The SPARS Pandemic 2025–2028: A Futuristic Scenario to Facilitate Medical Countermeasure Communication

How the Psy Oppery Gets Made: More Tabletop Stuff from Johns Hopkins and the Center for Health Security, 2017

Promo Code: Bob Stone

Johns Hopkins, when they are not banging out self spreading and self amplifying “vaccines”, is always busy with various planning exercises, aka, Predictive Programming.

Here is a primer on their public communication exercise about a novel coronavirus called SPARS 2025 conducted from 2014-2016.

Abstract

Effective communication about medical countermeasures—including drugs, devices and biologics—is often critical in emergency situations. Such communication, however, does not just happen. It must be planned and prepared for. One mechanism to develop communication strategies is through the use of prospective scenarios, which allow readers the opportunity to rehearse responses while also weighing the implications of their actions.

This article describes the development of such a scenario: The SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028. Steps in this process included deciding on a timeframe, identifying likely critical uncertainties, and then using this framework to construct a storyline covering both the response and recovery phases of a fictional emergency event. Lessons learned from the scenario development and how the scenario can be used to improve communication are also discussed.

---

*Bonus Stacking* Added*

Note that I am focused below on the public communication (propaganda/Psy Op) angle of SPARS-2025, but here is the link to the whole exercise:

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2017/spars-pandemic-scenario.pdf

It is worth a read! 😮

---

Communication Strategies Download available here:

https://stars.library.ucf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=jicrcr

I call this SPARS Pandemic “Futuristic” Scenario:

“How to gain compliance for medical countermeasures such as herd culling exp. vaccines in the pandemic that you are soon to unleash on the world.”

I will now block quote some of the salient points herein, and provide some snarky comments insightful points along the way.

Abstract:

Medical countermeasures (MCM)—including drugs, devices, and biologics (e.g., vaccines)—often play critical roles in curtailing the impacts of natural disease outbreaks as well as chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) incidents. It is not uncommon for members of the public, however, to misuse or hesitate to take recommended MCM. New and unfamiliar technology, an accelerated regulatory approval process, or discordant expert views may heighten perceived risks of MCM, leading to public aversion to the countermeasure and/or diminished public trust in MCM regulators or recommenders.

Almost like they knew some new and unfamiliar technology was coming up on the “Medical Countermeasures” playlist, and that they would need to have an accelerated regulatory approval process; and they are game planning for how to gaslight those hesitant Useless Eaters.

---

From 2014 to 2016, the Center for Health Security undertook a research project to catalog MCM (vaccines) communication “dilemmas” (in the broad sense of a problem) in emergency situations and provide practical and strategic recommendations on how better to obtain desired population health outcomes through improved communication.

“How do we get the Useless Eaters to take the herd culling exp. injections which we instructed all of our public-private partners on how to make?”

desired population health outcomes = cull

---

In the case of a low probability high-consequence event like a pandemic or CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear) incident in which MCM (vaccines) may be deployed, scenario development provides a way—absent an actual emergency—for stakeholders to characterize specific impacts (based on the accepted science), create a shared vision of the threat, weigh alternatives futures with or without risk-reducing interventions, and stimulate action.

The probability of a pandemic seems to go up the more that Ralphie Bear works his magic in the lab.

Is what I’m sayin’!

Are the WEF/Gates/DOD the stakeholders in this scenario, funding this “futuristic scenario” study?

You have to create a shared vision of threat.

Early 2020 is starting to make lots of sense!

---

Discussion-based exercises (often called tabletop exercises) help participants, typically decision-makers, become more familiar with emergency plans and procedures, individual and organizational roles and responsibilities, and special challenges posed by a particular threat to public health and safety

Your tabletop exercise Event 201 resulted in you ruining the world with lockdowns, herd culling drugs, and hospital death protocols.

Heckuva job, Brownie.

NO MORE TABLETOP EXERCISES, YOU ASSHOLES.

---

Second, ITC (information and communication technologies) can, and is, used to spread false information. Wolfe and associates (2002), for example, found that 32% of antivaccine websites surveyed included pictures of “menacing needles” and 23% had pictures of children reported to have been harmed or killed by vaccines. As parents come across these images and their associated stories this can lead parents to place greater emphasis on personal and emotional experience rather than scientific evidence. Referred to as false consensus bias in the social psychology literature, parents may then hesitate to vaccinate or reject vaccines for their children altogether.

Menacing needles? What?!!

---

This process allowed the project team to identify expected and new communication dilemmas to include in the scenario. As one example of this, the project team considered how the internet and social media affect the social dynamics of health communication. Using the theory of false consensus bias and the findings on vaccination in social media (described previously in the literature review section), the project team identified specific communication dilemmas to include in the scenario.

ex. of false consensus bias: SAFE AND EFFECTIVE

These guys are projecting!

