Uncategorized
Dr. Malone: ‘Disease X’ is manufactured by the WHO to drive fear and public compliance
Building of the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland
From LifeSiteNews
Don’t be fooled by Disease ‘X’ or ‘Y’ or ‘Z.’ These aren’t real diseases. They are being weaponized to acceptance of the transfer of both funding and authority to an unelected globalist non-governmental organization – the WHO.
I have been working in the public health sector for over 30 years. This includes a fellowship at Harvard and numerous other courses on bioethics. In all that time, there has been one clear message: for the emotional and physical wellbeing of the public, the government and public health must not incite fear without cause, and that to do so is unethical and immoral, akin to yelling “fire” or “active shooter” in a crowded movie theater. That public trust requires transparency and truth telling on the part of public health officials and government.
The CDC codifies this basic premise in their public health risk communication statement:
Be first, be right, be credible. That’s the mantra for crisis communication. Health communicators, whenever a crisis occurs, always be prepared to provide information to help people make the best possible decisions for their health and well-being. [Emphasis added]
READ: WHO’s Dr. Tedros says new global pandemic is matter of ‘when’ not ‘if’ at 2024 Davos summit
In 2018, the World Health Organization came up with the idea of “Disease X,” which is a placeholder for a disease that could be a potential cause of a future major epidemic or a pandemic. The original idea being that planning for an (imaginary) “Disease X” would allow for scientists, public health officials, and physicians to design the best possible practices for a future epidemic or pandemic. They then formally added “Disease X” (an imaginary disease) to the top priority list of pathogens.
The idea behind Disease X was later weaponized to create a fog of fear in the public as well as governments. The weaponization started with COVID-19 communications. In a 2021 study, it was found that the “the only predictor of behavior change during COVID-19 was fear.” Despite their finding that such fear was related to a decrease in both emotional and physical wellbeing, the authors concluded that using fear to drive the public into compliance was the only path forward for public health. The authors write:
However, fear of COVID-19 was related to decreased physical and environmental wellbeing. Overall, these results suggest that ‘fear’ and anxiety at the current time have a functional role, and are related to increased compliance for improving public wellbeing.
‘Damn the torpedoes full steam ahead’
Without further questioning of the basic ethics behind using fear to drive compliance, this logic then became the consensus of public health officials and governments throughout the world. That being that the use of fear to get compliance for vaccines and vaccine mandates, vaccine passports, masking, lockdowns, social distancing, school closures, etc., was acceptable in the name of public health. That the decreased emotional and physical wellbeing of the general public by the promotion of fear tactics was an acceptable side effect.
Exit COVID-19… stage left. Enter ‘Disease X’… stage right
And just like that, “Disease X” has been substituted for COVID-19.
Without any qualms whatsoever, The World Health Organization (WHO) has gone from launching a global scientific process using Disease X as a model, to using “Disease X” as a propaganda driver to drive fear of an imaginary infectious disease. Then to use that fear to get public and governmental compliance for a new pandemic treaty, and more money for the WHO. Such weaponized fear (fearporn) also has been found to elicit more public compliance for public health measures, such as masking, social distancing, vaccines, and lockdowns.
The gradual shift was subtle. In April 2023, the WHO wrote:
Disease X represents the knowledge that a serious international epidemic could be caused by a pathogen currently unknown to cause human disease. The R&D Blueprint explicitly seeks to enable early cross-cutting R&D preparedness that is also relevant for an unknown ‘Disease X.’
In 2024, the WHO gave the general warning (without any data what-so-ever) that the imaginary Disease X could result in 20 times more fatalities than COVID-19.
Of course, there are some people who say this may create panic. It’s better to anticipate something that may happen because it has happened in our history many times, and prepare for it.
Bottom line is that Director-General Tedros now openly admits that the WHO is using fear to drive governments to open their pocket books and to drive compliance for the new pandemic treaty.
And the WHO’s fear mongering is working, the House recently introduced a new bill H.R.3832 – Disease X Act of 2023.
The bill reads:
This bill expands the priorities of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to specifically include viral threats that have the potential to cause a pandemic.
