World Economic Forum’s Plan For A Mandatory Subscription Based Service For Antibiotics

It has been obvious since early 2020 that there has been an organized cult outreach that has permeated the world as a whole. It’s possible that this formed out of a gigantic error, rooted in a sudden ignorance of cell biology and long experience of public health. It is also possible that a seasonal respiratory virus was deployed by some people as an opportunity to seize power for some other purpose. 

World Economic Forum's Plan For A Mandatory Subscription Based Service For Antibiotics

Follow the money and influence trails and the latter conclusion is hard to dismiss. 

The clues were there early. Even before the WHO declared a pandemic in March 2020 (at least several months behind the actual fact of a pandemic) and before any lockdowns, there were media blitzes talking about the “New Normal” and talk of the “Great Reset” (which was rebranded as “Build Back Better”). 

Pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, and Astra-Zeneca were actively lobbying governments to buy their vaccines as early as February 2020, supposedly less than a month after the genetic sequence (or partial sequence) was made available by China. 

As a person who spent his whole professional career in pharmaceutical and vaccine development, I found the whole concept of going from scratch to a ready-to-use vaccine in a few months simply preposterous. 

Something did not add up.

I knew of the names with which everyone has become familiar. Bill Gates, Neil Ferguson, Jeremy Farrar, Anthony Fauci, and others had either been lobbying for or pursuing the lockdown strategies for many years. But still, the scope of the actions seemed too large to even be explained by those names alone.

So, the fundamental questions that I have been asking myself have been why and who? The “Why” seems to always come back to issues besides public health. Of course the “Who” had the obvious players such as the WHO, China, CDC, NIH/NIAID, and various governments but there seemed to be more behind it than that. These players have been connected to the “public health” aspect but that seemed to be only scratching the surface. 

I am not an investigative journalist and I would never claim that role, but even I can do some simple internet searches and start to see patterns evolve. The searches that I have done have yielded some very interesting “coincidences.”

If I give you the names of the following people – Biden, Trudeau, Ardern, Merkel, Macron, Draghi, Morrison, Xi Jinping – what do you think that they have in common? Yes, they are all pampered and stumble over themselves, but that is also not the connection.

One can see very quickly that these names certainly connect to lockdown countries and individuals who have ignored their own laws and/or tried in some way to usurp them. But, there is more to it than that and I will give a hint by providing a link with each name.

They are all associated with the World Economic Forum (WEF), a “nonprofit” private organization started (in 1971) and headed by Klaus “You will own nothing and be happy” Schwab and his family. This is a private organization that has no official bearing with any world governance body, despite the implication of the name. It could just as well have been called the “Church of Schwabies.” The WEF was the origin of the “Great Reset” and I would guess that it was the origin of “Build Back Better” (since most of the above names have used that term recently).

If you think that the WEF membership ends with just leaders of countries, here are a few more names:

Allow me to introduce more of the WEF by giving a list of names for the Board of Trustees. 

  • Al Gore, Former WP of the US
  • Mark Caney, UN Special Envoy for Climate Action
  • T. Shanmugaratnam, Seminar Minister Singapore
  • Christine Lagarde, President, European Central Bank
  • Ngozi Okonja-Iweala, Director General, WTO
  • Kristalian Georggieva, Managing Director, IMF
  • Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Minister of Canada
  • Laurence Fink, CEO, BlackRock 

You can see a cross section of political and economic leaders on the board. The leader of the organization, that is the leader of the Board, is still Klaus Schwab. He has built an impressive array of followers.

