The SPARS Pandemic: 2025 – 2028 - All The Birds One Stone

October 2017 – The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security publishes a “Futuristic Scenario for Public Health Risk Communicators” called “The SPARS Pandemic: 2025 – 2028.” The 89-page document is broken into 19 chapters that go through every aspect of what a pandemic response would look like after an outbreak of a fictional illness known as the St. Paul Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SPARS), which is a coronavirus. The document also uses fictional “medical countermeasures, characters, news media excerpts, social media posts, and government agency responses” to “illustrate the public health risk communication challenges that could potentially emerge during a naturally occurring infectious disease outbreak requiring development and distribution of novel and/or investigational drugs, vaccines, therapeutics, or other medical countermeasures.” As you will see, the similarities between this fictional scenario and the COVID pandemic are eerie to say the least, and this document should be considered the playbook political leaders throughout the western world closely followed once the COVID pandemic kicked off. The following is a chapter-by-chapter breakdown, but I recommend reading the entire document for yourself.

Preface – “Possible Future In 2025: The ‘Echo Chamber’”

The document describes the echo chamber as “unbridled global access to information coupled with social fragmentation and self-affirming worldviews.” The preface tells readers that the futuristic scenario presented in the document is meant to provide them with an “opportunity to mentally ‘rehearse’ responses while also weighing the implications of their actions.” Right off the bat, they put in the reader’s mind that one of the challenges they will face during a medical emergency is “varying levels of fragmentation among populations along social, political, religious, ideological, and cultural lines.” In other words, people from a diverse variety of social groups will question their authority for different reasons, and since they will all be getting their information from various “echo chambers” they will all be wrong. The authors write that while information will be widely accessible through new technologies in 2025, many will “have chosen to self-restrict the sources they turn to for information, often electing to interact only with those with whom they agree.” They finish setting the stage for the scenario by creating a fictional president, a fictional vice president and a fictional HHS head. They also talk about how the CDC, FDA, HHS and “other public health agencies have increasingly adopted a diverse range of social media technologies, including long-existing platforms such as Facebook, Snapchat, and Twitter, as well as emerging platforms like ZapQ… Federal and state public health organizations have also developed agency-specific applications and ramped up efforts to maintain and update agency websites. Challenging their technological grip, however, are the diversity of new information and media platforms and the speed with which the social media community evolves.” The authors lament that the government will not have the capability or budget to keep their information at the forefront across all social media platforms and therefore will not be able to “improve public uptake of key messages.” As the COVID pandemic picked up steam throughout the west, government officials and various agency heads used social media platforms like Twitter to communicate with the public. In fact, I have documented many of the admissions made via these communication channels at this very website, making it easy to identify the government’s lying and flip-flopping, as well as the role our “representatives” played in making matters worse.

Chapter 1 – “The SPARS Outbreak Begins”

The first chapter begins by displaying a fictional newspaper with a fictional report about the “Third Death in a Week Due To ‘Unknown Illness’ In Twin Cities.” The latest victim is a 42-year-old woman named Sonja Dixon who entered the hospital on October 15th with “severe flu-like symptoms” and who later died on the 19th after developing pneumonia. The date of the paper is October 17th, so I guess by 2025 we’ve figured out how to see into the future – though I would argue that reading documents like this one is a great way to do just that. The outbreak of SPARS begins among a congregation in St. Paul, Minnesota after two of the church members returned from a missionary trip to the Philippines. Traditional flu tests confirmed these people did not die from the flu, before a “pancoronavirus RT-PCR test” administered later confirmed that they were, in fact, victims of a “novel coronavirus” dubbed SPARS. The CDC monitored the cluster of cases in MN closely, but since the “flu season was just getting underway and… a rapid diagnostic test for SPARS-CoV infection was not yet available, CDC officials could not be sure if these were, in fact, true cases of SPARS.” On November 17th, the HHS secretary would notify the WHO about the outbreak out of concern that this could quickly become a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). Just like what happened with COVID, the “transmission of SPARS was determined to occur via droplet spread, [so] the CDC initially recommended that everyone diligently maintain hand hygiene and frequently disinfect potentially contaminated surfaces.” Page 13 of the report displays fictional Tweets issued by the CDC instructing people to wash their hands, avoid public places should they feel ill, and to be mindful about hygiene during the Thanksgiving holiday and on Black Friday. People would keep spreading SPARS by not seeking medical attention for mild cases, and so the public became increasingly fearful over the “apparent virulence of the pathogen.” Making matters worse – again, just like with COVID – initial fatality rate estimates were way off, ranging from the CDC’s 4.7% prediction to the WHO’s estimated fatality rate of 14-15% (50% for people over 64), though “Later in the SPARS outbreak, data that included more accurate estimates of mild SPARS cases indicated a case fatality rate of only 0.6%.” Also similar to COVID, “the virus had an extended incubation period (seven to ten days) compared to its latent period (four to five days). Thus, infected persons could spread the virus for up to nearly a week before showing symptoms of the disease themselves.” While this later proved to be untrue of COVID, it definitely helped make the public fearful, and that fear was used to make people accept locking down society as a necessary step in fighting the pandemic. The only major difference between COVID and SPARS is that the “morbidity and mortality from SPARS were both significantly higher in children than adults.” The opposite is true when it comes to COVID.

