Author


As of this writing, the world approaches the second anniversary of the declared Covid-19 pandemic. In these two years, we have collectively experienced what can best be described as a seismic shift in power relations. These shifts can be clearly defined by those who have benefited from the pandemic compared to those who have been harmed: While we are endlessly told by governments and media systems that, “We are all in this together”, the reality is far different as global elites fly into Davos for yet another World Economic Forum (WEF) looking down from 35,000 feet on the multitudes below.

The chasm between the magical mediated reality conjured up by international organizations such as the WEF and World Health Organization (WHO) in lockstep with governments around the world versus the empirical reality of widespread dispossession is, at present, filled in by a vast and sophisticated propaganda campaign from controlled mass media that spans international boundaries. Clearly, the evidence of a convergence of powerful actors around the COVID-19 event is strong grounds to believe that a fundamental social and economic reset agenda has long been the political project being driven. This article aims to clear away the coordinated deceptions and camouflage since it is only by knowing the forces that have brought about the push for the Great Reset that we will be able to effectively combat it.

Two Years of Medical and Social Fraud

It is increasingly clear to this author and many others that the entire thrust of the pandemic response was premeditated. Event 201, the Johns Hopkins University simulation of a world response to a viral pandemic, was held in in New York City in October 2019. The meeting was largely funded by the WEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [1]. The WEF’s director, Klaus Schwab, promoting what he termed the “Great Reset” would later use the actual pandemic to achieve that end; the Gates foundation would later strongly advocate for vaccination against the Covid-19 virus for the entire human race as the only exclusive way out of the pandemic and toward a return to “normal.”

As in military planning, Event 201 describes a case of a ‘dress rehearsal’ to find the weaknesses in the pandemic plan. In the tested scenario, the players attempted to anticipate the responses of the world’s population to a pandemic and to determine how to best manipulate the eventual outcomes.

In the actual pandemic, an alliance of governments and primarily the pharmaceutical industry was complemented by a massive mainstream media campaign that instilled hysteria in populations, particularly in the global West, fear that enabled governments of all stripes and at all levels to bring in “state of exception” measures that increased the centralized power of governments. Increased governmental controls, in lockstep with a range of new pharmaceutical products such as vaccines against the virus, created perhaps, for the first time in world history, a world of corporate-government hybrid States untethered to Constitutional foundations. How has this philosophically fascist world, whose leaders convened in Davos, been so swayed by the leading figurehead of this “New Normal”?

A significant portion of the successful media campaign was constructed upon outright medical and scientific fraud. The examples of such fraud included manipulations of epidemiological data on Covid-19 case numbers and deaths [2-4] to increase fear, distortions about virus transmission leading to largely ineffective measures such as social distancing and the use of masks [5, 6] and vaccine mandates [7] around the world, highly touted publications of “imaginary” data to ensure that no effective pharmaceutical therapies apart from vaccination were able to be used [8-14], massive governmental funding for Covid-19 vaccines [15], the fast tracking by various health organizations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration and national health ministries to approve the resultant clearly experimental vaccines [16], and the subsequent rush to Emergency Use Authorization for the vaccines [17] on the basis of what can only be considered preliminary efficacy and safety data (see citations below).

It was, overall, a massive success for those seeking profit and/or control.

And then, inevitably, the “official narrative” began to fall apart: Studies condemning hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as protective therapeutics against the virus were shown to be fraudulent [18], presumed vaccine efficacy began to drop precipitously [19], thus leading to calls for booster shots [19,20], control measures such as masking came under increased scrutiny and resistance as did mandates to “incentivize” people to get “fully” vaccinated. Evidence for such measures included a leaked video of Vancouver Coastal Health president Patricia Daly making such a statement, a statement later essentially repeated by British Columbia Public Health Officer Bonnie Henry in the Vancouver Sun [21].

Most telling of all, a host of adverse vaccine reactions, including deaths, began to appear with increasing frequency [22-24].

Cui bono?