In particular, the bill expands the scope of innovation grants and contracts that may be awarded by BARDA to specifically include those that support research and development of certain manufacturing technology for medical countermeasures against viruses, including respiratory viruses, with pandemic potential. It also expands BARDA’s authorized strategic initiatives to include advanced research, development, and procurement of countermeasures and products to address viruses with pandemic potential.
In order to understand the significance of this bill, it is important to understand what BARDA is:
(BARDA)’ is a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) office responsible for the procurement and development of medical countermeasures, principally against bioterrorism, including chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) threats, as well as pandemic influenza and emerging diseases.
This bill is a sneaky backdoor to significantly expand the mission space of BARDA to include research into viruses. In the past, BARDA has been limited in their scope, so as to not compete with NIH. The expansion of yet another agency with very few limits on their scope is not in the public interest.
So, here is an easy ask. Contact your House representative and let them know how you feel about H.R.3832 – Disease X.
In the meantime, don’t be fooled by Disease “X” or “Y” or “Z.” These aren’t real diseases. They are made-up. They are being weaponized to gain compliance, drive fear, and to gain acceptance of the transfer of both funding and authority to an unelected globalist non-governmental organization – the WHO.
Yes, we have a problem with ongoing gain-of-function research and China is continuing on with its dangerous gain-of-function experiments. By all accounts, these are being conducted in poorly controlled laboratory environments. But such experiments aren’t limited to China; they are also happening in the USA. In 2023, Boston University School of Medicine scientists created a highly lethal SARS-CoV variant, which they then tested on mice.
Furthermore, the Biological Weapons Convention does not prohibit biological weapons, as an overlooked loophole allows for development, manufacture, and stockpiling of such for prophylactic, protective, or other peaceful purposes. The convention must be re-negotiated. The Biological Weapons Convention also does not adequately address gain-of-function research, which must to be banned worldwide.
These are concrete ongoing issues that the World Health Organization is not addressing. If the WHO’s motive is to stop future threat of infectious disease, why are they not working on these issues?
How far the WHO and public health has fallen…
Reprinted with permission from Robert Malone.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has released a new report titled Canada’s Surrender of Sovereignty: New WHO health regulations undermine Canadian democracy and Charter freedoms. Authored by Nigel Hannaford, a veteran journalist and researcher, the report warns that Canada’s acceptance of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) revised International Health Regulations (IHR) represents a serious erosion of national independence and democratic accountability.
The IHR amendments, which took effect on September 19, 2025, authorize the WHO Director-General to declare global “health emergencies” that could require Canada to follow directives from bureaucrats in Geneva, bypassing the House of Commons and the will of Canadian voters.
The WHO regards these regulations as “binding,” despite having no ability or legal authority to impose such regulations. Even so, Canada is opting to accept the regulations as binding.
By accepting the WHO’s revised IHR, the report explains, Canada has relinquished its own control over future health crises and instead has agreed to let the WHO determine when a “pandemic emergency” exists and what Canada must do to respond to it, after which Canada must report back to the WHO.
In fact, under these International Health Regulations, the WHO could demand countries like Canada impose stringent freedom-violating health policies, such as lockdowns, vaccine mandates, or travel restrictions without debate, evidence review, or public accountability, the report explains.
Once the WHO declares a “Pandemic Emergency,” member states are obligated to implement such emergency measures “without delay” for a minimum of three months.
Importantly, following these WHO directives would undermine government accountability as politicians may hide behind international “commitments” to justify their actions as “simply following international rules,” the report warns.
Canada should instead withdraw from the revised IHR, following the example of countries like Germany, Austria, Italy, Czech Republic, and the United States. The report recommends continued international cooperation without surrendering control over domestic health policies.
Constitutional lawyer Allison Pejovic said, “[b]y treating WHO edicts as binding, the federal government has effectively placed Canadian sovereignty on loan to an unelected international body.”
“Such directives, if enforced, would likely violate Canadians’ Charter rights and freedoms,” she added.
Mr. Hannaford agreed, saying, “Canada’s health policies must be made in Canada. No free and democratic nation should outsource its emergency powers to unelected bureaucrats in Geneva.”
