Sea levels at historic lows:Why the climate alarmists are wrong
By Willow Tohi
Posted on Mar 07, 2025
Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist and geoscientist, argues that modern sea levels are historically low compared to Earth's long-term geological record, debunking the notion of unprecedented or alarming sea-level rise.
Through a "time-traveling" journey, Dr. Soon uses historical landmarks like the Battle of Thermopylae and the ancient port city of Ephesus to demonstrate that sea levels have fluctuated dramatically over millennia due to natural processes.
Dr. Soon's analysis of sea levels over the past 550 million years reveals that they have changed by hundreds of meters due to natural phenomena such as tectonic activity, volcanic eruptions and changes in Earth's orbit, with current levels being close to the lowest in half a billion years.
He emphasizes that the current rise in sea levels began in the early 19th century, long before widespread fossil fuel use, and has not accelerated in recent decades. This rise is natural and insignificant compared to the rapid changes during the end of the last ice age.
Dr. Soon's work challenges the prevailing narrative of human-driven climate catastrophe, advocating for a more balanced and rational perspective that acknowledges the complexity of the climate system and the natural variability of sea levels. He calls for adaptation and innovation rather than panic.
In a world increasingly dominated by climate alarmism, where dire predictions of rising sea levels and submerged cities dominate headlines, one scientist is pushing back with a refreshing dose of historical perspective. Dr. Willie Soon, an astrophysicist and geoscientist with over three decades of experience studying solar and climate phenomena, has released a compelling video that challenges the narrative of catastrophic sea-level rise. His message is clear: sea levels are not only stable but are historically low compared to the Earth’s long-term geological record.
The myth of rising seas
Dr. Soon’s video, which has gone viral, takes viewers on a “time-traveling” journey through history to debunk the notion that modern sea levels are unprecedented or alarming. Starting with the mythical city of Atlantis, which was supposedly “consumed by waves and a serious case of global warming,” Dr. Soon humorously dismantles the idea that humanity’s carbon emissions are driving sea levels to dangerous heights.
“The sea level alarm is another bit of unscientific fear-mongering!” Dr. Soon declares.
Using historical landmarks and ancient events, Dr. Soon demonstrates how sea levels have fluctuated dramatically over millennia. For example, he revisits the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC, where the narrow pass between the mountains and the sea played a pivotal role in the Spartan defense against the Persian army. Today, that same location is a wide plain, with the sea having receded significantly. Similarly, the ancient port city of Ephesus, once a bustling hub of maritime trade, now lies miles inland, its harbor long since dried up.
A geological perspective on sea levels
Dr. Soon’s most striking revelation comes from his analysis of sea levels over the past 550 million years. Using data from geological studies, he shows that sea levels have fluctuated by hundreds of meters due to natural processes such as tectonic activity, volcanic eruptions and changes in Earth’s orbit.
“Three things are clear from this,” Dr. Soon explains. “One, global sea levels change a lot—like by a few hundred meters up and down. Two, sea levels change naturally all the time. They are never stable. And three, where are we? Right down here. Sea levels right now are close to being as low as they have been in half a billion years.”
This perspective is a stark contrast to the modern narrative that portrays sea-level rise as a uniquely human-caused crisis. Dr. Soon emphasizes that the Earth is currently in an ice age, with temperatures and sea levels far lower than they have been for most of the planet’s history.climate
The role of natural climate variability
Dr. Soon also addresses the role of natural climate variability in sea-level changes. He points out that the current rise in sea levels began in the early 19th century, long before the widespread use of fossil fuels. “The rise in sea level that began in the early to mid-19th century is entirely natural, not man-made,” he says.
He further notes that the rate of sea-level rise has not accelerated in recent decades, despite claims to the contrary. “Sea levels have been rising naturally since the mid-1800s. Since then, the rate of change has not increased. And by historic standards, sea levels are changing incredibly slowly.”
This observation aligns with historical data showing that sea levels rose much faster during the end of the last ice age, when they increased by over 120 meters in just a few thousand years. Compared to these ancient changes, the current rise of 20 centimeters over the past 120 years is negligible.
