Following the USA's example, the government of Argentina has also announced plans to withdraw from the World Health Organization, citing that body's mismanagement of the Covid-19 pandemic.
February 5, 2025 - "Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, has followed Donald Trump’s example and announced that Argentina will also leave the World Health Organization (WHO). Milei attributed his decision to the WHO’s management of the Covid-19 pandemic, which he described as a 'caveman quarantine that involved … one of the most outlandish crimes against humanity in history'.
"A self-declared 'anarcho-capitalist', Milei is a prominent fan of Trump, who within hours of his 20 January inauguration signed an order for the United States to withdraw from the WHO, which he also has criticized for its handling of the pandemic.
“'We have decided to leave such a harmful organisation, which was the executing arm of what was the largest social-control experiment in history,' wrote Milei on social media. But critics said that the decision was not Milei’s to make, as such a move would require approval by congress.... Milei’s spokesperson, Manuel Adorni, argued that the decision would not result in a loss of funding for the country....
"Also on Wednesday, the presidential office announced that Milei had taken the decision to ban gender change treatments and surgeries for minors, as well as impose limits on trans women being housed inside women’s prisons. In a press conference, presidential spokesperson Manuel Adorni said the ban would include hormone therapy and followed similar pushbacks in legislation on trans rights in countries such as the UK, Sweden, Finland and the US, and sought to protect children’s mental health.
"The announcement comes days after thousands of Argentines protested in favour of LGBTQ+ rights after Milei made a speech in Davos, Switzerland, in which he questioned 'feminism, diversity, inclusion, abortion, environmentalism and gender ideology”, calling progressive policies a “cancer that must be extirpated'....
"Milei has frequently voiced criticism of international bodies, but many critics interpreted Wednesday’s decision to withdraw from the WHO as an attempt to align himself even more closely with the US president.... Following Trump’s lead, the libertarian has also announced plans to leave the Paris climate agreement and build a 200m wire fence along the border with Bolivia to curb immigration....
"In November, Milei visited Palm Beach, Florida, and became the first foreign leader to meet with Trump after his election victory. The Argentinian was one of three Latin American presidents to attend Trump’s inauguration at the Capitol, alongside El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele and Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa.
"Since taking office, Milei has implemented a series of austerity measures in state healthcare, the latest of which included 1,400 layoffs at the ministry of health in January – among them, 30% of the vaccine directorate staff, and 40% of the HIV, hepatitis and tuberculosis response directorate team."
On January 20 President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order giving notice that the United States was withdrawing from the World Health Organization (WHO), referencing the organization's mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic, and pulling out of negotiations on the proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement.
January 20, 2025 - "By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Purpose. The United States noticed its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2020 due to the organization’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states. In addition, the WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries’ assessed payments. China, with a population of 1.4 billion, has 300 percent of the population of the United States, yet contributes nearly 90 percent less to the WHO.
Sec. 2. Actions. (a) The United States intends to withdraw from the WHO. The Presidential Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations signed on January 20, 2021, that retracted the United States’ July 6, 2020, notification of withdrawal is revoked.
(b) Executive Order 13987 of January 25, 2021 (Organizing and Mobilizing the United States Government to Provide a Unified and Effective Response to Combat COVID–19 and to Provide United States Leadership on Global Health and Security), is revoked.
(c) The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs shall establish directorates and coordinating mechanisms within the National Security Council apparatus as he deems necessary and appropriate to safeguard public health and fortify biosecurity.
(d) The Secretary of State and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall take appropriate measures, with all practicable speed, to:
(i) pause the future transfer of any United States Government funds, support, or resources to the WHO;
(ii) recall and reassign United States Government personnel or contractors working in any capacity with the WHO; and
(iii) identify credible and transparent United States and international partners to assume necessary activities previously undertaken by the WHO.
(e) The Director of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy shall review, rescind, and replace the 2024 U.S. Global Health Security Strategy as soon as practicable.
Sec. 3. Notification. The Secretary of State shall immediately inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations, any other applicable depositary, and the leadership of the WHO of the withdrawal.
Sec. 4. Global System Negotiations. While withdrawal is in progress, the Secretary of State will cease negotiations on the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the amendments to the International Health Regulations, and actions taken to effectuate such agreement and amendments will have no binding force on the United States.
Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person."
The global Covid response was destructive to public trust, economic vitality, citizen health, free speech, literacy, religious and travel freedom, elite credibility, demographic longevity, and more. Five years later, the postwar neo-liberal world order itself seems to be in danger.
October 20, 2024 - "The global Covid response was the turning point in public trust, economic vitality, citizen health, free speech, literacy, religious and travel freedom, elite credibility, demographic longevity, and so much more. Now five years following the initial spread of the virus that provoked the largest-scale despotisms of our lives, something else seems to be biting the dust: the postwar neoliberal consensus itself.
"The world as we knew it only a decade ago is on fire, precisely as Henry Kissinger warned in one of his last published articles. Nations are erecting new trade barriers and dealing with citizen uprisings like we’ve never seen before, some peaceful, some violent, and most that could go either way. On the other side of this upheaval lies the answer to the great question: what does political revolution look like in advanced industrial economies with democratic institutions? We are in the process of finding out.
"Let’s take a quick march through modern history through the lens of US-China relations. From the time of China’s opening in the 1980s to the election of Donald Trump in 2016, the volume of trade imports from China only grew, decade after decade. It was the most conspicuous sign of a general trajectory toward globalism that began following the Second World War and accelerated with the end of the Cold War. Tariffs and trade barriers fell ever more, as dollars as the world reserve currency filled the coffers of world central banks. The US was the global source of liquidity that made it all possible.
"It came at a huge cost, however, as the US through the decades lost its manufacturing advantages in dozens of industries that once defined the American commercial experience. Watches and clocks, pianos, furniture, textiles, clothing, steel, tools, shipbuilding, toys, household appliances, home electronics, and semiconductors all left US shores while other industries are on the rocks, most especially cars. Today, the much-celebrated 'green energy' industries seem fated to be outcompeted as well. These industries came to be largely replaced by debt-financed financial products, the explosion of the government-backed medical sector, information systems, entertainment, and government-funded education, while the primary exports of the US became debt and petroleum products.
"Many forces combined to sweep Donald Trump into office in 2016 but resentment against the internationalization of manufacturing was high among them. As financialization replaced domestic manufacturing, and class mobility stagnated, a political alignment took shape in the US that stunned the elites. Trump got busy on his pet issue, namely erecting trade barriers against countries with whom the US was running trade deficits, primarily China.
"By 2018, and in response to new tariffs, the volume of trade with China took its first huge hit, reversing not only a 40-year trajectory of growth but also dealing the first the biggest blow against the 70-year postwar consensus of the neo-liberal world. Trump was doing it largely on his own initiative and against the wishes of many generations of statesmen, diplomats, academics, and corporate elites.
