Hubbry Logo
PlandemicPlandemicMain
Open search
Plandemic
Community hub
Plandemic
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Plandemic
Plandemic
Plandemic
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Plandemic is a trilogy of conspiracy theory films produced by Mikki Willis, promoting misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. They feature Judy Mikovits, a discredited American researcher and prominent anti-vaccine activist. The first video, Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19, was released on May 4, 2020, under Willis's production company Elevate Films. The second film, Plandemic Indoctornation, which includes more interviewees, was released on August 18 by Brian Rose's distributor of conspiracy theory related films, London Real. Later on June 3, 2023, Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening was released on The Highwire, a website devoted to conspiracy theories run by anti-vaccine activist Del Bigtree.

Upon its release, the first video went viral, becoming one of the most widespread pieces of COVID-19 misinformation, its popularity most attributed to online word-of-mouth. It was quickly removed by multiple online platforms, but this failed to stop its proliferation. The video also plausibly contributed to non-compliance with health protocols. Due to social media companies' preparedness for its release, Plandemic: Indoctornation received less attention.

Scientists and health professionals have criticized all the installments of the trilogy for their misleading claims, while Willis's filmmaking style employing various modes of persuasion has been cited as lending to a conspiratorial and brainwashing character of the film. Responding to the outcry directed at the first video, Willis expressed doubt about Mikovits's claims but continued to defend her, with Indoctornation being self-described as a "response video" to debunkers. The Great Awakening was also subject to debunking by fact-checkers.

Background

[edit]
Main articles: COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 misinformation, and List of unproven methods against COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic was caused by the virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), first identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, becoming a pandemic in 2020.[1] Billions of people have contracted the disease and millions eventually died from it.[2] As a result of the pandemic declaration, travel restrictions,[3] social distancing measures,[4] and many other precautions were enacted to try to prevent the spread of COVID-19[5] while vaccines were quickly developed and underwent phased distribution in most countries.[6] Meanwhile, misinformation and conspiracy theories about the pandemic emerged, concerning the pandemic's scale, the virus' origin, diagnosis, and treatment. Among the popular conspiracy theory is that the virus is a bioweapon to control the population.[7] Some people have claimed to have magical or faith-based cures for the disease.[8]

Judy Anne Mikovits is a former American research scientist who is known for her discredited medical claims, such as the claim murine endogenous retroviruses are linked to chronic fatigue syndrome.[9] Even prior to the pandemic, Mikovits was engaged in anti-vaccination activism and the promotion of conspiracy theories,[10] and was accused of scientific misconduct.[11] Prior to the release of Plandemic, Mikovits had expressed support for various COVID-19 conspiracy theories, claiming, for example, that the COVID-19 pandemic is a predictable flu season.[12]

Mikki Willis[a] is a former model and actor[14] who had been making several New Age documentary films and conspiracy videos.[15]: 4  At age 25, he founded the New York/Los Angeles Theater of the Arts, where he made several experimental plays, before making his feature debut film, Shoe Shine Boys (1996). He owns a production company, Elevate Films, which operates under the 501(c)(3) non-profit Elevate Foundation, founded in 2006. At one point, it also operated a namesake film festival.[13][16][17] He was also co-director, co-cinematographer, and co-editor of the documentary Neurons to Nirvana (2013), which makes therapeutic claims on psychedelics. Residing in Ojai, California, Willis has a wife and business partner, Nadia Salamanca, as well as two sons. He has a family YouTube channel, Elevate Family, where one of his videos encouraging young boys to be unashamed of their cross-gender interests went viral. In 2023, it was reported they were planning to launch an alternative learning center.[15]: 3 [18][19]

Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19

[edit]

Summary

[edit]
The word Plandemic in all capital, with the letter I replaced with a syringe. The word Plan has a thin body, while the word Demic is bolder.
The logo used for the first video

The first installment of the trilogy, a 26-minute video titled Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19,[19] promotes the conspiracist claim that vaccines are "a money-making enterprise that causes medical harm",[20] exploring themes of the loss of free speech and free choice, also promoting parental autonomy against the pharmaceutical industry.[15]: 14  It takes the form of an interview between Willis and Mikovits, who makes unsupported and false statements about SARS-CoV2, the disease it causes, and her own controversial history.[19]

Fact-checking responses

[edit]

Fact-checking website PolitiFact highlighted eight false or misleading statements made in the video:[19]

  • That Mikovits was held in jail without charge. Mikovits was briefly held on remand after an accusation of theft from her former employer the Whittemore Peterson Institute but charges were dropped. There is no evidence to support her statement notebooks removed from the Institute were "planted" or that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and its director Anthony Fauci bribed investigators.[19] When asked, both Mikovits and Willis said it was an error to say Mikovits had not been charged; she had meant to say the charges were dropped. Mikovits later said "I've been confused for a decade" and that in the future she would try to be clearer when she talks about the criminal charge; "I'll try to learn to say it differently".[21]
  • That the virus was manipulated. This possibility is still being investigated. According to Nature magazine, "Most scientists say SARS-CoV-2 probably has a natural origin, and was transmitted from an animal to humans. However, a lab leak has not been ruled out, and many are calling for a deeper investigation into the hypothesis that the virus emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), located in the Chinese city where the first COVID-19 cases were reported."[22]
  • That the SARS-CoV2 virus evolved from SARS-CoV-1 within a decade and that is inconsistent with natural causes. This is incorrect; SARS-CoV-2 is similar but is not directly descended from SARS-CoV (SARS-1), and the viruses have only 79% genetic similarity.[23]
  • That hospitals receive $13,000 from Medicare if they "call it COVID-19" when a patient dies. This statement, which had previously been made on The American Spectator and WorldNetDaily,[24] was rated "half true" by PolitiFact[25] and Snopes;[26] payments are made, but the amount is open to dispute and there is no evidence this influences diagnosis. The evidence suggests COVID-19 may be under-diagnosed.[27]
  • That hydroxychloroquine is "effective" against coronaviruses. This statement originates in work by Didier Raoult that subsequently received a "statement of concern" from the editors of the scientific journal in which it was published.[28] The first randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 found no evidence of benefit and some evidence of harm.[29] The NIH said there is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against its use to treat COVID-19.[30] As of May 7, 2020, other bodies were running additional controlled trials to investigate hydroxychloroquine's safety and efficacy.[19]: 1 
  • That flu vaccines increase the chance of contracting COVID-19 by 36%. This statement is false;[31] it misinterprets a disputed article that studied the 2017–2018 influenza season, predating the COVID-19 pandemic. The statement the flu vaccine increases the chance of contracting COVID-19 does not appear in the original article. The article's author Greg G. Wolff said coronavirus cases increased from 5.8% (non-vaccinated) to 7.8% (vaccinated) with an odds ratio of 1.36, with (1.14, 1.63) 95% confidence interval, and the article highlight said; "Vaccinated personnel did not have significant odds of respiratory illnesses".[32] The article refers to seasonal coronaviruses that cause the common cold, but COVID-19 was added by the website disabledveterans.org.[31]
  • That despite the goal of preventing coronaviruses, flu vaccines contain coronaviruses. In reality, there are no vaccines with coronaviruses.[33]
  • That "Wearing the mask literally activates your own virus. You're getting sick from your own reactivated coronavirus expressions." This statement is unsupported by evidence. Masks prevent airborne transmission of the virus, especially during the up-to-14-day asymptomatic period when carriers may not be aware they have the disease.[34] A virus may be deactivated, but cannot add to one's infection level if it leaves the body, even temporarily.[35]
A young adolescent carrying a yellow sign saying, "We are woke to your plandemic. We do not consent to a Gates Vaccine."
A child protesting COVID-19 vaccines with the word plandemic at Franklin County, Ohio

The journal Science also repeats some of the statements made by PolitiFact and fact-checked some of Mikovits's and Willis's other statements:[36]

  • That Italy's COVID-19 epidemic is linked to influenza vaccines and the presence of coronaviruses in dogs. There is no relation between these.
  • That SARS-CoV-2 was created "between the North Carolina laboratories, Fort Detrick, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, and the Wuhan laboratory". Considering relations between the US and the Wuhan lab stopped, the claim is false.
  • That Mikovits is not anti-vaccine. According to Science, she once wore a piece of Vaxxed II merchandise promoting the 2019 sequel to a 2016 film that says MMR vaccines cause autism and that she once sent Science a PowerPoint presentation calling for an "immediate moratorium" for "all vaccines".
  • That the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) "colluded and destroyed" Mikovits's reputation, and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) kept this secret but did nothing to help her. Science said, "Mikovits has presented no direct evidence that HHS heads colluded against her".
  • That Mikovits's article on Science "revealed that the common use of animal and human fetal tissues was unleashing devastating plagues of chronic diseases", which the article does not say.
  • That Mikovits's Ph.D. thesis Negative Regulation of HIV Expression in Monocytes "revolutionized the treatment of HIV/AIDS"; the thesis "had no discernible impact on the treatment of HIV/AIDS".