Chapter 2 – “A Possible Cure”

At the top of chapter two is a fictional December 25th CDC Health Advisory explaining that while the FDA and NIH are “evaluating potential treatment options… previous trials in other coronavirus patients” have shown that a fictional antiviral drug called “Kalocivir” is the leading candidate for treating SPARS. (This is almost identical to how The Twerp would roll out Remdesivir, even though previous trials had shown it was not only ineffective at treating Ebola, but deadly. Nevertheless, this drug would remain the standard of care in the US throughout the pandemic.) After the WHO declares SPARS to be a PHEIC on November 25th, the disease spread like wildfire over the holiday weekend and by “mid-December, SPARS cases were reported in 26 states.” Meanwhile, “the Ministries of Health in Mexico, Canada, Brazil, Japan, and several European countries had notified the WHO of dozens of imported cases,” creating “widespread concern in public health circles that travel over the Christmas and New Year’s holidays would spark a global pandemic… By late December, public concern about SPARS in the United States was extremely high, and there was intense public pressure to identify treatments for the disease.” Since there were no drugs proven to be effective for SPARS, Kalocivir began being administered through an Emergency Use Authorization, referred to as an “Expanded Access protocol” in the report, “despite some concerns about potential adverse side effects.” As SPARS continued to spread without any dependable treatment options, “the media, the public, and political leaders” demanded “the FDA… be more forthcoming with information on potential treatment options.” At this point the authors should have had a fictional Fauci tell everyone to go pound sand and just accept his expensive, deadly poison as their only option, but I digress. The “food for thought” section at the end of the chapter (there’s one of these for every chapter) asks the question: “What risks do public health agencies face if the public, media, and/or political leaders feel that information about potential treatment options is being withheld?” Well, that depends a lot on what side people are on, what media they consume, and who they look to for leadership.

Chapter 3 – “A Potential Vaccine”

The third chapter begins by displaying a fictional memorandum from GMI – “a multinational livestock conglomerate” operating in Southeast Asia – that contains a summary section that reads in part, “In 2021, a coronavirus caused an outbreak in Region 7 (Southeast Asia) hoofed mammal populations. Our researchers developed and produced in-house an effective vaccine against the infection (HMRV-vac14). Its subsequent approval and use successfully ended the outbreak in the region. While largely effective in preventing infection, severe side effects – including swollen legs; severe joint pain; and encephalitis potentially resulting in seizures, seizure disorders or death – occasionally occurred… Given the millions of vaccinations required for Region 7, this resulted in measurable losses to the animal population; however, these were acceptable compared to those from the respiratory infection itself… Each of the severe side effects was accompanied by physical presentation such that the affected animal was removed from the population and culled to prevent processing affected animals for sale. It is unknown at this time how similar the two coronaviruses are or whether HMRV-vac14 (or a similar vaccine) would be effective in human populations… HMRV-vac14 has not been tested or authorized by any governing agency for use in animals or humans.” The chapter’s text goes on to summarize the memorandum before describing how the lack of a “viable alternative” led the federal government to award “a contract to CynBio, a US-based pharmaceutical company, to develop a SPARS vaccine based on the GMI model.” While the contract required “safety testing, ensuring the vaccine would be safe and effective for human use,” the HHS secretary “agreed in principle to invoke the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), thereby providing liability protection for CynBio and future vaccine providers in the event that vaccine recipients experienced any adverse effects.” I find it interesting how while much of what’s in this report is fictional, the PREP Act is real and does exactly what the report says it does. It should also be noted that the experimental gene therapy drugs being injected into billions of people all over the world (except in China) are being administered under an Emergency Use Authorization and have been given liability protection. And the fictional CynBio received funding for the vaccine from the NIH just like Pfizer and Moderna did. The “food for thought” section asks: “How might federal health authorities avoid people possibly seeing an expedited SPARS vaccine development and testing process as somehow ‘rushed’ and inherently flawed, even though that process still meets the same safety and efficacy standards as any other vaccine?” This is startling as the COVID “vaccines” being used in real life did not meet the “same safety and efficacy standards as any other vaccine.” That process would normally take 5-10 years. Not only did Pfizer and Moderna skip the animal trials phase of their R&D, their jabs were rolled out in a “rushed” fashion in less than a year. Other questions raised at the end of chapter three are about how “liability protection for SPARS vaccine manufacturers jeopardizes individual freedom and wellbeing,” “how… public health communicators enabl[e] people to make their own informed decisions about whether to accept the novel SPARS vaccine,” and what the “potential consequences” might be should “health officials overreassur[e] the public about the potential risks of a novel SPARS vaccine when long-term effects are not yet known.” All very important questions, especially when you are planning to treat the general public like guinea pigs or convince them to willfully participate in a mass-culling event. Notice, too, the contradiction between question one and question four… The authors claim in question one that the same “safety and efficacy standards” are being applied to this “novel” vaccine, yet acknowledge in question four “potential risks” being a possibility because “long-term effects are not yet known.” This is doublespeak.