"Then something happened to reverse the reversal. That something was the Covid response.... Trade with China soared. Within a matter of weeks, Americans were wearing Chinese-made synthetic coverings on their faces, having their noses stuck with Chinese-made swabs, and being tended to by nurses and doctors wearing Chinese-made scrubs.
The chart on China’s trade volume looks like this. You can observe the long rise, the dramatic fall from 2018, and the reversal in the volume of PPE purchases following the lockdowns and Kushner’s interventions. The reversal did not last long as trade relations broke down and new trade blocs were born.
"The irony, then, is a salient one: the aborted attempt to restart the neo-liberal order, if that is what it was, occurred in the midst of a global bout of totalitarian controls and restrictions. To what extent were the Covid lockdowns deployed in service of resisting Trump’s decoupling agenda? We have no answers to that question but observing the pattern does leave room for speculation.
"Regardless, the trends of 70 years came to be reversed, landing the US in new times, described by the Wall Street Journal in the event of a Trump victory in 2024:
If it turns out that the tariff on China is 60% and the rest of the world is 10%, the U.S.’ average tariff, weighted by the value of imports, would leap to 17% from 2.3% in 2023, and 1.5% in 2016, according to Evercore ISI, an investment bank. That would be the highest since the Great Depression, after Congress passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (1932), which triggered a global surge in trade barriers. U.S. tariffs would go from among the lowest to highest among major economies. If other countries retaliated, the rise in global trade barriers would have no modern precedent.
"Talk of the Smoot-Hawley tariff really does plunge us into the wayback machine. Back in those days, trade policy in the US followed the US Constitution (Article I, Section 8). The original system granted Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among other powers. This was intended to keep trade policy within the legislative branch to ensure democratic accountability. As a result, Congress responded to the economic/financial crisis by imposing huge barriers against imports. The Depression worsened.
"It was a widely accepted belief among many in elite circles that the 1932 tariffs were a factor in the deepening of the economic downturn. Two years later, efforts began to transfer trade authority to the executive so that the legislature would never do something so stupid again. The theory was that the president would be more likely to pursue a free-trade, low-tariff policy. That generation never imagined that the US would elect a president who would use his power to do the opposite.
"In the waning days of the Second World War, a group of extremely smart and well-intended diplomats, statesmen, and intellectuals worked to secure the peace in the aftermath of the wreckage in Europe and around the world. They all agreed that a priority in the postwar world was to institutionalize economic cooperation as broadly as possible, under the theory that nations that are dependent on each other for their material well-being were less likely to go to war against each other.
"Thus was born what came to be called the neo-liberal order. It consisted of democratic nations with limited welfare states cooperating in trading relationships with ever-lower barriers between states. In particular, the tariff was deprecated as a means of fiscal support and industrial protection. New agreements and institutions were founded to be the administrators of the new system: GATT, IMF, World Bank, and the UN.
"The neo-liberal order was never liberal in the traditional sense. It was managed from the outset by states under US dominance. The architecture was always more fragile than it appeared to be. The Bretton Woods agreement of 1944, tightened through the decades, involved nascent institutions of global banking and included a US-managed monetary system that broke down in 1971 and was replaced by a fiat-dollar system. The flaw in both systems had a similar root. They established global money but retained national fiscal and regulatory systems, which thereby disabled the specie-flow mechanisms that smoothed and balanced trade in the 19th century.
"One of the consequences was the manufacturing losses mentioned above, which coincided with a growing public perception that the institutions of government and finance were operating without transparency and citizen participation. The ballooning of the security state after 9-11 and the stunning bailouts of Wall Street after 2008 reinforced the point and set the stage for a populist revolt. The lockdowns – disproportionately benefitting elites – plus the burning of cities with the riots of the summer of 2020, the vaccine mandates, and combined with the onset of a migrant crisis, reinforced the point.
"In the US, the panic and frenzy all surround Trump but that leaves unexplained why almost every Western country is dealing with the same dynamic. Today the core political fight in the world today concerns nation-states and the populist movements driving them versus the kind of globalism that brought a worldwide response to the virus as well as the worldwide migrant crisis. Both efforts failed spectacularly, most especially the attempt to vaccinate the entire population with a shot that is only defended today by manufacturers and those in their pay.
"The problem of migration plus pandemic planning are only two of the latest data points but they both suggest an ominous reality of which many people in the world are newly aware. The nation-states that have dominated the political landscape since the Renaissance, and even back in some cases to the ancient world, had given way to a form of government we can call globalism. It doesn’t refer only to trade across borders. It is about political control, away from citizens in countries toward something else that citizens cannot control or influence.
"From the time of the Treaty of Westphalia, signed in 1648, the idea of state sovereignty prevailed in politics. Not every nation needed the same policies. They would respect differences toward the goal of peace. This involved permitting religious diversity among nation-states, a concession that led to an unfolding of freedom in other ways. All governance came to be organized around geographically restricted zones of control. The juridical boundaries restrained power.
"The idea of consent gradually came to dominate political affairs from the 18th through the 19th century until after the Great War which dismantled the last of the multinational empires. That left us with one model: the nation-state in which citizens exercised ultimate sovereignty over the regimes under which they live. The system worked but not everyone has been happy with it.
"Some of the most high-status intellectuals for centuries have dreamed of global government as a solution to the diversity of policies of nation-states. It’s the go-to idea for scientists and ethicists who are so convinced of the correctness of their ideas that they dream up some worldwide imposition of their favored solution. Humanity has by and large been wise enough not to attempt such a thing beyond military alliances and mechanisms to improve trade flows.
"Despite the failure of global management last century, in the 21st century, we’ve seen the intensification of the power of globalist institutions. The World Health Organization (WHO) effectively scripted the pandemic response for the world. Globalist foundations and NGOs seem to be heavily involved in the migrant crisis. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, created as nascent institutions for a global system of money and finance, are exercising outsized influence on monetary and financial policy. The World Trade Organization (WTO) is working to diminish the power of the nation-state over trade policies.
"Then there is the United Nations. I happened to be in New York City a few weeks ago when the United Nations met.... The attendees were not only statesmen from all over the world but also the biggest financial firms and media outfits, along with representatives of the largest universities and nonprofits. All of these forces seem to be coalescing at once, as if they all want to be part of the future. And that future is one of global governance wherein the nation-state is eventually reduced to pure cosmetics with no operational power.
"The impression I had while there was that the experience of everyone in town that day, all swarming around the big United Nations meeting, was one of deep separation of their world from the world of the rest of us. They are 'bubble people.' Their friends, source of financing, social groupings, career aspirations, and major influence are detached not only from normal people but from the nation-state itself. The fashionable attitude among them all is to regard the nation-state and its history of meaning as passe, fictional, and rather embarrassing.
"Entrenched globalism of the sort that operates in the 21st century represents a shift against and repudiation of half a millennium of the way governance has worked in practice. The United States was initially established as a country of localized democracies that only came together under a loose confederation. The Articles of Confederation created no central government but rather deferred to the former colonies to set up (or continue) their own structures of governance. When the Constitution came along, it created a careful equilibrium of checks and balances to restrain the national state while preserving the rights of the states. The idea here was not to overthrow citizen control over the nation-state but institutionalize it.
