1. In February 2018 Science magazine ran a long puff piece about the Global Virome Project. Its authors included Peter Daszac, his associates Jonna Mazet and Dennis Carroll. Carroll is a former official at the CDC and USAID, an agency that funded Daszak extremely well. Carroll left USAID to found and lead the Global Virome Project, and he and Mazet both signed the Lancet letter. George Gao, current head of China’s CDC, also is a coauthor, as well as 5 others. Daszac is the corresponding author. The tone of the piece suggests Daszak wrote it, because like much else he has written, it sounds like a fund-raising letter. It discusses the wonderful benefits to be gained in terms of drugs and vaccines for future pandemics, simply by virus hunting… if the world will pay the $billions Daszak requires. I wonder if EcoHealth Alliance paid Science to run this piece.
I would say that plan did not work out so well for the world.
2. On January 27, 2020 Peter Daszac, EcoHealth employee Kevin Olival and Hongying Li submitted a paper for publication to the journal Biosafey and Health, with copyright going to the Chinese Medical Association Publishing House. Daszac is the corresponding author.
The paper was rapidly accepted and available online on February 5, 2020. It was titled, “A strategy to prevent future epidemics similar to the 2019-nCoV outbreak.” In it, the wildlife trade is blamed for pandemics. The authors write, “the drivers of disease emergence are human activities that are expanding on a global scale, including deforestation, agricultural intensification and the wildlife trade…suggesting that pandemics will become more frequent and more devastating in the future.” NIAID and USAID paid for the work.
3. The Lancet Covid-19 Commission (for which Peter Daszak chaired a task force) authored a 23 page statement published in the Lancet on September 14, 2020. This was 23 pages of mostly repetitive garbage. I have never seen anything 23 pages long in the Lancet, ever. Did somebody cough up a per page price?
This long statement has clues that it was written by the pandemic purveyors for their own purposes. For example, “The Covid-19 epidemic can and should be suppressed through non-pharmaceutical interventions, including effective community health services, that cut transmission of the virus, to be followed by the introduction of effective and safe vaccines…” This is an unsubtle statement against treating the illness with drugs! Published in the world’s top medical journal! Is the Lancet the best journal money can buy, especially given the Lancet‘s publication of the May 22 fabricated paper on the chloroquines and the March 7 Daszac ghost-written letter panning Covid conspiracy theories?
And, “Uncertainty also remains about the duration of acquired immunity from past infection.” Since we know that people who recovered from SARS-1 had long-lasting immunity, why question the duration of immunity from SARS-2? The only reason is as a marketing tool for vaccinating those who are already immune, and then giving frequent boosters.
4. During July 27-31, 2020 Peter Daszac chaired the International Workshop of Biodiversity and Pandemics/ Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Its Executive Summary seems to be a commercial for Daszac’s multibillion dollar One Health initiative to (supposedly) prevent pandemics. Not start them.
But the Summary also contains many clues to where the purveyors of the pandemic seem to want to take the world’s people. “[Disease] emergence is caused by human activities” it declares.
Other suggestions from this group reveal the hidden hand driving the agenda. What are some of the things the group calls for?
- ‘Green’ corporate bonds
- Reduced meat consumption
- Reassessing the relationship between people and nature
Yes, we have heard it before, and Daszak was everywhere, promoting such ideas. I could go on and on. He chaired a group at the National Academies. He was made a member of the National Academies.
But you get the point. Daszak had several roles. EcoHealth Alliance, with extensive military funding, seems to have explored and transferred dangerous viruses among its partners in 31 countries. Daszac also posed as an environmentalist, protecting the environment from wanton agriculturalists and wildlife traders, A.K.A rural people. Finally, he was a teller of tales, tales meant to shape the future. Man’s incursions into areas of high biodiversity harm the planet. We must live in harmony with nature. We must eat less meat.
Mind you, he never talked about growing livestock more safely, avoiding antibiotics that encourage the growth of resistant bacteria. He never talked about recycling, or using less energy. No, he was fixated on a few memes, shared with Fauci and the World Economic Forum, that seem to be intended to direct us to new ways of living.
