"Disease X" & The Alchemy Of 100 Days

Is the Davos cabal hoisting itself by its own petard?

This newsletter is about CEPI and its mission to implement unending global vaccination.

Acknowledgement to Dr Robert Malone, ‘Friday Funnies’ Aug 12, 2022 The needle and the damage done

As I wrote previously, The Coalition of Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) was founded in Davos in January 2017 with an exquisite timing only seen in the private-jet traveling elite associated with the World Economic Forum (WEF). The governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome, and the World Economic Forum were the institutional founders. Since then a profoundly tangled interconnected web of conflicting interests have culminated in what may be described as a bonanza of cash and corporate control, facilitated by synthetic fear and synthetic mRNA.

The Birth Of CEPI

CEPI was an idea reportedly born from a conversation within the WEF in Davos a year earlier in 2016. The earliest reference to CEPI identified on the WayBack Web Archive was September 12 2016. Nascent CEPI outlines its ‘Mission’ as one based upon a new alliance of governments, industry, academia, philanthropy, and intergovernmental institutions such as the WHO, and the repugnantly named third arm of the UN, so called, Civil Society. The articulated aim of CEPI from its earliest days was to “ensure that vaccines play the fullest possible part in containing infections with epidemic potential, to prevent them becoming public health emergencies, and [to] build a safer world.”

The central thesis was the hyperbolic ‘extraordinary danger’ that epidemics posed, how vaccines offered the solution but, and this is the big stretch, how they required development on a very accelerated and harmonised pathway.

Therein lay the crux.

Roll in the ACT accelerator ~ Access to COVID-19 Tools (hosted by the WHO) funded by all the usual suspects and countries.

ACT accelerator, ‘ACT-A’, self describes as …

… the only global, integrated, end-to-end platform for developing, scaling access and delivering vaccines, tests, treatments and PPE – ACT-A will sharpen its focus on supporting countries in achieving national coverage objectives and in closing gaps in access to COVID-19 tools, especially in countries that are not on track to meet the global coverage targets to achieve an end to the acute phase of the pandemic.

Notice the sleight of hand. Vaccine ‘equity’ is used as a means to enforce global adherence.

The ACT accelerator was launched in April 2020, at an event co-hosted by the Director-General of the World Health Organization, the President of France, the President of the European Commission, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The co-convening agencies of the ACT-Accelerator are: CEPI, FIND, Gavi, The Global Fund, UNICEF, Unitaid, Wellcome, WHO, the World Bank and The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The present phase of its operation is formally concluded in September, indicating that the plandemic is considered officially concluded. We might then anticipate ad hoc changes to NZ GOV policies, actually predicated on clandestine directives or operative time lines received from supranational entities.

However, of concern is that the ACT-Accelerator is not destined to disappear at the end of September 2022. As it points out, it is presently in transition, exploring ways (seeking justification for a continued existence) in which to continue to, ‘manage subsequent waves of COVID-19, if and when new variants emerge’.

Supranational bodies and foundations, international funding, partners, investors, developers, corporate manufacturers, safety guarantors, providers, distributors, mandating governments and health authorities, hospital authorities, doctors , nurses, department store and pharmacy ‘vaccinators’ all these and more were woven into a web ensnaring the globe. Their compliant, conned, or coerced subjects, brainwashed into a state of idiocy and hyper-alarm by a relentless diet of government sponsored media propaganda that pumped a fear laden narrative ensured success.

The “success” seems stunning. To date, August 2022, 67.4% of people in the World have received at least one ‘vaccine’ dose.

Acknowledgement to Dr Robert Malone, ‘Friday Funnies’ Aug 12, 2022 The needle and the damage done

Introducing “Disease X”

A theme was created and incorporated into the corporate milieu of CEPI. The mysterious hobgoblin, “Disease X,” whose modus operandi is catastrophisation, primarily in order to furnish unending justification.

“Disease X” defined by CEPI

Disease X” represents the knowledge that a serious international epidemic could be caused by a pathogen currently unknown to cause human disease. In February 2018, “Disease X” was included in the updated WHO R&D Blueprint list of priority diseases.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a “Disease X.” As COVID-19 shows, diseases do not respect borders. We need to be prepared on a global scale to respond to future outbreaks.

However, the CEPI definition required a tweak to the WHO definition of a pandemic. The current WHO definition of a pandemic conveniently describes it as an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people.