A call for rational discourse
Dr. Soon’s work is a timely reminder that climate science is far from settled. While it is true that human activities have contributed to recent warming, the role of natural variability cannot be ignored. As Dr. Soon puts it, “Sea level changed naturally all the time. And right now, I’m happy to say they are changing incredibly slowly.”
In an era where climate science is often politicized and sensationalized, Dr. Willie Soon’s work serves as a much-needed corrective. By highlighting the natural variability of sea levels and the Earth’s climate, he challenges the prevailing narrative of human-driven catastrophe.
As Dr. Soon concludes his video with a tongue-in-cheek request for donations to “buy more coal for my time machine,” he leaves viewers with a powerful message: the climate has always changed, and it will continue to do so, with or without human influence. The real challenge is not to panic but to adapt and innovate, as humanity has done for millennia.
So the next time you hear a dire prediction about rising seas, remember Dr. Soon’s words: “The sea level alarm is another bit of unscientific fear-mongering.” And perhaps, take a moment to appreciate the incredible resilience and adaptability of our planet—and ourselves.
A video on the Geneva Convoy and a selection of articles from Frontline Doctors on the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty. Thank you for allowing me to use this event to demonstrate the impact of lethargy on our behavioral choices. Thanks again to Ev.
Del Bigtree’s The Highwire covers the Geneva convoy
Countries at the World Health Assembly in Geneva last week approved new amendments to the International Health Regulations, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced Saturday.
The International Health Regulations (IHR) are a set of international laws that are legally binding on all WHO countries. Claps and cheers reportedly erupted at the World Health Assembly when country delegates agreed to the IHR amendments.
The amendments are the result of two years of negotiations, which began after WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus insisted the IHR be updated in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Here are five key takeaways from the new IHR amendments.
The director-general has unilateral power to declare a ‘pandemic emergency’
Director-General Ghebreyesus may declare public health emergencies and pandemic emergencies at will. He requires no approval from a committee or oversight body.
Once an emergency is declared, it triggers the IHR, which obligate governments to obey the WHO’s rules. These rules require countries to use resources that go towards monitoring and tracking cases, surveillance, research, and developing and distributing “health products” such as masks and vaccines.
Each country must establish a WHO enforcement body
The IHR amendments also require each country to establish a “National IHR Authority,” which is a governmental body tasked with enforcing the WHO’s regulations in that particular country. This is different from the existing requirement to establish a National IHR Focal Point, which is simply a point of contact in each country for WHO officials.
Countries must address ‘misinformation’
Another new addition to the regulations is that governments must develop “risk communication” in a pandemic. This requires “addressing misinformation and disinformation” such as social media posts questioning the safety of vaccines or promoting scientific evidence that challenges conclusions made by public health authorities.
Member countries must pay for ‘equitable access’
WHO member countries must fund the pandemic response in poorer countries, which the IHR refers to as “equity.” The term “equity” or “equitable access” has been added eight times to the amendments, which require governments to:
[I]dentify and enable access to financial resources, including through the Coordinating Financial Mechanism, established pursuant to Article 44bis, necessary to equitably address the needs and priorities of developing countries, including for developing, strengthening and maintaining core capacities.
The WHO will issue mandates concerning ‘health documents’
The WHO will make decisions about how countries issue and authenticate “health documents,” which would seemingly include the international certificate of vaccination mentioned elsewhere in the IHR:
WHO, in consultation with States Parties, shall develop and update, as necessary, technical guidance, including specifications or standards related to the issuance and ascertainment of authenticity of health documents, both in digital format and non-digital format. Such specifications or standards shall be in accordance with Article 45 regarding treatment of personal data.
According to Article 45, governments should not publicize a person’s personal data unless it is necessary for public health.
The WHO has been working on a digital international certificate of vaccination since last year.
In June 2023, the WHO announced the launch of its “digital health partnership” with the European Commission that will involve the development of global vaccine passports among other “digital products to deliver better health for all.”
(2)
WHO pandemic treaty hits snag
Republican governors slam pandemic accord: ‘Unprecedented and unconstitutional powers over the United States and its people’
World Health Organization (WHO) officials have expressed disappointment that negotiations for a “pandemic treaty” have failed to meet a crucial deadline.