"All these years later, most people in most nations, the United States especially, believe that they should have final say over the structure of the regime. This is the essence of the democratic ideal, and not as an end in itself but as a guarantor of freedom, which is the principle that drives the rest. Freedom is inseparable from citizen control of government. When that link and that relationship are shattered, freedom itself is gravely damaged.
"The world today is packed with wealthy institutions and individuals that stand in revolt against the ideas of freedom and democracy. They do not like the idea of geographically constrained states with zones of juridical power. They believe they have a global mission and want to empower global institutions against the sovereignty of people living in nation-states.
"They say that there are existential problems that require the overthrow of the nation-state model of governance. They have a list: infectious disease, pandemic threats, climate change, peacekeeping, cybercrime, financial stability, and the threat of instability, and I’m sure there are others on the list that we’ve yet to see. The idea is that these are necessarily worldwide and evade the capacity of the nation-state to deal with them.
"We are all being acculturated to believe that the nation-state is nothing but an anachronism that needs to be supplanted. Keep in mind that this necessarily means treating democracy and freedom as anachronisms too. In practice, the only means by which average people can restrain tyranny and despotism is through voting at the national level. None of us have any influence over the policies of the WHO, World Bank, or IMF, much less over the Gates or Soros Foundations. The way politics is structured in the world today, we are all necessarily disenfranchised in a world governed by global institutions.
"And that is precisely the point: to achieve universal disenfranchisement of average people so that the elites can have a free hand in regulating the planet as they see fit. This is why it becomes supremely urgent for every person who aspires to live in peace and freedom to regain national sovereignty and say no to the transfer of authority to institutions over which citizens have no control.
"Devolving power from the center is the only path by which we can restore the ideals of the great visionaries of the past like Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and the entire generation of Enlightenment thinkers. In the end, governing institutions must be in citizen control, and pertain to the borders of particular states....
"There are plenty of reasons to regret the collapse of the neo-liberal consensus and a strong rationale to be concerned about the rise of protectionism and high tariffs. And yet what they called 'free trade' (not the simple freedom to buy and sell across borders but rather a state-managed industrial plan) also came at a cost: the transference of sovereignty away from the people in their communities and nations to supranational institutions over which citizens have no control. It did not have to be this way but that is how it was constructed to be.
"For that reason, the neo-liberal consensus built in the postwar period contained the seeds of its own destruction. It was too dependent on the creation of institutions beyond people’s control and too reliant on elite mastery of events. It was already crumbling before the pandemic response but it was the Covid controls, nearly simultaneously imposed all over the world to underscore elite hegemony, that exposed the fist under the velvet glove.
"The populist revolt of today might someday appear as the inevitable unfolding of events when people become newly aware of their own disenfranchisement. Human beings are not content to live in cages. Many of us have long predicted a backlash to the lockdowns and all that was associated with them. The full scale of it none of us could have imagined. The drama of our times is as intense as any of history’s great epochs: the fall of Rome, the Great Schism, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, and the fall of the multinational empires. The only question now is whether this ends like America 1776 or France 1790."
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.
U.S. think tank has concerns about amendments to World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations adopted by the WHO's World Health Assembly on June 1.
August 18, 2024 - "A U.S. think tank is questioning the legitimacy of amendments to International Health Regulations made by the made by the World Health Organization on June 1. In a recent analysis [prepared by REPPARE (REevaluating the Pandemic Preparedness And REsponse agenda), a multidisciplinary team convened by the University of Leeds], the Brownstone Institute said negotiations surrounding the amendments were 'polemic, operating in a political environment that has largely stifled democratic deliberation, wider scientific and political consultation, and ultimately, legitimacy.'
"Although the legacy IHR (2005) says proposed changes must be finalized four months in advance of a vote (Art 55, Para 2), the text put to a vote was not available to the delegates of the World Health Assembly until the afternoon of the decision.
"'This raises important questions about whether these eleventh-hour additions are based on sound evidentiary rationales and wider public health benefits, or whether they merely allow for a further concentration and potential misuse of power,' the Brownstone report explains.
"The IHRs are a set of rules for combating infectious diseases and acute health emergencies that are binding under international law, last revised in 2005. An initial compilation of reform proposals from December 2022 suggested that recommendations made by the WHO Director-General during an emergency would effectively become orders for member nations....
" [I]nternational backlash left the new IHR reforms significantly weakened. 'Nevertheless, they still contain some worrying points. For example, there is the introduction of a "pandemic emergency" whose definition is highly unspecific and whose consequences remain unclear, as well as new sections on increasing core competencies for public information control, capacity financing, and equitable access to vaccines," Brownstone warns.'....
"The new ['pandemic emergency'] designation would apply to an infectious pathogen with a wide geographical risk of spread that could overload health systems of affected states, and possibly have significant socio-economic impacts. 'This gives the WHO Director-General considerable scope for interpretation and is a reminder of how extensive restrictions on fundamental human rights were justified for over two years in many countries during the COVID-19 response, ... even at times of minimal transmission,' Brownstone warns.
"A fourth criterion concerns Brownstone even more: 'The health emergency in question "requires rapid, equitable and enhanced coordinated international action, with whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches"'.... The language echoes a WHO report from Wuhan in February 2020 where Chinese authorities were praised for their 'all-of-government and all-of-society approach'.... Only future agreements and implementation will show what the agreement really means....
"The new IHR requires states to offer access to health products and services and deal with misinformation and disinformation. Benchmarks updated in December 2023 include 'infodemic management," something Brownstone says has a dubious precedent. 'Emails published by Facebook as part of a court case reveal that the platform informed White House employees that it had inhibited the spread of posts claiming that natural immunity from infection was stronger than immunity from vaccination, even though this is very much an open question.'
"Brownstone expressed concerns that empowered governments could stifle legitimate speech to promote 'ulterior political motives'.... What political or bureaucratic body would decide the truth was another question.... '[T]his ambiguity has created an ongoing condition ripe for politicization, weaponization, and the abandonment of meaningful and open scientific discourse and policy reflection,' Brownstone said."
The Louisiana Senate has unanimously passed Bill SB-133, which provides that "No rule, regulation, fee, tax, policy or mandate of any kind of the [World Health Organization] WHO, [United Nations] UN and the [World Economic Forum] WEF shall be enforced or implemented by the state."
March 29, 2024 - "The State of Louisiana Senate unanimously passed a bill that would ban all influence from the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations (UN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF).
"International organizations, especially since the pandemic, have gained an increasingly dominant role in many of its 194 member countries’ policy making, including in Canada.
"Bill SB-133 on Public Health and International Organizations, a law that proposes 'that the WHO, the UN and the WEF shall have no jurisdiction or power within the state of Louisiana,' passed ... the senate by a vote of 37 to 0 Monday. 'No rule, regulation, fee, tax, policy or mandate of any kind of the WHO, UN and the WEF shall be enforced or implemented by the state of Louisiana or any agency, department, board, commission, political subdivision, governmental entity of the state, parish, municipality, or any other political entity,' the bill states....