Mikovits also alludes to several conspiracy theories that state Bill Gates is implicated in causing the pandemic to profit from an eventual vaccine,[20] and makes false and unsupported statements such as the claim that beaches should remain open because of "healing microbes in the saltwater" and "sequences" in the sand that can "protect against the coronavirus".[37] The video states the numbers of COVID-19 deaths are purposely being misreported to control people.[38] External videos, such as one in which a chiropractor says tonic water can treat or prevent COVID-19 and one of a press conference among doctors Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi in Bakersfield, California, says the COVID-19 pandemic is over-hyped. These external videos were also disputed beforehand.[39]

Production

[edit]
The word Elevate in all caps, with the word V resembling a diamond.
Logo of Elevate Films, the production company for the first video

According to Willis, producing Plandemic was a struggle. At that time, he was aware getting involved in controversial topics would risk his reputation and would likely embroil him in heated discussions. "And of course there's been tons of it. I've just been navigating all of that", he told the Los Angeles Times. Willis's concern arose from his perception of the pharmaceutical industry's corruption, a concern that began with the deaths of his mother from cancer and of his brother from AIDS during his 20s.[13]

Willis met Mikovits for the first time in 2019, via mutual friends. Willis told the Ojai Valley News: "Because of [Mikovits's] direct connection with [those] involved with the pandemic ... I reached out to her for advice. We met, had a meeting, and what she revealed to me I knew the world needed to know." Principal photography took a day and editing took two weeks. Willis said he stopped editing a "socially conscious" documentary film he produced in 2019, arguing Plandemic was urgent. He was unsure whether to make a continuation.[40][18] After hiring a cinematographer and researcher to join the project, Willis calculated it had a budget at less than US$2,000.[13]

Willis, a low-budget filmmaker who was 52 years old at the time of Plandemic's release, teamed up with Salamanca to market the video;[13] among their efforts were creating an Instagram account.[41] They intentionally chose conspiratorial branding to gain attention. The project's title, a portmenteau of plan and pandemic, was the most popular choice in a Facebook poll conducted by Willis; runners-up were The Invisible Enemy and The Oath.[13]

Release

[edit]

Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 was released on May 4, 2020.[42] It was promoted by American far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones on InfoWars,[43] and spread virally on social media, garnering millions of views,[20] making it one of the most widespread pieces of COVID-19 misinformation. "Judy Mikovits" became a trending search on Google for two days.[44] Two weeks prior to release, 30,368 tweets used the term "plandemic", most of which were merely retweets. After the video's release, the word "plandemic" was used 155% more on Twitter.[45] According to CrowdTangle, QAnon Facebook groups endorsed the video. A Facebook spokesman recalled its hired fact-checkers wasting a huge amount of time to verify the video's claims, partly due to its duration and the number of claims.[46] Before being removed, one of the videos featuring the work attracted one million views.[47] Despite its removal, viewings of the video on the original site continued.[48]

A YouTube spokesperson said the platform would remove videos supporting the claims of Plandemic without sufficient evidence, saying "[s]uggesting that wearing a mask can make you sick could lead to imminent harm". Vimeo's Trust & Safety team removed the video for violating its policies on misinformation; Twitter said hashtags like #PlagueofCorruption[b] and #PlandemicMovie had been blacklisted and that not all of Mikovits's attempts to spread propaganda on the platform violated its policies. By the time the video was removed from Facebook, it had been watched 1.8 million times, had attracted 17,000 comments, and had been shared nearly 150,000 times.[49] On TikTok, the video continued to find popularity via excerpted clips, some of which were removed from the platform.[50] Google Drive and the Internet Archive were also used to spread the video; the former removed the files after being notified by The Washington Post.[41]

According to Zarine Kharazian, assistant editor of the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, as the film was removed from mainstream social media platforms, a "censorship backfire" that was characterized as a form of Streisand effect occurred; links to copies were promoted on alt-tech platforms—some of which were designed to host controversial content—were shared, with people's interest attracted by the video's perceived taboo nature.[51] On Facebook, posts flagged as misinformation are more likely to be spread than those ignored. Shahin Nazar and Toine Pieters of the journal Frontiers in Public Health called the marketing campaign of encouraging people via decentralized social media to propagate the anti-vaccine belief "sophisticated", noting that it might have been a major contributor to the lack of compliance towards health protocols.[45] According to The Verge, end-to-end encrypted services like WhatsApp and private groups meant the video was still being spread, unbeknown to the public.[46]

Reception

[edit]
Scene featuring Mikovits standing at a walkway in a lonely forest.
The atmosphere, cinematography, and score of Plandemic are said to be what makes the claims stated sound convincing. Pictured is a cutaway during the video's opening scene.

Scientists, medical doctors, and public health experts condemned Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 for promoting misinformation and NBC News called it "a hodgepodge of conspiracy theories".[44] Governmental organizations, including the Indonesian COVID-19 Task Force, also labeled the video as a hoax, describing it as brainwashing and a red herring to divert the public's attention from real issues.[52] Experts like specialist disinformation reporter Marianna Spring and disinformation researcher Erin Gallagher said the video's professionally crafted atmosphere, cinematography, and ominously dramatic score made the stated claims sound true; according to Spring; "That makes them as dangerous—if not more so—than advice with a mix of truth and misleading medical myths".[53][54][55]

Science journalist Tara Haelle described the video as pseudoscientific propaganda and said it succeeded at promoting misinformation because it plays on the viewers' confusion and desperation for answers. The opening sequence best targets people unfamiliar with Mikovits, painting her as the scientific industry's underdog, giving a good first impression on her. and editing, The video also uses various modes of persuasion such as the Gish gallop (giving excessive arguments to sound convincing), as well as scientific-looking images and "harrowing" stock footage of dying people during the AIDS scene.[55] Writing for the Deseret News, Amy Iverson expressed sympathy for those who stumbled upon the video in search for "someone to blame" for the effects of the pandemic, however noted "we cannot turn to outrageous, unchecked claims from a few loud voices to ease our concerns. And we definitely should not spread their unsubstantiated claims."[39]

Meanwhile, the British musician Seal expressed love for the video and called the responses to it unjustified. Other public figures including the mixed martial arts fighter Nick Catone, spread the video's misinformation and Melissa Ackison, a Republican politician, supported the video.[56] The video's legacy continues long after its release; in February 2021, The Washington Post reported an anti-mask Facebook page called "Shop Mask Free Los Angeles" used Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 to support its claims. By this time, the Post reported some of the links had suffered from link rot.[57]

The Los Angeles Times contacted yoga teacher and author Shiva Rea, who was a member of the board of directors of the Elevate Foundation; Rea stated she was not associated with the foundation or the film, and found Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 to be "very disturbing".[13]

Mikki Willis's response

[edit]

Willis said that although he expected the provocative marketing to garner interest, the actual scope of popularity was unexpected.[18] Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Willis said he is not anti-vaccine and that he was merely trying to "start a conversation about science". He described himself as open-minded; "I have a profound love and respect of doctors despite how many doctors are mad at me now". Willis said he is also skeptical of Mikovits's claims in the video; "We're working very hard right now to validate the majority of the claims that were made" and expressed a willingness to be involved in civil discussions with doctors "on all sides".[13]

ProPublica health care reporter and investigative journalist Marshall Allen contacted Willis, who said Plandemic "is not a piece that's intended to be perfectly balanced". When asked whether Plandemic might be fairly called propaganda, he said the definition fits, although he did not feel it contains anything misleading. According to Allan, "based on [the definition of propaganda], [Willis] feels 100% of news reporting is propaganda".[21]

The Center for Inquiry's (CFI) Benjamin Radford and researcher Paul Offit asked Willis eight questions about the accuracy of the claims made in the video, either asking for evidence and clarification or asking questions such as "considering that bacteria don't kill viruses, how would 'healing microbes' reduce or treat coronavirus infection?" Willis agreed to answer all of the questions but he never did. Radford said on the CFI's website:[58]

If the claims made by Mikovits and Willis in Plandemic are based in truth and facts, you'd think they would be eager to offer evidence supporting their claims. What better way to turn the tables on scientists, skeptics, and journalists than to offer a referenced, fact-based, point-by-point rebuttal to critics who offer them a platform? ... Where are their responses? Why are they suddenly so quiet? Why are they afraid to answer questions? What do they have to hide?

Plandemic: Indoctornation

[edit]
The logo in all caps and a morbid font.
Plandemic: Indoctornation's logo

Summary and fact check

[edit]

The second installment, an 84-minute film titled Plandemic: Indoctornation[c] was released on August 18, 2020.[59] Willis said the film is a "response video to all the debunkers", and that he worked with a coalition of 7,000 doctors and attorneys to make the film to "reform our medical systems such that they're not under the stranglehold of Big Pharma".[40] PolitiFact categorized it as a pseudo-documentary.[60]

The film says there is a worldwide conspiracy seeking to control humanity through fear and to make money for the putative conspirators; the COVID-19 pandemic is described as a key moment in a decades-long plan. The film says people and institutions including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Google and the fact-checking agencies it employs, climate scientists, John Oliver, and Bill Gates coordinate with each other to enact the conspiracy.[61]

Plandemic: Indoctornation says COVID-19 was engineered in a laboratory, that Event 201—a 2019 disaster response exercise—was a plan to release a real virus into the population, and that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was ejected from India.[59] The film also says a defensive patent applied by the CDC during the 2003 SARS outbreak was meant to "[control] the proprietary rights to the disease, to the virus, and to its detection and all of the measurement of it".[60] These were later unproven; Event 201 was not a virus conspiracy plot, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation does not have technology allowing it to covertly implant an invisible proof of vaccination.[59] The CDC's defensive patent covers the genetic material detection methods for human coronaviruses so "public research and communication were not jeopardized by commercial parties seeking exclusive private control".[60]

Production and release

[edit]
The word London Real in all caps, with the word Real being colored red.
Logo of distributor London Real

Immediately after the release of Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19, Willis said he was contacted by an independent producer who said he had worked on projects with HBO, Netflix, and Amazon. The producer asked Willis if he had an interest in collaborating on making a feature-length version, though the Los Angeles Times found the companies had expressed no interest in the film.[13] Soon after Plandemic's release, another set of teams announced the clips from Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 would be part of a documentary feature film.[19]

Plandemic: Indoctornation was released by an online distributor called London Real on the website Digital Freedom Platform, which has promoted several discredited theories about the COVID-19 pandemic,[59] and was founded and managed by podcaster Brian Rose.[60] Because the film's release was promoted in advance, social media platforms were able to prepare for its release rather than scrambling to react to misinformation already circulating on their networks.[59] As part of their policy to counter disinformation about the pandemic, Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms took steps to limit the spread of the film as soon as it was posted, affixing warnings to links shared by users. YouTube removed multiple copies of the film and sixteen clips presenting specific sections from its servers.[61] Although no steps to block the content were taken, Facebook warned users when clicking the film's URL, which was blacklisted by TikTok and Instagram.[62]