To tackle the “cui bono” (who benefits?) question, suffice it to say that the answer is hiding in plain sight: The key beneficiaries are these: the pharmaceutical industry, governments of all stripes, other high tech sectors, organizations such as the WHO and the WEF, and the world’s billionaire elite. These are the non-State players. The primary state player appears to be China under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The active collaboration between the non-State and State players will be described, and I will address each of these in the following.

As for those harmed, this list includes, or will soon include, most of the world’s population which has become poorer and immeasurably less free, not to mention that those who have been “fully” vaccinated and even required to take “booster” shots may suffer life-long health consequences.

These outcomes will all be addressed below.

The Pharmaceutical Industry

The clearest financial beneficiaries have been the companies directly involved in the manufacturing of the various “vaccines” developed against the original Covid-19 virus variant. At least in the global west, these were Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca (AZ), and Johnson & Johnson (J&J). The first two developed a novel mRNA platform that had never been used en masse before; the latter companies used a viral vector platform, also not previously used for populations. Details of the nature of these platforms and their efficacy and safety trials can be found in Shaw [25] and on various websites [e.g., the CCCA website]. Note that while I will use the term “vaccine” for each of these products, there is now clear evidence that none of them would fit the conventional long-accepted definition of a vaccine. Before the roll out of these products, a “vaccine” was defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as, “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease” [26] the new definition became, “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases” [27]. It is worth noting here that changing definitions in such fashion, along with changing definitions of herd immunity and indeed even immunity, has swayed public perceptions in favour of Covid-19 vaccination [28].

Put into context, the profits from all vaccines in 2019 developed and marketed by the major pharmaceutical companies was USD $28.8 billon [25]. The profits for the above four Covid-19 vaccines companies, in contrast, were: Moderna ($18.5 billion) [29]; Pfizer ($37 billion) [30], AZ ($3.9 billion) [31], and Johnson & Johnson ($2.39 billion) [32]. It should be borne in mind that in each case, the companies were paid huge sums to develop their products and also uniformly received blanket immunity from civil actions from adverse events that might arise in the future in those vaccinated.

From a corporate perspective, such an outcome would have to be seen as the absolute apex of a capitalist economics: massive profits with zero financial or civil risk. Can this scheme possibly be even better? Yes, it can, as these companies stand to massively profit from the increasing calls by various governments to continually mandate Covid vaccines and to make boosters for each product a condition for maintaining a “fully vaccinated” status. An analogy might be to a product such as a smartphone which requires perpetual updates to its apps. This constellation of finances and privileges, thus, becomes an endless financial windfall for the companies involved. As well, the emergence of Covid-19 variants will certainly spur the development of other Covid-19 vaccines to target these variants alone or in combination with influenza [33, 34] or other viral infections.

Other Beneficiaries of Pharmaceutical Industry Influence

There are currently some 276 vaccines being developed for the initial Covid-19 and variants and a number of other pharmaceutical drugs [35]. Each will certainly generate massive and potentially huge profits for the companies involved.

The ‘State’ Players: Governments

Virtually every government in the world has seen its powers expand during the pandemic with the attendant loss of human rights and civil liberties. Nowhere have these changes been more apparent than in the Western nations, which often define themselves as being democratic and staunch adherents of the rights of their citizens, by the use of State of Exception measures (also termed “state of emergency”). The process by which States become more powerful and less democratic has been well described by various authors including Agamben [36], Cernic [37] and Shaw [25]. It is also worth noting that the loss of human and civil rights is rarely reversible except through revolution by those affected.

The High-tech Sector

Catherine Austin Fitts and Children’s Health Defense have described in detail how various sectors have also done remarkably well during the pandemic [38,39]. Key amongst these are companies that specialize in surveillance [40] and those involved in products supporting the WEF’s goals of promoting “transhumanism” on a global population.

The WHO

The power of the WHO has increased substantially during the pandemic, most starkly in the early stages where WHO declared the initial pandemic and then used this declaration to pressure member states to follow their recommendations[41]. Their ultimate goals are spelled out in detail in their Immunization Agenda, 2030 [42].

