Disease X: The Scientific Absurdity Underpinning an “all-in-one vaccine”

By Mathew Maavak

On August 10, the UK tabloid Daily Express warned that a new pandemic, possibly caused by a yet unknown “Disease X”, could lead to “civil unrest and food shortages” worldwide.

The world is already experiencing a surge in “civil unrest and food shortages” due to a raft of senseless global policies pushed by an unhinged West and its institutional lackeys. A new “pandemic” would conveniently mask this inevitability.

Disease X is the placeholder name for a hypothetical pandemic caused by a yet-unknown virus. The operative word here is “hypothetical”. Billions in taxpayer money will be spent on developing a vaccine for a phantom virus that has yet to emerge or evolve from an indeterminate origin.

Following a depressingly familiar pattern, the World Health Organization (WHO) is lending its scientific gravitas to this absurdity. Global “statesmen” are correspondingly providing the political gravitas. From mid-2021 onwards, then senior minister of Singapore and WEF board trustee Tharman Shanmugaratnam repeatedly warned that “future pandemics” and “new viruses” are “coming”. This assertion was based on “blue sky research” undertaken by the “global scientific community”. Shanmugaratnam also pledged that an “all-in-one vaccine” was also on the cards. (Ergo, expect a renewed crackdown on vaccine refuseniks.)

Is it possible to preempt a disease that has yet to exist with an all-in-one-vaccine? That is exactly what the UK government is attempting at the moment. It will be justified based on the known pestilential potentials of select viruses and their hypothesised pathogenic pathways and morphologies (including their potential to cross the species barriers). To provide a veneer of scientific rigour, elements of artificial intelligence will be thrown into the viral potpourri. From a statistical standpoint, this feat would be akin to firing a bullet into the sky and expecting it to take down a drone, an aircraft or a flying saucer on the very first attempt.

Since we are frequently bombarded by the rancid call to “listen to The Science”, let me elaborate further. From a systems science perspective, the feat of developing an all-in-one vaccine for a Disease X may arguably surpass the two century-old quest to resolve the Unified Field Theory – something a host of scientific luminaries, including Albert Einstein himself, could not accomplish. It may be mathematically easier to predict next month’s jackpot-winning lottery number than to develop a vaccine for a phantom virus. Accomplishing this feat would be broadly equivalent to resolving physics conundrums such as Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle which states that “we cannot know both the position and speed of a particle, such as a photon or electron, with simultaneous accuracy”. Some theoreticians claim that if this uncertainty is ever resolved, we will be able to predict the future.

Certitudes parroted by proponents of The Science can be tricky. Let us consider an example from the medical world, particularly over a drug that has been tried and tested for more than four decades. Prof Andy Crump, who had worked with Nobel Prize-winning scientist Satoshi Omura – who discovered the microorganism that led to the synthesis of ivermectin – recently made the following observation: “Surprisingly, despite 40 years of unmatched global success, plus widespread intensive scientific study in both the public and private sectors, scientists are still not certain exactly how ivermectin works. Moreover, whereas ivermectin-resistant parasites swiftly appeared in treated animals… no confirmed drug resistance appears to have arisen in parasites in human populations, even in those that have been taking ivermectin as a monotherapy for over 30 years.

If we do not even know how yesterday’s ivermectin fully works, how can we be confident of tomorrow’s all-in-one Vaccine X that will supposedly neutralise a Virus X that in turn may cause Disease X (or a new coronavirus pandemic)? Science is governed by its immutable laws; but then again, we are living in an age of lawlessness which pervades every sphere of human life, including scientific activity. In the aftermath of the Covid-19 hysteria, Crump lamented that the days when we could “unquestioningly trust science and scientists are long gone”.

All in all, I would place the advent of a naturally occurring Disease X on the same probabilistic plane as the arrival of Planet X. But what if it is not “naturally occurring”?

Gain of Function Madness

Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, head of the Russian Armed Forces’ Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defense (RCBD) Troops, recently held a briefing on US military-biological activities worldwide which he viewed as a threat to global security.

According to Kirillov, gain of function (i.e. dual use) research into anthrax, tularemia, coronavirus, avian influenza and African swine fever have ironically – and perhaps unsurprisingly – caused the very outbreaks they were supposed to prevent. Even more damning was his observation that on October 18, 2019 – two months before official reports emerged over a new coronavirus phenomenon in China –  Johns Hopkins University had conducted an Event 201 exercise in New York which suspiciously preambled the Covid-19 pandemic. Kirillov suggested that this sequence of events was artificially engineered. More ominously, there appears to be a mechanism in place to handle another “outbreak”.

Kirillov warned: “We do not rule out that the United States may use so-called defensive technologies for offensive purposes, as well as for global governance by creating crisis situations of biological nature.” It is worth checking out Kirillov’s translated presentation (the original documents are either blocked, shadow-banned or deliberately taken down).

