(1) Dr. Simone Gold defends HCQ & Ivermectin, warns against mandating an experimental vaccine(2) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement(3) Epidemiologist on massive drop in influenza cases: many are being falsely counted as COVID-19(4) With no lockdown or mask mandate, Florida has roughly same hospitalization level as 2018 flu season(5) Rosa Koire Explains Agenda 21 and the Great Reset(6) Build Back Better: We need a 'rainbow recovery'??(7) Japan in 1994 revised its vaccination law to scrap mandatory inoculation(8) World Economic Forum on The Future of Food(9) What will we eat in 2030?(1) Dr. Simone Gold defends HCQ & Ivermectin, warns against mandating an experimental vaccine From David West <dgwest7@gmail.com>video:https://nhn-video.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/YouTube-Videos/Dr.+Simone+Gold+-+The+truth+about+the+CV19+vaccine.mp4https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/dr-simone-gold-the-truth-about-the-cv19-vaccine/DR. SIMONE GOLD – THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CV19 VACCINEOn January 3rd, 2021, Emergency Physician, Dr. Simone Gold gave this gobsmacking talk on the Great Awakening show about the breathtaking skullduggery that was coordinated worldwide across governments and health agencies against the drug, hydroxychloroquine, in the ordering of needless masks, lockdowns and now, in mandating the experimental vaccine.I recommend that everyone share this with their normie friends and loved ones.Dr. Gold says, "I come before you on behalf of America's Frontline Doctors, which is a volunteer physicians organization that we started specifically to combat the serious and life-threatening disinformation that has really taken over America and really, the entire Globe.Dr. Gold decided to speak out after she prescribed hydroxychloroquine and zinc to a COVID-positive patient, who recovered completely in 48 hours. However she, herself was called into see her Medical Director, who threatened to fire her, while her State Board threatened her with a potential investigation of unprofessional conduct."We are licensed as individuals. It's actually against the law to have a corporate practice of medicine…it has to be the individual doctor physician, that's why patients go to multiple doctors."It's very, very scary stuff. I've been a doctor for a very long time. Before me, my father was a doctor. I've never seen anything like this, where we have groups of physicians or scientists or government bureaucrat agencies essentially lying to the American people and people across the world."The publication of fraudulent studies in the world's pre-eminent medical journals, including The Lancet and the draconian decrees have crashed the world economy and resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths.The experimental vaccine has not been shown to reduce mortality, in a disease which already has an almost non-existent mortality rate and there's no evidence that it stops transmission. Why is the vaccine being mandated, again?Dr Gold raises the very real security threat of mandating an experimental vaccine. "What if, for example you've given that vaccine to all of your healthcare workers and you've given that vaccine to all of your military and all of your police officers. I find this shocking, as a public policy matter, that we would even consider giving anything to our healthy first responders and frontline people who defend our country…It's so shocking to accept that kind of risk."She ends her talk with a call to action. "We, at America's Frontline Doctors intend to fight the urge that's sweeping the globe to mandate people taking an experimental biological agent. This is a big fight we have on our hands…we're very concerned with private businesses mandating this; employers, schools and travel – airlines, in particular."You can imagine if all the airlines got together, the CEOs and said, "You know what? We're just going to mandate this – the 6 biggest ones all got together and said that. It's just like the masks, right? You can't avoid their mandates. This is a very big problem. So, America's Frontline Doctors is tackling this. We intend to talk to the decision-makers in the airline industry."One of our tools in that battle will be to go in armed with at least 1 million signatures of human beings who are going to say, "No! We are not going to do business with anybody – and we're not going to comply with anyone who's going to mandate this…everyone hearing this can agree, we don't need the CEOs of big companies forcing experimental biological agents on anyone…"We are going to be at their mercy if we don't get ahead of them. We must get ahead of that bad decision that they seem headed towards making. Qantas Airlines has already said that they're going to do this…Sign the petition and get everybody you know to sign it! StopMedicalDiscrimination.org …She says, "This is your life! Are you going to be able to travel?…frame this as a Human Rights issue. You can't mandate that human beings take experimental biological agents."