2018 Biodefense | Follow the Money & Marriage of Military to the Private Sector
I just found this 2018 Biodefense hearing which gives insights into how these bureaucrats think and how we humans end up in the mess we’re in. Follow the money and their logic. The meeting basically focuses on what is needed to incentivize and centralize partnerships between the federal government and industry, academia, BigPharma, BigData, and other nongovernmental organizations to improve biological intelligence for current and future threats. Threats that we now believe these organizations were the cause of, and the very reason for suppressing of early treatments (killing millions), and why BigMedia, scientific establishments, and governments of the world could so easily fall in line.
You’ll probably see that when you’re “in” that mindset, that meeting, that role, that organization, how this is how it “has” to play out through centralized operations, and thereby, I don’t see an easy solution here, because the way they are setup, is literally where they are easily taken advantage of by the other organized structures, and how they “must” do it this way because it’s also the logic when in that structure is all you know. Decentralization is probably the only way forward to un-do this kind of red-tape bureaucratic and corporate ownership logic that these people must contend with, but it’s millions of these kinds of organizations all doing this same kind of group-think mentality, each having to get their own corporation to max-value, and unable to see beyond their part in it, or rather, “that’s not my job” (no one’s job it would seem). Their job is to keep themselves in a job, all under the guise of helping protect humanity. Like, they have the same concerns we do, and yet, the solutions are always “give more money to those who are doing it”.
“Govt Help Private Sector”
“It will get through the FDA because the government’s helping fund it.” “Corporate Partnerships” “Reduce risk for Private Sector” “Double BARDA’s funding”, etc.” There are so many alarm bells in this little clip that is infuriating to me… getting through FDA regulations, geez, how did that work out? Corporate Partnerships… geez, how did that work out? Reducing the risk for the Private Sector… Geez, how did that work out? Give BARDA more money? lol, fml… geez, how did that work out?
“It’s really about risk. It’s always about managing risk, and so we do have to engage the commercial private sector. That is absolutely true. The only way this is gonna sustain… it can’t be sustained purely on government. However, the government can help that transition into the private sector, and the way it does that’s very simple is reduces the risk of the upfront part.
What we’re trying to say is that when you develop any of these things, the diagnostic tests, this development cost, we get it, but subsequent to that, there’s also regulatory cost, and that is because the FDA has to do their very important work. We all celebrate what they do, but that it comes with a cost. And we can reduce those front-end costs, it makes a transition much, much easier, and you reduce risk, of course, to the commercial entity that’s gonna take it on. It will get through FDA because the government’s helping fund it going through the process.
So that’s why I say that for BARDA, which is trying to do all this on, honestly, very, very little money, it would be very great if we could somehow support BARDA and the ASPR R&D budget up a little bit more. I’m not saying make them, you know, 20 billion dollar agency, I’m saying, you know, they have 500 million, give another 500. I mean, that’s, you know, that’s dust compared to some of the things we talked about for something like this, and we don’t have an equivalent of a DARPA at HHS. I think that we really should. I think that would be, you know, something that would be, and it remember all of DoD, the Department of Defense (DoD) is big and monstrous as this, DARPA is only a two and a half billion dollar agency compared to everything else that they do it, but look at what they’ve achieved.
I’m just saying it, this is kind of where we need to be because it’s the only way we’re gonna make it palatable for the commercial sector. Take out commercial sector, I’ll sustain it. They’ll carry for the next 10 or 20 years, that’s awesome. The government should not do that. That should be in the purview of the commercial sector, but we just have to make it so that they can carry it over. The front up front risk and cost is reduced.”
“We need finance for CRISPR Gene-editing and to alter DNA”
“We need finance for CRISPR Gene-editing and to alter DNA in combination with artificial intelligence and a centrally-coordinated capability to map, plan, prioritize, and finance the collection, analysis, and reporting on biodefense related systems”
“Today, one of the highly promising areas for treating bacterial infections, correcting genetic problems such as cystic fibrosis, haemophilia, or sickle-cell diseases, producing biofuels, creating bacteriophages to eliminate malaria-carrying mosquitoes is CRISPR CAS 9, the enzyme, allows much easier gene editing. Research can easily alter DNA sequences and modify gene function. CRISPR is generating extreme excitement in the scientific community because it’s faster, cheaper, more accurate, and more efficient than other existing genome editing tools. The decreasing cost of entry into the science area increases the amount of research that can be completed but it also makes it more difficult to understand where the work is occurring, who is doing it, and for what purpose.
Potentially, the disease-fighting benefits of CRISPR are incredible, but there’s a threat side to this tool. Unethical governments and organizations may use the techniques to synthesize viruses, allowing the targeting of specific ethnicities with disease or enhancing their genetic traits. As well as the potential for affecting germline stem cells, creating targeted harm or enhancements that are generational.
Overlapping CRISPR’s Venn diagram with the focused future advances in artificial intelligence, and you may see a future with the potential for computer-driven design and virtual testing and genetic editing that may eliminate the need for laboratory testing and tell prototyping. The computer can drive the research based on programming from man and the lessons it learns as it moves through the program. The disciplines required to study the extent of this problem are not fungible. Moreover, they’re not fungible across the other WMD paradigms.