‘We are not where we hoped we would be’
For over two years, the WHO has been attempting to introduce a pandemic accord that it claims will “strengthen global pandemic prevention, preparedness and response to prevent a repeat of the health, social and economic impacts that were caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Last week, the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) held its ninth round of negotiations with member states to compose a final draft of the treaty. The negotiations did not meet expectations, however. WHO officials are disappointed that a final draft was not approved in time for the organization’s annual World Health Assembly in Geneva this week.
“We are not where we hoped we would be when we started this process,” INB Chairman Roland Driece told the Associated Press. Driece added that creating a pandemic treaty is crucial “for the sake of humanity.”
The WHO is also holding negotiations to amend the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) with which all member states must comply.
24 governors join opposition to pandemic treaty
There has been widespread criticism that the pandemic treaty and IHR amendments will require member states to cede sovereignty to the WHO in the event of a pandemic.
On Wednesday, 24 Republican governors signed a letter to Joe Biden expressing concern that these two initiatives “would purport to grant the World Health Organization (WHO) unprecedented and unconstitutional powers over the United States and its people.”
“The objective of these instruments is to empower the WHO, particularly its uncontrollable Director-General, with the authority to restrict the rights of U.S. citizens, including freedoms such as speech, privacy, travel, choice of medical care, and informed consent, thus violating our Constitution’s core principles,” the governors wrote.
They also expressed concern that the agreements currently under negotiation will transform the WHO from an advisory body to a global health authority. Under the proposed arrangements, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus would have the power to unilaterally declare a “public health emergency of international concern” (PHEIC).
“Furthermore, these instruments would erode sovereignty by granting the WHO’s DirectorGeneral [sic] the authority to dictate responses to a declared PHEIC, stripping elected representatives of their role in setting public health policies and compelling citizens to comply with WHO directives, potentially including mandates regarding medical treatments,” the letter continued.
What does the agreement say?
Indeed, recent drafts of the pandemic treaty would crack down on taxpayers who disobey mandates, among other measures.
In Article 18 of the draft, the WHO clarifies that governments must promote “pandemic literacy” — a strategy which, like media literacy, tells the public who to trust and suppresses “misinformation.”
“The Parties shall strengthen science, public health and pandemic literacy in the population, as well as access to information on pandemics and their effects and drivers, and combat false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through effective international collaboration and cooperation as referred to in Article 16 herein,” the agreement states.
In addition, governments should craft policies that will quash noncompliance with “public health and social measures” and enforce “trust in science and public health institutions.”
“The Parties shall, as appropriate, conduct research and inform policies on factors that hinder adherence to public health and social measures in a pandemic and trust in science and public health institutions,” says the document.
Member states are also instructed to rope in the private sector for pandemic-related activities.
Other provisions in the agreement require governments to take an authoritarian approach to pandemics that go beyond mere regulations and extend to social engineering. In Article 17, for example, governments must not only develop public health policies but also “social policies” aimed at “mobilizing social capital in communities for mutual support.”
A pretense to prescribe global policies?
The WHO would also be able to use public health as a pretext to dictate global policy. In one clause, for example, the WHO demands that governments “encourage ceasefires in affected countries during pandemics to promote global cooperation against common global threats.” In another clause, countries must enforce “gender equality” and place more women in leadership positions to create a proper “health and care workforce.”
Governments would be permitted to withdraw from the pandemic agreement only after waiting two years after signing it, following which the agreement will still remain in effect for that nation for another year as the withdrawal does not take effect immediately.
During that time, the WHO can declare a pandemic at any time and for any reason. Such reasons might include a virus like COVID-19, a social condition like loneliness, or a phenomenon like “climate change.”
(3)
Your personal freedoms are dangerous — to the WHO
‘People having too much freedom is the thing that annoys the regulators’
The failure of the WHO member states to adopt the WHO’s pandemic treaty by the proposed May 27th deadline can be seen as a victory, albeit not final, by freedom-loving persons around the globe.
WHO calls personal decisions dangerous
In September 2019, the WHO ”declared vaccine hesitancy one of the ten biggest threats to global health . . .“ The WHO may actually be threatened by individuals exercising the right to make their own personal health decisions based on their own research.