The ‘One Health’ idea, which is based on the proposition that we should be constantly worried about zoonotic infections, has recently crept deeply into the fiber of public health, and imho it needs to be rooted out. It is being promoted as the justification for changing the way humans and animals interact. While I am all for improved animal husbandry, the One Health idea looks more like a Trojan horse than an animal welfare plan to me, especially since Daszac and his ilk have been its major cheerleaders.
Here is what our CDC, another major promoter of the [deliberately] vague One Health concept, says about it:
One Health is gaining recognition in the United States and globally as an effective way to fight health issues at the human-animal-environment interface, including zoonotic diseases. CDC uses a One Health approach by involving experts in human, animal, environmental health, and other relevant disciplines and sectors in monitoring and controlling public health threats and to learn about how diseases spread among people, animals, plants, and the environment.
Successful public health interventions require the cooperation of human, animal, and environmental health partners. Professionals in(doctors, nurses, public health practitioners, epidemiologists), (veterinarians, paraprofessionals, agricultural workers), (ecologists, wildlife experts), and need to communicate, collaborate on, and coordinate activities. Other relevant players in a One Health approach could include law enforcement, policymakers, agriculture, communities, and even pet owners. No one person, organization, or sector can address issues at the animal-human-environment interface alone.
By promoting collaboration across all sectors, a One Health approach can achieve the best health outcomes for people, animals, and plants in a shared environment.
Do you see what I mean? This statement doesn’t say anything. There are no goals, and no strategies. Collaboration for collaboration’s sake? One Health looks like an excuse to spend public funds while promoting a meaningless concept. But more than that, from my reading I anticipate that One Health will be used to impose changes in the way humans and animals interact… most likely based on the needs of the WEF/elites and not the needs of the people or the animals that will be affected. And One Health will probably try to grab attention in the aftermath of the pandemic, promising, just like Daszak does, that it will save us from the next pandemic. One Health and Peter Daszak are practically synonymous.
A huge gravy train has been built of public health professionals, veterinarians, and government/UN/other agencies to carry out “One Health.” The One Health Commission website provides the following list of governmental organizations that are ‘implementing’ One Health:
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO)
- Institute for Infectious Animal Diseases
- Minnesota One Health Antibiotic Stewardship Collaborative (MOHASC)
- National Center of Competence in Research – Swiss National Science Foundation
- One Arctic, One Health Project of the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Work Group
- One Health Action Collaborative (OHAC) – U.S. National Academies Forum on Microbial Threats
- One Health Awareness Kentucky (OHA-KY)
- One Health Bangladesh
- One Health Collaborating Center Universitas Gadjah Mada – INDOHUN/USAID
- One Health for Next Generations
- One Health Sweden
- Public Health Agency of Canada
- Tennessee Department of Health – One Health Committee
- USAID Emerging Pandemic Threats(EPT-1 and EPT-2) One Health Workforce
- U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) One Health Steering Committee (OHSC)
- U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)
- U.S. National Park Service – One Health
- World Health Organization (WHO)
- World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)
Here is what Peter Daszac, the Commissioner in the , predicted on August 28, 2019:
“In his invited lecture on “Can One Health Help Prevent the Next Pandemic?” Prof. Daszak talked about how emerging infectious diseases are a growing global threat. These diseases are complex and hard to predict. Many of these emerging diseases are zoonotic, meaning that they can spread from animals to humans. A One Health approach, which recognises the interaction between humans, animals and the environment could help disease prediction and preparedness.”
BTW, Daszac is not a professor and never has been. However, our co-conspirator Ian Lipkin, coauthor of the Nature Medicine article, made Daszac a Member in Lipkin’s Center for Infection and Immunity at Columbia.
I think you see what I’m trying to convey. This is a concept promoted by hucksters, for reasons best known to themselves, since their writings lack meaning. Be aware that it may be used as a cudgel to promote pandemic “solutions” and a persistent pandemic mindset.