The WEF

The WEF and its founder and current director, Klaus Schwab, both largely unknown to most people before the pandemic, have now become arguably the most powerful non-State players. Schwab and other members of the WEF have published extensively on using the pandemic as a means to achieve what they term the “Great Reset”, an ambitious and frankly Orwellian restructuring of society to favour a unified corporate-government monopoly on power. The term “fascist” would well describe the vision of Schwab/WEF, which, due to the clever use of “woke” language, is seen in what used to be considered as “progressive” circles as socially beneficial [43]. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that the older terms “fascist” versus “communist” may be misleading in the sense that while they were initially used to describe what were considered to be different economic/political systems, when in reality they both actually described systems of control and domination by elites power blocks. In other words, regardless of the label, both are totalitarian in nature.

The Billionaire Elite

While it is relatively well known that the world’s billionaire class became immensely wealthier during the pandemic [44], it is still unclear what role most of the billionaires played, if any, in the origin and progression of the disease. The obvious exception to this is Bill Gates whose work with all of the above entities has been well documented [45-47].

China and the CCP

The rise of China during the pandemic and the diminution of the Western powers at the same time, added to the GoF studies, shows possible motive and method. It may not be possible, however, for independent investigators to ever determine conclusively whether the CCP had deliberately set out a path of asymmetrical warfare with the western nations to further its ascendancy, even as superficial evidence appears to suggest as much.

It should be borne in mind that the above accomplishment of the pandemic scenario would not have been possible without the active compliance, if not outright collaboration, with the non-State and various State players named above. Event 201, cited previously, was remarkably prescient in this regard [25].

The Planned Destruction of Human Bonds?

Was there an objective to fracture inter-human bonds and, thus, society so that greater control could be exerted? To determine if this was part and parcel of an overall agenda, one has first to look at the capabilities of those actors discussed already. In the next part of the article, it will be worthwhile examining if indeed the social structures, particularly in the west have been damaged and, if so, how irreparably.

Social cohesion in any society requires common values and goals where the ability of members of that society to foster such values and goals can only occur when people actively interact. Tribal societies are one such example on a smaller scale. Military formations are also organized along these lines, with the smaller groupings fostering the greatest group cohesion [50]. Indeed, one way of disrupting any organization is to prevent social interactions, starting at the most fundamental level, including that of the family.

Some of the more glaring events since March 2020 strongly suggest that the elimination of social cohesion was, at the very least, a pro bono outcome of the COVID-19 event. Included in the list are the general fear of other people, including within families, and the widespread closure of houses of worship which served to disrupt the connections within and between faith communities.

The outright fear campaigns conducted by most governments served to rationalize the functional removal of both the freedoms of religion and assembly. None of this was difficult in authoritarian societies, but was accomplished in the notionally democratic societies first with media/government campaigns stressing the mortal dangers of the pandemic, followed by an endless series of regulations forbidding in-person religious or social ceremonies. Many of these regulations continue to this day with the arrival of the Omicron variant and have not only included the forced closure of churches and other houses of worship, but also the restrictions on assembly in general during sacred holidays.

In British Columbia, for example, the public health officer, Bonnie Henry, recently decreed not only limits on family gatherings over Christmas, but also forbid (she actually used that word [51]) the vaccinated from having non-vaccinated family and friends attend any gathering. Similarly, vaccine mandates have been applied to many aspects of the workforce with those not complying facing constructive dismissal for non-compliance.

At the Canadian federal level, such mandates and dismissals have been applied to civil servants, the military, and members of the national police, the RCMP. At provincial levels, the mandates have been designed to target healthcare workers, university staff, and educators at all levels. While the provinces have not directly forced mandates and punishments on other sectors, the pressure for the private sector to do so has been enormous.

The functional effect of such mandates and regulations serves to fracture society into two classes of citizenship: Those who comply with any and all governmental demands versus those who will not, the latter now routinely described as selfish, often disloyal, callous to the needs of others, and even dangerous [52]. Now with Omicron variant increasing, the same health authorities are pushing harder, demanding that those previously considered “fully vaccinated” with two shots, now need to take a booster, or even an endless stream of boosters [53] on the whim of government. The latter have generated increasing push back from those who had thought, erroneously, that they had done all that was required to return to “normal.”