Explicit in these words is the notion of ‘not respecting borders’ (to wit, the very aim of corporate globalism). To achieve this, while simultaneously and drastically lowering the bar on what constituted a pandemic, the tweak was delivered.

The WHO redefined ‘pandemic’ to exclude reference to the words, "with enormous numbers of deaths and illness" and (for virus theory adherents), also deleted the requirement for a new sub-type with a simple reassortant virus, meaning that many seasonal flu ‘viruses’ could be classified as ‘pandemic influenza'. The continued presence of these deleted words would have precluded the political execution of the COVID charade.

And so the comparatively trivial seasonal affliction that was “COVID” was morphed into a ‘pandemic’, thereby unleashing the necessary social and economic degradation facilitating the further machinations of the WEF and its corporate globalist partners. We observed the coincidence of the political leaders and health authorities of so many countries collectively enthused, acting in concert as if from the same instruction manual.

The Pandemic Became A Political Instrument

Unsurprising to the informed is the observation that the WHO plots continually (like corporation UN) to leverage its role to impose a global economic and social revolution. And like its UNEP and UNFCCC bedfellows, it is just another Trojan horse.

So, it is no coincidence that the WHO objectives appear very similar to those of the UNFCCC, an entity born of UNEP doctrine and the manifestly sycophantic adulation of Maurice Strong. The definitions of ‘climate change’ are broadly predicated on any direct or indirect anthropogenic influence on land usage and/or atmospheric composition. This ideologically structured general statement replaced ‘global warming’ as the latter was readily falsifiable. Only one way exists to falsify the current idelogical statement (ie: to arrest ‘climate change’), namely the expunging of humanity from the globe. In this way the ideological statement serves to provide unending justification for the imposition of destitution, de-industrialisation and ultimately, de-population. That is the Trojan horse of UNFCCC climatism ideology.

Machiavellian corporate gobalist planning has existed for a long time.

Back in September 2009 its then the WHO Director-General, Dr Margaret Chan Fung Fu-chun, a Canadian physician stated:

‘ “Ministers of health" should take advantage of the "devastating impact" swine flu will have on poorer nations to tell, "heads of state and ministers of finance, tourism and trade," that the belief that, "living conditions and health status of the poor would somehow automatically improve as countries modernized, liberalized their trade and improved their economies," is false. Wealth doesn't equal health.’

‘She went on to say that, "Changes in the functioning of the global economy," are needed to, "distribute wealth on the basis of "values" [ideology] like community, solidarity, equity and social justice,” [communism/socialism/technosocial fascism/corporate globalism, just take your pick!] and, "The international policies and systems that govern financial markets, economies, commerce, trade and foreign affairs have not operated with fairness as an explicit policy objective." ‘

There is little difference today except that the corporate globalist quest has become blatant and many more people are aware of the rank theft of their freedom, prosperity and happiness. Destitution, de-industrialisation and de-population is taking place.

The Importance Of Fear

Fear is crucial to the expedition of the ideology of corporate globalism.

The installation of future fear, the risk of economic collapse, the potential death of millions at the hands of “Disease X," is key. In the case of COVID, “Disease X” was comparatively trivial Nevertheless, the modus operandi of fear served to furnish the requisite justification to intervene with an experimental, unsafe and ineffective global ‘vaccination’ program en masse, using the novel and extraordinary means of an accelerated production that intentionally circumvented the inconvenient but established wisdom and experience demanding several years or even a decade of research.

From 10 Years To The Alchemy Of 100 Days

US$1.535 billion was pledged to CEPI. New Zealand pledged US$7m; the biggest commitments came from Japan $300M, UK $211M, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $154M, Wellcome $150M, USA $150M.

The CEO of CEPI, Dr Richard Hatchett, announced the BigPharma alchemy of ‘100 days’ that was christened with pledges of cash in Oslo, Norway, on 8 March 2022 when the global[ist] ‘community came together to commit to the 100 Days Mission – the [ludicrous] ambition to have safe and effective vaccines within 100 days of an epidemic or pandemic threat being identified’.

Just recently, Dr Richard Hatchett CEO of CEPI tweeted that mRNA is an essential, critical component of our being able to achieve the 100 day mission

It is hard to know where ‘100 days’ arose from except possibly the incidental meeting of a marketing focus group at the water cooler. Buzz phrases are clichés before they even become marketing clichés. The intellectual wattage behind ‘100 days’ was a Rainbow of zeros, but it looked good and sounded better.