The Justice Centre urges Canadians to contact their Members of Parliament and demand they support withdrawing from the revised IHR to restore Canadian sovereignty and reject blind compliance with WHO directives.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
As the Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress move aggressively to roll back the climate alarm-driven energy policies of the Biden presidency, proponents of climate change theory have ramped up their scare tactics in hopes of shifting public opinion in their favor.
But CNN’s energetic polling analyst, the irrepressible Harry Enten, says those tactics aren’t working. Indeed, Enten points out the climate alarm messaging which has permeated every nook and cranny of American society for at least 25 years now has failed to move the public opinion needle even a smidgen since 2000.
Appearing on the cable channel’s “CNN News Central” program with host John Berman Thursday, Enten cited polling data showing that just 40% of U.S. citizens are “afraid” of climate change. That is the same percentage who gave a similar answer in 2000.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Enten’s own report is an example of this fealty. Saying the findings “kind of boggles the mind,” Enten emphasized the fact that, despite all the media hysteria that takes place in the wake of any weather disaster or wildfire, an even lower percentage of Americans are concerned such events might impact them personally.
“In 2006, it was 38%,” Enten says of the percentage who are even “sometimes worried” about being hit by a natural disaster, and adds, “Look at where we are now in 2025. It’s 32%, 38% to 32%. The number’s actually gone down.”
In terms of all adults who worry that a major disaster might hit their own hometown, Enten notes that just 17% admit to such a concern. Even among Democrats, whose party has been the major proponent of climate alarm theory in the U.S., the percentage is a paltry 27%.
While Enten and Berman both appear to be shocked by these findings, they really aren’t surprising. Enten himself notes that climate concerns have never been a driving issue in electoral politics in his conclusion, when Berman points out, “People might think it’s an issue, but clearly not a driving issue when people go to the polls.”
“That’s exactly right,” Enten says, adding, “They may worry about in the abstract, but when it comes to their own lives, they don’t worry.”
This reality of public opinion is a major reason why President Donald Trump and his key cabinet officials have felt free to mount their aggressive push to end any remaining notion that a government-subsidized ‘energy transition’ from oil, gas, and coal to renewables and electric vehicles is happening in the U.S. It is also a big reason why congressional Republicans included language in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to phase out subsidies for those alternative energy technologies.
It is key to understand that the administration’s reprioritization of energy and climate policies goes well beyond just rolling back the Biden policies. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin is working on plans to revoke the 2010 endangerment finding related to greenhouse gases which served as the foundation for most of the Obama climate agenda as well.
If that plan can survive the inevitable court challenges, then Trump’s ambitions will only accelerate. Last year’s elimination of the Chevron Deference by the Supreme Court increases the chances of that happening. Ultimately, by the end of 2028, it will be almost as if the Obama and Biden presidencies never happened.
The reality here is that, with such a low percentage of voters expressing concerns about any of this, Trump and congressional Republicans will pay little or no political price for moving in this direction. Thus, unless the polls change radically, the policy direction will remain the same.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Canada’s privacy commissioner says he was not consulted on bill to ban dissidents from internet
Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline
Oil Sands are the Costco of world energy – dependable and you know exactly where to find it
Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships
Indigenous Communities Support Pipelines, Why No One Talks About That
Colorado gave over 500 people assisted suicide drugs solely for eating disorders in 2024
Poland’s president signs new zero income tax law for parents with two children
-
Energy23 hours agoMinus Forty and the Myth of Easy Energy
-
Business3 hours agoQuebecers want feds to focus on illegal gun smuggling not gun confiscation
-
Uncategorized23 hours ago
New report warns WHO health rules erode Canada’s democracy and Charter rights
-
Crime21 hours agoFrance stunned after thieves loot Louvre of Napoleon’s crown jewels
-
Business3 hours agoEmission regulations harm Canadians in exchange for no environmental benefit
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day agoOttawa Should Think Twice Before Taxing Churches
-
Alberta1 day agoBusting five myths about the Alberta oil sands
-
Business1 day agoUS government buys stakes in two Canadian mining companies