Spawn Of DARPA: ARPA-H Is Fast Track To Digital Dictatorship

Please Share This Story!
Biden intends to appoint Dr. Reenee Wegrzyn, a former scientist with DARPA, as the inaugural director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H). Her specialties are synthetic biology, genetic engineering and data collection through biosurveillance. ARPA-H will be a swarming hive for Transhumanist scientists and projects. ‚ĀÉ TN Editor

Last Wednesday, President Biden was widely praised in¬†mainstream¬†and¬†health-care‚Äďfocused media¬†for his call to create a ‚Äúnew biomedical research agency‚ÄĚ modeled after the US military‚Äôs ‚Äúhigh-risk, high-reward‚ÄĚ Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA. As touted by the president, the agency would seek to develop ‚Äúinnovative‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúbreakthrough‚ÄĚ treatments for cancer, Alzheimer‚Äôs disease, and diabetes, with a call to ‚Äúend cancer as we know it.‚ÄĚ

Far from ‚Äúending cancer‚ÄĚ in the way most Americans might envision it, the proposed agency would merge ‚Äúnational security‚ÄĚ with ‚Äúhealth security‚ÄĚ in such as way as to use both physical and mental health ‚Äúwarning signs‚ÄĚ to prevent outbreaks of disease or violence before they occur. Such a system is a recipe for a technocratic ‚Äúpre-crime‚ÄĚ organization with the potential to criminalize both mental and physical illness as well as ‚Äúwrongthink.‚ÄĚ

The Biden administration has asked Congress for $6.5 billion to fund the agency, which would be largely guided by Biden‚Äôs recently confirmed top science adviser, Eric Lander. Lander, formerly the head of the Silicon Valley‚Äďdominated Broad Institute,¬†has been controversial¬†for his ties to eugenicist and child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and his relatively recent praise for James Watson, an overtly racist eugenicist. Despite that, Lander is set to be confirmed by the Senate and Congress and is reportedly significantly enthusiastic about the proposed new ‚Äúhealth DARPA.‚ÄĚ

This new agency, set to be called ARPA-H or HARPA, would be housed within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and would raise the NIH budget to over $51 billion. Unlike other agencies at NIH, ARPA-H would differ in that the projects it funds would not be peer reviewed prior to approval; instead hand-picked program managers would make all funding decisions. Funding would also take the form of milestone-driven payments instead of the more traditional multiyear grants.

ARPA-H will likely heavily fund and promote mRNA vaccines as one of the ‚Äúbreakthroughs‚ÄĚ that will cure cancer. Some of the mRNA vaccine manufacturers that have produced some of the most widely used COVID-19 vaccines, such as the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine,¬†stated just last month¬†that ‚Äúcancer is the next problem to tackle with mRNA tech‚ÄĚ post-COVID. BioNTech¬†has been developing¬†mRNA gene therapies for cancer for years and is collaborating with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to create mRNA-based treatments for tuberculosis and HIV.

Other ‚Äúinnovative‚ÄĚ technologies that will be a focus of this agency are less well known to the public and arguably more concerning.

The Long Road to ARPA-H

ARPA-H is not a new and exclusive Biden administration idea; there was a previous attempt to create a ‚Äúhealth DARPA‚ÄĚ during the Trump administration in late 2019. Biden began to promote the idea during his presidential campaign as early as June 2019, albeit using a very different justification for the agency than what had been pitched by its advocates to Trump. In 2019, the same foundation and individuals currently backing Biden‚Äôs ARPA-H had urged then president Trump to create ‚ÄúHARPA,‚ÄĚ not for the main purpose of researching treatments for cancer and Alzheimer‚Äôs, but to stop mass shootings before they happen through the monitoring of Americans for ‚Äúneuropsychiatric‚ÄĚ warning signs.

Still from HARPA‚Äôs video ‚ÄúThe Patients Are Waiting: How HARPA Will Change Lives Now‚ÄĚ, Source:

For the last few years, one man has been¬†the driving force¬†behind HARPA‚ÄĒformer vice chair of General Electric and former president of NBCUniversal, Robert Wright. Through the Suzanne Wright Foundation (named for his late wife), Wright¬†has spent years¬†lobbying for an agency that ‚Äúwould develop biomedical capabilities‚ÄĒdetection tools, treatments, medical devices, cures, etc.‚ÄĒfor the millions of Americans who are not benefitting from the current system.‚ÄĚ While he, like Biden, has cloaked the agency‚Äôs actual purpose by claiming it will be mainly focused on treating cancer, Wright‚Äôs 2019 proposal to his personal friend Donald Trump revealed its underlying ambitions.