If you want to really see the extent of influence, go to the website and pick out the corporate name of your choice; there are many to choose from: Abbott Laboratories, Astra-Zeneca, Biogen, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Serum Institute of India, BASF, Mayo Clinic, Kaiser Permanente, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Blackrock, CISCO, Dell, Google, Huawei, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Zoom, Yahoo, Amazon, Airbus, Boeing, Honda, Rakuten, Walmart, UPS, Coca-Cola, UBER, Bank of China. Bank of America. Deutsche Bank, State Bank of India, Royal Bank of Canada, Lloyds Banking, JP Morgan-Chase, Equifax, Goldman-Sachs, Hong Kong Exchanges, Bloomberg, VISA, New York Times, Ontario (Canada) Teacher’s Pension Plan

The extent of reach is huge even beyond the worldwide leader network. For example, we all know what Bill Gates has been doing with his wealth via the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF). But, the Wellcome Trust is equal to the task. Who is the Director of the Wellcome Trust? One named Jeremy Farrar, of the United Kingdom SAGE and lockdown fame – arguably the architect of the US-UK lockdowns in 2020 – is closely associated with WEF. 

Concerning the reach that can occur, let me give some examples from the BMGF alone, and it comes from the time that I spent in 2020 reading their extensive funding list.

A few years ago, the BMGF awarded the Institute for Health Metric Evaluation (IHME) a ten-year, almost $280 million award. IHME (associated with the University of Washington in Seattle) was at the forefront of the computer modeling that was driving the lockdowns and the nonpharmaceutical Interventions during 2020. People have seen their name often in print or on MSNBC or CNN. 

In 2019, IHME awarded the Editor of the Lancet (Dr. Richard Horton) a $100,000 award and described him as an “activist editor.” The Lancet, once considered one of the best medical journals, has been at the forefront of censoring opposing scientific viewpoints since 2020 and publishing “papers” that were not fit to be published. I never could understand what it meant to be an “activist” editor in a respected scientific/medical journal because, stupid me, I always thought that the first job of the editor was to be impartial. I guess I learned in 2020 how wrong I was.

Of course, the Lancet is also heavily funded from pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer (also a member of the WEF). 

But, the BMGF reach goes far beyond just IHME and these connections have been quite recognizable. Here are some examples of the organizations and moneys received during 2020 alone broken down by areas.

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Grants 2020

Organization NameAmount USD
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health20+ million
World Health Organization (WHO)100+ million
Oregon Health Sciences Univ.15+ million
CDC Foundation3.5+ million
Imperial College of London7+ million
Chinese CDC2+ million
Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health5+ million
Institute of Health Metric Evaluation (IHME)28 million (part of a 10 yr/279 million USD grant)
Nigeria CDC1.1 million
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Z. (Gmbh)5+ million
Novartis7+ million
Lumira Dx UK LTD37+ million
Serum Institute of India4+ million
Icosavac10 million
Novavax15 million
BBC2 million
CNN4 million
Guardian3+ million
NPR4 million
Financial Times LTD0.5 million
National Newspaper Publishers Assoc.0.75 million
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Grants 2020

Bill Gates has also invested heavily in Moderna and his investments have paid out nicely for him. The BMGF has also given close to $100 million to the Clinton Health Access Initiative.

The questions now have to be asked: 

  • Is this some beginning of a controlled authoritarian society intertwined via the WEF? 
  • Has the Covid panic been staged to set the stage? Please note, I am not a “Covid Denier” since the virus is real. But, has a normal seasonal respiratory virus been used as an excuse to activate the web?

The next questions, for those of us who at least pretend to live in “Democratic” societies, have to be:

  • Is this what you expected and/or want from the people you elect?  
  • How many people knew of the “Associations” of the people that they voted for? (I certainly did not know of the associations until I did the searches but maybe I am just out of touch)

Can we anticipate their next moves? There may be some hints.

The Next Move 

Jeremy Farrar of The Wellcome Trust recently wrote an article for the WEF with the CEO of Novo Nordisk Foundation, Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen. It is a summary of a larger piece written for and published by the Boston Consulting Group. 

In this article, they propose that the way to “fix” the problem of antibiotic resistant bacteria is via a subscription service. That is, you pay a fee and when you need an antibiotic, presumably an effective one will be available for you. 