Chapter 4 – “Users Beware”

The fourth chapter begins by describing Kalocivir’s failure as an effective SPARS treatment due to “intense stomach cramping” and its inability to prevent or reduce transmission of the disease. Despite this being the case, “due to high public demand for access to viable SPARS treatments, public health and healthcare agencies drew from existing SNS inventories of Kalocivir (several million doses) until further production of the drug could begin.” So even though the drug is garbage (just like Remdesivir), the government still administers it to millions of people. The report then explains how, despite “extensive interagency efforts… made to coordinate messages, slight differences were emphasized by the media, leading to the appearance of diverging messages.” In other words, when you’re unleashing a propaganda campaign on the public it has to be consistent or people won’t believe you. “Some individuals on social media, citing the CDC spokesperson’s interview, claimed that Kalocivir had not been thoroughly tested and was potentially unsafe. Others, citing parts of the CDC and NIH announcements, incorrectly claimed that while Kalocivir was safe for adults, it was possibly unsafe for children. Yet others wondered why the drug was not being administered preventatively to the entire US population. Because little actual data on the safety and efficacy of Kalocivir existed at the time, government agencies had a difficult time responding to the ever-diverging public responses on social media.” The report goes on to describe how SPARS had spread to 42 countries by “late January 2026,” leading to anxiety among the US population and causing many to crowd hospitals looking for treatment for even mild cases. Similar to how many people around the world were made to be fearful of COVID, the report also acknowledges how even after the CDC revised its fatality rate for SPARS down to 1.1%, the damage had already been done and the positive news did little to calm the public. Also of note are the groups of people who rejected Kalocivir, namely ethnic minorities that live in “large, tight-knit communities” and promoters of natural medicine. In one attempt to get better uptake of Kalocivir in the “ethnic minority group” of Navajo Indians in the southwestern US, health authorities there turned to a more “fear-based” approach, adding “SPARS can kill you” to messaging promoting the use of the drug. When that failed, public health figures changed their messaging “to reflect Navajo beliefs in sustaining life and eschewing a focus on death. Specifically, the fear-based messaging was replaced with positive messages including ‘Seeing health care providers for SPARS-like symptoms can help you and your family members live long and happy lives.’” The chapter concludes by explaining how these tactics worked to varying degrees within the general public, but failed to convince “special interest groups, including the growing national anti-Kalocivir/natural medicine movement, which was dispersed across the country and not concentrated in local areas.” You know, the anti-science kooks.

Chapter 5 – “Going Viral”

The chapter begins with a scenario about a boy who began “projectile vomiting immediately after taking a dose of Kalocivir.” Video of the event went viral across social media platforms showing the boy being administered a “pediatric dose of liquid Kalocivir” before he begins “vomiting profusely, chokes, and then faints while his mother shrieks in the background.” Along with the video, hashtags like #NoKalocivir and #NaturalIsBetter began to make messaging about Kalocivir difficult as “the hashtags… provided a way for people sharing these views to find one another and band together on social media.” As a result, the “social media groundswell quickly overwhelmed the capacity of local, state, and federal agencies to respond, and compliance with public health and medical recommendations dropped considerably.” The report describes how by the “FDA and other government agencies” telling the public that vomiting was not a known side effect of Kalocivir they came off as lacking “appropriate empathy” (even though it was supposedly “scientifically accurate”), thus making matters worse. The authors go on to lament how social media spread negative messages about Kalocivir much more quickly than the government could “promote positive, accurate information about Kalocivir.” They also describe how “Several members of Congress were very active on sites like Twitter where they could leverage their office to spread their own personal beliefs under the guise of public positions.” In one case, a Senator from Iowa Tweets, “Don’t be buffoons! Kalocivir is 100% safe and 100% effective. Correlation does NOT equal Causation!” which led to a series of “awkward news interviews” whereby FDA and CDC officials “had to clarify that while the sentiment of the message was correct, Kalocivir did have potential side effects and was not completely effective at treating SPARS.” In the end, the viral nature of the vomit video proved to be too much and “the government was ultimately unable to develop a suitable response.” One of the questions in the food for thought section reads: “Why is it also important to communicate with compassion, concern, and empathy?” Well – being that you have to ask – I’ll assume that any “compassion, concern, and empathy” you might convey in real life is as phony as a three-dollar bill.

Chapter 6 – “The Grass Is Always Greener”

The chapter begins: “As confidence in Kalocivir continued to deteriorate across the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union jointly announced authorization for another antiviral treatment” in March of 2026. The new drug, VMax, is made available through an emergency use authorization, but in the end the results were similar to that of Kalocivir. People from across the pond expressed their views about VMax on social media and as a result “This persistent social media buzz around the pandemic ensured that public anxiety remained high – even though the incidence of new SPARS cases had begun to taper off.” Hmmm. If cases are tapering off, why continue “developing a vaccine based on the GMI model”? The short chapter includes fake Tweets with fake hashtags like “#SuckItSPARS” and “#VMaxSucks.”