We need a centrally coordinated capability to map, plan, prioritize, and finance the collection, analysis, and reporting on bio-defense-related systems. Thus, assuming the appropriate priority and resourcing, a National Intelligence Manager for biological threats would have the ability to create that interdisciplinary team within the framework of a discreet intelligence topic. While addressing bystanders and distributing assessments necessary for the enterprise. In addition, one of the components within the organization could be dedicated to intelligence sharing to all levels of our governmental structures with needed intelligence information. Thank you very much.”
Incentives for Medical Countermeasures “We need guaranteed purchase & ongoing funding”
“How do we create incentives in the private sector to produce medical countermeasures or diagnostics for which there may not be a market, unless there’s a crisis?” “We need money that isn’t held hostage by the annual budget, and we need guaranteed purchase and guaranteed sustainability of funding” Also includes how DARPA thinks vs how BARDA thinks.
“Centralized Lockstep collaboration with BigPharma, BigData, and Govt“
This is how you coordinate government projects with BigPharma, BigData: Google, Amazon, and other departments: Agriculture, Health, Universities, etc., into lockstep for biodefense programs. “The question is how to take this threat and make it a priority for the leaders so they get ready for it.”
“Except for an occasional, novel that scares people about the biological threat is on people’s minds. Of course, it was during the anthrax scare in 2001. Senator Daschle was a target, and now every now and then, something regarding ricin comes up. People do get a bit nervous about it. The poisoning of the former Russian agent in England got people’s attention. It was quite different, it was targeted and all that, but it got people’s attention. On the question of infectious disease pandemics, you know, the country was in a state of almost a frozen state for a while about Ebola. And it was really quite confined, and thank God not much happened. But people are frightened by that. And of course, when you think about what happened in 1918, as we said earlier today, there’s good reason for that. So there is public concern out there.
The question is how to take this threat and make it a priority for the leaders so they get ready for it. Because as I said to Tim Marcin earlier in the day, a lot of the work that’s being done on this is invisible to almost every other American until that day comes, God forbid, when there is a biological attack, or there is a genuine outbreak of infectious disease. Then the entire country and world will be focused on it, and a lot of fingers will be pointed if we’re not ready.
I mean, that’s actually how we got to our, as I recall, our recommendation for a National Intelligence Manager for Biological Threats, which is, if you will, if you think about how do you defend against the threat? It’s like any other defense effort, and this one, particularly, you need good intelligence. And as we studied the field, it seemed to us that in this part of it, like most everything else we were saying, there was some work going on, and some of it focused on biological threats, some of it coincidental to intelligence work that was being done, for instance, on the terrorist threat. So you might come across something that suggested that this terrorist group was beginning to get interested in perhaps committing resources to developing biological weapons. But there was no coordination, and there was not a real awareness across the intelligence community of how much money was being spent, or was being spent.
[…] So I mean, I think I’ve heard the drift of what you all said, but I’m curious as to whether everyone, I’m first about the attitude, the opinion you have about this idea of a National Intelligence Manager for Biological Threats. Is it a good idea? Is it the way to answer some of the problems you’ve described and we’ve described?”
“I think it’s a good idea. I think we’ve got to put some meat on the bones on what the NIM’s qualifications would be and then what that NIM’s outreach would be to the rest of the community which it serves, right? So this isn’t just an intel problem, this is also reaction from the Department of Agriculture, Health, and Human Services which doesn’t even have an intelligence arm. They were thinking about it, but they don’t even have one. Universities, how does this NIM, how does this person reach out to the rest of the community? Because all of those solutions aren’t in the intelligence community, they’re out there.
They’re in the pharmaceutical companies, they’re in the universities. Duncan brought up the importance of good analytics, big data. You know, Google, Amazon, bring them in too. But that person is going to be able to reach out into the entire community.
Intelligence is a supporting role, right? It supports, you don’t have a secretary of intelligence, you know, it’s a supporting role to every single one of the department’s bureaus and agencies and then in the US government. So preventative measures, as you brought up, Mr. Winston, this is very important and understanding what those preventative measures are without being a Chicken Little and saying the sky is falling and everybody’s gonna die of anthrax, you know, or Ebola, but we have a resolute, mature and very sober approach to what defense, bio-defense really is and what could really harm us. That NIM is critical, you know, having that central point inside the intelligence community is critical, but that person has got to be able to reach out outside the intelligence community. So, should they reside inside the Executive Office of the President? Should they be in the Director of National Intelligence? You know, where that position is something that maybe we should chat about.”
Genetic Profiling “China paid 100 million dollars for genetic records of Americans”
“Yes, I’d like to build on something that is Riley raised. It’s another example of asleep-at-the-switch. This issue of foreign access to genetic information on people in this country, apart from the security of the databases, whether it be in healthcare or 23andme and ancestry.com, the following obviously is an unclassified comment. All this information is available in the public literature. And that is the question of the Chinese company called iCarbonX. iCarbonX is a consortium of 600 million dollars invested in by individuals who have a known association with the Chinese government and the PLA.