According to London Real, Plandemic: Indoctornation was watched 1.2 million times by the end of its first day of release but the Digital Forensic Research Lab called the film "a total flop" that achieved much less social media engagement than the original video.[61] Because social media companies were forewarned by the viral nature of the first video, the distribution of Plandemic: Indoctornation was limited.[59] The Daily Dot said the only platform where it succeeded in getting exposure was Facebook, where it had 4,000 views of posts linking to the film on BitChute, where it had 40,000 views.[62]

Reception

[edit]

Critics compared Plandemic: Indoctornation unfavorably with the first video.[62] Jane Lytvynenko at BuzzFeed News gave it zero stars, saying while the first video presents a protagonist (Mikovits) and a fairly clear narrative, the film does neither: it is "bloated, confused, and filled with nonsense", switching between topics without clearly establishing how all the information presented relate to each other. Its subjects are said to be cliché with respect to the first video. Lytvynenko said Willis's initial claim 'the first video is a trailer for a feature film is incorrect; while Plandemic: Indoctornation discusses the same themes and includes Mikovits, most of the material in the first video is not used in the feature-length film.[61]

Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening

[edit]

Willis teamed up with Del Bigtree, the founder of the anti-vaccination group Informed Consent Action Network, to release another film, Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening on Bigtree's website The Highwire.[14] In February 2023, a rough cut was screened at the "Rabbit Room" section of the 21st Conscious Life Expo in Los Angeles, a New Age and far-right conspiracy event[63] where he won a humanitarian award in 2008.[17] The trailer was released on May 23, 2023, and the film itself on June 3. Its promotional tagline, placed at a "slick" official website, is "100% Censored, 0% Debunked." The fact-checking organization Logically reported that the trailer had earned two million views on Twitter as of May 31.[14] The 101-minute film is said to be dedicated to conspiracy theorist G. Edward Griffin, with archival clips of him used sporadically.[64]

The film begins with Willis claiming that his AIDS-infected brother died of consuming the treatment drug zidovudine. PolitiFact and Agence France-Presse found no evidence that it caused the deaths of AIDS patients. The clip circulated in Instagram, but was then flagged by parent company Meta.[65][66] Willis then says that COVID-19 lockdowns are "synchronized tyranny" aimed at controlling the masses. The trailer includes out-of-context clips of world leaders and politicians discussing the Great Reset at the World Economic Forum (WEF), and features personalities who have promoted misinformation about the pandemic and vaccines, including Ghent University professor Mattias Desmet and Vladimir Zelenko.[d][14] The film also misleadingly depicts WEF founder Klaus Schwab as creating a "purported plot for a unified world government" as well as being a Nazi due to him being born in Nazi Germany. It also falsely covers the George Floyd protests (additionally calling Black Lives Matter a pro-communist organization), antifa protests, and a Washington state bill regarding gender-affirming surgery.[64]

See also

[edit]

Similar films

[edit]

Explanatory notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Plandemic

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Plandemic is a portmanteau of "" and "pandemic," referring to a that the outbreak was deliberately orchestrated by pharmaceutical companies, government officials, and global organizations to advance agendas including forced , economic disruption, and . The term gained widespread attention through a trilogy of films produced by Mikki Willis of Elevate Films, beginning with Plandemic: Indoctornation on May 4, 2020, which featured virologist alleging that Dr. profited from suppressing treatments like and while promoting harmful interventions, and that viruses such as originated from funded by U.S. agencies. Subsequent installments, including Plandemic II: Indoctornation and Plandemic 3: The (2023), expanded on these themes, linking the events to broader critiques of institutions like the . While the videos amassed tens of millions of views across platforms before widespread removals for violating content policies, peer-reviewed examinations have identified numerous factual errors, such as Mikovits's retracted claims linking XMRV to chronic fatigue syndrome and unsubstantiated assertions about vaccine-induced diseases. The series contributed to heightened public skepticism toward official pandemic responses, correlating with spikes in online discussions of alternative theories, though lacking empirical validation for its core causal assertions of intentional orchestration.

Background

Mikki Willis and Production Context

Mikki Willis is an independent filmmaker and the founder and CEO of Elevate Films, a based in , dedicated to creating socially conscious media. Previously a model and , Willis shifted to filmmaking after participating in rescue efforts at the following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. His portfolio includes diverse projects such as contributions to the 2016 presidential campaign and wellness-oriented videos. Willis's decision to produce the Plandemic series was driven by longstanding personal concerns regarding vaccine safety and alleged corruption within the , shaped by family experiences including his brother's death from AIDS and his mother's battle with cancer. These issues gained urgency amid the emerging crisis in early 2020, as Willis observed what he perceived as inconsistencies in responses, such as shifting guidelines on masks and . Having connected with virologist approximately a year earlier, he sought her input to explore alternative perspectives outside mainstream narratives. The films were produced independently without institutional or corporate funding, relying on Willis's self-financed resources and home-based setup in Ojai. The initial installment, a 26-minute with Mikovits, cost under $2,000 to produce, featuring a simple format of questioning interspersed with dramatic like slow-motion footage and ominous music. This approach enabled rapid creation during the spring 2020 lockdowns, positioning Plandemic as a challenge to dominant accounts. The series' inception unfolded against the backdrop of preparatory exercises like Event 201, a October 18, 2019, simulation of a coronavirus pandemic outbreak organized by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which Willis later referenced as prompting scrutiny of official preparedness timelines relative to the actual outbreak.

Key Figures and Influences


Judy Mikovits, who earned a Ph.D. in biochemistry and molecular biology from George Washington University in 1991, began her career as a lab technician at the National Cancer Institute in 1988, advancing to scientist there before serving as research director at the Whittemore Peterson Institute for Neurological Research by 2009. Her key prior research focused on retroviruses, culminating in a 2009 Science paper co-authored by her team that reported an association between xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus (XMRV) and chronic fatigue syndrome in 67% of patients studied. The paper was fully retracted on December 22, 2011, after multiple laboratories, including the original authors, failed to replicate findings due to contamination from lab reagents and poor experimental controls, establishing XMRV as a non-human artifact rather than a genuine pathogen. This retraction precipitated her firing from the institute in October 2011 for refusing to share research materials, followed by arrest on felony theft charges (later dropped in June 2012) and no peer-reviewed publications thereafter. David E. Martin, Ph.D., a former assistant professor at the School of Medicine, founded M·CAM International as its CEO, specializing in analytics, patent quality audits for governments, and tied to IP assets. He contributed to the second installment, Plandemic: Indoctornation, by analyzing historical patents on coronaviruses and related technologies to argue for premeditated development of bioweapons. G. Edward Griffin, featured in the third installment Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening, is the author of The Creature from Jekyll Island (1994), which details the 1910 Jekyll Island meeting where bankers allegedly drafted plans for the System to consolidate control over U.S. . Griffin's work extends to critiques of collectivism, , and institutional power abuses, framing historical events as elite-orchestrated schemes that parallel the series' narrative of suppressed truths. The Plandemic series positions these individuals as sidelined experts whose exclusion from dominant public health dialogues underscores alleged biases favoring pharmaceutical interests over independent inquiry.

Core Claims and Themes

Assertions on Pandemic Origins and Planning

In the Plandemic series, assertions are made that the SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for COVID-19 was not of natural zoonotic origin but rather resulted from laboratory manipulation, potentially as part of a deliberate bioweapon program or through risky experiments conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Proponents point to U.S.-funded gain-of-function (GOF) research at the WIV, where viruses were enhanced for transmissibility or pathogenicity, as a likely pathway for the virus's emergence. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), through the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), awarded grants totaling approximately $3.7 million to EcoHealth Alliance starting in 2014, with subawards of about $600,000 directed to the WIV for bat coronavirus studies involving serial passaging in humanized mice and other cell cultures—experiments later acknowledged by NIH officials as qualifying under GOF definitions despite initial denials. In 2024 congressional testimony, NIH Acting Director Lawrence Tabak confirmed that such funding supported GOF research at the WIV, highlighting oversight failures that allowed experiments without required risk assessments. EcoHealth Alliance maintains these activities did not constitute GOF under NIH's framework, but U.S. Department of Health and Human Services actions in 2025 formally debarred the organization and its president, Peter Daszak, for facilitating such research without proper reporting. These claims extend to suggestions of intentional engineering or accidental release, with early Plandemic narratives alleging the virus's cleavage site—a feature enhancing human infectivity—was artificially inserted, echoing bioweapon development concerns raised by defectors from Chinese programs. U.S. intelligence assessments have increasingly supported a lab-related incident over natural spillover, with the deeming a lab origin "most likely" at moderate confidence and the Department of Energy at low confidence, based on WIV's lapses and researcher illnesses in late 2019. The Agency's 2025 reassessment shifted to view a lab leak as more probable, citing like the WIV's proximity to the outbreak's and its focus on SARS-like coronaviruses, though with low confidence due to limited access to Chinese data. Initial dismissals of lab-leak hypotheses as conspiratorial by officials and media outlets, including coordinated efforts documented in emails from figures like , have been critiqued for prematurely favoring a natural origin narrative amid institutional pressures to protect international collaborations. Pre-pandemic planning exercises are cited in Plandemic-aligned theories as indicators of foreknowledge or orchestration, rather than mere preparedness. X, a May 15, 2018, tabletop simulation by the Center for Health Security, modeled a fictional paramyxovirus originating from a bioterror event in the , projecting 900 million global deaths and exposing U.S. response gaps in diagnostics, , and international coordination. Event 201, held October 18, 2019—just weeks before COVID-19's detection—involved participants from the Center, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the , and pharmaceutical executives, simulating a from pigs in with 65 million deaths, emphasizing disruptions to global supply chains and the need for public-private partnerships. Assertions frame these as prescient blueprints for control measures like lockdowns and rollouts, though organizers describe them as standard scenario-planning tools used historically for events like avian flu. The timing of Event 201, amid ongoing WIV collaborations, fuels speculation of scripted inevitability, contrasting with official accounts attributing the exercises to routine risk modeling rather than predictive intent.