The psychological harms applied to all citizens are now becoming obvious. As described by Dr. Mattias Desmet [54, 55], the state of exception measures applied have further divided society into three segments: the fully compliant (for now) who have found an identity and form of unity in blind submission and those who complied initially due to fear of job losses or the more mundane ability to travel or freely associate (although that segment may now be beginning to realize that the freedoms they hoped to have restore were merely transient). Finally, there is the segment, smaller than the others, that refuses to accept such mandates on the basis of various ethical codes such as those of Nuremberg or Helsinki [56-58]. Desmet identifies the first as suffering from what he terms “mass psychosis phenomenon”, akin to Stockholm Syndrome, in which captives came to identify with their captors. The second group can be expected to continue to comply up to a point with the still emerging mandates intended to keep them pacified. The last group, the resisters, are the focus of a series of punishments to be administered by government or even fellow citizens for their resistance.

The various mandates have, therefore, accomplished a key goal of making society fracture along lines that allow the segregation and demonization of the non-compliant who are functionally becoming “untermensch” in a manner not fundamentally different from the treatment of various minorities in history.

The impact on adults is now becoming clearer as the mandates and official forms of coercion continue to increase. Friendships and marriages have been damaged, perhaps permanently, in many cases. The long-term impact on children is still unknown but can be predicted to have severe and enduring effects that may render a number of children unable to form relationships with those perceived to be from “other” segments of society. Other consequences will inevitably follow: increased poverty for those unemployed due to mandates, increases in alcoholism and drug addiction, increased levels of child and spousal abuse, and the further control over the lives of all citizens, even for those in the first segment. In many ways, these outcomes clearly resemble what has happened in China under the CCP: much of the Uighur population confined to camps and those deemed socially unreliable banned from most public transportation and thus movement [59,60]. These similarities between what has been happening in China and what is now extant in much of the West seem unlikely to be merely coincidences, but rather a deliberate and planned outcome that has rolled out, as in Event 201, in an almost military fashion [61].

Social fracture is also accomplished by decreasing the overall level of trust people in any society innately hold for each other. In the resistant segment of the population, who amongst them will ever trust government again, or the medical profession, or even scientists? In this last regard, the most charitable view would be that epidemiology as a branch of science has been shown to be built on foundations of quicksand given how consistently wrong it has been throughout the pandemic.

Who will trust their police or military? Who will trust their own friends and family after being made into lepers by people they thought they had bonds with? Who will anyone in the compliant-but-resentful group trust if family members, especially children, have adverse reactions to the mandated vaccines?

In the end, the loss of trust across various aspects of society may be the final outcome of Covid-19 and the Great Reset. From the perspective of a totalitarian, the loss of trust in personal relationships and in the machinery of society are desirable outcomes as the widespread demise firmly sets up the larger global agenda for comprehensive social and economic control by government.

Conclusion

To careful observers of controlled societal and economic destruction, the past two years demand answers to many reasonable questions more and more people are asking privately and, when official censors are foiled, publicly. The promising researcher will pursue such questions and, very likely, find even more invaluable insights about the very nature of a global program.

Based upon the misleading information coming from governments, the mainstream medical profession, and its media systems, how much of anything these entities say in the future can be trusted as accurate? Is there some quantitative metric or algorithm that can be developed and applied to the study of these centers of power and influence? It seems possible that the same sorts of algorithms that exploit fears, deployed against the masses in social media, can be written and deployed to monitor the veracity of truth claims emanating from the major centers of global power.

Given the obvious and easily proven falsehoods flooding the public discourse, how much of what we have assumed in the past from the same sources is likely to be incorrect as well? What should citizens who have come to the realizations that they cannot trust these entities do about it? How might this realization spur changes in efforts to establish true democracy? These are but a few questions that researchers can grapple with in the interest of rescuing society.

Acknowledgements

The author is a member of the Canada Covid Care Alliance Scientific and Medical Advisory board. No other conflicts of interest are declared.

The author thanks Suresh Bairwa for help with formatting and editing.