As first proposed by Wright in 2019, the flagship program of HARPA would be¬†SAFE HOME, short for Stopping Aberrant Fatal Events by Helping Overcome Mental Extremes. SAFE HOME would suck up masses of private data from ‚ÄúApple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo, and Google Home‚ÄĚ and other consumer electronic devices, as well as information from health-care providers to determine if an individual might be likely to commit a crime. The data would be analyzed by artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms ‚Äúfor early diagnosis of neuropsychiatric violence.‚ÄĚ

The Department of Justice‚Äôs¬†pre-crime approach known as DEEP¬†was activated just months before Trump left office; it was also justified as a way to ‚Äústop mass shootings before they happen.‚ÄĚ Soon after Biden‚Äôs inauguration, the new administration began using information from social media to¬†make pre-crime arrests¬†as part of its approach toward combatting ‚Äúdomestic terror.‚ÄĚ Given the history of Silicon Valley companies collaborating with the government on¬†matters of warrantless surveillance, it appears that aspects of SAFE HOME may already be covertly active under Biden, only waiting for the formalization of ARPA-H/HARPA to be legitimized as public policy.

The national-security applications of Robert Wright‚Äôs HARPA are also illustrated by the man who was its lead scientific adviser‚ÄĒformer head of DARPA‚Äôs Biological Technologies Office Geoffrey Ling. Not only is Ling the main scientific adviser of HARPA, but¬†the original proposal¬†by Wright would have Ling both personally design HARPA and lead it once it was established. Ling‚Äôs work at DARPA can be summarized by BTO‚Äôs stated mission, which is to work toward merging ‚Äúbiology, engineering, and computer science to harness the power of natural systems for national security.‚ÄĚ BTO-favored technologies are also poised to be the mainstays of HARPA, which¬†plans to specifically use¬†‚Äúadvancements in biotechnology, supercomputing, big data, and artificial intelligence‚ÄĚ to accomplish its goals.

The direct DARPA connection to HARPA underscores that the agenda behind this coming agency dates back to the failed Bio-Surveillance project of DARPA‚Äôs Total Information Awareness program, which was launched after the events of September 11, 2001. TIA‚Äôs¬†Bio-Surveillance project¬†sought to develop the ‚Äúnecessary information technologies and resulting prototype capable of detecting the covert release of a biological pathogen automatically, and significantly earlier than traditional approaches,‚ÄĚ accomplishing this ‚Äúby monitoring non-traditional data sources‚ÄĚ including ‚Äúpre-diagnostic medical data‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúbehavioral indicators.‚ÄĚ

While nominally focused on ‚Äúbioterrorist attacks,‚ÄĚ TIA‚Äôs Bio-Surveillance project also sought to acquire early detection capabilities for ‚Äúnormal‚ÄĚ disease outbreaks. Bio-Surveillance and related DARPA projects at the time, such as LifeLog, sought to harvest data through the mass use of some sort of wearable or handheld technology. These DARPA programs were ultimately shut down due to the controversy over claims they would be used to profile domestic dissidents and eliminate privacy for all Americans in the US.

That DARPA’s past total surveillance dragnet is coming back to life under a supposedly separate health-focused agency, and one that emulates its organizational model no less, confirms that many TIA-related programs were merely distanced from the Department of Defense when officially shut down. By separating the military from the public image of such technologies and programs, it made them more palatable to the masses, despite the military remaining heavily involved behind the scenes. As Unlimited Hangout has recently reported, major aspects of TIA were merely privatized, giving rise to companies such as Facebook and Palantir, which resulted in such DARPA projects being widely used and accepted. Now, under the guise of the proposed ARPA-H, DARPA’s original TIA would essentially be making a comeback for all intents and purposes as its own spin-off.

Silicon Valley, the Military and the Wearable ‚ÄúRevolution‚ÄĚ

This most recent effort to create ARPA-H/HARPA combines well with the coordinated push of Silicon Valley companies into the field of health care, specifically Silicon Valley companies that double as contractors to US intelligence and/or the military (e.g., Microsoft, Google, and Amazon). During the COVID-19 crisis, this trend toward Silicon Valley dominance of the health-care sector has accelerated considerably due to a top-down push toward digitalization with telemedicine, remote monitoring, and the like.

One interesting example is Amazon, which launched a wearable last year that purports to not only use biometrics to monitor people’s physical health and fitness but to track their emotional state as well. The previous year, Amazon acquired the online pharmacy PillPack, and it is not hard to imagine a scenario in which data from Amazon’s Halo wellness band is used to offer treatment recommendations that are then supplied by Amazon-owned PillPack.