(2) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancementhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5Published: 09 September 2020Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapiesWen Shi Lee, Adam K. Wheatley, Stephen J. Kent & Brandon J. DeKoskyNature Microbiology volume 5, pages1185–1191(2020)AbstractAntibody-based drugs and vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are being expedited through preclinical and clinical development. Data from the study of SARS-CoV and other respiratory viruses suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Previous respiratory syncytial virus and dengue virus vaccine studies revealed human clinical safety risks related to ADE, resulting in failed vaccine trials. Here, we describe key ADE mechanisms and discuss mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies in development. We also outline recently published data to evaluate the risks and opportunities for antibody-based protection against SARS-CoV-2. [...](3) Epidemiologist on massive drop in influenza cases: many are being falsely counted as COVID-19https://summit.news/2021/01/05/epidemiologist-says-influenza-cases-are-being-counted-as-covid-19/Epidemiologist Says Influenza Cases Are Being Counted as COVID-19"Influenza has been renamed COVID-19 in large part."Published 2 days ago on 5 January, 2021Paul Joseph WatsonTop epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski says that the massive drop in influenza cases can be attributed to the fact that many are being falsely counted as COVID-19 cases.Wittkowski, former Head of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Research Design at Rockefeller University, cautioned that, "Influenza has been renamed COVID-19 in large part."According to CDC figures, the cumulative positive influenza test rate from late September into the week of December 19th was just 0.2%, compared to 8.7% from a year before.According to Wittkowski, this is because many flu infections are being incorrectly labeled as coronavirus cases."There may be quite a number of influenza cases included in the 'presumed COVID-19' category of people who have COVID-19 symptoms (which Influenza symptoms can be mistaken for), but are not tested for SARS RNA," Wittkowski told Just the News.Those patients may "also may have some SARS RNA sitting in their nose while being infected with Influenza, in which case the influenza would be 'confirmed' to be COVID-19," he added.Wittkowski challenges the notion that masks and social distancing have resulted in a drop in flu cases, asserting that flu and COVID-19 viruses are "more similar than people want to acknowledge.""People know everybody is wearing masks and distancing, and so people want to come up with things that are good about it," he said.In places like California and Pennsylvania where mask wearing is most common, COVID-19 cases have continued to skyrocket.As Just the News notes, "Data indicate that more than nine out of every 10 Americans in most states are wearing masks in public regularly; those numbers have been above 80% since the early fall. Yet average positive COVID-19 tests have multiplied by nearly seven times since the spring peak."http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2021/january/06/biden-taps-architect-of-2014-ukraine-coup-for-state-department/Biden Taps Architect of 2014 Ukraine Coup for State Departmentwritten by dave decampwednesday january 6, 2021undefinedAccording to a report from Politico, Joe Biden's transition team is expected to nominate Victoria Nuland to be the under secretary of state for political affairs for the incoming administration's State Department.Nuland, who is married to neoconservative Robert Kagan, is known for her role in orchestrating the 2014 coup in Ukraine while she was the assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs in the Obama administration.A recording of a phone call between Nuland and then-US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt was leaked and released on YouTube on February 4th, 2014. In the call, Nuland and Pyatt discussed who should replace the government of former Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who was forced to step down on February 22nd, 2014.The US-backed coup sparked the war in eastern Ukraine's Donbas region and led to the Russian annexation of Crimea. Both regions have a majority ethnic-Russian population who rejected the nationalist, anti-Russian post-coup government that even had neo-Nazis in its midst.In a 2020 column for Foreign Affairs titled, "Pinning Down Putin," Nuland said Russian President Vladimir Putin "seized" on the 2014 coup and other "democratic struggles" to "fuel the perception at home of Russian interests under siege by external enemies." She also cited the war in the Donbas and annexation of Crimea as examples of Russian aggression, as most in Washington do.Currently, Nuland is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and works for the Albright Stonebridge Group. She is also a board member of the National Endowment for Democracy, a US-taxpayer funded nonprofit that funds "pro-democracy" movements across the world.Nuland worked in the Bush administration from 2005 to 2008 as the US ambassador to NATO. From 2011 to 2013, she served as the spokesperson for Barack Obama's State Department, and from 2013 to 2017, Nuland was the assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs.Politico also reported that the Biden administration is tapping Wendy Sherman to work directly under Secretary of State-designee Anthony Blinken. Sherman worked in the Obama administration's State Department and played a crucial role in negotiating the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.Reprinted with permission from Antiwar.com.