My guess is that they have the same philosophy for vaccines and that certainly seems to be the approach with Coronavirus. Keep paying for and taking boosters. 

In view of this philosophy, the vaccine mandates make sense. Get society “addicted” to an intervention, effective or not, and then keep feeding them. This becomes especially effective if you can keep the fear going.

This approach is so shortsighted, from a scientific viewpoint, it astounds me. But, like much of recent history, I think science has little to do with it. The goal is not scientifically founded but control founded. 

After the discovery of penicillin almost one century ago, there were scientists who warned that antibiotic usage should be considered very carefully in practice because evolutionary pressures would lead to antibiotic resistant species of bacteria. At that time, they were considered to be rogue scientists; after all, didn’t we suddenly have a miracle cure for many deadly problems?

From the time of discovery, it took over a decade before fermentation methods were developed to produce sufficient quantities of antibiotics to be practical. These methods allowed for the use of penicillin on the battlefield towards the end of WWII and undoubtedly saved many lives then and later in subsequent wars (Korea and Vietnam) by preventing serious infections resulting from wounds sustained during battle. 

However, it did not take long before the medical establishment was handing out antibiotics like candy. I experienced this myself when I was a child in the 1960s. It seemed like every time we went to the doctor, no matter what the problem, I was given a series (not just one) of injections of penicillin. There were never any attempts to determine if I had a virus, bacteria, or even an allergy. The answer was: in with the needle. I cannot count how many times I was “jabbed” as a child.

It didn’t take long before resistance species started to appear. The result was that more and more money was pumped into R&D for antibiotics. When I was in graduate school during the 1980s, one sure way to get some NIH funding was to tie the research into the “antibiotic” search. Antibiotics became big business. 

We now have several classes of antibiotics that are used for specific cases. We have Aminoglycosides (Streptomycin, Neomycin, etc.), Beta-Lactams Cephalosporins (four generations including Cefadroxil-G1, Cefaclor-G2, Cefotaxime-G3, Cefepime-G4 , Beta-Lactams Penicillins (including Ampicillin, Amoxicillin, and Penicillin), Other Beta-Lactams (Meropenem), Fluoroquinolones (Levofloxacin, Gemifloxicin, etc.), Macrolides (Azithromycin, Clarithromycin, etc.), Sulfonamides (Sulfisoxazole, etc.), Tetracyclines, and others such as Clindamycin and Vancomycin (typically reserved for resistant bacteria). All in all, physicians have over 50 different choices for antibiotics.

The most common place to encounter antibiotic resistant bacteria is in a hospital. Most people who get some sort of infection in the normal routine of life, like a sinus infection or skin infection, will not likely encounter an antibiotic resistant species. 

Except there has been another source of the problem and that has been in the food supply. Antibiotics have become very popular with large scale meat production facilities of all types including beef, poultry, swine, and even fish. These include actual farms where the animals are raised as well as in the processing of the meat. The overuse of antibiotics in these industries has also produced resistant forms of bacteria.

For example, in attempts to limit the bacteria e. coli, common to mammalians, antibiotics have been used and this has resulted in some antibiotic resistant forms of e. coli. An infection via e. coli (antibiotic resistant or not) can be avoided by proper cooking and handling of meats. However, sometimes that does not happen and there are e. coli outbreaks (also from improperly washed vegetables that may use contaminated irrigation water). 

For most healthy people, experiencing e. coli (either resistant or not) is only a passing discomfort that includes intestinal cramps, diarrhea, and other GI complaints. Depending on the amount of contamination, a person may suffer for a day or two or for several days. 

But, with some people, it can be serious or deadly (such as in elderly people in poor health and young children). If that occurs, then the presence of an antibiotic resistant form can be a serious matter. Presence of a non-resistant form can be treated more readily.