Criticisms of Public Health Authorities

Criticisms of authorities during the centered on allegations of conflicts of interest stemming from funding relationships with research entities in , which allegedly influenced the dismissal of the lab-leak and shaped origin narratives. , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), participated in early 2020 teleconferences with virologists who initially expressed concerns about SARS-CoV-2's potential laboratory engineering, yet these discussions contributed to the March 2020 publication of "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" in , which publicly rejected a lab origin while downplaying cleavage site anomalies as evidence of natural evolution. This stance contrasted with subsequent U.S. intelligence assessments; for instance, the Department of Energy concluded in 2023, with low confidence, that a laboratory-associated incident at the (WIV) was the most likely origin, while the assessed it with moderate confidence. The (WHO) also drew scrutiny for its origins investigation, particularly a January 2021 joint mission with Chinese officials that rated a lab leak as "extremely unlikely" despite limited access to raw data from the WIV and pressure from Chinese counterparts to exclude further lab-related probes. WHO Director-General later acknowledged in July 2021 that all hypotheses, including a lab incident, required deeper study, amid revelations of China's influence over the team's composition and findings. These actions were linked to broader geopolitical considerations, including WHO's reliance on Chinese cooperation for , which critics argued compromised impartiality in favor of maintaining diplomatic ties. Documented funding trails underscored potential incentives for narrative control: between 2014 and 2019, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), under Fauci's oversight, awarded approximately $3.7 million to EcoHealth Alliance for bat coronavirus research, with subgrants of $600,000 directed to the WIV for experiments enhancing viral infectivity in humanized models—work later classified as gain-of-function by NIH principal deputy director Lawrence Tabak in May 2024 congressional testimony. EcoHealth president Peter Daszak, who did not disclose his WIV ties, organized a February 2020 Lancet letter condemning lab-leak inquiries as conspiracies, further entrenching natural-origin orthodoxy among institutions. Such partnerships, critics maintained, created structural biases where agencies prioritized protecting research pipelines over transparent risk assessment, indirectly favoring broad, policy-driven responses like nationwide lockdowns—implemented from March 2020 onward in the U.S. and globally—over evidence-based targeted protections for high-risk groups, as these measures aligned with centralized authority and pharmaceutical development timelines amid emergency use frameworks.

Vaccine and Treatment Controversies

The Plandemic series raised concerns about the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines under Operation Warp Speed, highlighting the unprecedented compression of timelines from typical multi-year processes to under a year, with mRNA platforms representing novel technology without prior large-scale human use for infectious diseases. Traditional vaccine development, such as for polio, involved extended phases spanning 5-10 years of sequential testing for safety and efficacy, whereas Warp Speed initiated manufacturing during phase 3 trials and relied on emergency use authorizations based on short-term data, forgoing long-term safety assessments prior to rollout. The videos warned of potential autoimmune and inflammatory risks from mRNA vaccines, which instruct cells to produce spike proteins potentially triggering immune dysregulation. Post-rollout surveillance substantiated some early cautions, with peer-reviewed analyses confirming elevated myocarditis risks following mRNA , particularly in adolescent and males after the second dose, at rates of approximately 40-70 cases per million doses in certain strata. VAERS data from December 2020 to August 2021 documented over 1,900 myocarditis reports among hundreds of millions of doses, aligning with signals of autoimmune-mediated cardiac inflammation linked to exposure. While overall vaccine benefits were argued to outweigh these rare adverse events in preventing severe , the series' emphasis on underappreciated risks drew from first principles of novelty, later echoed in clinical observations without initial long-term precedents. Regarding treatments, Plandemic contended that repurposed drugs like (HCQ) and were suppressed despite evidence of benefits in early outpatient settings, contrasting with promotion of vaccines and . Meta-analyses of randomized trials indicated mixed results for HCQ, with some early-treatment studies showing reduced hospitalization risks, though larger inpatient trials like RECOVERY found no mortality benefit and potential cardiac harms. For , systematic reviews of non-hospitalized patients reported potential reductions in needs and adverse events, with reductions up to 50% in progression to severe disease in certain outpatient cohorts, despite negative findings in high-dose or late-stage RCTs. Regulatory actions, including FDA revocation of HCQ emergency use on June 15, 2020, and warnings against for , coincided with platform of proponents, amid debates over study quality and biases in trial designs excluding early intervention. These claims underscored causal tensions between antiviral repurposing and novel interventions, with empirical data revealing non-zero efficacy signals for alternatives in specific contexts overlooked by consensus guidelines.

First Installment: Plandemic - The Hidden Agenda Behind

Content Summary and Structure

, the third installment in the Plandemic series released in 2023, adopts a broader thematic framework than its predecessors by linking the response to wider global political, economic, and institutional dynamics. Directed by Mikki Willis, the film compiles interviews with figures such as economist , who addresses monetary system influences and central banking critiques rooted in his work on history, alongside archival clips featuring founder on transparency and power structures. Additional contributors include commentator Maximo Alvarez and member , emphasizing transatlantic perspectives on governance and individual rights. The documentary's structure unfolds as a of revelation, employing a "puzzle-piece" to connect disparate elements—ranging from pandemic policies to agendas and speech restrictions—into a cohesive portrayal of systemic orchestration. This approach frames the content as an investigative montage, interspersing testimonies, historical , and visual analogies to underscore themes of collective awakening to interconnected crises beyond isolated health events. In contrast to the earlier films' primary emphasis on virology and measures, this entry prioritizes causal links to financial control mechanisms and supranational entities, positioning them as foundational drivers of recent global upheavals.

Principal Claims Examined

The third installment of the Plandemic series posits that the served as a deliberate test case for implementing a globalist control framework, with the World Economic Forum's (WEF) "" initiative presented as its ideological core. Interviewees in the film, including economist , argue that the WEF, under founder , exploited the crisis to advance a pre-planned restructuring of society toward centralized authority, digital dependency, and erosion of individual sovereignty. This claim frames the pandemic responses not as reactive measures but as beta-testing for enduring mechanisms of and economic reconfiguration, linking disparate events like lockdowns to long-term agendas outlined in WEF publications. A central assertion is that Schwab's "," launched in June 2020, functions as a blueprint for elite-driven control, evidenced by his statements on the creating a "unique window of opportunity" for "resetting" toward "stakeholder" models emphasizing equity, , and technological . The film cites Schwab's COVID-19: The (co-authored with Thierry Malleret, July 2020), which advocates leveraging the crisis for systemic overhaul, including greater public-private partnerships and Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies like AI and biotech integration into daily life. Examination reveals the initiative's explicit goals: WEF documents promote "reshaping" economies to prioritize environmental goals and , with Schwab predicting in 2020 that post-crisis policies could enforce behavioral shifts via digital tools. While no substantiates premeditated engineering to trigger this—genomic and epidemiological data trace SARS-CoV-2 origins to natural in markets by late 2019—the observed policy convergence post-March 2020, such as endorsements of WEF-aligned recovery plans, accelerated supranational coordination, raising causal questions about opportunistic power consolidation amid $28 trillion in global fiscal stimuli by 2022. Critics of the film's interpretation note that "" rhetoric, including viral excerpts like "you'll own nothing and be happy" (from a 2016 WEF contributor piece by forecasting shared-economy futures), reflects aspirational forecasting rather than binding policy, though WEF partnerships with governments (e.g., 100+ "strategic partners" including banks and tech firms) facilitated real-world implementations like ESG investment mandates totaling $30 trillion in assets by 2023. The film further claims economic motivations underpinned prolonged crisis responses to enable wealth redistribution and dependency, portraying lockdowns as tools to bankrupt independent sectors while enriching compliant corporations, ultimately paving the way for WEF-endorsed and asset . This ties the pandemic to a "test case" for crashing legacy economies, with data points like U.S. closures (over 200,000 permanent by mid-2021) contrasted against market cap gains exceeding $7 trillion from 2020-2022. Empirical scrutiny shows disproportionate impacts: IMF estimates indicate pandemic policies transferred $13.8 trillion in wealth upward globally, with net worth rising 54% to $13.1 trillion by April 2022, amid asset purchases inflating equities. However, causal realism attributes these outcomes to emergent incentives— expansion and —rather than unified plotting; pre-2020 trends like automation-driven inequality (Gini coefficients rising in 80% of nations since 2010) suggest the crisis amplified existing dynamics, not originated them, though WEF advocacy for "resilient" systems via CBDCs (piloted in 130 countries by ) aligns with post-crisis pushes. Broader allegations extend to surveillance state acceleration, with the film asserting that pandemic-era tools like contact-tracing apps and health passports prototyped permanent tracking infrastructures, endorsed by WEF visions of "seamless" digital identities for governance. It links this to Schwab's framework, where cyber-physical fusion enables real-time behavioral monitoring. Post-2020 developments substantiate partial implementation: EU's Digital COVID Certificate (deployed July 2021, used by 2.3 billion people) evolved into 2.0 frameworks for wallet-based IDs by 2024; similarly, 193 UN member states advanced digital ID strategies, with WEF-backed pilots in (Aadhaar-linked for 1.3 billion) and expanding systems. While these enhance efficiency—reducing fraud in welfare distribution by 30% in tested programs—they enable granular , with erosions evident in U.S. CISA expansions (2022 budget $2.9 billion for cyber monitoring) and EU's Data Act (2023) mandating data-sharing. First-principles analysis reveals trade-offs: mitigates risks like pandemics (e.g., Taiwan's app-tracing limited deaths to 0.04% case fatality via early detection), but systemic biases in institutions—evident in underreporting of tech overreach by aligned media—underscore risks of unaccountable power, though no verifiable proof ties origins to WEF orchestration versus opportunistic adaptation.

Production and April 2020 Release

Mikki Willis, through his Elevate Films, directed and produced Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 using a minimal crew that included himself, one , and one researcher. The project was self-funded by Willis at a cost of less than $2,000. Filming occurred in early April 2020, shortly after appeared as the featured expert. The video was conceived as the first installment in a planned series of documentaries. Willis opted for direct online distribution on May 4, 2020, to circumvent traditional media gatekeepers amid widespread lockdowns implemented in response to the escalating crisis. This approach allowed for immediate public access without reliance on established or channels, which Willis described as a deliberate strategy to disseminate information rapidly.