(4) With no lockdown or mask mandate, Florida has roughly same hospitalization level as 2018 flu seasonhttp://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/january/06/with-no-lockdown-or-mask-mandate-florida-has-roughly-same-hospitalization-level-as-2018-flu-season/by daniel horowitzwednesday january 6, 2021We are being told that our liberties must be suspended in order to keep hospitals from reaching apocalyptic levels. But what if those levels are just above normal and not anywhere near apocalyptic levels? And what if these lockdown measures do nothing to keep the levels down anyway?Well, if there is anywhere we can cross-check this hypothesis, it would be in Florida, where there is no lockdown or mask mandate. In fact, people are flocking there from out of state to enjoy vacations and host conferences and even to live. Naturally, we'd expect hospital levels to be bursting at the seams if they rise and fall with lockdowns and masks, right?Well, actually, you can barely see an increase in the hospitalization level in the Sunshine State from previous years, and the current level appears to be on par with the 2018 flu season, which was more of a pandemic flu than other flus in recent years. And in 2018, we did nothing as a nation to suspend liberties.There is much debate over how to count a COVID hospitalization given the rampant and unprecedented testing of people relative to past flus. But one easy way to observe an apples-to-apples comparison to past flu seasons is to compare the overall average daily census of hospitalizations now to previous years and adjust those numbers per capita to existing population. In other words, if all of the COVID patients are legitimately there because of COVID, we would see an enormous excess in the total number of people in the hospital at any given moment for any ailment. Florida is simply not seeing a gigantic increase.Here is how the math works: HHS tracks total daily hospital levels in all the states dating back to Jan. 1, 2020. If you take the average daily total hospitalization levels in Florida for the fourth quarter of 2020, you will find an average (some days are more, some are less) of 43,150.Naturally, I wondered what the levels were in previous years, because the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration publishes quarterly data of hospital censuses for several recent years. I started with the first quarter of 2018, which included the harshest flu season we had in a decade. If you average the total hospital census over the 90 days from Jan. 1 to March 31, it works out to 41,094 people in the hospital on an average day. Adjusting for the population at the time, that would be 1,972 hospitalizations per 1 million people. That is compared to 1,998 per 1 million for this past quarter of 2020 with COVID as the predominant illness.As you can see, although the hospital numbers for the fourth quarter of 2020 were about 6%-8% higher than in the fourth quarter of the previous two years, it was barely higher than the first quarters of every year. The reason it is fair to compare to the worst months of previous years is because it has become clear that the flu is gone for this year and that COVID-19 is this year's version of the flu. Thus, with flu cases down 98.8%, it is reasonable to assume that the January census will not grow as it typically does during peak flu season.Read the whole article here.(5) Rosa Koire Explains Agenda 21 and the Great ResetFrom: David West <dgwest7@gmail.com>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iK3EIXIfHUhttps://www.bitchute.com/video/3iK3EIXIfHU/(6) Build Back Better: We need a 'rainbow recovery'??From: David West <dgwest7@gmail.com>Build Back Better: We need a 'rainbow recovery'https://nwri.org/build-back-better-a-buzz-phrase-for-more-agenda-21-2030-control/Build Back Better – a buzz-phrase for more Agenda 21/2030 controlby Sue Forde, Guest Author | Dec 29, 2020 | In General, Moving toward Marxist Socialism, UN Agenda 21If you have had enough of COVID lockdowns and wearing masks that don't make a difference, then get prepared for yet another onslaught against individual liberty – the "Build Back Better" mantra being used worldwide, and in the Biden ranks for our own country.Those who are aware of Agenda 21 and the move toward global governance may have seen this already. If you don't know about Agenda 21 (now Agenda 2030), here's a good place to start for an overview (Agenda 21 in One Easy Lesson). You'll see that much has taken place already.In the move toward worldwide socialism/communism, the United Nations (UN) began the transition in 1987 with Maurice Strong and "Sustainable Development" and "The Wildlands Project". "Sustainability" was defined at that time by what is "not" sustainable: Private property ownership, fossil fuels, high meat intake, privately owned cars, air conditioning, logging, dams, grazing of