SPARS Pandemic Report: Missing Pieces

Like Event 201...but with a little added transparancy.

Source document can be found here.

It’s no longer a matter of if but rather when steps will be taken to alleviate the suffering of the vaccinated. It’s also still a question of how the ‘messaging’ will be directed by so-called public health authorities — rather than the legitimacy of the claims themselves.

From the earlier ‘SPARS Pandemic’ (a self-styled “report”) — hosted by John’s Hopkins — buried right at the end are some likely potential next steps that may prove to be signposts of things to come.

On pages 59-61, the exercise predicts that once there is critical mass achieved on lawsuits, for damages from vaccine injuries, perhaps we will see a ‘Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund’ established. This would be an admission that, yes, this particular vaccine caused issues in a particular segment of the population, but we don’t exactly know yet who has been impacted or not. Regardless of how widespread both short-term and long-term side effects are — it’s an admissions that ‘The Science’ will be changing into ‘The Sacrifice’ (read on for more about that.)

---

Vaccine Injury Fund

How do we explain this? The SPARS pandemic exercise predicts:

1. Parents of children whose children suffered neurological symptoms (due to the vaccine) will file lawsuits.

2. Parents of children who “developed mental retardation as a result of encephalitis” (due to the vaccine) will file lawsuits

3. “Demanding removal of the liability shield protecting the pharmaceutical companies responsible for developing and manufacturing Corovax” — driven by a lawsuit.

4. The lawsuits are placated (and withdrawn) by the establishment of the “National Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund (NVICTF) and an emergency appropriate of funds authorized by Congress under the PREP Act”.

5. There is a positive reaction to these funds being established, little impact on vaccination rates (???) given that everyone who had been willing to take the vaccine had already done so, and that African American parents in particular continued to “question the government’s motives regarding the Corovax vaccination campaign.”

Wow. So they will admit to the fact that there are innumerable side effects and issues, but nobody cares. That sounds awfully familiar to what is happening right now.

Safe and effective?

There’s a LOT more (continued from above)..

1. Independent journalists compile scientific data (in this case using Apple ResearchKit and HealthKit) in an open source way — collecting data from VAERS, creating maps, and measuring rates of incidents and side effects at the user level. SPARS effectively predicts the general public will crowdsource the data necessary to validate the rates of side effects we are already starting to see — which is depicted as an interruption to the CDC, FDA and other organizations studying this matter. The SPARS authors used the term “continually undermined” — in reference to how individuals (untrusted) were researching connections between Corovax and “reported neurological side effects” and drew conclusions before the “FDA, CDC, and other agencies” (Authorities).

2. In response, the federal government investigates the data — again — this is all after creating a “vaccine injury fund” in response to lawsuits. This tactic is such that it placates the majority of the loudest voices. Acute vaccine side effects are paid out from the fund, but long-term effects are deemed ‘too hard to correlate’ — and so program funding is halted for those suffering from long-term side effects.

---

What remains to be seen is how the general public would respond to an acknowledgement of such a fund in the first place. The authors of the report suggest that they will largely be placated — and that their suffering is somehow a ‘sacrifice/’ By admitting there are short-term side effects that went unacknowledged for the last several years, how big of a leap is it to understand that there are also long-term side effects?

But John Hopkin’s doesn’t make it that far… Their report claims that the individuals filing for long-term effects from the vaccination are simply: “Displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of scientific research, [and] many demanded proof that the vaccines did not cause long-term side effects.” They also suggest that there was “no data to support these claims.”

---

The Appendix section even has a timeline and roadmap:

On the very first page, this important section simply cuts off. As if the author suffered an abrupt, sudden, and unexplained neurological side effect while writing it..

Kalocivir sounds a little similar to Remdesivir

There are a few more pages here worth a close study through.

SPARS Recovery Scenario Timeline

The most mind-blowing section, however, is found a little earlier on Page 64.

Following the meeting, ASPR recommended to HHS Secretary Nagel that SAMHSA collaborate with stakeholders and devise behavioral health guidance for the states, tribes, and territories on how to strengthen the public’s coping skills, provide support for grieving individuals, encourage a forward direction, and meet other SPARS recovery needs. It was further recommended that Secretary Nagel consult with President Archer about the possibility of acknowledging the emotional toll of SPARS during a future public appearance. The primary message would be one of gratitude to the American people for remaining strong during the pandemic. Another key message would convey appreciation for adhering to public health recommendations, including vaccination, to hasten the end of the pandemic in the face of considerable uncertainty.

President Archer agreed to address the country’s resolve and recovery in the face of SPARS. Top risk communication advisors from the CDC, FDA, NIH, and SAMHSA conferred as a group about how best to frame the President’s remarks. The group 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.

Here it is.

The only question is whether or not in public statements — after vigorous debate — there will be any admission of the “sacrifice that vaccine recipients had made on behalf of their communities or to console them in their grief over that sacrifice.”

Um, excuse me, what?

Safe and effective.