In August 2020 the WHO credited itself with coining the term “infodemic,” declaring information not coming from the agency to be dangerous misinformation.
Soon after the world started getting used to the terms coronavirus and COVID-19, WHO coined another word: “infodemic” — an overabundance of information and the rapid spread of misleading or fabricated news, images, and videos. Like the virus, it is highly contagious and grows exponentially. It also complicates COVID-19 pandemic response efforts.
“We’re not just battling the virus,” said WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. “We’re also battling the trolls and conspiracy theorists that push misinformation and undermine the outbreak response.”
A BMJ article, “‘Torrent of fake news’ has put negotiations at risk, says WHO chief,” published January 29, 2024, revealed that WHO Chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a former leader of the Marxist terror group Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), already saw the writing on the wall — that the pandemic treaty was destined to fail. Instead of taking people’s concerns to heart, however, he chose to blame the troubles on “fake news.”
WHO officials blamed conspiracy theories for mobilising public opposition to the accord and hindering negotiations. Social media is awash with what Tedros described as a “a torrent of fake news, lies, and conspiracy theories.”
Among the false claims are that the pandemic treaty plans to snatch sovereignty from countries by imposing lockdowns or vaccine mandates. “This is fake news, lies, and conspiracy theories. Negotiating members know that the agreement will give WHO no such powers, because you are writing it,” Tedros said.
Despite Tedros protestations, “fake news” is not the reason the pandemic treaty is now on life support.
Power grab
Censorship
National Herald India‘s AJ Prabal described what appears to be the main reason politicians throughout the world have resisted ratifying the treaty – they’re apparently unwilling to cede their own powers to the world body. He documents the breadth of power the unelected and unaccountable body holds to censor scientists and what it deems “disinformation:”[1]
Once the countries sign the treaty, they will hand over all regulatory control of future pandemics (Disease X) to WHO. The UN body will declare the onset of fresh pandemics, declare protocols to be followed (lockdowns, vaccines), prescribe medicines and their dosage, demand surveillance prescribed by it, and decide on which medicines and vaccines are acceptable and which are not. What is more, WHO will also have the power to censor scientific papers, scientists, and research, and also decide what is disinformation and what is not.
WHO is an unelected body and is totally unaccountable to anyone, [Dutch politician and European Parliament independent member Robert ‘Rob’] Ruse has pointed out. But WHO nevertheless wants countries to cede part of their sovereignty so that WHO, despite its poor record, can control future pandemics, bio-terrorism and climate change. (Emphases added.)
Not a good fit for most
Ruse also explained that solutions cannot be one-size-fits-all. Different countries have different needs as demographics and health concerns vary.
Ruse has also pointed out that one size does not fit all. [Pune-based epidemiologist] Dr Banerjee agrees. Demographics differ from country to country as do conditions, he points out. India is a young country with an overwhelming percentage of its population below the age of 70, whereas Europe is ageing faster. Obesity and comorbidities are major health issues in the West but not so much in Asia. In Africa, mortality from Covid was higher in South Africa, where people are more obese than in other countries. While obesity is a problem in the West, malnutrition is a more serious problem in poorer countries like India. (Emphaisis added.)
Ignores local health concerns
Focusing on pandemic solutions rather than local health needs can lead to misapplied resources and bad outcomes. This is what happened in India where TB and dengue are more serious diseases than COVID was.
Not just demography, but population density and cultural differences too can play a role in pandemics. In India, 80 per cent of the population did not take a booster dose. They did not have to. More Indians died of other diseases than of Covid-19, and yet the government spent 50 per cent of the total health budget on securing vaccines to deal with Covid. Neglect of other diseases has led to a resurgence in cases of TB and dengue, and about 2,000 children in India continue to die every day of diseases other than Covid, Dr Banerjee points out. (Emphases added.)
Your personal health takes a backseat to “public health”
Former British comedian and actor, Russel Brand may be one of those who Ghebreyesus believes is spreading lies. Now a podcaster with some conservative views, Brand has not hesitated to express his perspective on the events of our times.
