Brownstone » Brownstone Journal » Government » The “One Health” Agenda
The "One Health" Agenda

The “One Health” Agenda


In my previous articles, we looked at the global war on farmers, the organizations pushing for the Great Food Reset, the tactics used to foist these changes on the public, the projects underway to remove your access to healthy, farm-fresh foods, and the mRNA, RNA, and DNA gene therapies entering our food supply. 

In today’s installment, we will examine the One Health agenda and how it threatens to destroy both food freedom and medical freedom. 

The term “One Health” was coined after the first SARS outbreak in the early 2000s to reflect the danger of new diseases emerging from human-animal contact. It refers to the idea of public health being not just about your health but also about animal and “planetary” health. It is framed in language designed to sound appealing and holistic. Embedded within it is the assumption that, because planetary health is at stake, there must be a global governing body with control over all plants, animals, and human beings to guard this “one health” and to “sustainably balance the health of people, animals, and ecosystems,” with equity between prioritizing animals, the environment, and your personal health. 

The One Health concept has incredibly dangerous ramifications which should be apparent when you consider who is pushing it: the WHO, the World Bank, Bill Gates, the Rockefeller Foundation, the NIH, the CDC, USDA, FDA, and every other Covid culprit you can think of. 

It includes a sick twist on the adage “Let your food be your medicine” – plans for doctors to write grocery prescriptions – which sounds good until you consider that the prescriptions will be based not just on what is good for you, but on what the medical establishment determines would benefit the planet. Mull over what the elites are actively eliminating from the food supply, as well as the food-adjacent substances they are adding. Consider the brainwashing of most doctors during Covid, and their refusal to recommend basic health supplements, sunshine, Vitamin D, or effective early treatment, instead leaving their patients at the mercy of remdesivir, ventilators, and mRNA shots. If you don’t love the idea of cricket meal and vaccine lettuce prescriptions, this agenda should raise your eyebrows.

It also raises the disturbing specter of healthcare being rationed or withheld on the grounds that your health needs are outweighed by environmental needs. When you consider the explicit Malthusian beliefs of the globalists, such an idea carries untold risk. The managers of society clearly believe that the planet’s ecosystems would benefit from a reduction in the number of peasants, and this new health paradigm allows them to factor that dogma into the decision of whether you deserve life-saving care, the right to opt out of vaccination, the right to real, natural food, or life at all. 

In Canada, the number of peasants is already being reduced quite effectively. In Quebec alone, more than 6.1 percent of deaths in 2022 came from the government’s euthanasia program, called Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID). Euthanasia is the sixth leading cause of death in Canada; it claims almost as many lives per year as Covid supposedly did in 2020. Canada has plans to expand the program to allow minors under the age of eighteen and mentally ill individuals to consent to physician-assisted death. Disabled and impoverished Canadians report being denied necessary medical care, but being offered suicide instead – including paralympian and veteran Christine Gauthier, who applied for a wheelchair lift but was instead offered death.

Beyond medical care, It is hard to imagine any aspect of your life that would not come under the purview of the one health framework. If the health of animals, people, and the environment are all to be weighed equally, the agenda goes far beyond the doctor’s office. Where you live, where you can travel, what you buy, how you can spend your money, and what you can eat would all fall under this totalitarian biosecurity system.

Think about this combined with central bank digital currencies, or CBDCs, a system already rolling out in other countries and planned for launch here in the United States. Under this system, all money is digital and centrally controlled. The federal government can program your money so you can only spend it on approved items. Your grocery prescription of insect powder and mRNA-laced vegetables may become mandatory unless you have already established an alternate food supply with the option to pay in an independent currency.

Certainly, not all of this has been launched yet. But if Covid taught us anything, it’s that the framework for our oppression is developed before it is mandated. Why fund experiments with mRNA in lettuce and gene therapy milk unless you intend to use food as a vehicle for genetic manipulation of the masses? Why track food purchases with a stated goal of cutting the consumption of red meat, dairy, fish, and eggs, unless you plan to control what people buy? And what will replace these healthy proteins – GMO soy burgers? Military plastic waste protein powder? Insects? Bioengineered tracking spores so society’s managers know exactly what the peasants are eating? 

Take all this in the context of the crackdown on farmers around the world, including here in the United States, then factor in the emerging One Health biosecurity control grid married to the central bank digital currencies, social credit scores, and personal carbon footprints, and the full picture emerges: the controlled demolition of the current food supply and freedom as we know it, to replace it with a global, centralized, fully surveilled, and tightly controlled system where the peasants subsist on industrially processed so-called foods, in which your medical care is based on what the Malthusians say is good for the planet, using climate change and planetary health as the excuse.

If you care about medical freedom, you must see by now that food freedom and medical freedom are two sides of the same coin, and if we don’t protect both, we will lose everything. Diet, injections, and injunctions: we need to reject their plans on all three.

So what can we do about it?

The good news is that there are many things we can do. We will explore our options in my next article.

Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.


  • Tracy Thurman

    Tracy Thurman is an advocate for regenerative farming, food sovereignty, decentralized food systems, and medical freedom. She works with the Barnes Law Firm's public interest division to safeguard the right to purchase food directly from farmers without government interference.

    View all posts

Donate Today

Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work.

Subscribe to Brownstone for More News

Stay Informed with Brownstone Institute