Chapter 7 – “The Voice”

The chapter begins by describing how public interest in SPARS begins to wane by May of 2026 (basically what we’ve come to know as “COVID fatigue”). A recent update to the fatality rate, now 0.6%, not only contributes to the public’s disinterest, but “led the public to grow increasingly hostile toward continued SPARS messaging.” Instead of just ending it there, “the CDC and FDA, in concert with other government agencies and their social media experts, began developing a new public health messaging campaign about SPARS, Kalocivir, and the forthcoming vaccine, Corovax. The purpose of this campaign was to create a core set of messages that could be shared by all public health and government agencies over the next several months during which time the SPARS vaccine would be introduced.” To justify the coming vaccine ruse, the authors write, “Even though the disease was less fatal than initially thought, it remained expensive to treat in its severe form and even mild cases had substantial impacts on economic productivity across the country.” To get the message out about the ~~new profit scheme~~ new vaccine, the government “enlisted the help of well-known scientists, celebrities, and government officials to make short videos and Zap clips and, in a few cases, give interviews to major media outlets.” One such person is a popular hip hop star named BZee (Jay-Z?). Unfortunately, after his “original Zap clip was widely shared, particularly among African American and urban populations,” a subsequent Access Hollywood interview proved to be a disaster when BZee made a reference to the Tuskegee Experiment. Ouch… “The resulting backlash, particularly from African Americans, undermined the effectiveness of BZee’s efforts.” A fictional Twitter thread by BZee shows how he tried to patch things up by concluding “I still strongly support the #CDC’s and #FDA’s recommendations to take #Kalocivir and #Corovax to #StopSPARS. #VaccinesWork.” Another disaster followed when a former president gave a “hesitant, somewhat contradictory response” when asked whether she would want her new grandson to take Kalocivir. Of course the former president took criticism “for not taking a strong stance in support of Kalocivir.” That’s right, you back Big Pharma or you’re useless trash. Besides, they probably gave plenty of money to your campaign! The food for thought question reads: “Given the ability of powerful, popular figures to reinforce or to undermine public health messages, what steps might health authorities – at either national or local levels – take to reverse the negative effects of BZee’s unintended linkage of Tuskegee and Corovax, or Bennett’s tepid, uncertain support for Kalocivir?” For starters, you might not want to ask questions you don’t want answers honestly. That said, maybe just rely solely on proven Big Pharma shills from now on?

Chapter 8 – “Are You Talking To Me?”

There’s nothing really of note in this short chapter as it mainly focuses on how government agencies failed to tap into UNEQL, the primary source of news for college students across the country. When their messaging did finally take hold, however, it focused on “equal access to medical care for SPARS.” This would lead to “students… using UNEQL forums to organize and promote protests outside the offices of state and local political leaders.” We saw the same type of “equal access” discussions centered around the COVID jabs, but I believe this was more of a marketing tactic aimed at creating the sense that there was high demand for the jabs. You know, ‘There’s only so much to go around, and everybody wants it, so we have to figure out a way to distribute the vaccines fairly.’ Something like that… Nothing but hype.

Chapter 9 – “Changing Horses Midstream”

The chapter begins by displaying a fictional “Hollywood Tribune” article about how the federal government wasted tens of millions of taxpayer dollars “in support of SPARS therapeutics that were recently found to be wholly ineffective.” The ensuing text reiterates this point by stating, “The new data suggested that Kalocivir was less effective at treating SPARS than initially thought and was, in fact, on par with Ribavirin and VMax, both of which showed low efficacy as SPARS treatments. These results led the FDA to conclude that all currently available drugs were only minimally effective at treating SPARS. In response, the CDC suggested that healthcare providers continue to provide palliative care to SPARS patients and that, if necessary, patients with more mild cases could use over-the-counter medications to alleviate symptoms. Ultimately, this left providers to address patient concerns and demands on their own, which proved frustrating for them and many of their patients.” In real life, doctors had no trouble treating COVID with off-label drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, though those drugs would quickly be suppressed to intentionally inflate the number of severe cases and deaths in a frenzied Big Pharma push to inject every man, woman and child with the soon-to-arrive “vaccine.” Similar to the SPARS report, however, this new information showed how “changing messages merely proved that scientists knew very little about how to deal with SPARS.” Contradictory and ever-changing COVID guidance policies have led many Americans to not only question the abilities of our supposed “experts” but their motives as well. The report then had to take a little shot at the kooks by stating, “The response was particularly vitriolic from the burgeoning natural medicine movement.” Chapter nine concludes by discussing the negative media coverage that ensued. The authors write, “The Los Angeles Tribune… ran a front-page editorial responding to local social media posts that questioned the government’s response to SPARS in light of the new revelations about Kalocivir. The editorial accused the government of shoddy science and wasting tens of millions of dollars to advertise and supply an ineffective treatment. It ended by questioning the government’s other SPARS-related endeavors, particularly the production and promotion of Corovax. The resulting media storm was especially problematic, as Corovax was due to be released in the coming weeks.” The food for thought questions are focused on how health communicators could have “better prepared the public for the “uncertainty and fluidity of crisis response,” how “health authorities best lay the groundwork for the release of the novel Corovax vaccine” and how “health authorities reestablish public confidence in MCM recommendations while also speaking truthfully about the state of knowledge about Corovax’s safety and efficacy profile.”

