5 Comments
User's avatar
Madam Stakeholder's avatar

Howdy, Mr. Max, Since you haven't posted about this new Substack at your Xwitter, you made me log in here to tell you this — and show you this…

Cassidy is typical Uniparty Right (calls himself "Republican"). He's awful (I say this from the Right and as an American). He's also the typical U.S. Senator who fancies himself as a big deal re biodefense (biodefence) and national security™. Btw, national security vis-a-vis scamdemics and CBRN threats/incidents also includes (going back to GW Bush the Catastrophizer) "critical infrastructure" and "key resources." It's that construct that gave us essential and nonessential. Cassidy's "conservative" rating is reliably an F+ or a D-. I am NOT a fan of the man.

What I want to show you is this document:

https://centerforhealthsecurity.org/sites/default/files/2023-10/cassidy-cdc-rfifinal.pdf

It represents and encapsulates "health security" meets Public Health (in form of the USA's primary PH agency, the CDC). The document at every turn is a puzzle piece — adding up to many puzzle pieces. For your thesis (or theses). Johns Hopkins (which is treated like a Branch of the Federal Govt by the actual Constitutional Branches of the Fed Govt) tells us what they want the ever-expanding, out-of-control "public health" apparatus to be. It's a nightmare. You can figure out the rest as you wade thru the RFI and see how it fits in with your work.

I agree that your explanations-in-progress are more promising than Ms. Ghandi's.

Carry on/all the best, @mdmstakeholder😎

Expand full comment
Max Lacour's avatar

Thank you for this—looks substantial! Do you know what role the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security has played in shaping health security in the USA over the last twenty years? What's interesting is that biosecuritisation/fears about bioterror really seem to only be part of the story, and I'm trying to do justice to it without saying that it's all the security state (I think, at least in Britain, that a much more substantial role was played by epidemiology itself. Our 'health security' tradition is a lot vaguer.)

Expand full comment
Madam Stakeholder's avatar

Please forgive my delay, Mr. Max.

I'm intrigued by your reply, so now I really want to deep dive and find/isolate insight into your trenchant queries. In the meantime, I'll drop off this Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security TIMELINE:

https://centerforhealthsecurity.org/who-we-are/history-of-the-center-for-health-security

Expand full comment
Madam Stakeholder's avatar

Did you ever see this^ second reply? Anyway, I've hoped to get back to you, Mr. Max.... I'm not up to date at this point with your various content so don't know what you know.... At the moment, I just want to stress to you what "health security" is/is not (besides bullcrap). I asked Grok to do the job; here is the link to its answer: https://x.com/i/grok/share/QbNQH6YQJLYBcGifhZm8HVZl2

Expand full comment
Max Lacour's avatar

Thanks, Mdm—I'm currently into looking into other things than biosecurity at the moment but I will return to it and hope to write more extensively about it at some point.

Expand full comment