A few years ago I had pneumonia; a relatively mild case. I was given a choice of in-patient treatment or out-patient and it was a no-brainer. If I wanted to make sure that my pneumonia could be handled by the normal course of antibiotics (I was given a quinolone), staying at home and away from the hospital was important. I knew that hospital-acquired pneumonia could be a much more serious situation. So, I stayed at home and easily recovered. That did not mean I was guaranteed getting a more serious resistant form in the hospital but I understood that the risk was much greater. 

Producing more antibiotics and giving them on subscription to the users is not the answer. That will only lead to more resistant forms and there will be this continuing loop of antibiotic use. But, if the actual goal is societal addiction to antibiotics out of fear, just like addiction to universal Covid vaccines out of fear, then it makes sense. 

Finding a few universal antibiotics that deal with the resistant forms is important and it is also important to use those sparingly and only as a last resort. In addition, better management of antibiotic use in our society would go a long way to attenuating the problem. 

There is nothing particularly controversial about that observation. It was accepted by nearly every responsible health professional only two years ago. But we live now in different times of extreme experimentation, such as the deployment of world-wide lockdowns for a virus that had a highly focused impact, with catastrophic results for the world. 

It was the WEF on March 21, 2020 that assured us “lockdowns can halt the spread of Covid-19.” Today that article, never pulled much less repudiated, stands as probably the most ridiculous and destructive suggestion and prediction of the 21st century. And yet, the WEF is still at it, suggesting that same year that at least lockdowns reduced carbon emissions

We can easily predict that the WEF’s call for a universal and mandated subscription plan for antibiotics – pushed with the overt intention of shoring up financial capitalization of major drug manufacturers – will meet the same fate: poor health outcomes, more power to entrenched elites, and ever less liberty for the people. 

Roger W. Koops holds a Ph.D. in Chemistry from the University of California, Riverside as well as Master and Bachelor degrees from Western Washington University. He worked in the Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industry for over 25 years. Before retiring in 2017, he spent 12 years as a Consultant focused on Quality Assurance/Control and issues related to Regulatory Compliance. He has authored or co-authored several papers in the areas of pharmaceutical technology and chemistry. This article was originally published on the Brownstone Institute.

GreatGameIndia is being actively targeted by powerful forces who do not wish us to survive. Your contribution, however small help us keep afloat. We accept voluntary payment for the content available for free on this website via UPI, PayPal and Bitcoin.

Support GreatGameIndia


  1. You need to go deeper in your examination of the “players” Start with the 13 families illumanti, 33 menbers of steering commitee and commitee 300 members. They are the Nueremburg defendents! (Dr Coleman has the story)

  2. Finding a few universal antibiotics that deal with the resistant forms is important… Ionic / colloidal silver is the answer.

  3. I don’t have any Legal standing, but I have read and studied The Law in times past and I conclude the following, which needs to be Legally verified – please put it before a Lawyer, Barrister, or other Legal Representative of your acquaintance, for their considered “Legal Opinion” :

    From a Legal point of view, because of the Law revision in 2013 – it must be argued that there are two species, those Human with humanity and Trans-humans, without natural people, no longer human and do not enjoy any human or other rights of a state, and all related rights are lost, because GEN-POINT technology patents are under US jurisdiction and law, where they were registered. This applies worldwide and patents are subject to US law.

    All the Covid-19 “vaccine” patents mention gene deletion. All the patents except one, mention “complimentary DNA” (cDNA). cDNA is a chimeric mRNA cocktail that’s being coded into Human cells using artificial genetic sequences in cross-species genomics.

    According to the US Supreme Court ruling in 2013, altering Humans with cDNA makes them patent eligible. The court documents show that cDNA is made using modified bacterium and Supreme Court judges ruled it patent eligible. This means that a plant, animal or Human, could be patented and owned if first genetically modified with cDNA.

