reSee.it - Related Video Feed

We must remain vigilant about current diseases, but an even greater danger lies in fixating on the last pandemic when preparing for future threats. Emerging infections can arise from various sources, and we are still susceptible to the intentional spread of diseases by those who seek to cause harm. Our global community faces numerous potential health threats.

The discussion centers on gain-of-function (GoF) research, its regulation, and the motivations behind it. The first speaker notes the administration’s goal to end GoF research and asks where that stands. The second speaker says progress has been made, and the White House is working on a formal policy. He then defines the issue in stages: what GoF research is, why someone would do it, and how to regulate it to prevent dangerous projects that could catastrophically harm human populations. He clarifies that GoF research is not inherently bad, but dangerous GoF research is. He gives an insulin example: creating bacteria to produce insulin is a legitimate GoF that benefits diabetics. In contrast, taking a virus from bat caves, bringing it to a lab in a densely populated city with weak biosafety, and manipulating it to be more transmissible among humans is a dangerous GoF that should not be supported. The administration’s policy aims to prevent such dangerous work entirely, and the President signed an executive order in April or May endorsing this policy. Next, he discusses implementation: how to create incentives to ensure this research does not recur. He explains that the utopian idea behind such research was to prevent all pandemics by collecting viruses from wild places, testing their potential to infect humans by increasing their pathogenicity, and then preparing countermeasures in advance (vaccines, antivirals) and stockpiling them, even though those countermeasures would not have been tested against humans yet. If a virus did leap to humans, the foreseen countermeasures might prove ineffective because evolution is unpredictable. This “triage” approach—identifying pathogens most likely to leap and preemptively preparing against them—was the rationale for dangerous GoF work, a rationale he characterizes as flawed. He notes that many scientists considered this an effort to do bioweapons research under the guise of safety and defense. The work is dual-use. The U.S. is a signatory to the Biological Weapons Convention and does not conduct offensive bio-weapons research, but other countries might. The discussion highlights that the GoF research discussed during the pandemic can backfire and may not align with true biodefense, since countermeasures might not match whatever pathogen actually emerges. The speaker concludes that this agenda—pursuing GoF to prevent pandemics—has drawn substantial support from parts of the Western world and other countries for about two and a half decades, but he implies it is not deserving of continuation.

I have served in 5 administrations and want to emphasize that the next administration will face challenges in infectious diseases. There will be both chronic diseases and surprise outbreaks. History shows that these challenges are inevitable, so it is crucial to be prepared. Many have underestimated infectious diseases, but they remain a significant threat.

The video discusses various topics related to biotechnology, biomedical technology, and the potential risks associated with biological weapons. It mentions the use of nanotechnology, the development of vaccines, and the role of international cooperation in addressing these issues. The speakers also touch on the possibility of synthetic viruses and the need for ethical governance in research and implementation. Overall, the video emphasizes the importance of understanding and managing the risks associated with biotechnology for the benefit of society.

"There's the transformative, if I might use that word, experience that we've all had now in year five of COVID." The speaker says, "The thought that we won't have another pandemic, I think is naive at best and just not completely unrealistic at worst." They add, "I'm convinced that there will be another pandemic and that's the reason why we have to be perpetually prepared to prevent the terrible impact of a pandemic."

The new global health security strategy aims to enhance capabilities to combat various health threats worldwide. It focuses on strengthening capacities through partnerships, mobilizing political support and financing, and fortifying global defenses. The strategy emphasizes the importance of investing in prevention, early detection, and response to outbreaks to protect lives and economies. Collaboration with partners, including governments and organizations, is crucial for effective global preparedness. The strategy also highlights the need for sustainable investments in technologies and manufacturing to ensure readiness for future health crises. The strategy underscores the significance of bipartisan support and partnership with Congress to address health security challenges effectively. Translation: The new global health security strategy aims to enhance capabilities to combat various health threats worldwide. It focuses on strengthening capacities through partnerships, mobilizing political support and financing, and fortifying global defenses. The strategy emphasizes the importance of investing in prevention, early detection, and response to outbreaks to protect lives and economies. Collaboration with partners, including governments and organizations, is crucial for effective global preparedness. The strategy also highlights the need for sustainable investments in technologies and manufacturing to ensure readiness for future health crises. The strategy underscores the significance of bipartisan support and partnership with Congress to address health security challenges effectively.

We need to discuss bioweapons. I've spent over two years researching them for a book and the technology to develop these microbes is rapidly advancing. Hundreds of millions have been invested in ethnically targeted microbes, and China is doing the same. There's an argument that COVID-19 was ethnically targeted, disproportionately impacting certain races. The genetic structure of ACE2 receptors varies among races, making some more immune than others. COVID-19 seems to target Caucasians and Black people, while Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese individuals appear more immune. Whether this was deliberate is unknown, but research shows the racial and ethnic impact differential. China and the U.S. are developing ethnic bioweapons, which explains those labs in Ukraine that collect Russian and Chinese DNA for targeting purposes.