When did the 100 day alchemy arise?

CEPI encouraged vaccine developers to work towards the following aspirational targets (a lightening period of 210 days from woe to go) for their platforms (2019 ~ pp4).

• 16 weeks from antigen identification to product release for clinical trials

• 6 weeks from administration of first dose to achieving an immune response likely to result in a clinical benefit

• 8 weeks to manufacture 100,000—from a “go” decision to production, fill, finish, and release.

This has been shortened yet further by the emplacement of the mRNA / lipid nanoparticle envelope biotechnology. Given the hideously unsafe and ineffective results observed so far it seems unbelievable that this approach would continue to be lauded. However, it has reaped its proponents countless billions providing a comfortable distraction from their actions, while simultaneously remaining a local and global political tool.

The double benefit in action once again.

I wrote previously: All poised and ready to go; just a tweaked gene sequence between “pandemics.”

CEPI inform us that this is exactly their policy when they explain how poised they are with their in situ “platform technology” broadly referring to a system that uses the same basic components as a backbone, but can be adapted for use against different pathogens by inserting new genetic or protein sequences.”

The Fear Narrative, Building On “Disease X?” 

Handily, “Disease X,” was prioritised by the World Health Organization (WHO) in February 2018, a year after CEPI was formed. Unsurprisingly, the WHO echoed the same definition as CEPI with an addition, that the research and development blueprint explicitly sought to enable the early proliferation of cross-cutting research and development preparedness relevant for an unknown “Disease X”.

‘By their very nature, we cannot predict what or where “Disease X” is likely to emerge’.

However, in their first articulation of an ‘Approach’ on September 5, 2016, CEPI made no reference to “Disease X” nor to unknown pathogens, although the proto-idea is articulated:

“CEPI will concentrate initially on vaccines for known epidemic threats. It will also build capabilities and partnerships that could rapidly be used against new epidemic diseases we are not aware of today, as and when these emerge.”

The Preliminary Business Plan 2017-2021 (Feb 2018) stated: “…Building technical and institutional platforms to accelerate R&D response to known or unknown pathogen emergencies.”

“Disease X,” was not identified in the CEPI Priority List Of Diseases (Jan 26, 2017).

Neither was it seen in the WHO first Annual Review of January 2017, occurring coincidentally at the same time as CEPI was formed. The list of priority diseases for research and development included Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and other highly pathogenic coronaviral diseases (such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome - SARS). “Disease X” does not appear to exist in the 2017 lingua franca.

For those interested, Dr Peter Daszak and Prof. Christian DROSTEN were members of the WHO 2017 Prioritization Committee.

So, by 2018, “Disease X” had materialised in the WHO and CEPI institutional.

WHO: Prioritizing diseases for research and development

The WHO Annual Review (2018) clearly describes “Disease X” in the following way echoing CEPI: Disease X represents the knowledge that a serious international epidemic could be caused by a pathogen currently unknown to cause human disease, and so the R&D Blueprint explicitly seeks to enable cross-cutting R&D preparedness that is also relevant for an unknown “Disease X” as far as possible.

“Disease X” was clearly distinguished by the WHO from highly pathogenic corona viruses, of which benign ‘COVID’ is most definitely not an expression (truncated and edited quote):

‘a number of additional diseases considered for inclusion in the priority list, including highly pathogenic coronaviral diseases other than MERS and SARS’; Although not included on the list of diseases to be considered monkeypox was discussed and [un-named] ‘experts’ stressed the risks they pose to public health.

CEPI Presses On

Meanwhile, CEPI earmarked up to $200 million to advance all-in-one coronavirus shots (February 25, 2018).”Disease X is referred to in January 2020: Our new call for proposals is for innovative platform technologies that can be used to develop vaccines and other immunoprophylactics to rapidly respond to future outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases and unknown pathogens, known as “Disease X”.

“Disease X” gets a brief mention in February 2021, “CEPI also invested in platform technologies that can be used for rapid vaccine and immunoprophylactic development against unknown pathogens (“Disease X”).”

Then comes the clincher.

In 2018, the WHO stated that ‘highly pathogenic coronavirus disease’ was a listed priority disease. Clearly, we know that ‘COVID’ is not '“highly pathogenic” by any stretch of the imagination and pre-existing immunity had been well demonstrated and reported in the BMJ on 17 September 2020, writing, “At least six studies have reported T cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 in 20% to 50% of people with no known exposure to the virus.”.