In a May 2022 podcast, a week before a gathering of the WHO’s World Health Assembly, the WHO‘s governing body, to work on the treaty, Brand elaborated on the agency’s interest in increasing its regulatory powers while quoting from a Telegraph article on the treaty draft. It is funded, Brand pointed out, primarily by nations and organizations with “biases at odds” with your and his health requirements and his preference for more freedom, not less:
Lifesite News journalist Stephen Kokx reported on an interview Brand had with Tucker Carlson, during which they discussed several topics, including Brand’s experience of having been targeted by the CIA and the UK government for his viewpoints — they had tried to destroy his reputation with vague sexual allegations — and Brand’s views of the globalists’ attempts to suppress dissent:[2]
“There are now sets of globalist organizations, funded by government, but also by corporations, that are making deliberate, profound attempts to shut down any dissent in an astonishingly aggressive way,” he said.
. . .
“It’s like we’re being prepped, groomed, primed for ‘war is coming.’ We’re being kept in a state of constant anxiety in order to induce compliance,” he asserted. “The ongoing stoking of cultural tension is to ensure that people don’t begin to recognize that actually we have far more in common with one another than we do with these curious sets of establishment interests that seem to be transcendent of national democracy. To be explicit, I’m talking about organizations like the WHO, NATO, the WEF, and their astonishing influence.” (Emphases added.)
They also discussed geopolitics and the globalists’ doublespeak to cloak their intentions. Kokx reported:
Brand and Carlson agreed that the “loathing of nature” carried out by global elites indicates “something dark” is happening.
“Clearly what we’re watching are the fruits of spiritual war,” Carlson stated. “Certainly the solution seems to me to be spiritual,” Brand replied, adding that “authoritarianism now is being deliberately veiled in the insidious language of care, concern, safety and convenience.” (Emphasis added.)
Trust them not to take away your freedom?
Authoritarianism vs freedom was a topic of grave concern for Sky News Australia’s Outsider program cohosts Rowan Dean, Rita Panahi, and James Morrow, as well. In a discussion about the global pandemic treaty,”[3] they voiced concern about the proposed treaty and how it may be well received in Australia, particularly as most of the people accepted and even cheered on COVID-19 countermeasures. They also expressed concern about the dire implications the treaty has for personal freedoms, pointing out that the regulators, who may not be willing to endure people’s personal freedom, claim that freedom is the problem:
Dean:
The reality is the World Health Organization have [sic] made it crystal clear James that they want that ability to have a global pandemic treaty.
Morrow:
Well you know, and thing here that underlies this and so many things that we need to be vigilant about and what people need to be vigilant about but they get called conspiracy theorists and whack jobs and things like that, the fundamental idea behind all of this is this idea that freedom is somehow the problem.
And this is the issue, with so many of the issues that we face, whether it’s the pandemic whether it’s the climate crisis, if you want to say that in quotes, whatever the issue is, people having too much freedom is the thing that annoys the regulators and we’re going to see this. We saw the Climate Council this week come out and say that well to, you know, fight the climate thing not only do we need to all move to EVS but we need to own half as many cars and take half as many car trips we need to take trips according to the public transport schedule.
You know, we see this on level after level after level and this is what people need to be really vigilant about. It is not freedom that is the problem. It is always the people who want to take your freedom away.
Dean:
And we’re now in a world where really it’s not left versus right — it’s authoritarianism versus freedom, as James says — or the collective, the greater good versus freedom of the individual to make their own choices. And what we saw during COVID, which is why we must have a royal commission, as Rita was saying, to find out what actually happened during COVID. You must have that Royal Commission into what actually happened and what did happen to our freedoms and at what costs they came. (Emphases added.)
Considering the above, it appears that it is the WHO’s agenda that presents a danger — to your personal freedom.
We think of people dying from the toxic vaccines, but what we don’t think about are people left horribly maimed.
I heard the case of a woman who is fully vaccinated and boostered and has just been diagnosed with a rare form of cancer that invades the face and, if left untreated, invades the brain.
The doctors said that, whatever the results from here on in, there would be some disfigurement. What a future. (Med beds.)
Of course it isn’t the vaccine. Of course not.
What a challenge before us. We the unvaccinated will now work the hospitals treating the vaccine injured. (Until med beds.)
***
In every case I’ve heard of, when medically examined, none of the deep-state actors has been found to have taken the vaccine.