We must remain vigilant about current diseases, but an even greater danger is focusing too much on the last pandemic when preparing for future threats. Emerging infections can arise from various sources, and we are still vulnerable to intentional spread by those seeking to cause harm. Our global community's health faces numerous potential threats. It's crucial to consider a wide range of possibilities to effectively safeguard public health.

We need to discuss bioweapons, particularly the advancements in ethnically targeted microbes. Significant investments have been made by various countries, including China, in developing these technologies. There's speculation that COVID-19 may have been engineered to target specific ethnic groups, with evidence suggesting it affects Caucasians and Black individuals more severely, while Jews and Chinese may have greater immunity. The Chinese are reportedly investing heavily in ethnic bioweapons, and similar efforts are underway elsewhere, including labs in Ukraine that are collecting DNA samples from different ethnicities to potentially target populations by race.

The speaker discusses the current state of biodefense and the need for a different approach due to emerging threats and advancements in technology. They highlight the importance of collaboration and the removal of bureaucratic barriers in addressing these challenges. The speaker also mentions the development of nonspecific medical countermeasures to enhance the immune system's response to unknown agents, as well as the rapid advancement of specific drugs through computational systems. They emphasize the role of situational awareness and the vulnerabilities in the industrial base and supply chain. The speaker concludes by discussing the review of policies, strategies, operational posture, research and development pipeline, and total force readiness in biodefense.

The speaker emphasizes the complexity of the issue, stating that the health sector alone cannot solve it. Collaboration with other departments like Homeland Security and NATO is necessary. They stress the importance of countering anti-vaccine aggression, highlighting the impact of such beliefs on public health.

Project BioShield is a proposed initiative to enhance future security against bioterrorism. The speaker requests support for a budget proposal of almost $6,000,000,000. This funding aims to rapidly develop and provide effective vaccines and treatments. The focus is on agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, Ebola, and plague. The speaker asserts the necessity to act preemptively, based on the assumption that enemies may weaponize these diseases.

To create a defensive program against bioterrorism, the speaker consulted with unconventional sources. These included former U.S. bioweapons experts from decades ago, international figures from countries like the U.K., and defectors from the Soviet Union. The speaker learned from these experts to inform the development of a multi-billion dollar program.

The speaker, who has served in 5 administrations, discusses the issue of pandemic preparedness. They emphasize that the coming administration will face challenges in dealing with infectious diseases, including both chronic diseases and surprise outbreaks. The speaker highlights the importance of learning from past experiences, such as HIV, and stresses the need for substantial resources, involvement of communities, cross-sector collaboration, and engagement of leaders and policymakers. They assert that infectious diseases are a perpetual challenge that will not go away, and confidently state that such challenges will be seen in the next few years.

The speakers discussed the constant hacks that caused disruptions and the need for better protection against future threats. They suggested that studying the origins of outbreaks should become a routine practice, with experts reviewing each outbreak. They also emphasized the importance of joint studies and collaboration among scientists worldwide. The speakers believed that making these measures routine would help prevent and combat future outbreaks.

We used to defend against a known list of chemical and biological threats, but now we face new challenges. Global warming is causing the permafrost to melt, revealing forgotten pathogens. Additionally, our adversaries have advanced technologies that expand the definition of biodefense beyond known threat agents. To address these changes, the Department of Defense is forming a council that will involve combatant commands, services, and other components. Working groups will be established to tackle the complex policy and strategy challenges and prioritize efforts. These bodies will shape the biodefense environment within the department.

I will discuss pandemic preparedness today. Based on my experience, I can say that the next administration will face challenges with chronic infectious diseases and unexpected outbreaks. In my 32 years as NIAID director, history shows that these challenges are inevitable for the new administration.

The speaker discusses the lack of transparency and safety concerns surrounding the operation of a biological laboratory in Ukraine, which is reportedly funded by the US Department of Defense. The speaker highlights the previous outbreaks caused by similar US military overseas biological experiments, leading to protests and suspicions from multiple countries. The international community is deeply concerned about this laboratory, and questions remain about the true intentions and detailed information of these projects. The speaker urges the US to be transparent, responsible, and address the concerns of the international community by fulfilling its obligations under the biological weapons convention and providing comprehensive explanations regarding the military activities involving biological agents both inside and outside its borders.

All components involved in global or targeted responses will come together in this new initiative. Working groups will address the complex policy and strategy challenges, as well as prioritize future efforts. The Department of Defense and the biodefense enterprise will have ad hoc or evergreen bodies to shape the environment.

The speaker discusses the importance of the Bioposture Review (BPR) and the need for active US government engagement in biodefense. They mention the appointment of new leadership, the creation of a Biodefense Council, and the need for better biosafety and biosecurity. The BPR addresses bio threats from various sources, including natural, man-made, and accidental, and emphasizes the importance of international cooperation. The speaker also highlights the role of the Department of Defense (DoD) in supporting civilian efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic and other bio threats. They mention the need for ongoing reviews and the establishment of working groups to address policy and strategy challenges in biodefense. The speaker concludes by discussing the funding request for biodefense initiatives.

