IF EVER a cure was urgently needed, it’s for the unrelenting medical nihilism of ‘pandemic preparedness’. Exhibit A is Disease X, the unknown ‘pandemic potential pathogen’ which the biodefence mafia and WHO are currently, or should I say once again, preparing us for. It made a return appearance at Davos last week, six years after its 2018 debut. Its trail led back to the insane DARPA X-factor pandemic prevention platform project behind the first Disease X, SARS-CoV-2.
Disease X entered public discourse after joining Ebola, Zika, MERS and SARS on the World Health Organization’s newly developed Research and Development Blueprint for vaccines (convened by the ubiquitous Sir Jeremy Farrar). It was ‘an inescapable truth’, they said, that the next pandemic is coming. Despite the fearmongering it gained little traction with the public.
Unnoticed in the background of this Disease X promotional campaign was the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). To support military preparedness it wanted to create a Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3). Dr Matt Hepburn, the program manager originally running the P3 project, describes it as ‘a technology platform that can place a protective treatment into health providers’ hands within 60 days of a pathogen being identified, and have that treatment induce protection in patients within three days of administration . . . we need to be able to move at this speed considering how quickly outbreaks can get out of control’. Notably he stated that ‘the technology needs to work on any viral disease, whether it’s one humans have faced before or not’.
In a TEDTalk he said: ‘Our premise is you make this [protective compound], you administer it early and you interrupt transmission in those communities. If you can interrupt it, then potentially you can head off the pandemic or at least you can slow things down. Think about a firebreak, or a series of firebreaks to halt the spread of a fire. We knew we were going to push the envelope a little bit, that’s kind of how DARPA is. And so we met with a set of government experts and they laughed at us. That’s ok.’
The P3 concept was two-pronged. DARPA wanted the capability to create synthetic antibodies within 60 days which could be administered for immediate transient protection lasting for a few weeks or months, followed up with a rapid response vaccine which DARPA envisaged being ready in one hundred days. mRNA was to be the technology to deliver both the antibodies and the vaccines.
The groundwork for P3 was laid in 2013 when DARPA contracted Moderna to develop gene-encoded mRNA medical countermeasures against Chikungunya, a viral disease endemic in East Africa and parts of Asia.
DARPA described a four-year project during which participants were to prove their products had viable pathways to regulatory authorisation by selecting a virus of their choice and getting a product through a phase 1 clinical trial. The final test of their platform entailed two demonstrations of their platform in which the identity of a mystery DARPA-selected pathogen which ‘will remain opaque to the teams until the 60-day clock starts’.
The participants selected for the antibody portion of the P3 project were announced in January 2018: MedImmune (a division of AstraZeneca), Abcellera (a Moderna collaborator) and two universities, Duke and Vanderbilt. In June 2020 AstraZeneca licensed a Covid-19 antibody from Vanderbilt and the product called Evusheld received an emergency use authorisation (EUA) from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2021. It was revoked in January 2023 when the FDA said it didn’t work against new variants and there was a risk of allergic reactions. Abcellera received an EUA for its product Bebtelovimab in February 2022 and it was withdrawn from use in November 2022.
However, Moderna’s mRNA ‘vaccine’ programs activities in the run-up to January 2020 also align with the P3 program as described in the call for proposals. In February 2017 Moderna had begun collaborating with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) on a Zika vaccine, enabling US government scientists to run animal tests on Moderna’s mRNA platform.
In 2018 Moderna initiated a Phase 1 trial of its Merck-financed mRNA-RSV vaccine. The trial took place in Australia, presumably to avoid FDA assessors becoming alert to or nervous about any safety issues prior to the demonstration component of the project. Merck was financing both an RSV vaccine and a secret MERS coronavirus vaccine which Moderna was claiming was a shingles vaccine.
Both RSV and coronavirus vaccines have a history of causing vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD). Moderna’s RSV vaccine used an NIAID-developed pre-fusion stabilised protein design developed by Dr Barney Graham of NIAID which they believed solved the VAERD problem. This is an example of the NIAID’s prototype pathogen approach where generalisable solutions to the problems of vaccine development are identified and solved in advance, or so it claims.
Graham’s design was used in mRNA-1273, Moderna’s SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and all Operation Warp Speed (OWS) vaccines except AstraZeneca’s. BioNTech’s Securities Exchange Commission filings show it also used this design in its vaccine BNT162b2 and that it had a licence from the National Institutes of Health.
All the OWS vaccines relied solely on the published genetic sequence. Dr Rick Bright, who was fired as director of Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) in April 2020, says that on January 27, 2020 he was a lone voice within the US government pushing to obtain actual samples of the virus from other countries including China for conventional vaccine development. The US government never requested any.
With schoolboy-like enthusiasm, Hepburn had told his TEDTalk audience on March 3, 2020, that there was a possibility of ‘taking pandemics off the table’. He said: ‘By definition we have a novel virus, therefore research and development is required right now in real time and right now it’s happening because this will accelerate our ability to find vaccines and treatments. So here’s where the good news starts. This process to find a new vaccine used to take ten to 15 years, a really long time, and cost tens of millions of dollars. I think now we can go from discovery to at least having products in clinical trials in weeks.’
By definition a novel virus is something you don’t understand and should invite caution. The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, with its carefully scripted and in retrospect utterly implausible escalation to the March 12 World Health Organization-declared pandemic, occurred midway through the P3 project. And it was Hepburn who was drafted in to run the Operation Warp Speed vaccine development program (or, as they now call it, the Vaccine Acceleration Program) one week afterit was finally launched.
On March 22, 2020, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said: ‘The Chinese government was the first to know of this risk to the world and that puts a special obligation to make sure that data gets to our scientists, our professionals. This is not about retribution. This matters going forward. We’re in a live exercise here.’
It sure was a stroke of luck for a virus to have escaped a Chinese lab, as Dr Kadlec and the US government would have us believe, two years into the DARPA Pandemic Prevention Platform project. The NIAID-funded bat coronavirus vaccine research described in the EcoHealth Alliance DEFUSE proposal which is being blamed for the SARS-CoV2 outbreak was outsourced to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2018 after the gain-of-function moratorium ended. Was this done to create cover for the P3 demonstration? Could SARS-CoV-2 be the mystery pathogen chosen by DARPA and the live exercise a test of its P3 mRNA platform?
Part Two will look more closely at DARPA’s grand P3 experiment