Viral Spread and Platform Censorship

The first installment of Plandemic experienced explosive viral dissemination shortly after its release, with multiple uploads on and accumulating over 8 million views within days. This rapid spread was facilitated by shares within anti-vaccine communities, QAnon-affiliated groups, and broader skeptic networks, amplifying its reach through algorithmic recommendations and direct messaging before platform interventions. By early May 2020, the video had been viewed tens of millions of times across , outpacing many contemporaneous mainstream online events in engagement metrics. Major platforms initiated coordinated removals starting around May 5, 2020, citing violations of policies prohibiting misinformation, including false claims about virus origins, treatments, and vaccines. , , , and systematically deleted instances of the video, with reporting the removal of hundreds of uploads and blocking over 1.5 million shares or views in some estimates. These actions formed part of a broader strategy to suppress content challenging official pandemic narratives, leading to a cat-and-mouse dynamic where new uploads were quickly flagged and taken down. In response to mainstream deplatforming, copies proliferated on alternative video-sharing sites like and Odysee, which positioned themselves as havens for content restricted elsewhere. These platforms saw increased traffic from users seeking uncensored access, with Plandemic exemplifying a migration pattern for COVID-19-related dissenting material that evaded oversight. Such selective enforcement highlighted disparities in , as vast volumes of uncensored promotions and institutional messaging—reaching billions of impressions—remained intact without analogous scrutiny.

Immediate Mainstream Responses and Fact-Checks

Following the video's viral dissemination in late and early May 2020, major fact-checking organizations and media outlets issued rapid rebuttals, characterizing its assertions as a collection of unsubstantiated conspiracy theories lacking empirical support. , in an article published on May 8, 2020, cataloged over a dozen specific falsehoods, including Mikovits' portrayal of as having orchestrated her firing from the in 1987; the organization noted she had been a low-level lab technician whose employment ended voluntarily amid unrelated disputes, not under Fauci's direct authority. These critiques emphasized that Mikovits' prior research on XMRV retroviruses had been retracted due to contamination issues, undermining her credibility on claims. NPR's May 8, 2020 analysis similarly dismissed the video's suggestion of a causal link between annual flu vaccinations and increased susceptibility to coronavirus-like illnesses, stating no peer-reviewed studies supported such a connection at the time. The outlet, drawing on consultations with infectious disease experts, rejected assertions that measures like mask-wearing were ineffective or part of a control scheme, aligning rebuttals with guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). magazine's contemporaneous fact-check focused on Mikovits' Fauci-related accusations, verifying through employment records that her tenure at the agency involved grant-funded work but no evidence of suppression or vendettas as claimed. These responses, often coordinated with input from epidemiologists and agencies like the , framed the video as a threat to public compliance with mitigation efforts, warning it could exacerbate and skepticism toward lockdowns amid rising case numbers. Fact-checkers like highlighted the video's rejection of natural origins for , countering with genetic analyses from that period indicating zoonotic spillover without lab engineering evidence. Mainstream outlets collectively urged platforms to remove shares, portraying the content as amplified by networks.

Subsequent Empirical Reassessments

In February 2023, FBI Director Christopher Wray publicly confirmed that the agency had assessed with moderate confidence that the most likely originated from a incident at the , marking a significant departure from initial dismissals of the lab-leak hypothesis as a . Similarly, the U.S. Department of Energy concluded with low confidence that a lab leak was the probable cause, based on updated classified assessments shared with intelligence partners. These positions, echoed in a June 2023 declassified Office of the report, highlighted inconsistencies in early viral sequencing data and lapses at the lab, validating empirical scrutiny that had been censored on platforms in 2020. Freedom of Information Act documents released in 2021 revealed that the (NIH) had funded on bat coronaviruses through grants to the , involving experiments that enhanced viral transmissibility and pathogenicity in humanized models—activities initially denied by NIH officials under congressional questioning. A 2024 House Oversight Committee hearing further confirmed NIH funding of such research, with testimony from NIH Acting Director Lawrence Tabak admitting that the grants supported experiments meeting criteria, despite prior assertions to the contrary. These disclosures, corroborated by grant records showing $3.7 million allocated from 2014 to 2019, underscored causal risks in pre-pandemic research that aligned with patterns of viral adaptation observed in , prompting reevaluations of oversight failures in high-containment labs. Post-vaccination surveillance from 2021 to 2023 identified elevated risks of and linked to mRNA vaccines, particularly in males aged 12-29 after the second dose, with incidence rates up to 105 cases per million in young males per Israeli Ministry of Health data analyzed in peer-reviewed studies. Experimental evidence from isolated cardiomyocyte studies demonstrated that expression from mRNA vaccines induced structural damage and impaired contractility, suggesting a mechanistic basis beyond mere immune overreaction. Concurrently, all-cause in Western countries persisted into 2022, totaling over 800,000 deaths above baseline in alone despite widespread vaccination and lifted restrictions, with patterns correlating to rollout timelines in some analyses though multifactorial causes including deferred care were also implicated. These findings prompted regulatory acknowledgments, such as CDC updates in 2021 recognizing vaccine-associated myocarditis as a rare but causal event, shifting from blanket assurances of safety to qualified risk-benefit assessments.

Second Installment: Plandemic - Indoctornation

Content Summary and Structure

Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening, the third installment in the Plandemic series released in 2023, adopts a broader thematic framework than its predecessors by linking the response to wider global political, economic, and institutional dynamics. Directed by Mikki Willis, the film compiles interviews with figures such as economist , who addresses monetary system influences and central banking critiques rooted in his work on history, alongside archival clips featuring founder on transparency and power structures. Additional contributors include commentator Maximo Alvarez and member , emphasizing transatlantic perspectives on governance and individual rights. The documentary's structure unfolds as a of revelation, employing a "puzzle-piece" to connect disparate elements—ranging from pandemic policies to agendas and speech restrictions—into a cohesive portrayal of systemic orchestration. This approach frames the content as an investigative montage, interspersing testimonies, historical , and visual analogies to underscore themes of collective awakening to interconnected crises beyond isolated health events. In contrast to the earlier films' primary emphasis on virology and measures, this entry prioritizes causal links to financial control mechanisms and supranational entities, positioning them as foundational drivers of recent global upheavals.

Principal Claims Examined

The third installment of the Plandemic series posits that the served as a deliberate test case for implementing a globalist control framework, with the World Economic Forum's (WEF) "" initiative presented as its ideological core. Interviewees in the film, including economist , argue that the WEF, under founder , exploited the crisis to advance a pre-planned restructuring of society toward centralized authority, digital dependency, and erosion of individual sovereignty. This claim frames the pandemic responses not as reactive measures but as beta-testing for enduring mechanisms of and economic reconfiguration, linking disparate events like lockdowns to long-term agendas outlined in WEF publications. A central assertion is that Schwab's "," launched in June 2020, functions as a blueprint for elite-driven control, evidenced by his statements on the creating a "unique window of opportunity" for "resetting" toward "stakeholder" models emphasizing equity, , and technological . The film cites Schwab's book COVID-19: The (co-authored with Thierry Malleret, July 2020), which advocates leveraging the crisis for systemic overhaul, including greater public-private partnerships and technologies like AI and biotech integration into daily life. Examination reveals the initiative's explicit goals: WEF documents promote "reshaping" economies to prioritize environmental goals and , with Schwab predicting in 2020 that post-crisis policies could enforce behavioral shifts via digital tools. While no substantiates premeditated engineering to trigger this—genomic and epidemiological data trace SARS-CoV-2 origins to natural in markets by late 2019—the observed policy convergence post-March 2020, such as endorsements of WEF-aligned recovery plans, accelerated supranational coordination, raising causal questions about opportunistic power consolidation amid $28 trillion in global fiscal stimuli by 2022. Critics of the film's interpretation note that "" rhetoric, including viral excerpts like "you'll own nothing and be happy" (from a 2016 WEF contributor piece by forecasting shared-economy futures), reflects aspirational forecasting rather than binding policy, though WEF partnerships with governments (e.g., 100+ "strategic partners" including banks and tech firms) facilitated real-world implementations like ESG investment mandates totaling $30 trillion in assets by 2023. The film further claims economic motivations underpinned prolonged crisis responses to enable wealth redistribution and dependency, portraying lockdowns as tools to bankrupt independent sectors while enriching compliant corporations, ultimately paving the way for WEF-endorsed and asset . This ties the pandemic to a "test case" for crashing legacy economies, with data points like U.S. closures (over 200,000 permanent by mid-2021) contrasted against market cap gains exceeding $7 trillion from 2020-2022. Empirical scrutiny shows disproportionate impacts: IMF estimates indicate pandemic policies transferred $13.8 trillion in wealth upward globally, with rising 54% to $13.1 trillion by April 2022, amid asset purchases inflating equities. However, causal realism attributes these outcomes to emergent incentives— expansion and —rather than unified plotting; pre-2020 trends like automation-driven inequality (Gini coefficients rising in 80% of nations since 2010) suggest the crisis amplified existing dynamics, not originated them, though WEF advocacy for "resilient" systems via CBDCs (piloted in 130 countries by 2024) aligns with post-crisis pushes. Broader allegations extend to surveillance state acceleration, with the film asserting that pandemic-era tools like contact-tracing apps and health passports prototyped permanent tracking infrastructures, endorsed by WEF visions of "seamless" digital identities for governance. It links this to Schwab's framework, where cyber-physical fusion enables real-time behavioral monitoring. Post-2020 developments substantiate partial implementation: EU's Digital COVID Certificate (deployed July 2021, used by 2.3 billion people) evolved into 2.0 frameworks for wallet-based IDs by 2024; similarly, 193 UN member states advanced digital ID strategies, with WEF-backed pilots in (Aadhaar-linked for 1.3 billion) and expanding social credit systems. While these enhance efficiency—reducing fraud in welfare distribution by 30% in tested programs—they enable granular , with erosions evident in U.S. CISA expansions (2022 budget $2.9 billion for cyber monitoring) and EU's Data Act (2023) mandating data-sharing. First-principles analysis reveals trade-offs: mitigates risks like pandemics (e.g., Taiwan's app-tracing limited deaths to 0.04% case fatality via early detection), but systemic biases in institutions—evident in underreporting of tech overreach by aligned media—underscore risks of unaccountable power, though no verifiable proof ties origins to WEF orchestration versus opportunistic adaptation.