Chapter 10 – “Head of the Line Privileges”

It’s now late June 2026 and “Corovax [has] entered the final stage of its expedited review in the United States. After passing FDA safety reviews, production of the completed vaccine had begun and was on schedule. Ten million doses were expected to be available by mid-July, with another twenty million doses due by the end of August.” This should sound very familiar as this was the exact way the COVID “vaccine” was rolled out. The major difference between SPARS and COVID, however, is the way that it affected different age groups. Whereas the most vulnerable groups to COVID are the old and infirm, SPARS has a more severe effect on children and pregnant women, so the government in the fictional scenario gave these groups first dibs on the jabs the same way we gave older folks first dibs. This is really the only major difference between COVID and the fictional SPARS pandemic with the unfortunate exception of pregnant women. One NEJM study found the jab caused “spontaneous abortions” to occur at a rate of 82% during the first two trimesters, yet medical authorities still feel injecting pregnant women with experimental drugs is a good idea… probably because the “fact checkers” will cover up any damaging reports (also see this). But I digress. The report continues, “This plan was met with skepticism among certain groups. Doctors and nurses, for example, expressed concerns that they were not included as a priority group. In Milwaukee, healthcare providers even protested their lack of inclusion by refusing to report for work, which, in turn, prompted the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to promise that healthcare providers would be vaccinated as soon as more vaccine became available.” This is very reminiscent of how the COVID “vaccines” were rolled out: surrounded by a manufactured controversy about who would get them first (also see this and this). As I mentioned a bit earlier, this was just a way to create the perception that the jabs were in high demand – which in turn led to higher demand. How do you get everyone to want a dangerous and ineffective clot shot? Marketing 101, of course! “Hell, everyone else is playing science experiment, I wanna play, too!”

Chapter 11 – “Standing In Line, Protesting Online”

The chapter starts out describing what has actually become a disturbing trend in reality – the total destruction of privacy in regard to your health. The authors write, “To determine how to best distribute limited doses of Corovax… the US government resorted to new, controversial tactics; notably, having healthcare providers access patients’ electronic health records (EHRs) to determine the number of individuals in high-risk populations receiving care in particular areas.” In this fictional account, violating people’s privacy “proved to be highly effective” and also allowed the government in Los Angeles to identify “neighborhoods with limited access to primary care” so that “intensive public vaccination campaigns” could begin in those areas. Doesn’t it just warm your heart to know that the government cares about you so much they are willing to violate your privacy? The report then describes the ensuing “controversy” to basically be a “misunderstanding.” “Some US citizens were upset because they believed the federal government was accessing private patient data. This stemmed from a misunderstanding on the citizens’ part: the federal government was not accessing patients’ EHRs directly, but rather was relying on healthcare organizations and providers to access patients’ EHR and then report summary information (specifically, the number of people in the targeted groups) to the CDC, FDA, and other government agencies.” Silly us! The authors then go on to describe how even though the government hopped on to social media to clarify what happened “these messages failed to reach a small but growing segment of the US population obtaining information about SPARS and SPARS treatments from other, non-government sources.” Those pesky non-government sources… I mean, so what if that means your doctor.

Chapter 12 – “Don’t Put All Your Eggs In One Basket”

This chapter is short and focused solely on how “the power grid at the Grand Coulee Dam in eastern Washington State experienced a catastrophic failure. While the event did not destroy any infrastructure or result in any deaths, it did cause widespread power outages in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia… Unfortunately, all communication about the vaccine roll out was published in electronic form, and consequently, many individuals in the affected areas were initially unable to access information provided by state, local, or federal health authorities regarding Corovax dispensing.” Cue the violins.

Chapter 13 – “Lovers and Haters”