The colloquialism is, “if it moves, they sequence it.” So it’s everything from microorganisms to us, but they have invested in buying up a number of companies, all of which are related to either profiling the antibodies which are present in the bloodstream of Americans, or the technology for measuring those antibodies in the bloodstream of Americans.
But most important, quite remarkably, in my opinion, unethically, Patients Like Me, which was an altruistic foundation where individuals with rare genetic diseases donated their genetic information for the purposes of advancing medical research, iCarbonX paid Patients Like Me a hundred million dollars for access to the records on 600,000 Americans with rare genetic disorders. And I would submit that that is only the ice tip of the iceberg relative to a very purposeful campaign on the part of the Chinese to actually gain access to the comprehensive genetic information of the American population.” “Well, that’ll keep us up tonight.”
“Gates-Zuckerberg Initiative gave them free genetic sequencers…”
One of the speakers said Gates-Zuckerberg Initiative gave them a free genetic sequencer… for “good will”…. “saying they’ll do the analysis for free, and they’ll store all the data for free.”
“Last week, I was at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Grand Challenges, and they paid for 1,200 scientists to come in and announced a big initiative with the Chan-Zuckerberg Centre, which is out at UC San Francisco, offering money and a free genetic sequencer to everybody who wants one, as long as you share all your genetic findings on microbes and humans from around the world with them. And they’ll do the analysis for free, and they’ll store all the data for free. And when asked what the business model is, they said it was just for human wellbeing and goodness, just like Facebook is to make friends. And so that’s going forward. I mean, CRISPR/Cas9 is now years old, and we’re trying to deal with that. So my question to you is, what’s our forward thinking on some of this bioinformatics as a bio-threat, really as I think where we’re going on this. So what should we be doing?”
“Again, it’s public awareness. It’s the second and third order effects of things like this that affect our population. So you can buy a gene-editing tool on the Internet for like $90 now. So you can do it at home in your kitchen, modify genes and mice or a plant or whatever you like. That’s pretty scary, isn’t it? The fact that folks are so, you know, they’ll go to a hospital, and they’ll have blood drawn, and there’s a little box at the bottom and very fine print that says, “Would you like your DNA shared with for research for medical research?” And everyone checks that block, and nobody has any idea where their DNA is going. And you know, in the intelligence community, we talk about obfuscation of data.
How do you obfuscate DNA? It’s Mrs. Fields’ recipes to her cookies. You can’t obfuscate it. It is your DNA. So you can extract a name, but you’re still going to be able to find out who that person is. It’s you. Everyone is unique. There’s no way to obfuscate it. Everyone is unique.
So as we introduce these vulnerabilities just interest in our and our own well-being center and our naïve, I’ll say naïve interest in medical research and checking blocks and yes, of course, and I fell for it too. You know, my father was at Johns Hopkins, and he had leukaemia, and he was dying, and I would do anything to save him, anything, anything, anything. Cut off my arms and legs, whatever, just save him, checking blocks all over the place, use my DNA for whatever you want. I fell for it too, but I didn’t know.
So the public awareness piece of it, how do we prevent that? How do we protect our human data? How do we understand, you know, put the warning on the side of the cigarettes, warning, Surgeon General has determined that the Chinese could get access to all of your genetic makeup and start editing the entire American population. Yeah, big fear.”
Sadly, these are the important related posts just off the top of my head:
- [DARPA] Paid [Moderna] & [Pfizer] For MRNA Research And Development In 2013
- Pfizer – IBM – Collaborate – Internet Of Things – 2017
- Suspicious Patents
- Reviewing C19=Bioweapon Patent Evidence [Kingston]
- James Giordano: 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Compilation
- Weaponizable ‘Brain Science & Nano-Scale Controllable Robotics’ That Can Be Aerosolized (Modern Warfare)
- Lieberman > Lieber > HCQ > Quantum Dot > Self-Assembling NanoTech > DARPA > Nano-Networks
- Internet Of Bio-NanoThings
- “Internet Of Things” Patent
- Dr Yanowitz’s “Connecting The Dots” Story
- All Viruses & Vaccines Are Bioterrorism? [Documentary, 2007]
- Former DARPA/DoD Scientist On Neuro-AI Mind-Control & Virus Weapons On ‘Ignorant Humanity’ 
- “The Playbook” – How The Few Control The Many [Covid Edition]
- Magnetic Phenomenon Is Real
- COVID-19 Research Awarded By DoD To Ukraine Special Projects In November 2019
- The REAL Anthony Fauci With Robert Kennedy, Jr.
- DNA Weapons | Dr Charles Morgan | Psycho-Neurobiology & War | Key Points
- Time For The Truth On The Presence Of Graphene In The Shots
- What Is In The C19 Vaccines? Trust Not. (Paper)
-  The Hidden Agenda Of Monsanto, GMOs, Rockefeller & Eugenics (Engdahl)
- [Legal] Dr David Martin – Paper Trail As Far Back As 1999 Leads To Current Pandemic
- And more… maybe over 1000 more just on my website, let alone the things I haven’t documented, or the things I have in my megafolder downloads.