References

  1. Event 201. 2019. Event 201 A Global Pandemic Exercise. Center for Health Security. [Website]
  2. Kolias P. 2022. Applying Benford’s law to COVID-19 data: the case of the European Union. Journal of public health (Oxford, England), fdac005. Advance online publication. [DOI]
  3. Morillas-Jurado, F.G.; Caballer-Tarazona, M.; Caballer-Tarazona, V. 2022. Applying Benford’s Law to Monitor Death Registration Data: A Management Tool for the COVID-19 Pandemic. Mathematics10, 46. [DOI]
  4. Balashov, V.S., Yan, Y. & Zhu, X. 2021. Using the Newcomb–Benford law to study the association between a country’s COVID-19 reporting accuracy and its development. Sci Rep 11, [DOI]
  5. Agley, J., Xiao, Y. 2021. Misinformation about COVID-19: evidence for differential latent profiles and a strong association with trust in science. BMC Public Health 21, [DOI]
  6. Esmaeilzadeh, P. 2022. Public concerns and burdens associated with face mask-wearing: Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Progress in disaster science13, 100215. [DOI]
  7. Ladapo, J.A. 2021. Vaccine Mandates Can’t Stop Covid’s Spread. The Wall Street Journal. [Website]
  8. Dabbous, H. M., Abd-Elsalam, S., El-Sayed, M. H., Sherief, A. F., Ebeid, F., El Ghafar, M., Soliman, S., Elbahnasawy, M., Badawi, R., & Tageldin, M. A. (2021). Efficacy of favipiravir in COVID-19 treatment: a multi-center randomized study. Archives of virology166(3), 949–954. [DOI] (Retraction published Arch Virol. 2022 Jan;167(1):277)
  9. Huang, S., Wang, S., Li, G., Wang, M., Yu, W., Shao, G., Zhang, J., & Yang, D. (2020). Efficacy and safety of acupuncture therapy for asymptomatic infection of COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine99(41), e22697. [DOI] (Retraction published Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Mar 19;100(11):e25227)
  10. Legrand, F. D., Polidori, G., Beaumont, F., Bouchet, B., Morin, A., Derruau, S., & Brenet, E. (2022). Retracted: Whole-Body Cryotherapy as an Innovative Treatment for COVID 19-Induced Anosmia-Hyposmia: A Feasibility Study. Journal of integrative and complementary medicine28(3), e284-e288. [DOI] (Retraction published J Integr Complement Med. 2022 Mar;28(3):283)
  11. Huang, S., Wang, S., Wang, M., Rong, J., Yu, W., Li, J., Han, J., & Yang, D. (2020). Efficacy and safety of acupuncture therapy for COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine99(22), e20407. [DOI] (Retraction published Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Mar 12;100(10):e25226)
  12. Jin, C., Yu, B., Zhang, J., Wu, H., Zhou, X., Yao, H., Liu, F., Lu, X., Cheng, L., Jiang, M., & Wu, N. (2021). Methylene blue photochemical treatment as a reliable SARS-CoV-2 plasma virus inactivation method for blood safety and convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19. BMC infectious diseases21(1), 357. [DOI] (Retraction published BMC Infect Dis. 2021 Jul 9;21(1):672)
  13. Dabbous, H. M., El-Sayed, M. H., El Assal, G., Elghazaly, H., Ebeid, F., Sherief, A. F., Elgaafary, M., Fawzy, E., Hassany, S. M., Riad, A. R., & Tagel Din, M. A. (2021). Safety and efficacy of favipiravir versus hydroxychloroquine in management of COVID-19: A randomised controlled trial. Scientific reports11(1), 7282. [DOI] (Retraction published Sci Rep. 2021 Sep 18;11(1):18983)
  14. Samaha, A. A., Mouawia, H., Fawaz, M., Hassan, H., Salami, A., Bazzal, A. A., Saab, H. B., Al-Wakeel, M., Alsaabi, A., Chouman, M., Moussawi, M. A., Ayoub, H., Raad, A., Hajjeh, O., Eid, A. H., & Raad, H. (2021). Effects of a Single Dose of Ivermectin on Viral and Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infected Subjects: A Pilot Clinical Trial in Lebanon. Viruses13(6), 989. [DOI] (Retraction published Viruses. 2021 Oct 26;13(11):)
  15. Frank, R.G. 2021. “It Was The Government That Produced COVID-19 Vaccine Success”. Health Affairs Blog. [DOI]