We’ve been railed at and vilified – for exactly the crime the cabal is guilty of, genocide – by precisely these people for not taking a vaccine they made sure not to take.
Many of the deep-state makers and promoters of vaccines have met their fate. I’m not sure what the crime was. In a common sense way, I’d imagine it was genocide.
And now we’ll need to turn around and treat the vaccine injured.
Why should we do it?
Because there’s a wonderful opportunity for incredible spiritual growth here. If we follow the model and example of the devolutionaries, if I may coin a phrase, we’ll also devolve. That isn’t what we … OK, I … want, is it?
Because we … I’m not alone, am I? … want to follow the example being held out before us in channeled messages. (1)
Because the others that condemned us and now require treatment are showing us an unhealed place in ourselves which can only be healed when up to the surface and in surface consciousness. Focus on healing the unhealed part of ourselves, I say.
And thank the others for helping to bring it to our attention so it could be healed.
***
I hate giving advice. And I don’t like people giving me advice. That comes from events with my father. And I don’t … errr, advise … anyone following my example.
Better to learn how to advise … or maybe freely suggest … something wisely. That’s what advice should be anyways, according to me.
What I do with advice freely given, if I don’t agree with it right away, is store it away. I act on it when I hear the same advice from a second person or source. Why do I do that? I don’t know. I know I do it though.
Confirmation? Corroboration? Significance? Etc. Is anyone else upset about this?
The subject becomes important now because I think we’ll see a flood of building the new and a tributary of that flood will, I think, be giving advice. And some people may be aggressive in their advice-giving. And we may react to their aggression and not consider their advice because of it. And we may miss opportunities we’d rather we didn’t.
***
What has me say this is that I feel sobered by a particular situation I read about. It involved the martial scene we enter inevitably when a nation is at war.
In modern warfare, you never know what you’ll encounter and how little time you have to react. The Alliance is committed to legality wherever the circumstances are not life-threatening or don’t require a lethal response.
But what I commonly read is a phrase which says a great deal: “There will be no second chances.” If a person draws, they’re immediately dispatched. Not wounded. Not given a second chance.
The same with opportunities to confess, opportunities to switch sides, plea deals, etc. If they’re turned down, there is no second chance.
Feeding into this change of stance is, I think, the fact that warfare has become so technological that responses have to be lightning quick.
The legal research is done before an arrest is made, but no (second) chances are given after setting in motion serving the warrant. Alliance agents and pilots have been killed. None of it is being reported in the mainstream news. Life and death are at stake in taking down the cabal.
The deep state cannot prevail but they can destroy and kill. The Alliance is trying to minimize the casualties and destruction by keeping things as quiet as possible but they are draining the swamp nonetheless.
Someone is taking the blanket and really shaking it. And our job right now, as far as I can see it, is to endure and help out … if you’d allow me to suggest it.
Keep in mind: Our star family, keeping things within bounds and always moving towards Ascension, will not allow the explosion of nuclear bombs in space. And most nuclear weapons are launched into space. (2) And they also won’t permit a world war.
What a challenge – to treat the vaccine-injured. And what an opportunity for spiritual growth. Genuine spiritual growth, not fakery.
Footnotes
(1) If you respond by ridiculing channeled messages, know that you’re following an old and corrupt paradigm [ridicule], which has consequences.
And Now for Something Completely Similar: Disease X
BySteve Beckow
Posted on November 15, 2023
A Chinese worker in a protective suit checks the temperature of a truck driver
Perhaps read this next article not as an “Oh, my, this could happen next” but as the deep state telling us exactly what they plan for us next.
Notice how the article sets the narrative for Disease X before it even emerges:
“Around three-quarters of emerging infectious diseases originate in animals and then leap from species to species until they can, in certain circumstances, infect human beings.”
So not laboratory-created, but in from the wild. Watch for Wikipedia to follow this narrative, were Disease X to get off the drawing board, if you’ll forgive my cheekiness.
Moreover, we’re discussing ordering vaccines for something that doesn’t exist, not like Covid did either: “Regarding vaccines for Disease X, there are currently no approved vaccines available.” How could there be? This statement makes sense only to someone who knows Disease X is being planned.