Production and August 2020 Release

Following the rapid virality and platform removals of the initial Plandemic installment in and May 2020, filmmaker Mikki Willis expanded production efforts for a , incorporating interviews with a broader array of figures including attorneys, doctors, and researchers to address perceived institutional related to health policies. The 75-minute film, titled Plandemic: Indoctornation, was completed over the ensuing months amid heightened scrutiny of mainstream narratives. In response to the censorship experiences with the first film—where content was swiftly deleted from , , and other major platforms—Willis collaborated with independent outlets prioritizing uncensored distribution. The occurred on , 2020, via a live stream on the Digital Freedom Platform operated by London Real, a service established by host Brian Rose to host controversial and alternative viewpoints excluded elsewhere. This event was structured as an exclusive paid-access broadcast to support ongoing production and sustain infrastructure. The stream achieved approximately 1.9 million unique viewers, a figure promoted by producers as the largest live for a at the time.

Reception and Fact-Checking

Plandemic: Indoctornation received praise from skeptic and communities for highlighting perceived government overreach in pandemic mandates and policies. Supporters, including user reviews on platforms like , commended the film for challenging mainstream narratives on restrictions and pharmaceutical influences, viewing it as a counter to institutional . The documentary's premiere livestream attracted 1.9 million unique viewers, setting a record for the largest live stream of a documentary at the time, primarily through alternative distribution channels resistant to mainstream censorship. Mainstream fact-checking organizations dismissed the film's claims as recycled , focusing on assertions about treatment efficacy such as the promotion of unproven therapies like and for COVID-19. rated multiple statements false, including those alleging conspiracies around vaccine development and pandemic origins tied to patents held by agencies like the CDC. Similarly, and debunked narratives of premeditated outbreaks and NIH-funded research as baseless, emphasizing a lack of empirical support for the video's causal links between policies and ulterior motives. These critiques often originated from outlets aligned with institutional health authorities, which have been noted for downplaying dissenting empirical data on treatment outcomes in early pandemic stages. The sequel achieved lower overall virality than its predecessor, with platforms implementing preemptive restrictions that limited shares on major sites like and before widespread dissemination. While the first installment garnered tens of millions of views rapidly, Indoctornation's reach was curtailed by heightened vigilance from content moderators attuned to content, resulting in quicker removals and reduced algorithmic promotion. This containment reflected evolving platform policies post-initial outbreak but drew commentary on suppression of debate over mandate proportionality.

Third Installment: Plandemic 3 - The Great Awakening

Content Summary and Structure

Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening, the third installment in the Plandemic series released in 2023, adopts a broader thematic framework than its predecessors by linking the response to wider global political, economic, and institutional dynamics. Directed by Mikki Willis, the film compiles interviews with figures such as economist , who addresses monetary system influences and central banking critiques rooted in his work on history, alongside archival clips featuring founder on transparency and power structures. Additional contributors include commentator Maximo Alvarez and member , emphasizing transatlantic perspectives on governance and individual rights. The documentary's structure unfolds as a of revelation, employing a "puzzle-piece" to connect disparate elements—ranging from pandemic policies to agendas and speech restrictions—into a cohesive portrayal of systemic orchestration. This approach frames the content as an investigative montage, interspersing testimonies, historical , and visual analogies to underscore themes of collective awakening to interconnected crises beyond isolated health events. In contrast to the earlier films' primary emphasis on virology and measures, this entry prioritizes causal links to financial control mechanisms and supranational entities, positioning them as foundational drivers of recent global upheavals.

Principal Claims Examined

The third installment of the Plandemic series posits that the served as a deliberate test case for implementing a globalist control framework, with the World Economic Forum's (WEF) "" initiative presented as its ideological core. Interviewees in the film, including economist , argue that the WEF, under founder , exploited the crisis to advance a pre-planned restructuring of society toward centralized authority, digital dependency, and erosion of individual sovereignty. This claim frames the pandemic responses not as reactive measures but as beta-testing for enduring mechanisms of and economic reconfiguration, linking disparate events like lockdowns to long-term agendas outlined in WEF publications. A central assertion is that Schwab's "," launched in June 2020, functions as a blueprint for elite-driven control, evidenced by his statements on the creating a "unique window of opportunity" for "resetting" toward "stakeholder" models emphasizing equity, , and technological . The film cites Schwab's book COVID-19: The (co-authored with Thierry Malleret, July 2020), which advocates leveraging the crisis for systemic overhaul, including greater public-private partnerships and technologies like AI and biotech integration into daily life. Examination reveals the initiative's explicit goals: WEF documents promote "reshaping" economies to prioritize environmental goals and , with Schwab predicting in 2020 that post-crisis policies could enforce behavioral shifts via digital tools. While no substantiates premeditated engineering to trigger this—genomic and epidemiological data trace origins to natural in markets by late 2019—the observed policy convergence post-March 2020, such as G20 endorsements of WEF-aligned recovery plans, accelerated supranational coordination, raising causal questions about opportunistic power consolidation amid $28 trillion in global fiscal stimuli by 2022. Critics of the film's interpretation note that "" rhetoric, including viral excerpts like "you'll own nothing and be happy" (from a 2016 WEF contributor piece by forecasting shared-economy futures), reflects aspirational forecasting rather than binding policy, though WEF partnerships with governments (e.g., 100+ "strategic partners" including banks and tech firms) facilitated real-world implementations like ESG investment mandates totaling $30 trillion in assets by 2023. The film further claims economic motivations underpinned prolonged crisis responses to enable redistribution and dependency, portraying lockdowns as tools to independent sectors while enriching compliant corporations, ultimately paving the way for WEF-endorsed and asset . This ties the pandemic to a "test case" for crashing legacy economies, with data points like U.S. closures (over 200,000 permanent by mid-2021) contrasted against market cap gains exceeding $7 from 2020-2022. Empirical scrutiny shows disproportionate impacts: IMF estimates indicate pandemic policies transferred $13.8 in upward globally, with net worth rising 54% to $13.1 by April 2022, amid asset purchases inflating equities. However, causal realism attributes these outcomes to emergent incentives— expansion and —rather than unified plotting; pre-2020 trends like automation-driven inequality (Gini coefficients rising in 80% of nations since 2010) suggest the crisis amplified existing dynamics, not originated them, though WEF advocacy for "resilient" systems via CBDCs (piloted in 130 countries by ) aligns with post-crisis pushes. Broader allegations extend to surveillance state acceleration, with the film asserting that pandemic-era tools like contact-tracing apps and passports prototyped permanent tracking infrastructures, endorsed by WEF visions of "seamless" digital identities for governance. It links this to Schwab's framework, where cyber-physical fusion enables real-time behavioral monitoring. Post-2020 developments substantiate partial implementation: EU's Digital COVID Certificate (deployed July 2021, used by 2.3 billion people) evolved into 2.0 frameworks for wallet-based IDs by 2024; similarly, 193 UN member states advanced digital ID strategies, with WEF-backed pilots in (Aadhaar-linked for 1.3 billion) and expanding social credit systems. While these enhance efficiency—reducing fraud in welfare distribution by 30% in tested programs—they enable granular , with privacy erosions evident in U.S. CISA expansions (2022 budget $2.9 billion for cyber monitoring) and EU's Data Act (2023) mandating data-sharing. First-principles analysis reveals trade-offs: mitigates risks like pandemics (e.g., Taiwan's app-tracing limited deaths to 0.04% case fatality via early detection), but systemic biases in institutions—evident in underreporting of tech overreach by aligned media—underscore risks of unaccountable power, though no verifiable proof ties origins to WEF orchestration versus opportunistic adaptation.

Production and 2023 Release

Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening was directed and written by Mikki Willis, the filmmaker behind the earlier installments in the series. Production leveraged independent resources developed following the viral dissemination and subsequent platform restrictions encountered by the initial 2020 release, enabling self-distribution without reliance on conventional streaming or broadcast outlets. The film premiered digitally on June 3, 2023, made available through the official Plandemic website and alternative platforms such as The HighWire, a site associated with vaccine skepticism. This approach facilitated direct access for viewers while circumventing potential , building on lessons from prior entries' rapid removals from . Community-hosted screenings were promoted, with options for private events and limited theatrical showings in independent venues, rather than wide commercial distribution. Funding derived from the support and viewership accrued by previous films, which had amassed tens of millions of views despite , allowing for low-budget independent production without external investors or mainstream backers. The release occurred amid a shift from acute response to broader evaluations of pandemic-era policies, including data and institutional accountability debates, positioning it within growing retrospective inquiries.

Reception and Impact

Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening, released on June 3, 2023, via a global premiere livestream on The Highwire platform hosted by anti-vaccination advocate Del Bigtree, garnered attention primarily within alternative media and conservative-leaning audiences amid widespread pandemic fatigue. Unlike the explosive virality of earlier installments in 2020, which amassed millions of views before platform removals, the third film's streaming metrics remained confined to niche channels, reflecting diminished public interest as COVID-19 restrictions eased globally by mid-2023. Discussions proliferated in podcasts such as Conversations That Matter, where host Alex Newman framed it as exposing a "globalist agenda" centralizing power, and The Life Stylist, featuring director Mikki Willis emphasizing psychological operations and collectivism critiques. Mainstream outlets and entities dismissed the film as perpetuating conspiracy theories, particularly claims linking early HIV treatments like AZT to exaggerated mortality or portraying global institutions as orchestrating control mechanisms. However, segments critiquing policy overreach—such as speech suppressions and economic forum influences—resonated in polarized circles skeptical of institutional narratives, sustaining discourse in despite broader apathy. This reception underscored deepening societal divides, with the film's integration into ecosystems fostering ongoing skepticism toward mandates among viewers already distrustful of centralized authority, though without the mass disruption seen in prior releases.

