Reminder: Remdesivir was written into the SPARS Pandemic Planning Exercise script
As the SPARS Pandemic Exercise was being written, the referenced ANTIVIRAL was being created at UNC. That antiviral was Remdesivir and it was sold in 2020 straight out of the 2017 SPARS script.
Background: SPARS and Event 201
From 2014 to 2016, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security conducted a planning exercise.
It involved preparing for a NOVEL CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC.
…where scientists confirmed that the patients did not have influenza. One CDC scientist recalled reading a recent ProMed dispatch describing the emergence of a novel coronavirus in Southeast Asia, and ran a pancoronavirus RT-PCR test. A week later, the CDC team confirmed that the three patients were, in fact, infected with a novel coronavirus, which was dubbed the St. Paul Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SPARS-CoV, or SPARS), after the city where the first cluster of cases had been identified. The CDC monitored the situation closely, working with partners in Southeast Asia to quickly develop a case definition for SPARS. Within four weeks of CDC publishing a working case definition on its website, nearly two hundred suspected cases of SPARS were reported across Minnesota and in six other states.
SPARS was an ostensible research project to catalog medical countermeasures (drugs, vaccines) “dilemmas” in emergency situations (pandemics), and provide practical and strategic recommendations on how better to obtain “desired population health outcomes”.
Yes this is the same John Hopkins Monster Biomedical Pretext for Fascism Crew who later brought you Event 201 in October, 2019…which was also concerned with a NOVEL CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC.
Strangely a purported NOVEL CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC did (allegedly) immediately emerge following Event 201.
The timing was so suspect that Johns Hopkins quickly issued an exculpatory statement.
January 24, 2020 – In October 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted a pandemic tabletop exercise called Event 201 with partners, the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Recently, the Center for Health Security has received questions about whether that pandemic exercise predicted the current novel coronavirus outbreak in China. To be clear, the Center for Health Security and partners did not make a prediction during our tabletop exercise. For the scenario, we modeled a fictional coronavirus pandemic, but we explicitly stated that it was not a prediction. Instead, the exercise served to highlight preparedness and response challenges that would likely arise in a very severe pandemic. We are not now predicting that the nCoV-2019 outbreak will kill 65 million people. Although our tabletop exercise included a mock novel coronavirus, the inputs we used for modeling the potential impact of that fictional virus are not similar to nCoV-2019.
The SPARS Pandemic Futuristic Scenario research project predated Event 201 by four years and was conducted throughout 2014-2016.
SPARS was published in 2017. Link is here:
The SPARS Exercise is also presciently concerned with a NOVEL CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC and in great detail lays out the roadmap for what was coming.
(We won’t even discuss Rockefeller Operation Lockstep planning exercise 2010 which foretold lockdowns.)
Previously we have discussed the latter chapters of SPARS which show that as the Public Private Partnership (fascism) Monster was running the literal PLANNING EXERCISE, these purveyors of faked pandemics understood that there would be blowback to jamming emergency countermeasures into zeeee bodies for zeeee greater good.
And thus the marks would need to be calmed and given a coupon and some attaherds.
I just made up word.
*attaherds*
Calm the Marks
Excerpts from the SPARS Exercise, and keep in mind that this was published in 2017.
ACKNOWLEDGING LOSS
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN
At the request of HHS Secretary Nagel, ASPR convened a series of meetings among senior leadership of the federal health agencies to address policy and program changes being implemented as a result of a departmental review of the response to the SPARS pandemic.
Among the issues considered were the implications of growing negative public opinion regarding Corovax and the government’s perceived indifference to victims of the public health response to SPARS.
One senior health official argued that time and a robust medical monitoring program for vaccine recipients—the components of which were already in place—should be sufficient to determine whether public concern about long-term effects was, in fact, warranted: “We have to wait for the data. People need to understand that fact.”
One prominent attendee at these meetings was Dr. Ann Flynn, the director of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Staff from the administration’s Disaster Technical Assistance Center had recently briefed Dr. Flynn on usage data for the SAMHSA Disaster Distress Helpline over the past year, and summary reports indicated that a significant number of helpline users said that their principal worry was associated with the SPARS pandemic and, more recently, uncertainty about potential long-term effects of Corovax.
Considering this new knowledge, Dr. Flynn countered the earlier claim that the public simply needed to wait until the science was clear: “Communities around the country went through what some felt was a harrowing public health emergency, only later to confront the possibility, however slim, that the medicine we promised would help them may in fact be hurting them.”
The senior leaders in attendance concluded, after much prompting by Dr. Flynn, that no top political or public health figurehead had publicly recognized the collective sense of vulnerability that the pandemic had elicited or the strength that the public exhibited under threat of grave danger. Moreover, no national leader had publicly acknowledged the public’s broad willingness to accept a prescribed countermeasure that promised to end the pandemic, but whose long-term consequences were not fully understood at the time.
So much is revealed here.
They knew in 2017 that long term consequences “were not fully understood” of emergency medical countermeasures even within their own fictitious planning exercise.
Moreover, no national leader had publicly acknowledged the public’s broad willingness to accept a prescribed countermeasure that promised to end the pandemic, but whose long-term consequences were not fully understood at the time.
Not only did they know that “long-term consequences” which “were not fully understood at the time” were a potentiality, but they game planned how to calm the marks, i.e. placate those harmed.
COMMUNICATION DILEMMA Communicating With the Public About Trustworthy Source s of Data and Options for Legal Recourse in a Climate of Mistrust
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
How might advance development and testing of recovery messages that specifically address the topics of adverse side effects and the NVICTF help improve health authorities’ ability to respond to public distress about medical issues emerging after a MCM campaign? What are some messages that would warrant such testing?