  16. Kashte, S., Gulbake, A., El-Amin Iii, S. F., & Gupta, A. 2021. COVID-19 vaccines: rapid development, implications, challenges and future prospects. Human cell34(3), 711–733. [DOI]
  17. Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained.2020. S. Food & Drug Administration. [Website]
  18. Joseph, A. 2020. Lancet, New England Journal retract Covid-19 studies, including one that raised safety concerns about malaria drugs. Stat News. [Website]
  19. Cohn, B. A., Cirillo, P. M., Murphy, C. C., Krigbaum, N. Y., & Wallace, A. W. 2022. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine protection and deaths among US veterans during 2021. Science (New York, N.Y.), 375(6578), 331-336. [DOI]
  20. Healy, M., 2021. Study shows dramatic decline in effectiveness of all three COVID-19 vaccines over time. Los Angeles Times. [Website]
  21. Henry, B. 2022. Dr. Bonnie Henry: As we venture out into the world again, let’s do so steadily but cautiously. Vancouver Sun. [Website]
  22. Montano D. 2022. Frequency and Associations of Adverse Reactions of COVID-19 Vaccines Reported to Pharmacovigilance Systems in the European Union and the United States. Frontiers in public health9, 756633. [DOI]
  23. Klein, N. P., Lewis, N., Goddard, K., Fireman, B., Zerbo, O., Hanson, K. E., Donahue, J. G., Kharbanda, E. O., Naleway, A., Nelson, J. C., Xu, S., Yih, W. K., Glanz, J. M., Williams, J., Hambidge, S. J., Lewin, B. J., Shimabukuro, T. T., DeStefano, F., & Weintraub, E. S. 2021. Surveillance for Adverse Events After COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination. JAMA, 326(14), 1390-1399. [DOI]
  24. Wu, Q., Dudley, M. Z., Chen, X., Bai, X., Dong, K., Zhuang, T., Salmon, D., & Yu, H. 2021. Evaluation of the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines: a rapid review. BMC medicine19(1), 173. [DOI]
  25. Shaw, C.A. 2021. Dispatches from the Vaccine Wars: Fighting for Human Freedom During the Great Reset. Skyhorse Publishing.
  26. Definition of Terms. 2021. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Website content on September 2, 2021. Page accessed from Web archive. [Website]
  27. Definition of Terms. 2021. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Website content on September 1, 2021. Page accessed from Web archive. [Website]
  28. Broudy, D., & Hoop, D. (2021). Messianic Mad Men, Medicine, and the Media War on Empirical Reality: Discourse Analysis of Mainstream Covid-19 Propaganda. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research2(1), 1–24. [Website]
  29. Grossman, M. 2022. Moderna Beats Profit Estimates, Fueled by Covid-19 Vaccine Sales. The Wall Street Journal [Website]
  30. Kollewe, J. 2022. Pfizer accused of pandemic profiteering as profits double. The Guardian. [Website]
  31. Jimenez, D. 2022. AstraZeneca revenues soar with nearly $4bn in Covid-19 vaccine sales. Pharmaceutical Technology. [Website]
  32. Mishra, M., O’donnell, C. 2022. J&J expects jump in COVID vaccine sales in 2022, eyes device deals. [Website]
  33. Aboubakr, A. 2022. Scientists are working on combo flu and COVID-19 shot, but don’t expect one this fall. ABC News Network. [Website]
  34. Woods, B. 2022. A universal flu vaccine may be the next big mRNA breakthrough for Moderna, Pfizer. CNBC. [Website]
  35. Milken Institute. 2022. COVID-19 Treatment AND Vaccine Tracker. [Website]
  36. Agamben, G. 2005. “State of Exception.” Translated by Kevin Attell. pg. 50: Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Website]
  37. Cernic, M. 2018. In Ideological Constructs of Vaccination. Wirral, UK: Vega Press Limited. [Website]
  38. Fitts, C. A. 2020a. The State of Our Currencies: The End of Currencies. The Solari Report. [Website]
  39. Fitts, C. A. 2020b. The injection fraud – It’s not a vaccine. The Solari Report. [Website]
  40. Children’s Health Defense Team. 2021. Planned Surveillance and Control by Global Technocrats: A Big-Picture Look at the Current Pandemic Beneficiaries. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, 1(2), 143–171. [Website].