Overall Reception and Controversies

Positive Responses in Alternative Media

, via his organization , has supported investigations into origins and policies that parallel the Plandemic series' emphasis on suppressed scientific debates, including potential involvement in dynamics. In circles, Kennedy's advocacy for transparency on and pharmaceutical influences has been cited as validating the series' early warnings about orchestrated elements in responses. Outlets like RT News, Sean Hannity's programs, and commentators such as amplified Plandemic content, commending its role in highlighting predictive concerns over event-driven restrictions and experimental interventions that gained traction post-release. These endorsements framed the videos as catalysts for discourse on accountability, distinct from institutional narratives, with shares exceeding millions across non-mainstream channels by mid-. Video-hosting platform Rumble provided an uncensored venue for the full Plandemic installments, accumulating views in the tens of millions and enabling user-generated discussions that praised the series for empowering personal into mandates. This contrasted with removals on larger platforms, allowing alternative voices to sustain on topics like bioterror preparedness and policy foresight.

Mainstream Dismissals and Criticisms

Mainstream media outlets and fact-checking entities dismissed the Plandemic series as a collection of conspiracy-laden videos promoting unsubstantiated claims about the pandemic's origins, vaccines, and public health responses. Publications such as described the content as featuring falsehoods that contradicted established , with rapid dissemination despite platform removals for violating policies on harmful . Similarly, analyzed the first installment's assertions—such as engineered viruses and suppressed treatments—as diverging from on SARS-CoV-2's natural zoonotic emergence and the of measures like masking. Fact-checking organizations like rated key claims in Plandemic: Indoctornation and its sequel as false, including allegations of deliberate pandemic orchestration by figures like and pharmaceutical interests to profit from . cataloged over a dozen misleading statements in the initial video, such as misrepresented data on flu side effects and unfounded links between and , arguing these distorted peer-reviewed studies. These critiques aligned closely with positions from health authorities like the NIH and CDC, prioritizing institutional narratives over alternative interpretations. A recurring focus was the credibility of central figure , whose prior work was discredited following the 2011 retraction of a paper linking XMRV to chronic fatigue syndrome due to contamination artifacts and failed replications. Outlets like ABC News highlighted her history of professional disputes, including a 2012 charge (later dropped) related to research materials, framing her Plandemic appearances as amplification of fringe views lacking rigorous validation. Critics expressed alarm over the videos' role in fostering and distrust in protocols, potentially exacerbating outbreaks by encouraging non-compliance with evidence-based interventions. linked Plandemic's narrative tropes—such as hidden elites and suppressed truths—to patterns of conspiratorial reasoning that undermine collective responses to verifiable threats like viral transmission rates documented in epidemiological data. experts rebutted specific assertions, like masks "activating" viruses, as biologically implausible based on dynamics and clinical trials showing respiratory protection efficacy. These institutional responses emphasized preserving adherence to consensus-driven amid the pandemic's documented mortality toll, exceeding 6 million globally by mid-2022 per WHO tracking.

Free Speech and Suppression Debates

The initial Plandemic video, released on April 25, 2020, was removed from major platforms including , , and within days, with and announcing actions on May 7, 2020, citing violations of policies against false claims about treatments, vaccines, and the virus's origins. Platforms reported ongoing efforts to delete reuploads and block shares, as the video amassed millions of views before takedowns, prompting accusations from supporters that such actions constituted arbitrary suppression rather than neutral enforcement. Critics of the removals argued that deplatforming created a on discourse, where initial shadowbanning—reducing visibility without notification—preceded outright bans, discouraging users from engaging with or sharing alternative narratives due to fear of account penalties. This dynamic, observed in broader moderation, led to among researchers and commentators wary of platform algorithms flagging content as "" based on evolving government or expert consensus. Proponents of moderation countered that platforms, as private entities under protections, have discretion to curb content risking public harm, such as reduced vaccine uptake, estimating that unchecked falsehoods contributed to excess deaths during peaks in 2021. Legal challenges amplified these tensions, with Missouri v. Biden (later ) alleging federal officials coerced platforms via threats of antitrust scrutiny or revocation to suppress dissent, including on vaccines and origins—a case encompassing content akin to Plandemic's themes. The Fifth Circuit ruled in July 2023 that such pressure likely violated the First Amendment by transforming platforms into state actors, though the vacated the in June 2024 on standing grounds without addressing merits. Disclosures like the and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's 2024 letter revealed Biden administration demands to demote or remove COVID-related posts, including some later deemed accurate, fueling claims of viewpoint discrimination over neutral harm prevention. In crisis contexts, advocates for strict moderation emphasized empirical risks, citing studies linking exposure to behavioral changes like non-compliance, while opponents invoked first-principles limits on power concentration, arguing that preemptive erodes trust in institutions more than it mitigates transient errors in scientific debate. Platforms' inconsistent application—sparing some partisan errors while targeting skeptics—highlighted , with mainstream outlets often framing removals as essential without scrutinizing government-platform coordination revealed in court records. These debates underscored unresolved tensions between private moderation rights and public accountability, particularly when federal involvement blurred lines of voluntary policy into control.

Legacy and Influence

Role in Fostering Skepticism

The Plandemic series, beginning with its first installment released on April 7, 2020, amplified public skepticism toward centralized COVID-19 management narratives by achieving widespread dissemination across social media platforms, accumulating millions of views prior to systematic removals. This viral reach, despite algorithmic deprioritization and content bans on sites like Facebook and YouTube, directed audiences toward less moderated alternative channels, correlating with a surge in engagement on platforms hosting dissenting content during the ensuing months. Empirical tracking of online discourse revealed spikes in terms related to orchestrated pandemic theories post-release, fostering broader distrust in institutional responses among viewers exposed to the material. Survey data on provides measurable indicators of this influence, with analyses attributing part of the early 2020 uptick in reluctance to narratives popularized by Plandemic, including claims of suppressed treatments and rushed development. For instance, U.S. polls documented hesitancy rates climbing from around 20-30% in pre- rollout assessments to higher levels by mid-2020, coinciding with the video's propagation of anti- sentiments that resonated amid uncertainties over mRNA technology novelty. Independent studies of amplification confirmed that exposure to such content heightened epistemic doubts, prompting informed rather than blanket rejection, as participants cited specific evidentiary gaps like underreported adverse events in official data. By highlighting perceived inconsistencies in —such as selective application of restrictions—the series spurred of failures, including economic disruptions and overreach in mandates. This shift encouraged non-professional investigators to compile localized data on efficacy, such as comparative analyses across jurisdictions, contributing to a decentralized absent from mainstream reporting. Mainstream academic sources, while critiquing the series' factual basis, acknowledge its rhetorical potency in eroding deference to expert consensus, evidenced by longitudinal surveys showing sustained erosion of trust in health authorities post-2020. Such outcomes underscore a causal pathway from narrative challenge to empirical self-inquiry, with Plandemic serving as an early vector for questioning top-down causal assumptions about causation and .

Long-Term Policy and Scientific Impacts

The narratives advanced in the Plandemic series, which questioned the natural origins of SARS-CoV-2 and alleged institutional cover-ups, aligned with subsequent policy responses to lab-leak hypotheses, including U.S. restrictions on gain-of-function (GOF) research funding. In January 2023, Senators Rand Paul and Rick Scott introduced S.81, the Viral Gain-of-Function Research Moratorium Act, to impose a moratorium on federal grants for GOF experiments at universities and research entities, citing risks of engineered pathogens escaping containment. Building on this, a May 2025 executive order paused U.S. funding for GOF studies in nations deemed security risks, such as China and Iran, while mandating enhanced biosafety reviews, directly responding to inquiries into Wuhan Institute of Virology practices funded partly by U.S. agencies. These measures reflected causal concerns over dual-use research, where enhanced pathogen transmissibility could precipitate pandemics, a theme echoed in Plandemic's claims of deliberate viral manipulation. Internationally, Plandemic's portrayal of supranational health bodies as vehicles for control influenced skepticism toward the WHO Pandemic Agreement, formally adopted by the on May 20, 2025, to coordinate future outbreak responses through shared surveillance and resource equity mechanisms. Critics, drawing on early distrust narratives, contended the accord's provisions for rapid data-sharing and binding recommendations risked eroding national policy autonomy, prompting U.S. congressional hearings in 2024-2025 that conditioned WHO funding on protections. This led to amendments emphasizing voluntary compliance over mandates, illustrating how amplified doubts constrained the treaty's scope despite its aim to address preparedness gaps exposed by COVID-19. In scientific domains, Plandemic's assertions of lab-engineered viruses spurred reevaluations of origin studies, contributing to retractions amid evidence of methodological flaws. A December 2024 retraction in Nature Communications withdrew a 2015-2019 study on bat coronavirus cross-species jumps in China, after post-publication audits revealed unsubstantiated transmission claims and data gaps relevant to SARS-CoV-2 proxies. Likewise, EcoHealth Alliance retracted and reissued its 2020 paper on RaTG13 bat viruses—closely related to SARS-CoV-2—in December 2024, following revelations of unverified sampling and potential GOF implications in unpublished sequences. Such withdrawals, alongside U.S. intelligence assessments favoring lab-leak scenarios with varying confidence levels, prompted funding shifts toward verifiable zoonotic tracing over assumptive models. These developments coincided with sustained erosion of public confidence in health authorities, undermining their policy influence. High confidence in the CDC plummeted from 82% in February 2020 to 56% by June 2021, with 2025 polls registering further declines to historic lows amid demands for internal reforms. Similar distrust toward the WHO, from 70% approval pre-pandemic to below 50% in post-2023 surveys, has manifested in legislative pushes for defunding unaccountable programs, prioritizing empirical oversight over institutional deference.