    Mark Steele summarized it perfectly by stating:
    In the US, the Supreme Court has ruled that vaccinated people worldwide are products, patented goods, according to US law, no longer human. Through a modified DNA or RNA vaccination, the mRNA vaccination, the person ceases to be human and becomes the OWNER of the holder of the modified GEN vaccination patent, because they have their own genome and are no longer “human” (without natural people), but “trans-human”, so a category that does not exist in Human Rights. The quality of a natural person and all related rights are lost. This applies worldwide and patents are subject to US law.

    Since 2013, all people vaccinated with GM-modified mRNAs are legally trans-human and legally identified as trans-human and do not enjoy any human or other rights of a state, and this applies worldwide, because GEN-POINT technology patents are under US jurisdiction and law, where they were registered.”

    So, we now have the not vaccinated with mRNA vaccines, who have all of the Human Rights and humanity, by Common Law AND The mRNA vaccinated patented trans-humans, who have no rights at all.

    This then suggests that a not vaccinated Human, cannot be tried by a Jury of their Peers, (Peers “one that is of equal standing with another : equal The band mates welcomed the new member as a peer Merriam Webster Dictionary since 1828) . when the Judge, Prosecution and Defense, Support Staff and Jury are mRNA vaccinated, are now trans-humans

    Can a trans-human, with no legal rights whatsoever, under the 2013, above, Law Revision, act on behalf of the Law in whatever capacity, when prosecuting a not vaccinated human who is Human under Common Law – Legally speaking, I would say NO although this has not been tested, in a Court of Law, yet

    It could be legally argued that a “not vaccinated Human”, under Common Law, cannot be housed with mRNA vaccinated trans-humans prisoners, because trans-humans have no rights under Human Laws and are a trans-humans species, whereas humans do.

    It also suggests that if a Human does something to a trans-human, it cannot be an offense, because the Human has Legal Rights under Common Law, where the mRNA vaccinated, trans-human, does not have any rights under the Human Common Law, at all.

    Thus, when “Crimes Against Humanity” charges are filed by mRNA vaccinated, trans-humans, they have no legal rights under Human Laws and cannot have any “Human Legal Representation”, accordingly, because when the “Human Common Laws” were entered into Law, no provision was made for any trans-humans species from 2013, which is why the mRNA vaccinated trans-humans have no rights at all.

    Can the Canadian Premier, his Mayors, Police, etc, do what they have been doing, under Human Laws, if they are vaccinated and trans-human – without any “Human Legal Rights”, whatsoever and can any other Premiers, of any other Country, once they are vaccinated and thus trans-human, have any Human Legal Rights at all, either, when the Human Law says they cannot?

    Only Humans who have NOT been mRNA vaccinated, can enjoy the rights of humanity, because they remain Human under Human Common Law – presumably?

    The Law is an instrument and in itself, it is infallible, as it is designed to be – but the humans that use it are not infallible and therein is the problem and where the conflict begins.

    It is NOT a defense to use the term “I did not know” – The Law requires everyone to take the trouble to know.

