Let's talk about SPARS 2025 and their use of conspiracy theorists.

I hope this gets far and wide. It needs to.

Here’s a summary + analysis of the SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028 scenario (Johns Hopkins / Center for Health Security) - including what it says about societal changes and the role of conspiracy theories.

Here is the PDF link: The SPARS Pandemic, 2025-2028: A Futuristic Scenario for Public Health Risk Communicators (PDF)

I raise this simulation as in the UK a new intelligence agency is being created for surveillance of “anti-migrant” posts. A software. I’m raising a judicial review and a claim against the intelligence agency, and the Home Office for multiple breaches of multiple laws. It is my belief that the script may have switched and we are seeing what are possibly false flags but certainly politicised events. Surveillance is the intended outcome but I also believe DEI is also intended.

---

What is SPARS?

• Title: The SPARS Pandemic, 2025-2028: A Futuristic Scenario for Public Health Risk Communicators.

• Purpose: It’s a fictional scenario / tabletop exercise designed to help public health communicators, emergency planners, researchers etc. to think through communication dilemmas that might emerge in a future pandemic involving novel pathogens and medical countermeasures (e.g. vaccines, new drugs)

• Not a prediction. It is stated as hypothetical, meant to allow rehearsal, anticipating surprises, and improving preparedness.

---

Key elements of the scenario

Here are the core features and storyline of SPARS, especially those relevant to societal change and communication:

1. Timeline & Pathogen

   • SPARS is a novel coronavirus first identified in St. Paul, Minnesota in 2025.

   • Initially it causes illness among returning travellers, with no known tests, no treatments, no vaccine. Over time, medical countermeasures are developed (some repurposed drugs, later vaccine) but there are delays, concerns, misinformation, etc.

2. Societal / Communication Context

   • The world is highly fragmented socially, politically, and culturally. There’s widespread use of information technology (internet, social media) but the fragmentation means many people live in echo chambers (i.e. isolated information environments reinforcing existing beliefs)

   • Distrust in institutions, government agencies and experts exists or emerges, especially as the scenario unfolds. Communication is uneven; different communities respond differently.

3. Communication Dilemmas & Challenges
   Some of the dilemmas posed include:

   • How to communicate uncertainty (e.g. about side-effects, vaccine efficacy, logistics) without losing public trust.

   • How to manage misinformation and rumors, particularly via social media or informal channels.

   • Prioritization and fairness in distribution of medical countermeasures; which groups get what, in what order, and how that is perceived.

   • Dealing with vaccine hesitancy, resistance, fear of medical countermeasures; questions about safety, side-effects.

4. Recovery
   The scenario also covers the recovery phase (once medical countermeasures are more available) and continuing communication issues - e.g. dealing with lingering distrust, managing expectations, long-term uptake of vaccines etc.

---

What it says about Societal Changes

From SPARS, some projected or illustrative societal changes are:

• Fragmentation & Polarization
  Social and political divisions intensify in crisis. Information ecosystems are splintered; different groups believe very different things about the pandemic, its cause, the response, and countermeasures. Echo chambers amplify beliefs and distrust.

• Role of Technology / Information Overload
  More people have access to information (including false or misleading), so speed of communications, rumor, misinformation etc. increases. The scenario suggests communication channels proliferate, but reliable communication becomes harder.

• Evolving expectations of public authorities
  The public demands transparency, quick data, safety, etc. Delays or missteps in messaging, or contradictions, can damage trust. Authorities must anticipate and plan for that.

• Unequal impacts
  Some communities are more vulnerable, either because of pre-existing health disparities, or because of less trust / lower access to accurate information, or because they are more resistant to medical countermeasures due to cultural, historical, political reasons. Distribution and equity become critical issues.

---

What it says about Conspiracy Theorists / Conspiracy Theories

SPARS doesn’t treat conspiracy theorists as just fringe caricatures; it builds them in as part of the scenario dynamics. Some points:

• Misinformation and Rumors are natural/expected components. The scenario shows how rumors about the origin of SPARS, about side-effects of treatments or vaccines, about motives of authorities will arise.

• Distrust and Fear feed into conspiracy beliefs. In times of uncertainty (e.g. when side effects unknown, when vaccine is fast-tracked), people may suspect nefarious intentions. The scenario suggests that if risk communicators are not careful and transparent, those fears can get worse.

• Echo Chambers make conspiratorial beliefs more persistent. Because like-minded people share and reinforce beliefs, contradictory evidence or official messaging may not penetrate (or be accepted).

• Effect on Uptake of Medical Countermeasures: The scenario suggests conspiracy theories or distrust lead to delays or refusals of vaccination or treatments, which prolong the pandemic, make distribution less efficient, etc. Also, they force public health communicators to spend resources reacting to falsehoods rather than focusing solely on more direct public health work.

• Policy & Messaging Impact: Because conspiracy theories create complication, authorities need proactive and thoughtful messaging; anticipating what kinds of rumors might spread; thinking about transparency, fairness, and how decisions/policies are communicated. SPARS emphasises the importance of communication strategies that are agile, honest about uncertainty, and responsive to public concerns.