Cultural and Media Ramifications

The term "plandemic," a portmanteau blending "planned" and "pandemic," gained traction in online discourse as a descriptor for alleged orchestrated health crises, with its usage surging on platforms like following the April 2020 release of the initial Plandemic video. Prior to the video, the appeared sporadically in skeptical posts questioning early responses, but post-virality, it embedded deeply into culture, often paired with visuals satirizing policy inconsistencies or institutional motives. Analyses of health-related memes identified "plandemic" in and content alongside variants like "scamdemic," reflecting a cultural shift toward framing events as engineered rather than emergent. This adoption marked a broader discursive pivot, where "plandemic" transcended niche forums to influence protest signage and alternative commentary, symbolizing distrust in top-down narratives without implying universal endorsement of underlying theories. The series' reach exacerbated measurable declines in media credibility metrics during 2020. Gallup's September 2020 survey found only 40% of U.S. adults held a "great deal" or "fair amount" of trust in mass media for accurate reporting, down from 41% in 2019, with Republican confidence dropping to 15% amid perceptions of partisan COVID-19 coverage. Knight Foundation data from the same period corroborated this erosion, linking heightened skepticism to alternative sources amplifying gaps in official accounts. Plandemic's model inspired a wave of independent documentaries probing similar themes of institutional overreach, including ": The People, the Conspiracy, the Journey" (2020), which interwove personal testimonies with critiques of pandemic management. These productions, distributed via non-mainstream channels, contributed to a fragmented media landscape where viewer-generated content challenged centralized authority, prioritizing over peer-reviewed consensus.

References

  1. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/the-twitter-origins-and-evolution-of-the-covid-19-plandemic-conspiracy-theory/
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10200718/
  3. https://plandemic.com/
  4. https://www.npr.org/2020/05/08/852451652/seen-plandemic-we-take-a-close-look-at-the-viral-conspiracy-video-s-claims
  5. https://www.alberta.ca/search-movie-ratings.aspx?fid=27715
  6. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7398426/
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8318131/
  8. https://elevate.us/team/
  9. https://www.audible.com/author/Mikki-Willis/B09BD99WDR
  10. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2020-05-13/plandemic-coronavirus-documentary-director-mikki-willis-mikovits
  11. https://www.science.org/content/article/fact-checking-judy-mikovits-controversial-virologist-attacking-anthony-fauci-viral
  12. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2011/12/22/144133284/journal-retracts-key-study-linking-virus-to-chronic-fatigue-syndrome
  13. https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/2006/scp_of_ge_06/speakers/martin.html
  14. https://www.factcheck.org/2020/08/new-plandemic-video-peddles-misinformation-conspiracies/
  15. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Creature_from_Jekyll_Island.html?id=UAeeGQAACAAJ
  16. https://www.c-span.org/clip/interview/user-clip-g-edward-griffin-talked-about-his-book-the-creature-from-jekyll-island/4906132
  17. https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_R01AI110964_7529
  18. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/coronavirus-bat-research
  19. https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-nih-repeatedly-refutes-ecohealth-alliance-president-dr-peter-daszaks-testimony-tabak-testimony-reveals-federal-grant-procedures-in-need-of-serious-reform/
  20. https://www.ecohealthalliance.org/2024/06/ecohealth-alliances-response-to-recent-allegations
  21. https://oversight.house.gov/release/breaking-hhs-formally-debars-ecohealth-alliance-dr-peter-daszak-after-covid-select-reveals-pandemic-era-wrongdoing/
  22. https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Unclassified-Summary-of-Assessment-on-COVID-19-Origins.pdf
  23. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9qjjj4zy5o
  24. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/cia-shifts-assessment-covid-origins-saying-lab-leak-likely-caused-outb-rcna189284
  25. https://centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/tabletop-exercises/clade-x-tabletop-exercise
  26. https://centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/tabletop-exercises/event-201-pandemic-tabletop-exercise
  27. https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/10/live-simulation-exercise-to-prepare-public-and-private-leaders-for-pandemic-response/
  28. https://hub.jhu.edu/2019/11/06/event-201-health-security/
  29. https://centerforhealthsecurity.org/2019/players-for-event-201-a-pandemic-exercise-include-global-business-leaders-and-prominent-government-and-public-health-leaders-livestream-open-to-all
  30. https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-suppression-of-the-lab-leak-hypothesis-was-not-based-in-science/
  31. https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Report-on-Potential-Links-Between-the-Wuhan-Institute-of-Virology-and-the-Origins-of-COVID-19-20230623.pdf
  32. https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan-china-intelligence
  33. https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2023
  34. https://www.science.org/content/article/nih-says-grantee-failed-report-experiment-wuhan-created-bat-virus-made-mice-sicker
  35. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768155
  36. https://historyofvaccines.org/vaccines-101/how-are-vaccines-made/vaccine-development-testing-and-regulation/
  37. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788346
  38. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352906723001112
  39. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056135
  40. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanam/article/PIIS2667-193X%2821%2900058-2/fulltext
  41. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024036788
  42. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-cautions-against-use-hydroxychloroquine-or-chloroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or
  43. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9308124/
  44. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27930696/
  45. https://letterboxd.com/film/plandemic-3-the-great-awakening/
  46. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/plandemic-goes-viral-those-targeted-discredited-scientist-s-crusade-warn-n1202361
  47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387602825_Cross-partisan_Conspiracy_Theories_How_Plandemic_Fueled_Vaccine_Misinformation
  48. https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/12/21254184/how-plandemic-went-viral-facebook-youtube
  49. https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2020/heres-how-plandemic-went-viral/
  50. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/07/plandemic-youtube-facebook-vimeo-remove/
  51. https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/05/07/1001469/facebook-youtube-plandemic-covid-misinformation/
  52. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/07/facebook-youtube-struggling-to-remove-plandemic-conspiracy-video.html
  53. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52588682
  54. https://medium.com/dfrlab/why-the-debunked-covid-19-conspiracy-video-plandemic-wont-go-away-c9dd36c2037c
  55. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-media-misinformation/
  56. https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/the-falsehoods-of-the-plandemic-video/
  57. https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/may/08/week-fact-checking-plandemic-trump-abc/
  58. https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origins-lab-china
  59. https://theintercept.com/2021/09/09/covid-origins-gain-of-function-research/
  60. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0
  61. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9538893/
  62. https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.16262
  63. https://bmjpublichealth.bmj.com/content/2/1/e000282
  64. https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/aug/18/fact-checking-plandemic-2-video-recycles-inaccurat/
  65. https://www.theverge.com/interface/2020/8/19/21373820/plandemic-indoctornation-facebook-youtube-twitter-removal-block-covid-hoax-block
  66. https://freedomplatform.tv/plandemic-indoctornation-world-premiere/
  67. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12927074/
  68. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12745644/reviews/
  69. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12745644/trivia/
  70. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/23/fact-check-plandemic-ii-alleges-false-cdc-nih-conspiracy-theory/3408658001/
  71. https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/18/21374081/plandemic-indoctornation-conspiracy-video-facebook-misinformation
  72. https://plandemic.com/hostscreening/
  73. https://takecontrol.substack.com/p/plandemic-3-the-great-awakening
  74. https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/plandemic-3-global-premiere-livestream-june-3rd/
  75. https://plandemic.com/plandemic-3-the-great-awakening/
  76. https://podcast24.fi/jaksot/conversations-that-matter-with-alex-newman/plandemic-3-the-great-awakening-is-happening-now-tUTwnO60cS
  77. https://www.lukestorey.com/lifestylistpodcast/513
  78. https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.33HH82G
  79. https://www.wired.com/story/mikki-willis-tulsi-gabbard-red-pilled-plandemic/
  80. https://open.spotify.com/episode/7GhtQrXmpuB6xqZ5LQa5tD
  81. https://www.yahoo.com/news/rfk-jr-said-organization-funded-211243416.html
  82. https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/20/politics/video/rfk-jr-pandemic-2020-video-government-lead-digvid
  83. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66226103
  84. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/20/technology/plandemic-movie-youtube-facebook-coronavirus.html
  85. https://rumble.com/playlists/A7LkHoMiJaY
  86. https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/may/08/fact-checking-plandemic-documentary-full-false-con/
  87. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-13/who-is-judy-mikovits-what-is-plandemic-movie/12233412
  88. https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/05/16/plandemic-and-the-seven-traits-of-conspiratorial-thinking/
  89. https://www.livescience.com/debunking-plandemic-coronavirus-claims.html
  90. https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/plandemic-video-judy-mikovits/
  91. https://undark.org/2024/01/08/covid-misinformation-censorship/
  92. https://reason.com/2023/01/02/under-government-pressure-twitter-suppressed-truthful-speech-about-covid-19/
  93. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60036861
  94. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411_3dq3.pdf
  95. https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/missouri-v-biden-ruling.pdf
  96. https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/justices-side-with-biden-over-governments-influence-on-social-media-content-moderation/
  97. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/zuckerberg-says-the-white-house-pressured-facebook-to-censor-some-covid-19-content-during-the-pandemic
  98. https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3701&context=lawreview
  99. https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118565/documents/HHRG-119-JU00-20250903-SD026-U26.pdf
  100. https://www.cfr.org/article/supreme-court-was-right-murthy-v-missouri
  101. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra2106441
  102. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11726705/
  103. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9195491/
  104. https://news.ku.edu/news/article/scholars-address-rhetorical-potency-of-plandemic-covid-19-misinformation
  105. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0263191
  106. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/81/text
  107. https://www.bioworld.com/articles/720005-us-funded-gain-of-function-research-paused-for-stiffer-oversight
  108. https://www.paho.org/en/news/20-5-2025-world-health-assembly-adopts-historic-pandemic-agreement-make-world-more-equitable
  109. https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/05/23/who-new-pandemic-treaty-landmark-flawed
  110. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-55454-w
  111. https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12/20/ecohealth-alliance-retracts-and-replaces-paper-on-potential-origin-of-covid-19-in-bats/
  112. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/new-data-underscore-rise-cdc-mistrust-during-pandemic
  113. https://www.kff.org/from-drew-altman/the-sad-state-of-trust-in-the-cdc-and-fda/
  114. https://europepmc.org/article/pmc/pmc8420120
  115. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08901171241272075
  116. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9892344/
  117. https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
  118. https://knightfoundation.org/reports/american-views-2020-trust-media-and-democracy/
  119. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12087978/
  120. https://www.npr.org/2022/11/03/1133686674/how-documentary-style-films-turn-conspiracy-theories-into-a-call-to-action
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.