Companies such as Amazon, Palantir, and Google are set to be intimately involved in ARPA-H’s activities. In particular, Google, which launched numerous health-tech initiatives in 2020, is set to have a major role in this new agency due to its long-standing ties to the Obama administration when Biden was vice president and to President Biden’s top science adviser, Eric Lander.

As mentioned, Lander is poised to play a major role in ARPA-H/HARPA if and when it materializes. Before becoming the top scientist in the country, Lander was president and founding director of the Broad Institute. While advertised as a partnership between MIT and Harvard, the Broad Institute is heavily influenced by Silicon Valley, with two former Google executives on its board, a partner of Silicon Valley venture capital firm Greylock Partners, and the former CEO of IBM, as well as some of its top endowments coming from prominent tech executives.

The Broad Institute, Source:

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who was¬†intimately involved with Obama‚Äôs 2012 reelection campaign¬†and who is close to the Democratic Party in general, chairs the Broad Institute as of this April. In March, Schmidt¬†gave the institute $150 million¬†to ‚Äúconnect biology and machine learning for understanding programs of life.‚ÄĚ During his time on the Broad Institute board, Schmidt¬†also chaired¬†the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, a group of mostly Silicon Valley, intelligence, and military operatives who¬†have now charted the direction¬†of the US government‚Äôs policies on emerging tech and AI. Schmidt¬†was also pitched¬†as potential head of a tech-industry task force by the Biden administration.

Earlier, in January, the Broad Institute announced that its health-research platform, Terra, which was built with Google subsidiary Verily, would partner with Microsoft. As a result, Terra now allows Google and Microsoft to access a vast trove of genomic data that is poured into the platform by academics and research institutions from around the world.

In addition, last September, Google teamed up with the Department of Defense as part of a new AI-driven ‚Äúpredictive health‚ÄĚ program that also has links to the US intelligence community. While initially focused on predicting cancer cases, this initiative clearly plans to expand to predicting the onset of other diseases before symptoms appear, including COVID-19.¬†As noted by¬†Unlimited Hangout¬†at the time, one of the ulterior motives for the program, from Google‚Äôs perspective, was for Google to gain access to ‚Äúthe largest repository of disease- and cancer-related medical data in the world,‚ÄĚ which is held by the Defense Health Agency. Having exclusive access to this data is a huge boon for Google in its effort to develop and expand its growing suite of AI health-care products.

The military is currently being used to pilot COVID-19‚Äďrelated biometric wearables for ‚Äúreturning to work safely.‚ÄĚ Last December, it was¬†announced that¬†Hill Air Force Base in Utah would make biometric wearables a mandatory part of the uniform for some squadrons. For example, the airmen of the Air Force‚Äôs 649th Munitions Squadron must now wear a smart watch made by Garmin and a smart ring made by Oura as part of their uniform.

According to¬†the Air Force, these devices detect biometric indicators that are then analyzed for 165 different biomarkers by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency/Philips Healthcare AI algorithm that ‚Äúattempts to recognize an infection or virus around 48 hours before the onset of symptoms.‚ÄĚ The development of that algorithm began¬†well before the COVID-19 crisis¬†and is a recent iteration of a series of military research projects that appear to have begun¬†under the 2007 DARPA Predicting Health and Disease (PHD) project.

While of interest to the military, these wearables are primarily intended for mass use‚ÄĒa big step toward the infrastructure needed for the resurrection of a bio-surveillance program to be run by the national-security state. Starting first with the military makes sense from the national-security apparatus‚Äôs perspective, as the ability to monitor biometric data, including emotions, has obvious appeal for those managing the recently expanded ‚Äúinsider threat‚ÄĚ programs in¬†the military¬†and the¬†Department of Homeland Security.

One indicator of the push for mass use is that the same Oura smart ring being used by the Air Force was also recently¬†utilized by the NBA¬†to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks among basketball players. Prior to COVID-19, it was promoted for consumer use by¬†members of the British Royal family¬†and Twitter CEO¬†Jack Dorsey¬†for improving sleep. As recently as last Monday, Oura‚Äôs CEO, Harpeet Rai, said that the entire future of wearable health tech will soon be ‚Äúproactive rather than reactive‚ÄĚ because it will focus on predicting disease based on biometric data obtained from wearables in real time.