livestock, and more. The tool to be used to get there: Global cooling, er, global warming, now "climate change" since the earth cools and warms cyclically.With the COVID shutdowns, a new opportunity to push the agenda forward more quickly (they have less than 10 years to accomplish their ultimate goal (thus Agenda 2030), they are not letting a "good crisis go to waste". So the "Green New Deal" has arisen, using so-called "Climate Change" as the reason, and planning for the "Great Reset", which is embodied in the term "Build Back Better".In an article for The Hill by Justin Haskins, the "great reset" was introduced in a virtual meeting earlier in June 2020 hosted by the World Economic Forum, some of the planet's most powerful business leaders, government officials and activists where they announced a proposal to "reset" the global economy. He states: "Instead of traditional capitalism, the high-profile group said the world should adopt more socialistic policies, such as wealth taxes, additional regulations and massive Green New Deal-like government programs.""Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed," wrote Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, in an article published on WEF's website. "In short, we need a 'Great Reset' of capitalism.""Build Back Better" is actually a United Nations invented phrase and what it actually means is more world government, more green taxes and regulation, more expensive energy, more identity politics, more corporatism — and, of course, less freedom and entrepreneurialism.Here are some recent examples:In a speech on April 23, 2020, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres stated: "Looking ahead, we need to build back better. The Sustainable Development Goals — which are underpinned by human rights — provide the framework for more inclusive and sustainable economies and societies." And the UN is using children to accomplish their goals of worldwide government.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Building Back Better: why we must think of the next generation, states that "The recovery must also respect the rights of future generations, enhancing climate action aiming at carbon neutrality by 2050 and protecting biodiversity."The UN is working hard through its "Children's Environmental Rights Initiative" to grant children the power over adults to achieve its goals: "Already, youth are way ahead of their elders when it comes to protecting the planet. Now, a generation of young people will have seen first-hand the impacts of a truly global crisis. For the youth voices anxious about the climate emergency, the pandemic may well only harden their resolve… If youth attitudes continue to solidify over environmental action because of the pandemic, the adults may not have a choice.As David Boyd, UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, notes, "Millions of children and youth across the planet are calling for change. The children have spoken. Now the adults must act."The World Economic Forum (WEF) states that: "The COVID-19 crisis is affecting every facet of people's lives in every corner of the world. But tragedy need not be its only legacy. On the contrary, the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future."The World Economic Forum, in its Davos Manifesto 2020: The Universal Purpose of a Company in the Fourth Industrial Revolution seeks to implement Agenda 21/2030 and Sustainable Development into a new business model, called "stakeholder capitalism". From their website: "Business leaders now have an incredible opportunity. By giving stakeholder capitalism concrete meaning, they can move beyond their legal obligations and uphold their duty to society. They can bring the world closer to achieving shared goals, such as those outlined in the Paris climate agreement and the United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda. If they really want to leave their mark on the world, there is no alternative."The website goes on to say: "A company that has a multinational scope of activities not only serves all those stakeholders who are directly engaged, but acts itself as a stakeholder – together with governments and civil society – of our global future. Corporate global citizenship requires a company to harness its core competencies, its entrepreneurship, skills and relevant resources in collaborative efforts with other companies and stakeholders to improve the state of the world."Where is the "great reset" headed? To utopia? Read the article from the World Economic Forum's website: "Here's How Life Could Change in my city by the year 2030" (That's the same year Agenda 21/2030 has in mind for completion of its goals.) Own nothing. No privacy. Life 'has never been better'. Sound like a science fiction novel? Be very aware that this is a plan for your life. Is this what you want?In their own words, here are "8 predictions for the world in 2030" by "imagining the societies of tomorrow," including individuals not owning anything; a global tax on carbon; US dominance is over; very few hospitals; bio-printed organs; eating less meat (it's a treat, not a staple); economic integration of Syrian refugees; reduction of Western values; moving humans toward Mars.President Trump