"On March 11, the bill was introduced in the Senate, read a second time, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Consumer Protection and International Affairs. After the unanimous vote Monday, it was sent to the House....
"Canadian Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis is pushing for similar steps to be taken in Canada. Lewis launched petition e-4623, in opposition to the WEF’s Agenda 2030 and for Canada to exit the WHO and UN. It garnered 90,089 signatures by its February 7 deadline and was presented to the House of Commons March 22.
"The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty, proposed last year, has a deadline of May 2024. Canada will then either commit to the treaty or not. However, there still has been no parliamentary review or even discussion of Canada’s position or commitments to an international pandemic treaty, according to Lewis.... The legally binding treaty gives power to the WHO over global health management of future pandemics — according to what the organization classifies as a pandemic. In such an event, the WHO would require countries to implement its designated response measures.
"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government earlier released a statement regarding the development of the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty. 'Canada is working closely with other countries and international partners to strengthen global pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. This includes the development of a new WHO convention, agreement or international instrument,' it said, adding that Canada has been offered the opportunity to contribute to the drafting process.... Canadian officials will then participate in the vote on the final draft at the World Health Assembly (WHA) meeting in May 2024.
"Last year Trudeau was questioned on the government’s engagement with the WHO on drafting these International Health Regulations amendments. 'As an active member of the WHO, Canada has always been there to push for better science and to push for better impacts in the way we collaborate around the world. Canada is a leading voice on ensuring not only that we make it through this pandemic, which is continuing to be ongoing, but also that we prepare for future pandemics, which, unfortunately, may well be the reality for decades and generations to come,' replied Trudeau. 'We will continue to be active, strong participants in international forums around health while always respecting and protecting Canada’s sovereignty and choices to make the right decisions for its own citizens.'
Deja vu all over again: the Chinese government is accused of trying to cover up an epidemic of unknown pneumonia that is reportedly overwhelming hospitals and closing schools.
December 5, 2023 - "The sense of helplessness that has gripped the Chinese people on and off since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic three years ago is again returning as the country grapples with an unidentified pneumonia outbreak that's infecting children and overwhelming hospitals.... [S]ick children have been filling hospital waiting rooms and hallways and spilling outside the main gates..... From north to south, the spike in children’s respiratory hospitalizations is shutting classrooms and pushing health authorities to issue a flurry of announcements telling teachers and students who feel unwell to stay home....
"Just like three years ago, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) appears dismissive of the disease’s risk, telling a concerned World Health Organization that there are no 'unusual or new pathogens' or clinical symptoms. The regime partially attributed the uptick to a mid-October upgrade in a respiratory surveillance mechanism.... Beijing’s explanation, which the international health agency as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have quoted verbatim, has convinced few in China or abroad....
"Sean Lin, microbiologist and former lab director at the viral diseases branch of Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, expressed frustration over the WHO’s reliance on China’s regime for information.... After whistleblower doctors sounded the alarm on the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan during the final days of 2019, it took nearly three weeks before the Chinese regime acknowledged that the virus can spread from human to human. During that time and afterward, authorities reprimanded the medics who spoke out, arrested citizen journalists, and muzzled reporters while orchestrating an internet cleanup on any mention of the outbreak deemed undesirable to its image. Many lawmakers in Washington, especially Republicans, see the same thing happening in China now....
"Even by the numbers from Chinese authorities, who have a persistent record of playing down unflattering data, the image is dire: Beijing alone reported more than 72,000 infections in the week that ended on Nov. 26.... The statistics released by the Beijing Municipal Health Commission are so far the only data point to gauge the severity of the current outbreak.... Chinese state media have spent the past month attempting to reassure the public that the outbreak is just a routine winter spike of common respiratory pathogens and that there’s little need to panic. The Communist Party’s official mouthpiece, People’s Daily, carried an article saying that mycoplasma pneumonia is 'preventable and controllable,' phrases that the regime used in January 2020 when the COVID-19 outbreak in China began to draw international anxiety.
"But the focus on mycoplasma might be a deliberate step to mislead and detract, according to Mr. Lin.... Unlike COVID-19, mycoplasma doesn’t lead to the 'white lung syndrome' — characterized by lung areas' showing up white on chest X-rays because of fluid buildup — that has been plaguing Chinese children recently, according to Dong Yuhong, an infectious disease analyst with 12 years of experience at Swiss multinational pharmaceutical Novartis. Nor has any past respiratory disease season reached the scale China is now grappling with.... Conventional treatment methods for mycoplasma pneumonia haven’t worked either....
"COVID-19 is probably still the driving force behind the current wave, according to Mr. Lin, the microbiologist.... '[Most likely,] some of the other respiratory pathogens destroyed their upper respiratory defense mechanism, so now COVID just goes straight in,' he said. Children may be the first group to take the hit, Mr. Lin said, but infections have also spread to adults.... As Xi Jinping prepared for his recent visit to San Francisco to sell China as a friendly market for foreign investors, he personally ordered officials to gloss over the gravity of the outbreak and make the case that a COVID-19 mutation isn’t the cause so that international visitors wouldn’t be scared away, a whistleblower close to the central Party leadership in Beijing’s Zhongnanhai and the Chinese military told The Epoch Times....
"In the northeastern province of Jilin, a woman whose son displayed white lung symptoms and was diagnosed with mycoplasma pneumonia said a doctor she was acquainted with told her that COVID-19 was the main cause..... Ms. Jin, of central China’s Xi’an City, heard the same from her hospitalized nephew: The doctor told him that he had COVID-19. 'They just called it by a different name,' she told The Epoch Times, relaying the doctor’s words. It’s the same playbook that the regime followed a year ago at the height of the devastating COVID-19 wave in December 2022. Beijing tweaked the criteria for classifying COVID-19 deaths, ... excluding anyone with underlying conditions. People involved in issuing death certificates, including multiple doctors, told The Epoch Times that they were ordered to not mention COVID-19.
"In some areas, even a public mention of sickness is taboo. At least two parents from Beijing and Tianjin told The Epoch Times that teachers have instructed parents to not mention their children’s sickness in the school chat groups for fear of 'negatively impacting others.' 'Everything is a national secret,' Mr. Wei, from Beijing, told The Epoch Times.
December 4, 2023 - "The World Health Organization (WHO) is not getting the cooperation it was looking for when it first pushed global regulation measures for a hypothetical pandemic. There have now been five countries to deny the WHO's efforts.
"The 'pandemic prevention, preparedness and response accord' is a 'legal' and "binding" agreement between countries in case there is another global pandemic, according to the WHO website. New Zealand, Mexico, Estonia, Slovakia and the Philippines have all declined to enter into a global treaty with the WHO.