  4. Musk’s Neuralink interface caused ‘extreme suffering’ in monkeys, doctors say
    Me: Monkey’s – we are supposed to have come from them. Pig’s – They are supposed to be the most similar to humans – hence replacement heart valves, etc – think Monkey’s think HUMANS
    The controversial brain implant caused monkeys to suffer and die, according to a new report
    Elon Musk’s brain-chip company Neuralink has caused horrific damage to test monkeys, according to a complaint filed by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) on Thursday and seen by the New York Post. The complaint, filed with the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), concerns Neuralink testing on the monkeys carried out at the University of California at Davis from 2017 to 2020. 
    The group has accused Neuralink and its host university of nine violations of the US federal Animal Welfare Act, noting in their complaint that “many, if not all, of the monkeys experienced extreme suffering as a result of inadequate animal care and the highly invasive head implants during the experiments.” It reportedly goes on to claim that the Neuralink implant procedure “produced recurring infections in the animals, significantly compromising their health, as well as the integrity of the research.” 
    They have also sued UC Davis to obtain more photos, videos, and information about the test monkeys, saying that the only such material that has been made public has been heavily curated by Musk’s company, showing a healthy-looking monkey playing a video game, supposedly with its mind. The university has denied any wrongdoing.
    Aside from publicizing the clip of the monkey gamer, Musk has remained silent about the results of the animal Neuralink trials. In December, he suggested human trials will begin this year, and even went so far as to post a job listing seeking a clinical trials director last month. However, the project has experienced delays before – Musk declared last March that human trials would begin within months, even though the Tesla tycoon has yet to move beyond pigs and (non-human) primates.
    While it’s not clear if the suffering the monkeys allegedly experienced is related to the delay in entering the human test phase, the degree of trauma cited in the complaint suggests Musk and his researchers may have to make some design improvements before testing their invention on humans.
    One monkey reportedly described in the complaint was found missing extremities “possibly from self-mutilation or other unspecified trauma,” and was later killed during a “terminal procedure.” Another monkey had holes drilled in its skull in order to implant the Neuralink electrodes directly into its brain – only to develop a “bloody skin infection” and be put down. And a third appeared to survive the electrode implantation, only to be overcome with “vomiting, retching and gasping.” Days later, it allegedly “appeared to collapse from exhaustion/fatigue” and finally died, revealing it had suffered a brain hemorrhage.
    The primates described by the Post were just three of the 15 experimental subjects – out of 23 test monkeys in total – that died or were euthanized during the three year period covered by the complaint. 
    Musk initially sold the idea of Neuralink as a brain-boosting implant to help humanity keep pace with the development of artificial intelligence, warning that otherwise we would be relegated to the status of “house cats” ruled by computers. 
    READ MORE: AI tool warns it will ‘never’ be ethical
    However, he has more recently scaled back that rhetoric, claiming that its primary use will be to help paralyzed people and others with brain injuries improve their quality of life.
    He hasn’t stopped touting the ease with which a Neuralink can supposedly be implanted into the user’s brain, however, insisting it can be done in an hour without general anesthesia. He also described a future where Neuralink implanting centers are as ubiquitous as ear-piercing kiosks were in American malls.

  5. We know that the vaccines sterilize everyone into whom it is put, whether male or female and with the age range now from 5 years old and up, but sooner or later, 6 months old and up, essentially, that means to me, that our species, from times past to today, will cease to exist within the next 50 years or so and the world as we knew it will return to nature and the other animal species on this planet.
    The new humans will be test tube babies or clones, modified with computer/human interfaces by Big Pharma or Big Tech and their lives won’t need the trappings of freedom, which we enjoy today.
    The best way to keep humans and trans humans happy and compliant is to keep their lifestyles the same, so that nothing happens to cause them to revolt, except the unseen deaths, which rapidly reduce the current human population, until their control, does not matter any more.
    If you disagree with my point of view, then the facts speak for themselves.
    I would love to think my forwards take on things, is wrong and what I see developing, won’t ever occur, but then, why the empty shelves in the shops, irrespective of what country you are live in, as presumably the delivery structure starts to collapse – and when, if ever, will it be restored again, to how it was before?
    I am finding other ways to have food essentials delivered, which don’t rely on shops, supermarkets and the things we have become accustomed to expect – and I suggest you start to do the same – humans that is, the vaccinated trans humans, well, you are on your own, it seems to me, on that one.

  6. I stopped reading when I arrived at this inanity:

    “Please note, I am not a “Covid Denier” since the virus is real.”

    The Brownstone is filled with this kind of ramblers.

  7. was pushing the “subscription economy” back in 2008. They believed that everyone would be a subscriber and were positioning themselves to be the payment processor. The software was all written in China. They seemed very confident that this was what would happen. I found the prediction chilling. And yet, here we are.

    I would research the “subscription economy”. And Zuora’s founders.

Leave a Reply