has stood in the way of the implementation of these globalist goals, standing instead for "America first", religious freedom and individual liberty and responsibility. When he spoke at the WEF's annual gathering in 2020, he explained how the U.S. has prospered by maintaining a free society. George Soros, in a speech to the World Economic Forum, talked about how President Trump is a "danger to the world", saying, ""Clearly, I consider the Trump administration a danger to the world," Soros said at a World Economic Forum event. "But I regard it as a purely temporary phenomenon that will disappear in 2020, or even sooner. I give President Trump credit for motivating his core supporters brilliantly, but for every core supporter, he has created a greater number of core opponents who are equally strongly motivated. That is why I expect a Democratic landslide in 2018."" [...]Other sectors and how they are incorporating the "build back better" slogan:UNEP financial arm: …how the banking sector can ensure financial inclusion is not forgotten as economies recover from the crisis and build back better.We Mean Business Coalition. Global companies join the bandwagon.They list 'The businesses urging governments to build back better from COVID-19¢Local government authorities join in. Press release from Invest in Manchester.This week, in partnership with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, The Greater Manchester Local Enterprise Partnership has launched the 'Build Back Better' campaign – an initiative which sets out to build back the economy and create a better opportunity for a strong and successful recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.U.S. World Resources Institute:Governments and others will spend trillions of dollars responding to the effects of the coronavirus. Rebuilding the old-fashioned way — by investing in fossil fuel-driven growth that threatens human health and exacerbates inequality — is a dangerous proposition. Future prosperity demands that countries build back better. To build back better, countries must harness low-carbon investment opportunities to reboot economies while reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution that jeopardize lives.Australia: "How Australia can 'build back better' after coronavirus"Friends of the Earth, Europe "EU Council: Governments must act together to 'build back better'"Africa can build back better after Covid-19. Our guiding frameworks for a better, more sustainable recovery are the Sustainable Development Agenda and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.The phrase has been knocking around for a while. Here is the UN using it in 2017 in the context of disaster recovery:Disaster impacted countries and communities are oftentimes much better equipped to Build Back Better during the extended period of recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction when they have taken actions to strengthen recovery capacity and decision-making effectiveness prior to the onset of disaster.Apparently it now also embraces identity politics – and a feminist green new deal. "Building back better requires building back differently. We need a 'rainbow recovery'." ...(7) Japan in 1994 revised its vaccination law to scrap mandatory inoculationhttps://arizonasports.com/story/2514608/japan-vaccination-uncertainty-casts-doubts-olympicsJapan vaccination uncertainty casts doubts over OlympicsBY ASSOCIATED PRESSJANUARY 22, 2021 AT 7:22 AMJapanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga speaks during a meeting of the coronavirus infection control headquarters at his office in Tokyo Friday, Jan. 22, 2021. Suga, in a speech earlier, said the vaccine is "the clincher" in the fight against the pandemic and vowed to start vaccinations as soon as late February, when a health ministry approval of the Pfizer vaccine, the first applicant, is expected. (Kazuhiro Nogi/Pool Photo via AP)TOKYO (AP) — Japan is publicly adamant that it will stage its postponed Olympics this summer. But to pull it off, many believe the vaccination of its 127 million citizens for the coronavirus is key.It's an immense undertaking in the best of circumstances and complicated now by an overly cautious decision-making process, bureaucratic roadblocks and a public that has long been deeply wary of vaccines.Japan hopes to start COVID-19 vaccinations in late February, but uncertainty is growing that a nation ranked among the world's lowest in vaccine confidence can pull off the massive, $14 billion project in time for the games in July, casting doubt on whether the Tokyo Olympics can happen.Japan has secured vaccines for all its citizens, and then some, after striking deals with three foreign pharmaceutical makers — Pfizer Inc., AstraZeneca and Moderna Inc. Its swift action was seen as proof of its resolve to stage the games after a one-year postponement because of the pandemic.The country needs foreign-made vaccines because local development is only in its early stages.Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, in a speech this week, said vaccines are "the clincher" in the fight against the pandemic and vowed to start vaccinations as soon as late February, when health ministry approval of the Pfizer vaccine, the first applicant, is expected.Suga pledged to provide "accurate information based on scientific findings, including side effects and efficacy," an attempt to address the worries of vaccine skeptics.Under the current plan, inoculations will start with 10,000 front-line medical workers. Then about 3 million other medical workers will be added ahead of high-risk groups such as the elderly, those with underlying health conditions and caregivers. The rest of the population is expected to get access around May or later, though officials refuse to give an exact timeline.Japan is under a partial state of emergency and struggling with an upsurge of infections. There have been about 351,000 cases, with 4,800 deaths, according to the health ministry.Many people are skeptical of the vaccination effort, partly because side effects of vaccines have often been played up here. A recent survey on TBS television found only 48% of respondents said they wanted a COVID-19 vaccination. In a Lancet study of 149 countries published in September, Japan ranked among the lowest in vaccine confidence, with less than 25% of people agreeing on vaccine safety, importance and effectiveness.Many Japanese have a vague unease about vaccines, said Dr. Takashi Nakano, a Kawasaki Medical School professor and vaccine expert. "If something (negative) happens after inoculation, people tend to think it's because of the vaccine, and that's the image stuck in their mind for a long time."The history of vaccine mistrust in Japan dates back to 1948, when dozens of babies died after getting a faulty diphtheria vaccine. In 1989, cases of aseptic meningitis in children who received a combined vaccination for measles, mumps and rubella, or MMR, prompted lawsuits against the government, forcing it to scrap the mix four years later.A 1992 court ruling held the government liable for adverse reactions linked to several vaccines, while defining suspected side effects as adverse events, but without sufficient scientific evidence, experts say. In a major change to its policy, Japan in 1994 revised its vaccination law to scrap mandatory inoculation.While several Japanese companies and research organizations are currently developing their own coronavirus vaccines, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. will distribute the Moderna vaccine and produce the Novavax vaccine in Japan.Masayuki Imagawa, head of Takeda's Japan vaccine business unit, said his company last year considered developing its own vaccine. But instead it decided to prioritize speed and chose to import Moderna's product and make the Novavax vaccine at Takeda's factory in Japan. He said the decision was not influenced by the Olympics.Experts also worry about running into logistical challenges and bureaucratic roadblocks in staging a massive inoculation project that involves five government ministries along with local towns and cities. The government has budgeted more than 1.5 trillion yen ($14 billion) for the vaccine project.Thousands of medical workers would have to be mobilized to give the shots, monitor and respond in case of any problems. Securing their help is difficult when hospitals are already burdened with treatment of COVID-19 patients, said Hitoshi Iwase, an official in Tokyo's Sumida district tasked with preparing vaccinations for 275,000 residents.While vaccines are considered key to achieving the games, Prime Minister Suga said they won't be required."We will prepare for a safe and secure Olympics without making vaccination a precondition," Suga said Thursday, responding to a call by opposition lawmakers for a further postponement or cancellation of the games to concentrate on virus measures.Uncertainty over vaccine safety and efficacy make it difficult to predict when Japan can obtain wide enough immunity to the coronavirus to control the pandemic."It is inappropriate to push vaccinations to hold the Olympics," said Dr. Tetsuo Nakayama, a professor at Kitasato Institute for Life Sciences. "Vaccines should be used to protect the people's health, not to achieve the Olympics."(8) World Economic Forum on The Future of FoodHere's how life could change in my city by the year 2030https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change-2030/Here's how life could change in my city by the year 203011 Nov 2016Ida AukenMember of Parliament, Parliament of Denmark (Folketinget)The World Economic Forum COVID Action PlatformAuthor's note: Some people have read this blog as my utopia or dream of the future. It is not. It is a scenario showing where we could be heading - for better and for worse. I wrote this piece to start a discussion about some of the pros and cons of the current technological development. When we are dealing with the future, it is not enough to work with reports. We should start discussions in many new ways. This is the intention with this piece.Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city - or should I say, "our city". I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes.It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.First communication became digitized and free to everyone. Then, when clean energy became free, things started to move quickly. Transportation dropped dramatically in price. It made no sense for us to own cars anymore, because we could call a driverless vehicle or a flying car for longer journeys within minutes. We started transporting ourselves in a much more organized and coordinated way when public transport became easier, quicker and more convenient than the car. Now I can hardly believe that we accepted congestion and traffic jams, not to mention the air pollution from combustion engines. What were we thinking?Sometimes I use my bike when I go to see some of my friends. I enjoy the exercise and the ride. It kind of gets the soul to come along on the journey. Funny how some things seem never seem to lose their excitement: walking, biking, cooking, drawing and growing plants. It makes perfect sense and reminds us of how our culture emerged out of a close relationship with nature."Environmental problems seem far away"In our city we don't pay any rent, because someone else is using our free space whenever we do not need it. My living room is used for business meetings when I am not there.Once in awhile, I will choose to cook for myself. It is easy - the necessary kitchen equipment is delivered at my door within minutes. Since transport became free, we stopped having all those things stuffed into our home. Why keep a pasta-maker and a crepe cooker crammed into our cupboards? We can just order them when we need them.This also made the breakthrough of the circular economy easier. When products are turned into services, no one has an interest in things with a short life span. Everything is designed for durability, repairability and recyclability. The materials are flowing more quickly in our economy and can be transformed to new products pretty easily. Environmental problems seem far away, since we only use clean energy and clean production methods. The air is clean, the water is clean and nobody would dare to touch the protected areas of nature because they constitute such value to our well being. In the cities we have plenty of green space and plants and trees all over. I still do not understand why in the past we filled all free spots in the city with concrete.The death of shoppingShopping? I can't really remember what that is. For most of us, it has been turned into choosing things to use. Sometimes I find this fun, and sometimes I just want the algorithm to do it for me. It knows my taste better than I do by now.When AI and robots took over so much of our work, we suddenly had time to eat well, sleep well and spend time with other people. The concept of rush hour makes no sense anymore, since the work that we do can be done at any time. I don't really know if I would call it work anymore. It is more like thinking-time, creation-time and development-time.For a while, everything was turned into entertainment and people did not want to bother themselves with difficult issues. It was only at the last minute that we found out how to use all these new technologies for better purposes than just killing time."They live different kinds of lives outside of the city"My biggest concern is all the people who do not live in our city. Those we lost on the way. Those who decided that it became too much, all this technology. Those who felt obsolete and useless when robots and AI took over big parts of our jobs. Those who got upset with the political system and turned against it. They live different kind of lives outside of the city. Some have formed little self-supplying communities. Others just stayed in the empty and abandoned houses in small 19th century villages.Once in awhile I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. No where I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me.All in all, it is a good life. Much better than the path we were on, where it became so clear that we could not continue with the same model of growth. We had all these terrible things happening: lifestyle diseases, climate change, the refugee crisis, environmental degradation, completely congested cities, water pollution, air pollution, social unrest and unemployment. We lost way too many people before we realised that we could do things differently.Author's note: Some people have read this blog as my utopia or dream of the future. It is not. It is a scenario showing where we could be heading - for better and for worse. I wrote this piece to start a discussion about some of the pros and cons of the current technological development. When we are dealing with the future, it is not enough to work with reports. We should start discussions in many new ways. This is the intention with this piece.