"Dr. Meryl Nass, of Maine, told the European Parliament the proposed treaty would allow the WHO to 'take over jurisdiction of everything in the world by saying that climate change, animals, plants, water systems [and] ecosystems are all central to health.'
"In addition, 'the idea is to create a whole new set of laws and ignore the existing human rights laws and others laws under the pretense of pandemic preparedness and the biosecurity agenda,' said Nass. The WHO will 'remove human rights protections,' 'enforce surveillance censorship,' 'get rid of freedom of speech,' and 'require governments to only push a single narrative.'
"Member states will officially vote on the Pandemic Treaty May 24, 2024."
The World Health Organization and European Union (EU) have signed an agreement and letter of internt to upgrade the EU digital Covid vaccine pass for global use in future pandemics.
June 7, 2023 - "Representatives of the World Health Organization [WHO] and the European Commission signed an administrative agreement and letter of intent at the WHO headquarters in Geneva on Monday, June 5th, for the upgrading of the EU system of digital COVID-19 certification to be used globally in future health crises, Euractiv reported. As expected, the announcement sparked instant backlash on social media, while experts and politicians weighed in to warn about the terrifying consequences that such a system could have in store. 'Are you seeing it yet? … Yet another "conspiracy theory" becoming reality!' German MEP Christine Anderson (ID) tweeted. She added:
If you don’t do as you’re told (get x amount of mRNA shots, get 'recommended' check-ups, procedures, whatever they will deem beneficial to “public health” (definition subject to change any given time) and are unable to provide proof, you will be labeled “a threat to society” and will be turned off with the flip of a switch, thanks to eID and CBDC!....
"According to EU Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides, who was delighted that the WHO 'will take up the framework' of the EU’s existing vaccine passport system, the aim of the global system is not to restrict liberties, but to facilitate mobility and protect citizens from future health threats.... According to technology expert Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D., a global, digital health passport would be about anything but protecting freedom. As he told The Defender, such a passport system could only mean 'restraints on movement and living for the unvaccinated and forced vaccination to participate in life'....
"According to the WHO’s press release, the global vaccine passport will only be the first building block of the WHO’s Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN), which is set to develop a wide range of digital products to track and deal with contagious outbreaks. According to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the organization is hoping to radically expand the capabilities of the Network in the coming months, progressively introducing a whole range of planned products, including global certificates for vaccination, routine immunization cards, and even international 'patient summaries.'
"As of Tuesday, June 5th, the Certification Network is already operational, joined by nearly 80 countries so far. However, the EU and the WHO aim to 'encourage maximum global uptake and participation' in the long term, the press release states. 'The WHO will continue to work with all regions to ensure that the network is accessible globally,' the WHO chief added....
"This agreement on the two organizations’ joint Digital Health Initiative is merely a follow-up to a previous one in December 2022, when the EU and the WHO pledged to enhance strategic cooperation on global health issues, going much further than just a global vaccine passport. Although building on the EU’s existing infrastructure is a recent development, the idea of a global vaccine passport has been on the WHO’s agenda for some time now, as the organization already commissioned the telecommunications giant Deutsche Telekom to build its global vaccine verification app back in February.
"In parallel with the development of this new digital certificate, the EU and the WHO are working together on a much larger project, the so-call Pandemic Treaty, which is a global framework of binding health regulations, set for adoption next year, which would make it mandatory for all 194 member states to follow the WHO’s guidelines during pandemics, including quarantine measures, border closures, and vaccine requirement.
"Naturally, the Pandemic Treaty is also opposed by a growing coalition of MEPs in Brussels. During last month’s International COVID Summit in the European Parliament, Croatian MEP Mislav Kolakusic lashed out against the idea, saying the WHO should be declared a terrorist organization instead of being given unprecedented global powers. If adopted by next year’s 77th World Health Assembly, the pandemic treaty would make it possible for the WHO to mandate the adoption of the Certification Network, which, for now, is still voluntary."
Proposed amendments to World Health Organization (WHO) regulations would give the WHO the power to impose lockdowns, border closures, and other mandates.
May 25, 2023 - "Lockdown measures could be imposed on the UK by the World Health Organisation (WHO) during a future pandemic under sweeping new powers, ministers fear. Member states would be obliged to follow the agency’s instructions when responding to pandemics, including by introducing vaccine passports, border closures and quarantine measures, under a draft update to its regulations. A new 'pandemic treaty' under discussion would also force Britain to spend five per cent of its health budget on preparing for another virus outbreak.
"Ministers are understood to be alarmed by plans to increase the WHO’s powers enabling its governing body to require countries to hand over the recipe of vaccines, regardless of intellectual property rights, and to counter misinformation. Conservative MPs have written to ministers to warn of an 'ambition evident … for the WHO to transition from an advisory organisation to a controlling international authority'. In their letter ... they urge the Foreign Office to block powers that 'appear to intrude materially into the UK’s ability to make its own rules and control its own budgets'.
"Responding to the concerns on Thursday, Andrew Mitchell, a Foreign Office minister, told The Telegraph that he would block any law that prevents the UK from setting its own health policy. 'The UK is supportive of the pandemic treaty currently being negotiated by national governments,' ... he said. 'We’re clear that we would never agree to anything that crosses our points of principle on sovereignty or prevents the UK from taking decisive action against future pandemics.'
"The rule changes have been proposed as part of plans to update the WHO’s International Health Regulations (IHRs) in light of the coronavirus pandemic and establish a new Pandemic Preparedness Treaty. The treaty was first proposed by world leaders including Boris Johnson in 2021 during the pandemic and was originally designed to improve alert systems, data-sharing and the production of vaccines....
"But among 300 proposed amendments to the IHRs are changes to make the WHO’s advice 'binding' and introduce a new requirement for countries to ... 'recognise WHO as the guidance and coordinating authority of international public health response…and undertake to follow WHO’s recommendations in their international public health response'. If passed, the change would mean the WHO could enforce border closures, quarantine measures and vaccine passports on all member countries, including the UK. A draft of the treaty itself would commit member states to spending five per cent of their health budgets, plus a proportion of GDP, to pandemic preparedness.
"Six conservative MPs led by Esther McVey, the former Cabinet minister, have written to Mr Mitchell to call for a Commons vote on the draft treaty and regulations before they are signed. Ms McVey said:... 'The plans represent a significant shift for the organisation, from a member-led advisory body to a health authority with powers of compulsion. This is particularly worrying when you consider the WHO’s poor track record on providing consistent, clear and scientifically sound advice for managing international disease outbreaks'....
"Campaigners also expressed concern about increasing the WHO’s role in identifying misinformation.... Molly Kingsley, co-founder of the UsForThem campaign group, said: “We should all be concerned about the WHO being ordained as an arbiter of pandemic truth, especially given its poor record during the pandemic, such as its claim that Covid was definitively zoonotic in origin and its April 2020 denial of the role of natural immunity in protecting against infection.”
May 5, 2023 - "Rochelle Walensky is resigning from her post as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). She has overseen the agency since the beginning of President Joe Biden's term and greatly expanded the CDC's authority.