I’m not posting this because I fear it happening. I’m posting it to show you evidence of the deep state signalling its intentions and what those intentions may be. I’m actually reassured by Matthew Ward’s statement that indeed Disease X will never happen:
“The international group that has undertaken the monumental task of ridding your world of all dark activities [i.e., the global white-hat military] is closing in on the Illuminati. We don’t know when arrests will be made [they are being made], but as soon as they are, Covid-19 will run out its course and never again will Earth’s peoples be subjected to such a scourge.” (Matthew’s Message, Aug. 3, 2020.)
‘Disease X’ could be 20 times deadlier than COVID-19, says expert. Top 10 updates
As COVID-19 transitions into a recurring and more familiar health concern, healthcare professionals in the UK are now gearing up for a potential new pandemic known as “Disease X.” They caution that this new virus could have a similar impact to the devastating Spanish Flu of 1918-1920.
Health experts are sounding the alarm about “Disease X,” a term coined by the World Health Organization. They warn that this potential new pandemic has the capacity to result in 20 times more fatalities than the coronavirus. The COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020 and has tragically claimed the lives of over 2.5 million people worldwide. Here are the top 10 points about Disease X.
1. In an interview with the Daily Mail, Kate Bingham, who served as the chair of the UK’s Vaccine Taskforce from May to December 2020, expressed her belief that Disease X is expected to be considerably more perilous than COVID-19.
> Also Read: ‘Disease X’ can cause a more fatal pandemic? What WHO says <
2. Based on expert estimates, Disease X could potentially result in up to 50 million fatalities. “Let me put it this way: the 1918-19 flu pandemic killed at least 50 million people worldwide, twice as many as were killed in World War I. Today, we could expect a similar death toll from one of the many viruses that already exist,” she told the Daily Mail.
In response to Disease X, Bingham asserted, “the world will have to prepare for mass vaccination drives and deliver the doses in record time.”
3. She disclosed that while scientists have identified 25 virus families encompassing thousands of individual viruses, she holds the view that there are millions of viruses yet to be discovered, and these have the potential to evolve into pandemics.
> Also Read: What is ‘Disease X’? Why top experts are warning of another COVID-like pandemic? <
4. “In a sense, we got lucky with Covid-19, despite the fact that it caused 20 million or more deaths across the world. The point is that the vast majority of people infected with the virus managed to recover. Imagine Disease X is as infectious as measles with the fatality rate of Ebola [67%]. Somewhere in the world, it’s replicating, and sooner or later, somebody will start feeling sick.”
5. The rise in outbreaks, according to Bingham, is attributed to the growing trend of more people congregating in urban areas. She also emphasizes that the continual destruction of millions of acres of natural habitat each year is contributing to this increase.
> Also Read: WHO identifying potential pandemic pathogens <
6. “This reason is particularly important, because around three-quarters of emerging infectious diseases originate in animals and then leap from species to species until they can, in certain circumstances, infect human beings.”
7. According to Bingham, one of the initial actions that need to be taken is to allocate the necessary financial resources, essentially putting “the money on the table.” Bingham said, ” The monetary cost of inaction is seismic. After all, even Covid-19 – a milder virus than Disease X – managed to leave us holding a bill for $16 trillion in both lost output and public health expenditure.”
> Also Read: Disease X, other pathogens that can cause future pandemics to be identified by WHO <
8. Regarding vaccines for Disease X, there are currently no approved vaccines available. Nevertheless, Bingham underscores the importance of scientists developing a collection of “different prototype vaccines for every threatening virus family.” She stressed that only a ‘head start’ on vaccines could help to target specific features of Disease X.
9. Bingham explained about the portfolio strategy – vaccines countering different facets of the virus. She explains by saying that ‘different types of vaccines stimulate different immune responses and therefore they provide different levels of protection’.
10. She further noted that the manufacturing capabilities vary enormously across countries and regions. Some vaccine formats may be suitable for large-scale production, while others may be easier to produce in the third world. Third, we need to address the shortcomings of current vaccines, not all of which are durable, easy to transport or cheap. Fourth, researchers must be encouraged to trial new technologies and approaches to vaccine design, potentially leading to more effective and efficient vaccines in the future.”