This chapter focuses on “anti-vaccination groups,” how they organize, and how they can be overcome. In this scenario, the main resistors are “Muslim groups across the country, who opposed the vaccine on the basis that the original formulation was used to treat pigs; African Americans, who refused vaccination based on continued fear of governmental experimentation on African American populations; alternative medicine proponents, who had also been active in campaigning against Kalocivir; and anti-vaccination activists, who were galvanized by the anti-antivaccination sentiment associated with the nationwide measles outbreak in 2015.” The authors describe how only the “anti-vaccination activists” were organized and did so through “several primary Facebook groups and numerous Twitter accounts… using hashtags like #NoVaccines4Me and #VaccinesKill. The anti-vaccination movement migrated to ZapQ upon its emergence in 2022 due to its ability to combine feeds from across multiple platforms, including real time text, picture, and video messages from members as well as select traditional media posts…” The authors lament how “through their ability to control group membership, these groups ensured that they would not be exposed to pro-vaccine ‘propaganda’ from pharmaceutical companies, the federal government, or public health or medical authorities. By 2026, many core members of the anti-vaccine movement obtained their national news almost exclusively from anti-vaccine ZapQ sites.” I don’t know why they put the word propaganda in quotes as that is the perfect word to describe the incessant “messaging” we get from both Big Pharma and the government at all levels regarding the COVID jab.
The next paragraph is an interesting one, and it reads in part, “Citing select quotes from the CDC, NIH, and other government agencies, anti-vaccine proponents began spreading the message that Corovax was inadequately tested and had unknown, long-term side effects and that natural immunity resulting from contracting the disease was a more effective means of conferring protection. Many of these messages also contained suggestions (once again drawing on carefully selected and edited quotes from CDC, NIH, and other government officials) regarding how to manage SPARS symptoms. The anti-vaccination movement’s ubiquity, motivation to prevent vaccine injury, and social media expertise meant that numerous Americans heard their message.” First off, the supposed “fact checkers” make a living off this “select quote” nonsense – both in regard to their claims that this is what people like me do, but also in regard to the fact that they do this themselves… religiously. I also find it strange that the authors would say the anti-vaxxers are motivated by preventing vaccine injury since we all know anytime Big Pharma provides the public with a novel or experimental treatment it’s always super safe and effective (I’m being very sarcastic)… Bit of a contradiction in my opinion. Another interesting comparison to reality lies in the objection to vaccination that the “Muslim groups” have as they are similar to the objections some Christians have in real life. The only difference is while the “Muslim groups” in the SPARS report object to taking medicine originally designed for pigs, Christians object to taking the COVID “vaccine” because it was developed through the use of human fetal cells. The report goes on to describe how the government set their sights on hitting the Muslims with some extra propaganda – sorry, messaging – but they would end up hitting a little snag: “In contrast to most Christian religions… the Muslim faith is not at all centralized, and the statements of an imam from Washington, DC held little validity for many local Muslim communities. The influence of local imams continued to perpetuate anti-Corovax sentiments among many local Muslim communities well into the national vaccination campaign. Consequently, vaccination rates among Muslims generally lagged behind those of other demographic groups in the United States.” Unfortunately, plan B involved the government getting the local leaders on board so their propaganda would become more meaningful, eventually leading to an increase in vaccination uptake in those communities.
The chapter then turns its attention to the “concerns of African Americans” and how they are “very different.” The authors write, “The legacy of the Tuskegee syphilis experiments and the fact that during the 2014 Ebola outbreak, experimental therapeutics were not made available to Thomas Eric Duncan (a Liberian traveler who had died of Ebola in Dallas, Texas), nor to many West African communities struck by Ebola, meant that many African Americans – particularly those living in communities consuming media through local, traditional media platforms – feared the possibility of being subjected to scientific experimentation.” For the record, black people were experimented on, so I think their apprehension is justified. What happens next in the report is what any government or organization fears when engaging in a scorched earth propaganda campaign – the groups who are resisting join forces. “Through August 2026, anti-vaccinators, Muslims, and African Americans remained largely isolated from one another. By early September, however, continued anger over EHR use and growing concern over Corovax’s side effects spurred these once-disparate groups to join forces with the alternative medicine proponents still campaigning against Kalocivir. Uniting their efforts, these groups began sharing common anti-vaccine messages through a variety of social media channels including Facebook, Tumblr, Snapchat, YouTube, and ZapQ forums, as well as local radio announcements. Some anti-vaccine groups also began crowdsourcing information about vaccine distribution sites to stage local anti-vaccination protests. These protests, along with the anti-vaccine messages shared by the supergroup, subsequently received wide, national coverage through traditional media outlets, including local and national television news channels.” When the government tried to reach these lost souls, “their messages did not reach many members of the anti-vaccination groups because they had already tailored their social media and news feeds to reflect only the opinions of those with whom they agree.” Ultimately it would be a coalition of parents and pro-vaxxers that formed a “semi-cohesive national group that attempted to counter the efforts of the super-anti-vaccination group.” LMAO. How can I get a job writing these things up?? The report then describes how the government and medical community stepped up their efforts to push Corovax, including how former President Bennett (recall chapter 7) “redeemed herself by televising her vaccination as well as the vaccination of two of her granddaughters” (they likely all received saline shots like our real-life “leaders” do when getting jabbed on television). The chapter concludes by describing how groups with high vaccination rates like “Filipino-Americans” who were often “blamed for the spread of SPARS… had near-perfect vaccination rates.” Sadly though, “their potential as a source of pro-vaccination rhetoric remained largely untapped.”

Chapter 14 – “The Grass Is Always Greener, Part II”

Presented at the start of the chapter is a fake news headline about the fake Prime Minister of Japan announcing that Japan’s Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency would not be approving Corovax for the prevention of SPARS, instead choosing to “pursue other options.” The reason they won’t approve it? Because it hasn’t been properly vetted, of course. The document goes on to state “The fact that the Japanese government was willing to wait six or more months for another vaccine to be developed was also especially concerning to the US public” and because of the “longstanding tradition of not commenting on other countries’ internal public health decisions” fears about the vaccine became increasingly exacerbated among the general public. The Japanese government was also influenced by the “growing anti-vaccination super-group” in the US as they viewed them as proof the vaccine is dangerous. And because people in the US had previously decided to “limit their newsfeeds” they were unable to be reached by the propaganda US agencies deployed to counter the negative vaccine news. The Food For Thought questions at the end of the chapter focus on what measures could be taken by health officials in the US to preempt or explain away negative news coming out of different countries.

