including genocidal policies against a rival tribal group in Ethiopia. As Ethiopia's foreign minister, Tedros aggressively suppressed freedom of speech, including arresting and jailing journalists who criticized his party's policies. Tedros's key qualification for the WHO gig was his loyalty to Gates. Tedros previously served on the boards of two organizations that Gates founded, funded, and controls: GAVI and the Global Fund, where Tedros was Gates's trusted chair of the board.”

COVAX And The Myth That “No One is Safe, Until Everyone is Safe”

WHO, CEPI, GAVI and UNICEF are collaborating on a program called COVAX which uses the slogan “no one is safe, until everyone is safe” to promote development, production and equitable access to Covid-19 tests, treatments and vaccines. Their main target is nations with limited resources, mainly in Africa.  So far US$7.5 billion has been committed to the program.

As described by Australian public health physician Dr David Bell in this recent presentation, protection is conferred by individual immunity either via recovered natural infection or effective vaccination, making the COVAX slogan illogical nonsense. Low-income nations with limited resources, by their very nature, have young populations who are at negligible risk from covid disease but who face high premature morbidity and mortality rates from “diseases of poverty” such as malaria, TB, HIV, childhood malnutrition, diarrhoea and pneumonia. The Global Fund spends US$4 billion per year on TB, HIV and Malaria combined; and the entire biennial WHO budget for 2022-2023 is US$6.725 billion ($3.36 billion per year), exposing the disproportionate spending on covid as a single disease which barely affected these populations.

Results of a meta-analysis authored by WHO researchers and published in the British Medical Journal in February 2022 showed that 65% of the African population had evidence of covid immunity from prior infection, contradicting infection surveillance data. This was prior to circulation of the much more transmissible Omicron strain which has likely resulted in most of the population now showing immunity. In other words, covid passed through the African population largely unnoticed. It is feasible that this occurred in other locations, such as New Zealand, prior to the declaration of a pandemic.

Nevertheless, COVAX is focused on ensuring equitable access to Covid-19 tests and vaccines (recommended for everyone regardless of risk or immunity), as well as novel, expensive treatments, to the African and other low-income populations. This can only be explained by the fact that WHO has relinquished its role as a community-centred public health organisation based on highest disease burdens, and is now directed by donors with obvious conflicts of interest in the sale of commodities for profit.

Other Vested Interests

There are multiple other interests involved in the ongoing establishment of the burgeoning pandemic industry. 

Perhaps the biggest conflicted interest is the thousands of people employed within it. This is well illustrated by New Zealand’s own health workforce largely complying with practices related to profit generation and obedience to authority, over evidence-based health care. Testing, recommending quarantine of healthy people, submitting to face mask use, and administering dangerous medical products (including dangerous therapeutics) are obvious examples.

On the global health scene, working for wealthy companies and well-funded organisations brings many perks, including good salaries, financial benefits, job security, travel opportunities, prestige, and the opportunity to meet others working within, and also leading, so-called “global health”. As a public health physician, Dr David Bell has worked in a number of global health organisations, including WHO and other Gates-funded organisations. He now speaks out against the new pandemic industry which is being installed globally.

He lists the following potential reasons for staff compliance with nonsensical and harmful practices:

• Career advancement

• Salary

• Peer pressure

• Prestige

• Fear of the virus

• Just following orders

• Ignorance

• Superior colonialist mentality

Dr Bell has observed the phenomenon of employees, lured by the personal benefits involved, agreeing to follow vested donor interests which contradict their knowledge, skill and professional ethics. He also describes the experience of working with famous people in prestigious organisations, as invoking the equivalent of a drug-induced high. This lessens or removes the capacity for critical analysis. It can also disempower people from questioning or challenging the revered hierarchy.

The pandemic industry is backed by multiple other vested interests. As well as the changes being implemented in the WHO legal framework, the World Bank and G20 now finance a Pandemic Fund. This is specified to be for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, which they claim will require US$10.5 billion per year, largely from national budgets (for a total of $50 billion in up-front, multi-annual funding for its first five years). This is already in place, and changes to the WHO frameworks will ensure their role as technical partners in the industry. The money to fund this will come from taxpayers in wealthy nations, including New Zealand.

Other vested interests include the Wellcome Trust, The World Economic Forum, known for its use of fear and censorship to promote corporate interests and population control, and the European Commission. This converges with the agenda of financial control, which is for a different article at another time.

Conclusion

Over the past twenty years, global health programs have departed from the intended purpose of improving health in the world’s most vulnerable populations who are burdened with high rates of diseases of poverty. As private corporations have become the largest contributors of funds, largely channelled from taxpayers in wealthy nations, programs have focused away from the diseases and social determinants (such as dirty water, food insecurity, unsafe housing, inaccessible education, unemployment and unsafe work environments) affecting people the most. Programs now concentrate on the financial and power structure interests of donors.

Pandemics are highly lucrative as it can be (erroneously) argued that everyone must accept recommended (and/or mandated) interventions. Covid has demonstrated that when these interventions involve the sale of products such as tests, masks, vaccines and expensive new therapeutics, profits can create billionaires. The covid response, including the authoritarian demands of lockdowns and mandates, as well as massive sales of lucrative medical products, resulted in the largest shift of wealth in human history. According to Oxfam’s 2022 report Profiting from Pain, a new billionaire was minted every 30 hours whilst a million people were pushed into extreme poverty every 33 hours.

Many highly credentialed public health professionals tried (and continue) to speak out against the illogical and harmful response promoted by the same power brokers who stood to profit the most. Those who spoke up were greeted with aggressive censorship. Many, including professionals in New Zealand, have had their licences revoked for refusing to comply with the pharmaceutical industrial complex. Some were even arrested, such as Swiss epidemiologist and cardiologist Dr Thomas Binder, and retired Canadian physician Dr Mel Bruchet.

It is clear that a form of global fascism is taking hold, using health emergencies as the pretext.

The health and safety of New Zealanders is under threat, given the known harms caused by almost every official recommendation, none of which protected us from a virus with an infection mortality rate similar to seasonal influenza. Untested and unsafe medical products are financed from our own taxes, yet the government has not made the contracts that they signed with pharmaceutical companies, available for public scrutiny.

After insisting that care for our health required relentless case counts, press conferences and forced interventions, that same government has persistently ignored and denied the growing number of vaccine-injured and rising excess mortality rate.

These ongoing threats to our health and democracy will continue to advance with minimal opposition whilst New Zealanders remain either oblivious or convinced that “it is just a conspiracy theory”. But there are ways to make a difference. 

Talk to friends and family about what you know. Contact your political representatives and ask what they are doing to advocate for the vaccine-injured, and to oppose the WHO Treaty and World Bank Pandemic Fund. Refuse to comply with rules which make no sense. Listen to independent media and find out what independent experts are saying.

Practice peaceful civil disobedience.