"Walensky's reign was chiefly characterized by her extreme reluctance to reverse the CDC's support for ongoing pandemic restrictions. When she took the helm in January 2021, the COVID-19 vaccine rollout was just getting underway, and there was good reason to believe that the most vulnerable people would soon enjoy robust protection from severe disease and death. Walensky, however, was not inclined to let the CDC's influence wane. For instance, she repeatedly extended the CDC's eviction moratorium, a policy that made it extremely difficult for landlords to collect rent; the Supreme Court finally struck down the illegal order in August 2021.
"Walensky firmly believed that CDC guidance on COVID-19 policies should reflect the up-to-date scientific consensus — that is, unless the science had arrived at a conclusion that vexed her. Walensky's CDC put incredible faith in junk studies that purported to prove the importance of mask mandates in schools. When the legitimacy of these studies came into question, she declined to reverse course and admit that ritualistically masking schoolchildren was unnecessary....
"When challenged on her policies, Walensky would demur and claim that CDC guidance on masks was just that — guidance. She sounded a similar note as COVID-19 adviser Anthony Fauci, who cloaked his enthusiasm for shutting down all of society under the guise of mere suggestion. The fact of the matter is that government policy makers at the local, state, and federal level routinely outsourced their COVID-19 decision making to Walensky and Fauci. They put their thumbs on the scales of lockdowns and mask mandates, and thus the U.S. continued these policies far longer than did our peer countries. The World Health Organization (WHO), in contrast, never recommended masks for children under 6 at all, and many Nordic countries were unwilling to mask kids up to age 11....
"Walensky wasn't necessarily looking to European peer countries.... She was far more inclined to celebrate the alleged success of China's 'really strict lockdowns,' which involved the country's authoritarian government starving some people via mandatory quarantine detention centers and trapping others inside burning buildings. (China eventually succumbed to the inevitable, gave up on its draconian lockdowns, and implicitly admitted that the 'zero-COVID' policy was a fantasy.)
"Walensky's CDC also pursued the questionable strategy of purging so-called misinformation about COVID-19 from social media. Throughout her time in charge, the CDC became the de facto internet speech police. Emails obtained by Reason show that Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, routinely deferred moderation decisions to government health authorities. Meta might have thought it had little choice but to seek the CDC's input, as Biden had publicly declared that the social media platform's failure to suppress allegedly misleading content was 'killing people.' In any case, this is a dangerous precedent....
"Walensky's exit from the CDC comes just a few days before the official end of the national COVID-19 pandemic on May 11. Whoever takes over the agency should concentrate on rebalancing its decidedly unhealthy approach to individual liberty."
The World Heath Organization has announced that Covid-19 is no longer a public health emergency of international concern, more than three years after declaring the emergency.
May 5, 2023 - "On Friday, the World Health Organization [WHO] declared that Covid-19 was no longer a global health emergency. Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesu's announcement comes nearly three and a half years after the virus was first labeled a public health emergency of international concern.
"'The Emergency Committee met for the 15th time and recommended to me that I declare an end to the public health emergency of international concern,' Tedros said, according to the BBC. 'I've accepted that advice. It is therefore with great hope that I declare Covid-19 over as a global health emergency.'
"Tedros noted that the announcement should not be taken to mean the virus no longer poses a risk. 'The worst thing any country can do now is to use this news as a reason to let down its guard, to dismantle the systems it has built, or to send the message to its people that Covid-19 is nothing to worry about,' he warned.
"In a statement, the WHO highlighted the fact that the pandemic had 'prompted countries to enhance their functional capacities, particularly related to emergency coordination, collaborative surveillance, clinical care, and risk communications and communication engagement'.... 'Reaching the point where COVID-19 can be considered as no longer constituting a PHEIC should be seen as an accolade to international coordination and commitment to global health.'"
May 5, 2023 - "The global COVID-19 health emergency is now over, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).... This is old news in the United States. The national COVID-19 emergency was officially terminated by a joint resolution of Congress and signed by President Joe Biden on April 10.... Nevertheless, the fact is that the pandemic was effectively over for most Americans well before the declarations made by Congress and the WHO.
"Back in December 2021, I reported on an article in the journal BMJ by two researchers who noted that 'the end of the pandemic will not be televised.' In their article, Princeton historian David Robertson and University of Maryland pharmacy professor Peter Doshi ... asked, 'By what metric, then, will we know that it is actually over?' After reviewing the history of three 20th century influenza pandemics, including the Spanish flu ... Robertson and Doshi argued that ... the pandemic will 'gradually fade as society adjusts to living with the new disease agent and social life returns to normal.' Basically, epidemics socially end when people grow tired of panic mode and learn to live with a disease.
"As the vaccines rolled out and the risks associated with infection became clearer, most Americans felt increasingly comfortable returning to normal activities — shopping, dining out, and attending social gatherings — by the spring of 2021. It's taken our global and domestic public health authorities two years more to formally acknowledge that for most Americans, the COVID-19 emergency has been long over."
March 23, 2023 - "An epic disaster like the COVID response, one might suppose, should inspire some humility and rethinking on how public health could have gone so wrong. They had their run at it but created a global disaster for the ages.... The next step might be to see if there are any places where matters went rather well, and Sweden comes first to mind. The educational losses were non-existent because they didn’t close schools. In general life went on as normal and with very good results.
"One might suppose the Swedish way would be vindicated. Sadly, our leaders care nothing for evidence, apparently. Their concern is for power and money at any cost. As a result, we are witnessing a concerted effort not only to double down on errors the next time but make them even worse.
"Gates deploys his privileged place at the New York Times to agitate once again for a Global Health Emergency Corps, ensconced at the World Health Organization [WHO] and managed by the same people who created the pandemic response this time around. In other words, it would be the core of the global government pushing more lockdowns for the world — lockdowns to wait for another round of vaccines.
"If you can believe it, he has learned nothing from the last mess that he created. Indeed, he is completely shameless about it. In his view, the only problem is that we didn’t lock down fast enough, get vaccines out fast enough, and conduct enough research ahead of time to craft the perfect vaccine. And yes, this necessarily requires gain-of-function research. In other words, in Gates’s view, we need to have research continue to fiddle around in labs with tricks that anticipate pathogens of the future, thus again raising the risk of lab leaks that then necessitate fixes that can only be produced and distributed by the pharmaceutical companies in which he has such heavy investments.
"As a result, we have this hellish loop in play: gain-of-function research to anticipate the next pathogen by creating it and thus risking a lab leak that releases the pathogen that then has to be fixed by the vaccines themselves but the world has to lock down until they can be put into billions of arms. And keep in mind that Gates isn’t just another bloke writing an op-ed. He is the de facto owner of the World Health Organization himself, so his push for a permanent pandemic bureaucracy carries a lot of weight. His dream bureaucracy would override national sovereignty to make sure that never again would there be another Sweden.
"'It’s difficult for any one country to stop a disease from spreading on its own,' he writes 'Many of the most meaningful actions require coordination from the highest levels of government.'