Chapter 15 – “Are You Talking To Me, Part II”

The chapter focuses on the lack of vaccine uptake in college-aged adults, particularly those living on the east and west coasts. The reason they don’t want it has nothing to do with Corovax’s poor safety profile, however. They don’t want it because they are apparently woke and complaining about the vaccine’s lack of availability “for populations in less-developed countries like Haiti, Guatemala and Cameroon.” The woke students even organize protests and say they will continue to refuse Corovax until it becomes available for everyone. The protests would eventually catch on in US media and on social media platforms throughout the world, leading to congressional hearings, meetings between President Archer and other heads-of-state, and “an enhanced international vaccine program based on the expanded financial support of the United States and other countries” (run by the WHO). The document states that since the students were heavily influenced by UNEQL, health agencies and college administrators decided to “incorporate the platform into their communication protocols.” Just like in real life, those tasked with running an organized society are a day late and a dollar short. Despite their best efforts, however, vaccine uptake among college-aged adults remained low because “the messages put out by the CDC, FDA, and other government agencies on UNEQL did not adequately address [their] specific concerns.” The Food For Thought section of the chapter is focused on how to better redirect the energy of the woke youngsters, suggesting their efforts might be better spent advocating for “marginalized groups” in their own community.

Chapter 16 – “Antibiotics, HO!”

It’s June 2027 and “efforts to vaccinate the entire US population [are] actively underway.” Just like in the real world, uptake rates varied greatly among different demographics. In the world created by the SPARS document, Filipinos, healthcare workers, families with children and Republicans are among the most vaccinated. In regard to political affiliation, this is the opposite of how things are really playing out in the US as Democrats have a much higher vaccination rate than Republicans. The chapter then mentions how computer search results began being manipulated as a way to promote the vaccine to groups with low rates of uptake. The authors write, “If someone searched Google for ‘Corovax side effects,’ for example, a sidebar advertisement appeared on the results page explaining the benefits of the vaccine. Likewise, if someone wished to view the Kalocivir vomiting video on YouTube, they would first have to watch either a montage of pictures illustrating the effects of SPARS or a clip of Paul Farmer’s explanation of Corovax’s benefits. This advertisement campaign required government officials to leverage relationships in the information technology industry, including the many companies involved with social media, but the impact was worth the effort.” Paul Farmer is a Bill Gates-like character in the fictional SPARS world who is described in the document as the “co-founder of Partners in Health and a renowned global health expert.”
The establishment’s fictional efforts would pay off as vaccination rates began to rise in all groups except “the most recalcitrant anti-vaccine activists.” Recalcitrant is defined as “having an obstinately uncooperative attitude toward authority or discipline.” This line makes it clear how the authors of this report, as well as those in charge of the pandemic response – in both real life and the fictional SPARS world – see those who refuse to take their ~~orders~~ loving advice.
The chapter then pivots to a new dilemma: antibiotic shortages. Interestingly, the government extends the use of the country’s expired antibiotic supply through the Shelf Life Extension Program – which is a real program – and finds that these expired drugs are still 95% effective even 5+ years after the expiration date. 2021 expiration dates were ultimately extended to 2029. This would of course lead to “inaccurate local news broadcasts and social media messages” about how the government was distributing expired, ineffective drugs. Though the government’s messaging would eventually help the gullible public see the light, it ultimately took a game-changing turn of events… A well-known proponent of natural medicine – referred to by the authors of the SPARS report as Alyssa Karpowitz (who was also one of the biggest critics of Kalocivir and later Corovax) – was forced to turn to Big Pharma after her son came down with pneumonia and her natural remedies weren’t helping. She would later describe the effects of the antibiotics on her son as “instantaneous” and commented how “within a day I had my beautiful baby boy back!” The report continues, “As a result of this experience, Alyssa used all of her connections in the natural medicine and anti-vaccine circles to share her story and her newfound belief in the safety and effectiveness of ‘expired’ antibiotics. While her message about the antibiotics being expired was erroneous, her outreach proved extremely effective… When government health authorities became aware of the impact of Alyssa’s story on her followers and others who heard about her son’s recovery, they began to expand their use of social media to gather accounts of positive experiences with Corovax and antibiotics used to treat post-SPARS pneumonia. The CDC in particular began mining data from public social media sources for positive stories they could include in their new outreach efforts.” The new efforts taken by the CDC would pay off in the fake SPARS world as “opposition to Corovax decreased by 23% and opposition to antibiotic use from the SNS decreased by 61% among the general US population.” Well done, CDC, well done. The biggest takeaway from chapter 16: hold on to expired drugs.

Chapter 17 – “Vaccine Injury”