Despite the uncertain science about the link between Coravax and the reported neurological symptoms, why should health officials still communicate with compassion and genuine sympathy toward those in the vaccinated population who experience medical issues subsequent to being vaccinated?
Given growing interest in open data systems and the application of “crowd sourcing” to solve complex problems, how might public health officials take greater advantage of two-way communication with an interested public in the aftermath of the SPARS outbreak? For instance, how might input and analysis from members of the public help improve adverse event monitoring or assess the strengths and weaknesses of a specific MCM (medical countermeasures) campaign?
This, my friends, is planning out the *Dolts Botching Shit PR Response.
*Mistakes were made. We’ll do better next pandemic.
Note the last three chapters of SPARS.
Following the meeting, ASPR recommended to HHS Secretary Nagel that SAMHSA collaborate with stakeholders and devise behavioral health guidance for the states, tribes, and territories on how to strengthen the public’s coping skills, provide support for grieving individuals, encourage a forward direction, and meet other SPARS recovery needs. It was further recommended that Secretary Nagel consult with President Archer about the possibility of acknowledging the emotional toll of SPARS during a future public appearance. The primary message would be one of gratitude to the American people for remaining strong during the pandemic. Another key message would convey appreciation for adhering to public health recommendations, including vaccination, to hasten the end of the pandemic in the face of considerable uncertainty.
“behavioral health guidance…”
“encourage a forward direction”
Did we reach the “end of the pandemic” by adhering to the public health recomendations, including vaccination…and masks?
WRITES PIERRE KORY AND PAUL MAYO IN USA TODAY WHEN THE HYPING OF THE NOVEL PATHOGEN WAS NEEDED TO PUSH OPERATION WARP SPEED.
The severity, morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 must be re-emphasized to all, both young and old, as it spares neither. To avoid a catastrophic repeat of the initial surge, we recommend a population-wide intervention — a significant increase in the use of N95 masks — that might allow for a safer reopening of the U.S economy.
The fact that the maximal exhaled viral load of infected persons occurs before the development of actual symptoms should concern all who might come into close indoor proximity with maskless presymptomatic 'super spreaders'.
Pierre Kory, USA Today, July 1, 2020
Remdesivir
SPARS also predictively programmed Remdesivir.
From Page 9 of the “fictional” scenario:
At that time, no treatment or vaccine for SPARS was approved for use in humans. The antiviral Kalocivir, which was initially developed as a therapeutic for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), was one of several antiviral drugs authorized in the United States by the FDA to treat a handful of severe SPARS cases under its Expanded Access protocol.
Kalocivir had shown some evidence of efficacy against other coronaviruses, and a small inventory of the drug was already a part of the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) in anticipation of FDA approval, despite some concerns about potential adverse side effects.
SPARS is…COVID-19.
Kalocivir sounds an awful lot like Remdesivir.
Right about the time the Johns Hopkins planning exercise was scripting the problem and “solution”, UNC was starting to work on just such an antiviral that would come to be dubbed Remdesivir.
From the 2014-2016 SPARS planning exercise script:
At that time, no treatment or vaccine for SPARS was approved for use in humans.
Sounds an awful lot like:
“Right now, there are no approved antiviral drugs for any human coronavirus.”
Tim Sheahan, UNC promoting Remdesivir, 2020
Tim Sheahan, UNC, in this YouTube video published March 19, 2020, Go to :20.
Sheahan adds:
“…we started working on Remdesivir about five to six years ago.”
Which would mean about 2014-2015.
“Over the years, we’ve shown that Remdesivir works against every coronavirus we’ve tested so far.”
Of course it does, Tim. Of course it does.
The script talking point is spawned in the 2014-2016 planning exercise about an antiviral solving the big problem of no FDA approved drug for a coronavirus, and comes to life in 2020 with the UNC interview announcing Remdesivir.
The creation of remdesivir overlays more or less exactly with the extensive SPARS Exercise.
While Johns Hopkins was game planning for a novel coronavirus pandemic, UNC, (Gain of Function Bioweapon UNC), was conveniently launching work on an antiviral to solve the big problem of no FDA approved treatment for a coronavirus.
The mRNA shots were written in all along, the inevitable result of Human Genome Project research and the need to experiment on the Lab Rats at scale.
Predictively programmed by one Dr. Robert Malone at the WHO in 2011.
Remdesivir, it appears, was also written in all along.
A fait accompli.
A foregone conclusion.
The script trotted out in the fluff Remdesivir promo video from UNC in March, 2020, with lots of hopeful music to know that we are changing the world, is straight out of the simultaneously written planning exercise.
All in response to the novel coronavirus that emerged.
One more thing.
The UNC video promo piece foreshadowed DTRA and its fancy DOMANE system also “discovering” Remdesivir in its own promo piece.
These guys wrote the script in 2014 as they began inventing the drug.
They played the planning exercise script out.
To UNC, to DTRA.
How did it go?
The Kalocivir/Remdesivir thing?
How did it all work out?
One aspect astounds me about the SPARS exercise and then the rollout: they seemed to be expecting and planning for greater pushback, and outpouring of grief from the herd … it hasn’t even happened (yet). Which makes me think that the whole Op has been even more successful than they anticipated.
It’s 2030 and Welcome to the 25th commemorative, bi-annual Ron Johnson hearing. And today, we’re going to replay the highlights from some of the memorable moments we’ve shared over the years, moments that established just how awful those jabs truly were. It is, if you will, a celebration of those moments …