  41. 2021, Director-General’s opening remarks at the World Health Assembly – 24 May 2021. World Health Organization. [Website]
  42. 2020, Immunization Agenda 2030: A Global Strategy to Leave No One Behind. World Health Organization. [Website]
  43. Schwab, K. and Malleret, T. 2020. Covid-19: The Great Reset. Amazon Digital Services LLC -KDP Print US. [Website]
  44. A. 2021. Billionaires got 54% richer during pandemic, sparking calls for “wealth tax”. CBS News.[Website]
  45. Solis, M. (2020). Coronavirus is the Perfect Disaster for ‘Disaster Capitalism’. Vice: [Website]
  46. Klein, N. (2007). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster CapitalismToronto: Random House of Canada Ltd.
  47. Fitts, C. A. 2020. The State of Our Currencies — Just a Taste. From “The Solari Report”. Retrieved from Truth Comes to Light. [Website]
  48. Devaux, C. A., Rolain, J. M., & Raoult, D. 2020. ACE2 receptor polymorphism: Susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, hypertension, multi-organ failure, and COVID-19 disease outcome. Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi53(3), 425-435. [DOI]
  49. Chen, F., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Li, W., Liu, X., & Xue, X. 2021. The Impact of ACE2 Polymorphisms on COVID-19 Disease: Susceptibility, Severity, and Therapy. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology11, 753721. [DOI]
  50. Junger, S. 2017. Tribe. London, England: Fourth Estate.
  51. Holliday, I. 2021. No gatherings for households with unvaccinated people in them under new B.C. restrictions. CTV News Vancouver. [Website]
  52. Minsky, M. 2007. The Emotion Machine: Commonsense Thinking, Artificial Intelligence, and the Future of the Human Mind. New York: Simon & Schuster. [Website]
  53. Pelley, L. 2022. Do you need a 4th dose of a COVID-19 vaccine? There’s no one-size-fits-all answer. CBC News. [Website]
  54. COVID-19 Information. 2022. Mattias Desmet on Mass Formation Psychosis. Covid Vaccine Side Effects & Information. [Website]
  55. Wetzler, H. 2021. Opinion: How have we gotten here? Mass Formation Psychosis, explained. Clark County Today. [Website]
  56. “The Proof as to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.” In Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10, Nuremberg, October 1946-April, 1949.pg. 181–82: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. [Website]
  57. WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. 1964. World Medical Association. [Website]
  58. “World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.” Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the International Journal of Public Health 2001, vol. 79, no. 4 (2001): 373-74. [Website]
  59. Jones, R.P. 2021. Chinese government responsible for genocide in Xinjiang, says independent report. CBC News. [Website]
  60. Moran, P. 2019. How China’s ‘social credit’ system blocked millions of people from travelling. CBC Radio. [Website]
  61. OODA loop. Wikipedia. [Website]

(Featured Image: “Socially distanced Outdoor Classroom at White Horse Hill Game Preserve” by USFWS Mountain Prairie is marked with Public Domain Mark 1.0.)

Author

  • Christopher A. Shaw is a neuroscientist whose research focuses on Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) using several models of the disease to explore possible environmental and genetic triggers of the disease. A second theme, related to the first, is to examine the role of aluminum in various neurological diseases, from Autism Spectrum Disorder to neurological diseases of older age. He did his undergraduate work at the University of California, Irvine and a M.Sc. and Ph.D. at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the author of over 150 peer-reviewed articles, numerous book chapters and edited books, and has authored two books on neurological diseases and a recent book about vaccine issues, including those related to the Covid-19 pandemic.