Interestingly, the last section of the report titled “Recovery” begins with a chapter on vaccine injuries. It’s almost as if the authors are saying you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs… and the injuries in the fictional SPARS world are very similar to vaccine damages in the real world. The authors write, “As time passed and more people across the United States were vaccinated, claims of adverse side effects began to emerge. Several parents claimed that their children were experiencing neurological symptoms similar to those seen among livestock exposed to the GMI vaccine. By May 2027, parental anxiety around this claim had intensified to the point of lawsuits. That month, a group of parents whose children developed mental retardation as a result of encephalitis in the wake of Corovax vaccination sued the federal government, demanding removal of the liability shield protecting the pharmaceutical companies responsible for developing and manufacturing Corovax,” though many in the “plaintiff cohort quickly withdrew their suit upon learning that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund (NVICTF) and an emergency appropriation of funds authorized by Congress under the PREP Act existed to provide financial reimbursement to those who were adversely affected by the Corovax vaccine in order to cover healthcare costs and other related expenses.” In real life this program is called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) and it has paid out billions of dollars since its creation in the 1980s. Despite efforts in the SPARS world to compensate those harmed by the jabs, skepticism remained high regarding long term side effects and the “government’s motive regarding the Corovax vaccination campaign.”
The report then discusses a “science blogger” known as “EpiGirl” who begins to publish interactive maps online that track Corovax side effects using data from VAERS – a real agency used to track vaccine damages in the US. After trashing EpiGirl’s methodology, the report acknowledges that “the long-term, chronic effects of the vaccine were still largely unknown.” The report continues, “Nearing the end of 2027, reports of new neurological symptoms began to emerge. After showing no adverse side effects for nearly a year, several vaccine recipients slowly began to experience symptoms such as blurry vision, headaches, and numbness in their extremities. Due to the small number of these cases, the significance of their association with Corovax was never determined. As of this writing in 2030, longitudinal studies initiated by the NIH at the beginning of the vaccination program have not reached the next round of data collection, so formal analysis on these symptoms has not yet been conducted. Furthermore, these cases arose from the initial cohort of vaccine recipients – those in high risk populations, including those with other underlying health conditions – making it increasingly difficult to determine the extent to which these symptoms are associated with vaccination.” This is called plausible deniability and I’m sure we’ll be seeing quite a bit of it from the US government a few short years from now – though I hope I’m wrong. In the end “uncertainties over possible links between vaccination and reported neurological symptoms” caused compensation requests to be “placed on indefinite hold, pending further data analysis,” though “the prospect of long-term effects and potentially permanent disability gave rise to concerns that additional resources would be necessary in the near future.” Disturbingly, one of the questions in the Food For Thought section asks, “Despite the uncertain science about the link between Corovax and the reported neurological symptoms, why should health officials still communicate with compassion and genuine sympathy toward those in the vaccinated population who experience medical issues subsequent to being vaccinated?” In other words they’re asking, “Since you can’t prove anything, and we’re certainly not going to conduct the studies needed to get to the bottom of this, why should we even pretend like we give a shit?” The answer? They don’t plan to. Instead the government will use their “relationships in the information technology industry” to continue suppressing reports of vaccine damages and/or demonize those doing the reporting.

Chapter 18 – “Acknowledging Loss”

At the start of chapter 18 the government is trying to figure out how to deal with “growing negative public opinion regarding Corovax and the government’s perceived indifference to victims of the public health response to SPARS.” Since there is no long term data that can prove Corovax is safe, people have to just wait for time to pass so that data can be collected. This is the exact same predicament the US finds itself in today. To combat the ongoing doubt and uncertainty, officials from HHS, the FDA, the CDC, the NIH and SAMHSA carefully plan a national address – to be given by President Archer – intended to thank the public for adhering to public health recommendations and to acknowledge how trying the pandemic has been for many Americans. Interestingly, the group of officials who planned the president’s address “vigorously debated whether it was appropriate for the President to acknowledge the sacrifice that vaccine recipients had made on behalf of their communities or to console them in their grief over that sacrifice.” In other words, they are at a loss about whether or not to thank the guinea pigs for allowing themselves to be experimented on or to express condolence for their regret. The first of two Food For Thought questions that conclude the chapter reads, “Given the uncertain long-term safety profile of the Corovax vaccine, why are both science and sympathy necessary when communicating about a possible correlation between vaccination and adverse events?” Unfortunately, western governments have yet to acknowledge such a correlation and likely won’t. They will simply create another crisis with the intention of sending the entire COVID crisis right down the memory hole.

Chapter 19 – “SPARS Aftermath”

The final chapter of the SPARS document is a retrospective that takes place about five years after the SPARS pandemic began. Though the pandemic officially ended in August of 2028, there are still human cases in 14 countries “across Europe, Africa, and Asia.” The WHO’s official position is that “future outbreaks will continue to emerge unless countries maintain widespread vaccination coverage.” Yet if the SPARS jab is anything like the COVID jab this is an impossibility as the current COVID “vaccines” do not prevent infection or transmission (or hospitalizations and deaths). Disturbingly, the reaction by the public in this document as the pandemic “tapers off” is quite similar to what we are now seeing in America and throughout the west. For example, “several influential politicians and agency representatives came under fire for sensationalizing the severity of the event” (does Dr. Fauci ring a bell?), the outcome of the pandemic is weaponized for political purposes (Trump, DeSantis, and Republicans in general have been consistently accused by the left of killing people) and “a widespread social media movement led primarily by outspoken parents of affected children, coupled with widespread distrust of ‘big pharma,’ supported the narrative that the development of SPARS MCMs was unnecessary and driven by a few profit-seeking individuals (Bill Gates and companies like Moderna and Pfizer certainly come to mind). Then comes the real doozy: “Conspiracy theories also proliferated across social media, suggesting that the virus had been purposely created and introduced to the population by drug companies or that it had escaped from a government lab secretly testing bioweapons.” That’s exactly what happened in the real world… The post pandemic atmosphere in the report is one of never-ending hearings and reviews, though the real-life governments throughout the west are likely planning to force society to move past COVID before all of our collective questions can ever be answered… perhaps by creating another crisis. The report even notes how – even though many questions remained unanswered at the end of SPARS – “Little desire remained on the part of decision-makers or those who served in the trenches during the response to rehash the events of the past several years.” I bet… What a fitting and accurate conclusion to this dystopian playbook.