Another wearable tied to the military that is creeping into mass use is the BioButton and its predecessor the BioSticker. Produced by the company¬†BioIntelliSense, the sleek new BioButton is advertised as a wearable system that is ‚Äúa scalable and cost-effective solution for COVID-19 symptom monitoring at school, home and work.‚ÄĚ BioIntelliSense¬†received $2.8 million¬†from the Pentagon last December to develop the BioButton and BioSticker wearables for COVID-19.

BioIntelliSense CEO James Mault poses with the company’s BioSticker wearable. Source:

BioIntelliSense, cofounded and led by former Microsoft HealthVault developer James Mault, now has its wearable sensors being rolled out for widespread use on some college campuses and at some US hospitals. In some of those instances, the company’s wearables are being used to specifically monitor the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine as opposed to symptoms of COVID-19 itself. BioIntelliSense is currently running a study, partnered with Philips Healthcare and the University of Colorado, on the use of its wearables for early COVID-19 detection, which is entirely funded by the US military.

While the use of these wearables is currently ‚Äúencouraged but optional‚ÄĚ at these pilot locations, could there come a time when they are mandated in a workplace or by a government? It would not be unheard of, as¬†several countries¬†have already required foreign arrivals to be monitored through use of a wearable during a mandatory quarantine period. Saint Lucia is¬†currently using BioButton¬†for this purpose. Singapore, which seeks to be among the first ‚Äúsmart nations‚ÄĚ in the world,¬†has given every single one of its residents¬†a wearable called a ‚ÄúTraceTogether token‚ÄĚ for its contact-tracing program. Either the wearable token or the TraceTogether smartphone app is mandatory for all workplaces, shopping malls, hotels, schools, health-care facilities, grocery stores, and hair salons. Those without access to a smartphone are expected to use the ‚Äúfree‚ÄĚ government-issued wearable token.

The Era of Digital Dictatorships Is Nearly Here

Making mandatory wearables the new normal not just for COVID-19 prevention but for monitoring health in general would institutionalize quarantining people who have no symptoms of an illness but only an opaque algorithm‚Äôs determination that vital signs indicate ‚Äúabnormal‚ÄĚ activity.

Given that no AI is 100 percent accurate and that AI is only as good as the data it is trained on, such a system would be guaranteed to make regular errors: the question is how many. One AI algorithm being used to ‚Äúpredict COVID-19 outbreaks‚ÄĚ in Israel and some US states is marketed by Diagnostic Robotics; the (likely inflated) accuracy rate the company provides for its product is¬†only 73¬†percent. That means, by the company‚Äôs own admission, their AI is wrong 27 percent of the time. Probably, it is even less accurate, as the 73 percent figure has never been independently verified.

Adoption of these technologies has benefitted from the COVID-19 crisis, as supporters are seizing the opportunity to accelerate their introduction. As a result, their use will soon become ubiquitous if this advancing agenda continues unimpeded.

Though this push for wearables is obvious now, signs of this agenda were visible several years ago. In 2018, for instance, insurer John Hancock¬†announced that¬†it would replace its life insurance offerings with ‚Äúinteractive policies‚ÄĚ that involve individuals having their health monitored by commercial health wearables. Prior to that announcement, John Hancock and other insurers such as Aetna, Cigna, and UnitedHealthcare¬†offered various rewards for policyholders¬†who wore a fitness wearable and shared that data with their insurance company.

In another pre-COVID example, the¬†Journal of the American Medical Association¬†published an article¬†in August 2019 that claimed that wearables ‚Äúencourage healthy behaviors and empower individuals to participate in their health.‚ÄĚ The authors of the article, who are affiliated with Harvard, further claimed that ‚Äúincentivizing use of these devices [wearables] by integrating them in insurance policies‚ÄĚ may be an ‚Äúattractive‚ÄĚ policy approach. The use of wearables for policyholders has since been heavily promoted¬†by the insurance industry, both prior to and after COVID-19, and some speculate that health insurers could soon mandate their use in certain cases or as a broader policy.

These biometric ‚Äúfitness‚ÄĚ devices‚ÄĒsuch as Amazon‚Äôs Halo‚ÄĒcan monitor more than your physical vital signs, however, as they can also monitor your emotional state. ARPA-H/HARPA‚Äôs flagship SAFE HOME program reveals that the ability to monitor thoughts and feelings is an already existing goal of those seeking to establish this new agency.

According to World Economic Forum luminary and historian Yuval Noah Harari, the transition to ‚Äúdigital dictatorships‚ÄĚ will have a¬†‚Äúbig watershed‚ÄĚ moment¬†once governments ‚Äústart monitoring and surveying what is happening inside your body and inside your brain.‚ÄĚ He says that the mass adoption of such technology would make human beings ‚Äúhackable animals,‚ÄĚ while those who abstain from having this technology on or in their bodies would become part of a new ‚Äúuseless‚ÄĚ class. Harari has also asserted that biometric wearables will someday be used by governments to target individuals who have the ‚Äúwrong‚ÄĚ emotional reactions to government leaders.

