Skip to main content

One Health Oneness

By its nature, One Health wants to bring all world health organizations into its Oneness. It's lead actors are typically involved in several global bodies.  Take Peter Daszak for example: President of EcoHealth, on the Editorial Board of One Health, investigator for WHO.

Or Christian Drosten: Germany's Coronavirus Tzar, Feb 1 Teleconferencer, WHO advisor, Director Charité Global Health.

Charité Global Health: Charité Global Health is currently in the process of negotiating collaborations with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford. (Sir Jeremy Farrar's realm)

A common cause amongst these One Health leaders is pedaling fear of a global zoonotic doom. To get more funding.

Drosten (2018): In an increasingly globalized world, preparedness against epidemics is becoming more and more important. Viruses don’t respect borders.

It all melds together. It’s impossible to know where one organization stops and another begins - they are One Organism.

One Health evangelists refer to this as lateralizing - breaking down the silos - absorbing them into the One Health agenda.

Dr Qu Dong-yu, PRC, Director General, UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (appointed Aug 1, 2019(!)), May 2021: This panel will contribute to advancing the One Health agenda, by ..being a shining example of silo-breaking, systems thinking and open dialogue. Expectations for collective action and the need for effective collaboration have never been higher. (due to Covid)

For investigators, this shifty Oneness/collective action concept can become disorientating - even nauseating - who’s in charge here? Who’s accountable? 

But if you recognize that that's their key weapon - the impenetrable fog - you’ll soldier on - it’s only fog. (The Andrews’ Govt’s enquiry (Vic, Aus) that found 'no-one was responsible' was a great example of how systems thinking works to envelop whilst shielding participants from unaccountability.)

So when Qu says, collective action, there are real people directing that action. Paradoxically, despite the fog, they're hiding in plain sight. Just ask 'em ...

Bruce Kaplan (One Health co-founder): This is evidenced by the numerous national and international meetings, symposia, “official” governmental agencies and unofficial organizations, university institutions and grass roots individuals (UFWD?) as well as “VIPs” raising the banner for more One Health performance and execution. .. A host of recent VIPs and prominent organizational endorsements have encouraged and helped by articulating One Health positions and endorsements.

I bet they have. 

BMJ Global Health Feb 2019: (A) number of related movements have gained traction among health policymakers and funders over the past 15 years, including One Health, EcoHealth and Planetary Health. Since 2010, political and financial attention to One Health has surged, with several developments in the last 3 years.

So a surging increase in power and money into centralized bodies.

BMJ Global Health: FAO (Dr Qu Dong-yu, Director General), OIE (World Animal Health Information System) and WHO (Tedros) launched a strategy for partnership (known as the Tripartite Concept Note) in April 2010 ..based on One Health principles. The Tripartite released a second strategic document in 2017 reaffirming its commitment to ‘more broadly embrace the One Health approach’.

Again, sounds nice, probably started with good intentions, but it’s become a power/data centralization device - a honeypot for despots. Sadly, that’s the fatal flaw of globalization. It’s why Aristotle favoured the small state - the polis (got him charged with impiety - same rap they got Socrates on - except Aristotle escaped - died shortly after in exile). It's easier to keep an eye on who’s up to what. The ideal-sized state was one where you could hear the town-crier.

BMJ Global Health: Results: We found that recent attention to One Health at high-level political fora has increased power struggles .. with stakeholders shifting operationalisation in directions most aligned with their own interests.

Otherwise known as human nature. When aligning their interests, which amount to exerting an unelected global health authority, it's easy to see why they gravitate towards the CCP's system of government. 

The One Health Oneness comes with its own built in rightness. It's a One-God-type model,under One Control. If you don't agree, you are, by definition, wrong.  We are all One on One Planet in One Universe

Except we're not. We're different.

Existential psychology is based on the exact opposite tenet to One-Everything - ultimately, we're all in this alone.  Our lives are the dynamic of how we accept/deny that scary knowledge.  To some extent, we do need to cooperate - but we don't need to be One. It's not the answer. The magic formula is: a diversity dynamic

Oneness sucks the life out of that.


  • Once upon a time, the woke-scientist community woke-up to find they were rich & powerful. 

  • To further centralize/entrench that power, the One Health concept became the dominant ideology/finance-body in the science community.

  • The One Health Editorial Board reads like a who’s who of pro-CCP scientists.

  • Two of the Director Generals from the Tripartite, FAO and WHO (Qu and Tedros), are outspoken pro-totalitarianists.

  • This immense power was marshaled to cover-up the origin of Covid.

  • Covid is used to justify restrictions on fundamental freedoms and invade privacy rights, thereby increasing centralized power

When your mind boggles at the sheer scale of the cover-up involved in the Covid Atrocity, the One Health-model provides compelling evidence of how a culture was invaded/dominated. That’s actually normal - it’s what cultures do if you let them. It’s not only scientists. Under cover of the night - people - scientists or normal people - do - immoral things.  Which is what happened with the One Health culture.

As Covid emerged One Health took disparate cultures to a unified global-level of bio-control.  This power-play is determining the future of humanity. The thing about The Future, though - it doesn’t have to be one particular way - despite the messaging & the seemingly inexorable trend towards Oneness. 

Pre-Covid, all of the above was going on - by stealth. If we can find a positive in Covid, it would be that it’s blown the lid on this drift towards global totalitarianism (lest we forget - the lid-blowing didn’t happen by itself -  took groups like DRASTIC - other random people - working independently).

The prevailing wind will be: 

Now’s not the time to talk about that coz we’re concentrating on the current evolving emergency!

But that’s a deflective tactic from the same people that brought us Covid. Now’s a great time to talk about it.

Even if the One Health Tripartite ever did finish with their evolving emergencies, which they never ever will, it would be too late. It’s designed that way.

The One-Everything zealotry sounds nice initially - if you want to get to the root cause of it - i blame Sir Bob Geldof (warning: graphic content) - though he genuinely didn't know what he was doing. 

The next step is to take a look at those who did know what they were doing - and what’s at stake here, aka: Why? 

It's not pretty.