Three years ago, who would have thought that it was possible that governments could lock down their citizens who would, in response to government mandates, be more than willing to sit in their homes, shutter businesses and churches among others and await their bad fortune and "certain death". Apparently, the United States has long had a plan in place to lock down its citizens as you will see in this posting.
Back in 2007, The National Infrastructure Advisory Council or NAIC released its plan for a pandemic outbreak in the United States which is currently available on the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) website which has been archived here just in case it should happen to disappear like it never existed.
Here is the title page of the report dated January 16, 2007:
Here is the background to the study:
"Though its timing, severity, and ultimate strain remain a mystery, a pandemic promises to test the critical infrastructure of both the United States and the world. Public health officials have long maintained the potential for pandemic influenza is not a matter of if, but rather a matter of when. To avoid an economic and social catastrophe, pandemic preparedness demands full public- and private-sector participation. With that in mind, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Michael Chertoff joined Secretary Leavitt in May 2006 to ask the National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) to provide them and President Bush with recommendations regarding the prioritization and distribution of pandemic countermeasures to the essential workers in our nation’s Critical Infrastructure and Key Resource (CI/KR) sectors.
Given the scope and scale of a pandemic, the Federal government has repeatedly asserted it cannot handle all pandemic preparedness, response, and recovery efforts on its own. In their letter to the NIAC, the Secretaries highlighted the necessity for the public and private sectors to prepare for this serious threat. The Secretaries also emphasized their understanding that successful pandemic planning requires coordination across all CI/KR sectors."
The pandemic assumptions were as follows:
Here are the estimates used by Health and Human Services for the impact of both a moderate and severe pandemic on the citizens of the United States:
Here are the six key issues that the study examined:
1.) Identifying and defining "critical services" that must be maintained in a pandemic; ‰ Establishing criteria and principles for critical service prioritization;
2.) Defining critical services priority (with principles for variation, if needed);
3.) Identifying critical employee group(s) in each priority critical service;
4.) Building a structure for communication and dissemination of resources; and ‰ Identifying principles for effective implementation by DHS and HHS.
The plan contained a list of "essential businesses" that would have to remain functional during a pandemic. These included:
1.) banking and finance sector
2.) chemical sector
3.) commercial facilities sector
4.) communications sector
5.) energy sector including electrical subsector
6.) food and agricultural sector
7.) healthcare sector
8.) information technology sector
9.) nuclear sector
10.) postal and shipping sector
11.) transportation sector
12.) water and waste management sector
The authors of the study noted that many of these sectors are interdependent; for example, banking and finance requires electricity, information technology, transportation and fuel. Here is a diagram showing the sector interdependencies which shows how vulnerable the economy has become:
WIth that background, let's look at how the group recommended responding to a pandemic:
1.) Pharmaceutical Countermeasures: Here is a quote:
"Pharmaceutical countermeasures for pandemic influenza fall into two major categories, antiviral medications and vaccines. Each countermeasure comes with positive and negative characteristics defining how healthcare providers may most effectively use them before and during a pandemic. Beyond the characteristics of the countermeasures themselves, current vaccine and antiviral medication distribution plans may be overwhelmed in a scenario demanding swift, nationwide distribution on a scale required to respond to a pandemic. This is particularly true when trying to reach public- and private-sector entities operating across state borders.
In preparation for a pandemic, Federal, State, local and private sector officials have begun stockpiling two antiviral drugs on the recommendation of the CDC:
Oseltamavir (Tamiflu) and Zanamavir (Relenza).
It was also recommended that the government acquire non-medical interventions such as gloves, respirators and surgical masks including N95 masks. The study noted that masks:
"...may serve two purposes, to limit the spread of disease to healthy populations and to prevent sick individuals from spreading the disease to others...."
2.) Social Interventions: Here is a quote with my bolds:
"The public health community is considering a series of measures intended to inhibit the spread of disease. These measures vary in their severity and potential to disrupt day-to-day activities. Federal, State, and local government officials are developing strategies to respond to a pandemic using these methods. These methods have a historical precedent; health officials have used them in the past to assist in controlling previous epidemics, with varying degrees of success. During a pandemic, the goal will be to slow the virus’ transmission; delaying the spread of the virus will provide more time for vaccine development while reducing the stress on an already burdened healthcare system.
The government retains the authority to limit the public’s movement during an outbreak. In addition to border closures, isolation, and quarantine generally represent the most widely known movement control methods. Quarantine is a legally enforceable declaration that a government body may institute over individuals potentially exposed to a disease, but who are not symptomatic. If enacted, Federal quarantine laws will be coordinated between CDC and State and local public health officials, and, if necessary, law enforcement personnel. During previous pandemics, particularly in 1918, many communities used isolation strategies and “reverse quarantine strategies” to prevent the disease’s spread to their community from surrounding populations. The government may also enact travel restrictions to limit the movement of people and products between geographic areas in an effort to limit disease transmission and spread. Authorities are currently reviewing possible plans to curtail international travel upon a pandemic’s emergence overseas.
Limiting public assembly opportunities also helps limit the spread of disease. Concert halls, movie theaters, sports arenas, shopping malls, and other large public gathering places might close indefinitely during a pandemic—whether because of voluntary closures or government- imposed closures. Similarly, officials may close schools and non-essential businesses during pandemic waves in an effort to significantly slow disease transmission rates. These strategies aim to prevent the close interaction of individuals, the primary conduit of spreading the influenza virus. Even taking steps such as limiting person-to-person interactions within a distance of three feet or avoiding instances of casual close contact, such as shaking hands, will help limit disease spread....
A pandemic will also demand changes in workplace behavior and practices. Businesses may be encouraged to have employees work from home as a means to limit employee interaction. Other steps, such as instituting shift work and altering business processes to minimize employee interaction are likely reactions to a pandemic...."
And there you have the source for CISA/Homeland Security's stay-at-home orders as shown here:
Here are screen captures of the pertinent pages about social interventions from the 2007 report:
Remember the "two weeks to flatten the curve" narrative from the early months of 2020? Well, it's nearly three years later and governments are still threatening to use the draconian social measures that they used during the COVID-19 pandemic despite the fact that they have been quite ineffective at preventing the spread of the pandemic and led to significant mental and physical health issues for multitudes of people. Thanks to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) website, at least now we know where the lockdown plan came from.
A cynic would almost wonder if there wasn't/isn't another agenda at play that doesn't really include protecting us from disease.
No comments:
Post a Comment