Unsurprisingly, one of Harari‚Äôs biggest fans, Facebook‚Äôs Mark Zuckerberg, has recently led his company into the development of a¬†comprehensive biometric and ‚Äúneural‚ÄĚ wearable¬†based on technology from a ‚Äúneural interface‚ÄĚ start-up that Facebook acquired in 2019. Per Facebook, the wearable ‚Äúwill integrate with AR [augmented reality], VR [virtual reality], and human neural signals‚ÄĚ and is set to become commercially available soon. Facebook also notably owns the VR company Oculus Rift, whose founder, Palmer Luckey, now runs the US military AI contractor Anduril.

As¬†recently reported, Facebook was shaped in its early days to be a private-sector replacement for DARPA‚Äôs controversial LifeLog program, which sought to both ‚Äúhumanize‚ÄĚ AI and build profiles on domestic dissidents and terror suspects. LifeLog was also promoted by DARPA as ‚Äúsupporting medical research and the early detection of an emerging pandemic.‚ÄĚ

It appears that current trends and events show that DARPA‚Äôs decades-long effort to merge ‚Äúhealth security‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúnational security‚ÄĚ have now advanced further than ever before. This may partially be because Bill Gates, who has wielded significant influence over health policy globally in the last year, is a long-time advocate of fusing health security and national security to thwart both pandemics and ‚Äúbioterrorists‚ÄĚ before they can strike, as can be heard in¬†his 2017 speech¬†delivered at that year‚Äôs Munich Security Conference. That same year, Gates¬†also publicly urged¬†the US military to ‚Äúfocus more training on preparing to fight a global pandemic or bioterror attack.‚ÄĚ

In the merging of ‚Äúnational security‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúhealth security,‚ÄĚ any decision or mandate promulgated as a public health measure could be justified as necessary for ‚Äúnational security,‚ÄĚ much in the same way that the mass abuses and war crimes that occurred during the post-9/11 ‚Äúwar on terror‚ÄĚ were similarly justified by ‚Äúnational security‚ÄĚ with little to no oversight. Yet, in this case, instead of only losing our civil liberties and control over our external lives, we stand to lose sovereignty over our individual bodies.

The NIH, which would house this new ARPA-H/HARPA,¬†has spent hundreds of millions of dollars¬†experimenting with the use of wearables since 2015, not only for detecting disease symptoms but also for monitoring individuals‚Äô diets and illegal drug consumption. Biden played a key part in that project, known as¬†the Precision Medicine initiative, and¬†separately highlighted¬†the use of wearables in cancer patients as part of the Obama administration‚Äôs related¬†Cancer Moonshot¬†program. The third Obama-era health-research project was the NIH‚Äôs¬†BRAIN initiative, which was launched, among other things, to ‚Äúdevelop tools to record, mark, and manipulate precisely defined neurons in the living brain‚ÄĚ that are determined to be linked to an ‚Äúabnormal‚ÄĚ function or a neurological disease. These initiatives took place at a time when Eric Lander¬†was the cochair¬†of Obama‚Äôs Council of Advisors on Science and Technology while still leading the Broad Institute. It is hardly a coincidence that Eric Lander is now Biden‚Äôs top science adviser, elevated to a new cabinet-level position and set to guide the course of ARPA-H/HARPA.

Thus, Biden’s newly announced agency, if approved by Congress, would integrate those past Obama-era initiatives with Orwellian applications under one roof, but with even less oversight than before. It would also seek to expand and mainstream the uses of these technologies and potentially move toward developing policies that would mandate their use.

If ARPA-H/HARPA is approved by Congress and ultimately established, it will be used to resurrect dangerous and long-standing agendas of the national-security state and its Silicon Valley contractors, creating a ‚Äúdigital dictatorship‚ÄĚ that threatens human freedom, human society, and potentially the very definition of what it means to be human.

Read full story here…

About the Editor

Patrick Wood
Patrick Wood is a leading and critical expert on Sustainable Development, Green Economy, Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda and historic Technocracy. He is the author of Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation (2015) and co-author of Trilaterals Over Washington, Volumes I and II (1978-1980) with the late Antony C. Sutton.
Notify of

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Just say no

Refuse to patronize the medical system.

[…] Spawn Of DARPA: ARPA-H Is Fast Track To Digital Dictatorship […]