---

Psychological Operations

In the following sections, we outline the scenario environment and how the fictional outbreak begins. We then provide excerpts of two dilemma sections as examples of the larger document.

In relation to MCM (vaccines) communication more specifically, government agencies like the CDC have increasingly adopted social media technologies, including long-existing platforms such as Facebook, Snapchat, and Twitter, as well as emerging platforms like ZapQ—an interface that enables users to aggregate and archive media content from other platforms and communicate with cloud-based social groups based on common interests and current events. Federal and state public health organizations have also developed agency-specific applications and ramped up efforts to maintain and update agency websites.

---

SPARS After much consideration of possible emergency situations that would require MCM use, the project team decided on setting the storyline around a novel coronavirus that caused a mild, flu-like disease in most instances, but pneumonia and/or hypoxia requiring hospitalization and extensive medical treatment in a small minority of cases.

You don’t say.

The project team named this fictional pathogen the St. Paul Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus, or SPARS for short, because in the scenario it is first identified in St. Paul, Minnesota. Two features of this disease are important to note because they impact how the storyline of the scenario plays out, as well as some of the communication dilemmas that occur.

First, the project team decided to make SPARS have an extended incubation period (7 to 10 days) but a short latent period (4 to 5 days). This complicates the scenario because infected persons in the story are capable of spreading the virus for up to 6 days before showing symptoms of the disease themselves. This feature of SPARS makes isolation procedures in the scenario, like urging people to stay home if they think they might be sick, less effective than what is typically expected for airborne pathogens and thus introduces novel dilemmas in the storyline.

Hint: “Asymptomatic spread” will be a feature of the *wink-wink* new coronavirus.

Was the project team tipped off on what scenario to use?

All of the elements are in play.

Proprietary vaccines funded by the Government, HHS Prep Act invoked.

Got some Warp Speed elements going on here, too.

Nobody’s gonna talk about mass vaxxing into an active pandemic is doomed to fail?

Geert was not invited? 😅

How to deal with those pesky vaccine injuries on social media.

In the following weeks, officials from the FDA, CDC, and other government organizations attempted to promote positive, accurate information about Kalocivir on several traditional and social media platforms in order to quell public fear. This messaging, however, was less than optimal both in terms of timing and dissemination. While the government took several days to provide an emotionally appropriate message, the spread of the viral video on social media was exponentially faster. By the time the government responded, most people across the country had already seen the vomiting video and formed their own conclusions. Additionally, in their responses, governmental organizations were not able to effectively access all social media platforms. ZapQ groups, for example, had closed memberships and typically could only be accessed via invitations from group members.

I think they just made an off-report executive decision to just CENSOR LIKE CRAZY with their public-private partners like Facebook, Twitter, and Google.

As to this:

Which is how you get this:

---

Recovery Scenario Excerpt The following excerpt from the scenario considers issues related with recovery, and how to communicate with the public about trustworthy sources of data and options for legal recourse in a climate of mistrust. At this point in the storyline, Corovax, the FDA approved vaccine for SPARS, has been released for more than 9 months and the United States is solidly in the recovery phase of the pandemic. SPARS is now uncommon in the US and public focus has shifted from the disease to the potential side effects of SPARS treatments including the Corovax vaccine.

Gotta love the scare quotes around vaccine injury.

While the FDA, CDC, and other agencies were busy researching possible connections between Corovax and the reported neurological side effects, their efforts were continually undermined by epidemiological analyses produced by various non-governmental individuals and groups.

The popular science blogger EpiGirl, for example, began posting interactive maps of the incidence of Corovax side effects in April 2027. To create the maps, EpiGirl collected anecdotes of adverse Corovax side effects using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube and combined them with data downloaded The SPARS Pandemic 2025–2028 93 from the HHS Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a national vaccine safety surveillance program maintained by the CDC and FDA.

😹

The federal government became concerned about the validity of EpiGirl’s anecdotal data and the widespread sharing of patient information via the internet. EpiGirl’s data showed a significantly higher incidence rate of nearly every reported side effect; however, federal officials believed that this was largely due to duplicate entries resulting from compiling data from multiple sources.

Projection!

The FEDS are doing all that they can to make VAERS go away. Extended discussion on this launches at about the14:00 mark:

https://rumble.com/v1kkf0b-livestream-sunday-1230pm-est-the-globalists-in-plain-sight.html

---

In conclusion:

Trust the Experts and you are not a horse.

Also, don’t believe the VAERS data, that shit is so bogus.

Here is a four minute entertaining video on this whole SPARS thing.

Not me! But it might be “EpiGirl” 😅

https://odysee.com/@whatsherface:2/SparsPandemicDocument:4

---

https://ko-fi.com/sagehanaproductions64182

https://www.buymeacoffee.com/sagehanaJ