The speaker discusses the globalist agenda to create race-specific bioweapons for depopulation. They warn of a new strain of bird flu with a 40% fatality rate, potentially causing a global pandemic. The speaker highlights the dangers of drug-resistant pathogens and the potential use of bioweapons to usher in a world government. They emphasize the need for preparedness and caution against ignoring the looming threat. The message is a stark warning to prioritize survival in the face of a possible global catastrophe.

The speaker discusses pandemic preparedness and the potential challenges the coming administration may face. They address the issue of gain of function research and deny funding it in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The speaker emphasizes the need to keep an open mind regarding the origins of the coronavirus and dismisses conspiracy theories. They provide guidance on mask-wearing and highlight the importance of vaccination. The speaker clarifies their stance on lockdown measures and refutes claims that vaccines can make people worse. They mention the optimal degree of protection after infection is vaccination. The speaker acknowledges concerns about long-term effects of vaccines and the need for further study. They express frustration with misinformation and disinformation campaigns.

There is a concern about the potential for a big war or a natural pandemic, which could cause millions of deaths. The last major pandemic happened a century ago, but with the speed of global travel, the spread of a pandemic could happen quickly. However, the speaker is most worried about bioterrorism. They believe that even a small terrorist group could cause significant harm using non-human to human transmissible agents like anthrax. Thankfully, these groups have not yet been able to obtain or create a nuclear weapon.

There are 25 to 30 US-funded biolabs in Ukraine conducting research on dangerous pathogens amid an active war. These facilities are at risk of being compromised, potentially leading to the spread of deadly pathogens worldwide, similar to COVID-19. To protect global health, these labs must be shut down immediately, and the pathogens destroyed. The Biden administration should collaborate with Russia, Ukraine, NATO, and the UN to establish a ceasefire around these labs until they are secured. Additionally, the US funds around 300 biolabs globally engaged in risky research. Given the vulnerabilities of these labs, they should have been shut down two years ago. This issue transcends partisan politics; immediate action is necessary for the safety of all people.

The transcript covers a broad set of interwoven claims about global health security, intelligence operations, political conspiracies, and alleged CIA influence on U.S. leadership. Key points include: - Pandemic preparedness and global infrastructure: There is discussion that an airborne, deadly disease could emerge, and to deal with it effectively we must put in place infrastructure globally and domestically to see, isolate, and respond quickly. The investment is framed as a smart, long-term insurance against future flu strains like the Spanish flu, especially in a globalized world. - CIA and presidency dynamics: The day after an election, the CIA director allegedly authorizes a president-elect to begin receiving a President’s Daily Brief (PDB) and uses the briefing to “suck him in,” presenting impressive can-dos that shape the new president’s perceptions and questions. This is described as psychological profiling and manipulation, with the CIA using long-standing methods to influence a president and government direction. - Allegations of a covert cabal influencing U.S. institutions: The conversation suggests a cabal has aimed to destroy U.S. institutions from within, including defunding the military and ordering actions that undermine allies while aiding enemies. This cabal allegedly includes control over the FBI, DOJ, and the presidency, culminated in the appointment of James Comey to head the FBI, portrayed as a “cardinal” with ties to the Clinton Foundation and as part of broader cabal activity. - 2008–2011 FBI and political corruption narrative: An asset described as a high-level foreign agent allegedly influenced U.S. politics and was connected to multiple intelligence services, with claims about his role in internal U.S. political manipulation. The rise of a president referred to as “Renegade,” identified as Barry Sartaro (Barry Soetoro), is described as part of the cabal’s plan to destabilize the United States from within, including military demoralization and misdirection. - Barack Obama conspiracy theories: The dialogue asserts that Barack Obama’s origins and identity have been manipulated for political purposes, including claims about a forged birth certificate, ongoing questions about birth location, and various individuals connected to Hawaii’s health department and local authorities providing or denying birth certificate verification. References include Loretta Fuddy and investigations into Obama’s birth details, with assertions that Obama’s name and identity were manipulated in Indonesia (Barry Soetoro) and that his family connections tie to CIA-backed operations in Asia. - Indonesia coup and CIA involvement: The conversation links Obama’s family to CIA-backed activities in Indonesia, including the overthrow of Sukarno and the rise of Suharto, with relatives described as having roles in money channels and death squads. The narrative asserts that Lolo Soetoro acted in intelligence-adjacent roles and that Obama’s grandmother helped channel CIA funds in the region. - Claims about CIA media manipulation and “MK Ultra” style operations: The speakers reference Operation Mockingbird, MK Ultra, and other CIA operations as public knowledge used to undermine the American people. They suggest continued silencing and manipulation by those operations. - Kill lists and drone warfare under the Obama administration: The transcript alleges that John Brennan led “Tuesday morning kill list” meetings starting in 2009, with drones and targeted killings used to eliminate designated individuals, and asserts confidence that Obama’s administration excelled at deploying missile strikes and other covert actions, contrasted with the possibility of ongoing use by subsequent administrations. - Recurrent thread of distrust in institutions: Across pandemic planning, birth certificate controversy, foreign influence, CIA cabal theories, and drone warfare, the overarching theme is distrust of established institutions and assertion of deep, planned manipulation by covert actors.