(9) What will we eat in 2030?https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/what-will-we-eat-in-2030{photo} A boy takes a meal break at a fruit stall in the central market in Kazan, Russia, August 11, 2015.Markets will grow for both local 'real food' as well as nutritious 'convenience food'10 Nov 2016Tim BentonProfessor of Population Ecology and UK Champion for Global Food Security, University of LeedsThe World Economic Forum COVID Action PlatformThis article is part of the Annual Meeting of the Global Future CouncilsThe future of food is a contested space, with multiple competing ideas about how the future will evolve. The growing human population, with a significantly increasing global middle class, will be the engine of increasing global demand. Historically, increasing wealth has led to changing consumption patterns, particularly more meat and other resource-intensive foods like cheese and eggs. The question is the extent to which historical trends will play out in future.This is for two prime reasons. First, on a global basis more people are now of an unhealthy weight than a healthy weight. At the same time, the historical "hunger challenge" is slowly receding, while malnourishment is increasingly associated with excessive weight and obesity, creating a new challenge for food systems. This is creating a new policy interest in "food for health" which has the potential to help shape diets and thus food systems.Second, the Paris climate agreement pledges to keep climate change to well-below 2 degrees C. Given that food systems - growing food and feed, making and transporting food, cooking, eating and throwing food away - accounts for just under a third of greenhouse gas emissions, food alone has the potential to use up the entire Paris agreement’s carbon budget. As many people have written, the most potent way to "decarbonise" the food system is to reduce the amount of greenhouse-intensive food we produce – notably meat.Dietary advice suggests 500g per person per week is healthy meat consumption = 26 kg per year; as can be seen, on average we exceed this globally, particularly in the rich worldThus, on the one hand, projections of demand are growing, but on the other hand, important policy drivers that may constrain demand growth - or increase demand for "sustainable nutrition" – are also growing.It is undoubtedly true that some areas of the world need access to radically more food, but equally, other areas of the world are suffering from eating too much of the wrong sort of food, and filling landfills with discarded food waste. Many commentators agree we are likely to need a "contract and converge" model, or as Tim Lang, a Professor of Food Policy at City University in London, has eloquently put it: "the rich need to eat less, and differently, so the poor can eat more and differently".As well as uncertainty over how global demand will evolve, there is uncertainty about how production will evolve. Since the green revolution, the global focus has been to produce a relatively small handful of commodity crops – maize, wheat, rice, soy, palm oil - in ever larger quantities and ever greater technical efficiencies. This means that "large scale" agriculture can produce calories very cheaply.For many, food is cheaper than it has ever been (relative to income) and this allows us both to eat a lot and waste a lot. But, however efficient "big ag" is, it creates significant environmental costs – particularly in eroding soil health, water quality and reducing biodiversity. It also supports few livelihoods, with capital investment increasing, and labour requirements falling.One can imagine a different food system. If we lived in a world where demand was different – perhaps because people wanted to eat healthily and sustainably – it is possible to imagine a much greater mix of big and small farms, producing a larger range of produce, employing more people and creating a more local and circular economy.So what might we eat in 2030? I think demand will be shifting and more people will want to eat a healthy diet, one that is less intensive (and wasteful) of resources. The increasing emergence of localism, wholefoods, organic, artisanal and "real food" movements is a sign of this – at least for the rich and dedicated. So our diets may be more veg and fruit, whole grains and vegetarian food or new alternatives (soya products, or perhaps insects or artificial meat), and less fried and sugary things. We’ll still eat meat, but, perhaps more like our parents and grandparents, see it as a treat to savour every few days.For the world’s poor, as Adam Drewnowski and others have shown, the cost of a nutritious diet is so much greater than the cost of a calorie-dense one. It is therefore likely that commodity crops (maize, wheat, sugar, oil) will continue to underpin the global food system – but will be processed in ways that are better for our health. This may include fortification (or biofortification) – where nutrients are engineered in, either in the biology or manufacture of food – and the significant reformulation of current foods for fewer calories and more nutrients. "Ultra-processed" foods need not be unhealthy.Although there are signs of a push-back against globalisation, its many benefits suggest that increasingly the historical divide between the "developed" and "developing" world will break down, and the issues, for every country, will be how to ensure access to culturally acceptable, healthy diets, that are affordable by the poor. This will involve both locally produced food and food traded from afar. Food systems are likely to diversify as markets simultaneously grow for local "real food" as well as nutritious "convenience food". We won’t have an "organic world" or a "big ag" world, we’ll have both. But we must have better nutrition, less waste, and more sustainability – otherwise we simply stack up ever more problems for the future.