Yet today CEPI (2022) states, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the world’s first “Disease X.”

When will the lies stop? … When there is no one to listen?

Post Script

Is the Davos cabal hoisting itself by its own petard?

An interconnected web of supranational organisations, corporations, colluding governments and individuals have adopted and enforced a novel, unsafe and ineffective, injected synthetic gene sequence biotechnology. It has demonstrated dire, unpredictable consequences that their own pre-existing corporate research well identified. Post hoc research confirms the carnage seen. The Unraveling of Experimental Medicine - Part III, documents and links to 1,376 peer-reviewed medical journal publications highlighting the severe adverse effects and deaths causally related to the COVID-19 vaccinations.

Daily it appears that this was a hastily seized moment that was opportunistically considered pivotal. It served to catalyse an already extant stream of political, economic and supranational changes in ways that definitively amplified the shift in the balance of power away from nation states, cultures, customs, traditions, individual liberty, rights and established ethics to a surveillance based collectivist model akin to communist China with its corrupt elite, faux-freemarket economy, collectivism, social credit scores and stifling surveillance. The labels may vary, the model and evident transition does not.

However, The Law of Unintended Consequences is eminently applicable in this scenario, given the large number of unpredictable variables encroached upon. These are variables that so many either knew about and took for granted or were unaware of, and then subsequently became aware. These variables also include but are not limited to the dire economic, social and individual personal consequences of the millions of injuries and resultant deaths following synthetic gene, lipid nanoparticle injections. Unpredictably subtracting a large number of people from society has a legion of consequences.

The unethical and abundantly self-evident constraint of a significant number of liberties, implemented in an illogical, irrational and vindictive manner by authorities who refused, and continue to refuse, to submit to scrutiny and accountability, but instead employ a swathe of media to screen paint an absurd and ridiculous image, is designed to occlude the obvious incoherence lying within, and deeper yet, the machiavellian coherence of a plan in play.

The Time of COVID ~ 9 August 2022

A Report by Phillip M. Altman BPharm(Hons), MSc, PhD
Clinical Trial & Pharmaceutical Regulatory Affairs Consultant 9 August 2022

Contributing editors Julian Gillespie LLB, BJuris

Associate Professor Peter Parry MBBS, PhD, FRANZCP Katie Ashby-Koppens LLB

Appended:
Australian COVID-19 vaccines Adverse Event Summary & Analysis Lisa Mitchell BSc., MAppStats, MBA FAICD

Foreword
I am pleased and proud to endorse the attached letter and monograph, meticulously compiled by Dr Phillip Altman and his colleagues. They address some important aspects of COVID19 management and policy, especially in Australia, with a focus on the nature, deployment and effects of “vaccines”.

It is abundantly clear that there has been repression and suppression in scientific circles and the media of any views or suggestions that run counter to the government/mainstream narrative. However, many studies now indicate that the Covid19 vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines, are less than 'safe and effective', and the ramifications are truly confronting.

Armed with these facts, the scientific and medical communities can now begin proper discussions of potential solutions that improve the benefit/risk ratios for the public and do not harm careers and livelihoods of professionals seeking the best outcomes for their patients.
Wendy Hoy AO FAA FRACP
Professor of Medicine
Director, Centre for Chronic Disease
University of Queensland
Brisbane, Australia

Conclusion

(truncated)

The introduction and worldwide use of COVID-19 gene-based ‘vaccines’ has been associated, in the short term, with far more deaths, illnesses, injuries, and disabilities than any other therapeutic agent in the history of medicine. Due to the total lack of any long-term safety data, the potential future iatrogenic effects (including neurological, immunological and carcinogenic effects) may be even more devasting.

Despite initial claims, the COVID-19 gene-based ‘vaccines’ have now been shown to possess disappointing clinical efficacy - they neither prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection nor do they prevent transmission of the virus; any immunological protection wanes rapidly and, coincident with the emergence of the Omicron variant, evidence of negative vaccine efficacy is being reported in many countries including Australia. '

In light of widely reported emerging and compelling evidence, there appears to be little scientific or clinical justification to support vaccine mandates as a health policy.

Phillip M. Altman PhD

The Law of Unintended Consequences will be the subject of my next news letter.