Kirillov outlined the timeline, institutions and senior personnel involved in the US biowarfare program as well as the pathogenic viruses currently being subjected to gain of function experimentations. While this does not constitute “news” to dissenting experts a.k.a “conspiracy theorists”, nearly 20,000 incriminating documents, as of January 2023, were allegedly uncovered during the course of Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine. Many of them were reportedly submitted to the UN Security Council for deliberation. If these appeals continue to be ignored, the Russian ministry of defence should just post the incriminating documents online. Otherwise, Western analysts may conclude that the Kremlin is merely using them as a grambit towards a final settlement in eastern Ukraine. In a similar vein, China has remained suspiciously reticent over the contents of these documents. Can one conclude that Taiwan and Southeast Asia may become the eventual quid pro quo for Beijing’s silence?

In the meantime, periodic revelations from Moscow remain outright damning. Last year, the Russian Security Council revealed that there were over 400 US biolabs worldwide, including 30 in Ukraine alone. Conducting highly dangerous experiments on potential pathogens in highly-unstable countries appears outright criminal. The sheer number of labs involved and the geographic spread of these alleged facilities suggest that a pervasive campaign of international subversion is at work. Therefore, do not expect national leaders, medical experts, non-governmental organisations and the media to question the rationale behind US military-linked biolabs in their midst. Once Virus X or a “deadly” coronavirus variant leaks out, these individuals and entities will have little choice but to promote the “international consensus” of billionaire-hijacked institutions like the WHO.

Era of Superfluous Humans

What exactly is the point of creating vaccines for intentionally weaponized viruses as well as non-existent ones? You can throw science and human conscience out of the window to approximate a logical answer. Big Pharma can extract big profits through innumerable means. The toxification of our foods (GMO and junk food) alone would provide an endless source of pharmaceutical revenue.

The real answer, in my opinion, was articulated decades ago. The Club of Rome’s “Predicament Of Mankind” project at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1971, for example, had probed the consequences of a rapidly rising global population in the face of finite natural resources. The study concluded that unless a balance was struck, global societal collapse was inevitable. Dennis Meadows, former project director and co-author of the bestselling book The Limits to Growth, claims that the sequence of events leading to the collapse was “unknowable” – unlike the surefooted scientists who are developing an all-in-one vaccine. Meadows hoped for a “civil”, “peaceful”, “non-violent” and “equal” means to reduce the global population to just one billion people. This has been a repeated theme of the architects of our current global order. This is what the Great Reset is all about.

Top WEF ideologue and advisor, Yuval Noah Harari, even crystallised the emerging political and economic dilemmas to the central question of “what to do” with hordes of “useless people”. Harari repeats this travesty at every high-profile international forum, including those hosted by the United Nations and its agencies like the UNESCO. No national leader, no mainstream NGO, academic or media has ever dared express outrage at Harari’s pet anti–human theme. The Pope and other religious figures have remained criminally silent. The Hindu mystic Sadhguru even routinely echoes Harari’s ideas.

At the very least, one would have expected the population-dense Islamic world to be alarmed by these statements – articulated by an Israeli homosexual no less – but their senior imams have scrupulously avoided the topic. Where are the fiery sermons from archrivals Iran and Saudi Arabia? What are they afraid of? Weasel “fact-checkers”?

Scripture-quoting religious stalwarts should note that Revelations 13:4 had foreseen a time when nations would surrender to a bottomless, universal evil by conceding: “Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?” We have reached a point in history when nation-states are powerless and national sovereignty is a myth. With the exception of scattered individuals, do not expect any nation, global leader or organised entity to challenge the metastasizing anti-human agenda.

But will the global ruling class settle for a worldwide population of just one billion people? Due to technological advancements since the 1971 Club of Rome study was published, the optimal population figure has been revised to just 500 million people. At a World Economic Forum panel in 2020, UN “Messenger of Peace” Jane Goodall called for the global population to return to what it was “500 years ago” i.e. 500 million. Roughly 95% of today’s population would have to vanish in order to meet the optimal number. Goodall did speak with a lot of grace and compassion, particularly for the chimpanzees she had encountered in Africa. Her call was also eerily redolent of the mysterious Georgia Guidestones manifesto which advocated a global population of 500 million in “perpetual balance with nature”.

At the end of the day, who would be deemed worthy to inherit the post-Great Reset world; that vast, green lebensraum of just 500 million people? Third World leaders should realise that the original proponents of global population controls were exclusively white, from the West, and had endorsed colonial depredations. Many of them were inspired by the Nazis.

All the Woke nonsense we are witnessing right now, replete with Potemkin diversity figures, appear like a stalking horse to a decades-long anti-human agenda. Ever wondered why many household brands are driving themselves into extinction through suicidal Woke campaigns? Maybe, their owners know that the future global market would be a drastically shrunken one.  If so, the US government’s armada of biolabs and an outbreak of Disease X or a new Covid-19 variant may speed up the process.

In any case, national populations have been effectively shrinking since the Covid-19 vaccines were rolled out. Now, that is something to think about…


One Reply to “Disease X: The Scientific Absurdity Underpinning an “all-in-one vaccine””