"The model is always the same and it is taken from the world of computer science. There is a clean hard drive ... but then an exogenous threat comes along in the form of malware. In order to defeat it, we need software that is updated. You clearly should not turn on your computer until you can get the hard drive cleaned up. I’m serious here: Gates’s understanding of viruses is no more sophisticated than that.... In reality, this has nothing to do with biological viruses, which we evolved to manage through the immune system, a concept that is entirely lost on him. He finds it inconceivable that the best strategy for healthy people is to meet the virus and train the immune system. Indeed, he is appalled by that idea, favoring only more injectable substances designed to fight diseases.
"Also lost on him is the way in which viruses — whether from labs or nature — all must obey the natural epidemiological dynamics of pathogenic spread. The more deadly they are, the less likely they are to spread. And the reverse is also true: the more prevalent they are, like COVID, the less severe they are. The reason is simple: a pathogen needs a living host. Yes, there are other variables such as latency, which is how long the virus lives in the host before debilitating symptoms appear. Other than that, a lab cannot create anything that games its ways out of this matrix.
"If you can understand that paragraph, I can promise you this. You now know far more about viruses than Bill Gates. And yet it is he who has the decisive influence over pandemic policy the world over. The reason is extremely crude: it’s his money. It certainly isn’t his intelligence. In fact, it is rather shocking how his money alone has managed to buy the silence of scientists the world over, who have shown themselves to be appallingly obsequious and deferential to the crankism that Gates has been peddling for decades."
October 5, 2022- "To date, we still don’t have especially good studies on the actual causes of excess deaths by state and country when the world first went into lockdown in spring 2020. For political reasons, these deaths were all generally been lumped together as 'Covid deaths,' but this coding was appallingly sloppy. According to the World Health Organization’s [WHO] initial coding guidance, if a decedent had either tested positive ... using a PCR test ... or been in contact with anyone who had within several weeks prior to their death, then the death should be classified as a 'Covid death'....
"Thus, this article reexamines data from the US CDC on all-cause excess deaths by state during peak lockdown in April 2020 using the information we now know to determine what actually caused them. This examination concludes that, contrary to popular belief, there was no uniquely deadly strain or variant emanating out of New York in spring 2020; this is clear from the fact that several states close to New York such as Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine experienced little to no excess deaths during that time period. On the contrary, over 30,000 Americans appear to have been killed by mechanical ventilators or other forms of medical iatrogenesis throughout April 2020, primarily in the area around New York.
"This result is not altogether surprising, as subsequent studies revealed a 97.2% mortality rate among those over age 65 who were put on mechanical ventilators in accordance with the initial guidance from the WHO — as opposed to a 26.6% mortality rate among those over age 65 who weren’t put on mechanical ventilators — before a grassroots campaign put a stop to the practice by the beginning of May 2020. As one doctor later told the Wall Street Journal, 'We were intubating sick patients very early. Not for the patients’ benefit, but in order to control the epidemic'…...
"The ... area around New York experienced a particular hysteria for the use of mechanical ventilators in spring 2020 to an extent that other states did not.... [W]e can get a sense for the level of this hysteria from the hundreds of headlines advocating mechanical ventilators that sprung up around that time. "For example, Google yields hundreds of results for the query 'New York mechanical ventilators 2020.' A sample of the hundreds of headlines are ones such as: 'NY may need 24,000 more ventilators to fight COVID-19. Here’s how it could get them,' 'Which coronavirus patients will get life-saving ventilators? Guidelines show how hospitals in NYC, US will decide,' 'New York City Needs 400 Ventilators by Sunday, de Blasio Says,' 'Amid Ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic, Governor Cuomo Announces 1,000 Ventilators Donated to New York State,' 'A New York hospital is treating two patients on a device intended for one.” Likewise, Google yields hundreds of results for the query 'New Jersey mechanical ventilators 2020'.... This phenomenon was not nearly as pronounced in other states.....
"Given we now know that patients over age 65 were more than 26 times as likely to survive if they were not placed on mechanical ventilators, it’s not hard to see how this hysteria for mechanical ventilators in the New York area accounted for the particularly high excess death rates in that region. Additionally, because the neighboring states of Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine experienced little to no excess deaths during this time period, the overuse of mechanical ventilators and other medical iatrogenesis in spring 2020 provides a far more robust explanation for the particularly high rates of excess deaths in the New York area than does a particularly deadly strain or variant.
"So just how many people were killed by the overuse of mechanical ventilators and other iatrogenesis in spring 2020?... [W]e can form a conservative estimate based on the data above by using the percentage of excess deaths in a comparable state that did not experience as much ventilator hysteria....
"Michigan also experienced a high percentage of excess deaths per capita in April 2020. Michigan is even colder than New York and New Jersey in terms of its climate, and its low-income urban centers are even more dense, both of which were primary factors correlating with excess deaths in spring 2020. Like New York and New Jersey, Michigan also had a strict lockdown at that time. However, Michigan did not experience nearly the same level of hysteria for mechanical ventilators as did the New York area, and Michigan’s rate of excess deaths, while high, was more in line with that of other states. Thus, we can assume that if New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts had not engaged in ventilator hysteria, then their percentages of excess deaths per capita would have been more similar to that of Michigan....
"By subtracting the number of excess deaths that each state would have experienced if their excess death rate had been the same as that of Michigan from the number of excess deaths they actually experienced each week, we can see that in total, during April 2020, approximately 17,289 deaths in New York City, 7,347 deaths in New Jersey, 803 deaths in Massachusetts, 788 deaths in Connecticut, and 3,725 deaths in New York outside New York City were attributable to the overuse of mechanical ventilators or other iatrogenesis. All told, this data indicates that some 30,000 patients in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts were killed by mechanical ventilators or other medical iatrogenesis in April 2020."
14 September 2022 - "As the number of weekly reported deaths from COVID-19 plunged to its lowest since March 2020, the head of the World Health Organization (WO) said on Wednesday that the end of the pandemic is now in sight. 'We have never been in a better position to end the pandemic., Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told journalists during his regular weekly press conference.
"The UN health agency’s Director-General explained however, that the world is “not there yet”.... He also warned that if the world does not take the opportunity now, there is still a risk of more variants, deaths, disruption, and uncertainty. 'So, let’s seize this opportunity', he urged, announcing that WHO is releasing six short policy briefs that outline the key actions that all governments must take now....
"The policy briefs 'are an urgent call for governments to take a hard look at their policies and strengthen them for COVID-19 and future pathogens with pandemic potential', Tedros explained.
"The documents, which are available online, include recommendations regarding vaccination of most at-risk groups, continued testing and sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and integrating effective treatment for COVID-19 into primary healthcare systems. They also urge authorities to have plans for future surges, including the securing of supplies, equipment, and extra health workers. The briefs also contain communications advice, including training health workers to identify and address misinformation, as well as creating high-quality informative materials....
"'We can end this pandemic together, but only if all countries, manufacturers, communities and individuals step up and seize this opportunity', he said.
"Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO’s technical lead on COVID-19, highlighted that the virus is still 'intensely circulating' around the world and that the agency believes that case numbers being reported are an underestimate. 'We expect that there are going to be future waves of infection, potentially at different time points throughout the world caused by different subvariants of Omicron or even different variants of concern', she said, reiterating her previous warning that the more the virus circulates, the more opportunities it has to mutate.
"However, she said, these future waves do not need to translate into 'waves [of] death' because there are now effective tools such as vaccines and antivirals specifically for COVID-19."
In the third year of the Covid pandemic, Canada's legacy media has begun to allow articles questioning vaccine and other mandates into print. This weekend, a couple of examples.
May 13, 2022 - "Vaccines are important in the fight against COVID-19. I wholeheartedly believe individuals should be vaccinated to protect against severe complications. I have put in hundreds of volunteer hours to make sure that evidence-based communication is brought to communities, both locally and internationally. And as someone who also works in travel medicine, I expect that making sure vaccines are up-to-date, including the COVID-19 vaccine, to be part of normal counselling.
"But medicine is about recognizing what does and does not make sense based on the prevailing science. That’s why, in February, I questioned the paradigm that existed around stringent global testing and travel restrictions. And while there has been a significant transition away from those measures, we need to bring down the other limits to individual rights that don’t make medical sense. This is why we should reconsider our mandate requiring full vaccination for Canadians boarding a commercial plane or train for travel to domestic and international destinations.
"The justification behind vaccine mandates is that they help prevent transmission. But this does not seem to be the case any longer, with the Omicron variant. We know that vaccine efficacy in this regard wanes significantly: Data from the UK Health Security Agency shows the effectiveness of two or three doses of vaccine against spreading the Omicron-variant infection over time approaches zero. In Canada, the requirements to be deemed fully vaccinated include several World Health Organization-approved vaccines that have even lower efficacy than mRNA vaccines.
"Furthermore, the efficacy of a prior infection against reinfection approaches that of two doses of vaccines; since many unvaccinated individuals have likely been infected, they may now have a similar level of immunity to their vaccinated peers. Additionally, since Canadians under the age of 12 are not currently required to be vaccinated, unvaccinated individuals have effectively been a part of travel all along – meaning that environments of exclusively vaccinated individuals do not exist. So current mandates are only creating environments in which people who can transmit the virus are alongside people who can transmit the virus, with minimal extra protection.
"The current vaccines do offer significant protection against severe disease or hospitalization and, certainly, individuals who are vaccinated are at a much lower risk of adverse outcomes.... But this minimizes the gradient of risk around age: A triple-vaccinated 70-year-old with diabetes, for instance, would still have a higher risk of hospitalization than an unvaccinated 30-year-old. Of course, discriminating against the ability to travel based on age would be unethical. So wouldn’t discriminating based on risk of severe disease be unethical, too?
"There has also been an argument that such mandates would incentivize vaccine uptake. However, the percentage of adults who have become fully vaccinated since Nov. 30, 2021, when the proof-of-vaccination became mandatory, has only increased by about 3 per cent.
"While lifting the mandate may seem unfair to those who were vaccinated, there are real equity issues with keeping it on the books. Many individuals may not be able to access essential life events, visit family or friends, or engage in employment opportunities, because of these regulations. While we may have beliefs around vaccination, denying an individual the ability to say goodbye at a funeral is not a part of our values as Canadians. If arriving from an international destination, an unvaccinated 12-year-old who had a prior infection would have to go into quarantine for 14 days and undergo repeated testing because of the current rules, when in reality they present little threat to their community.
"Enforcing the mandate is not cost-neutral, either. The 2022-2023 Canadian budget allots $25-million to the maintenance of the ArriveCan app, as well as to the cost of testing and the enforcement of border measures. These funds could instead go toward improving safety in transit in other ways. For example, improving staffing at airports to alleviate prolonged lineups in tightly enclosed spaces may reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission far more than ensuring all travellers are vaccinated....
"All levels of government took drastic steps in an unprecedented crisis in order to protect the health and safety of Canadians, including around travel, and they should all be praised for the actions taken to protect lives and navigate an uncertain time. But as the science evolves, so too should our response. That’s how we can ensure public trust is maintained moving ahead."
Zain Chagla is an infectious diseases physician and an associate professor at McMaster University.
June 24. 2022 - "With 3,417 confirmed Monkeypox cases reported across 58 countries, World Health Network (WHN) has announced that they are declaring the current monkeypox outbreak a pandemic. The WHN announcement comes ahead of WHO [World Health Organiztion] meeting to be held on 23 June to decide on their monkeypox outbreak designation....
"The outbreak will not stop without concerted global action, [WHN] said. Even with death rates much lower than smallpox, unless actions are taken to stop the ongoing spread ... millions of people will die and many more will become blind and disabled, it said... WHN said that the essential purpose of declaring Monkeypox a pandemic is to achieve a concerted effort across multiple countries or over the world to prevent widespread harm.
"'There is no justification to wait for the monkeypox pandemic to grow further. The best time to act is now. By taking immediate action, we can control the outbreak with the least effort, and prevent consequences from becoming worse.... Any delay only makes the effort harder and the consequences more severe', said Yaneer Bar-Yam,* PhD, President of New England Complex System Institute and co-founder of WHN.
June 25, 2022 - "The World Health Organization on Saturday declined to declare the unprecedented monkeypox outbreak that has spread around the world a public health emergency as of now. A public health emergency of international concern, or PHEIC, grants the WHO director-general certain powers, such as the ability to recommend how countries should respond.... The announcement came after a WHO emergency committee met Thursday to discuss the outbreak. Some 3,000 cases have been documented since mid-May, ... outside the regions in West and Central Africa where the virus is endemic and has animal reservoirs. Most of the cases have been in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men, with many occurring in men who have had multiple recent sex partners. One death has been reported, in an immunocompromised person....
"Gregg Gonsalves,* an associate professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, disagreed with WHO’s decision, which he called a 'punt.' He said he felt that the criteria had been met and that a PHEIC declaration could have pushed public health authorities to step up their response and coordinate better across countries. Gonsalves served as an adviser to the emergency committee, but did not have a say in whether to recommend a PHEIC be declared.
"Monkeypox infections can lead to painful lesions and rashes, including vesicles forming on the palms.... Many of the cases in the current outbreak have been comparatively mild, though some patients have been hospitalized for pain management as the infection runs its course.... In the current outbreak, ... the United States has reported 200 monkeypox cases, Germany has identified more than 675 cases, Portugal more than 300, and the United Kingdom more than 900. South Africa on Thursday also reported a case in a person who had no recent travel history....
"The PHEIC designation was created in an update to the International Health Regulations following the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak....The first PHEIC was declared for the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic, and others have included Ebola outbreaks and the Zika epidemic. The two active PHEICs are for Covid-19 and the continued transmission of polio." Read more: https://www.statnews.com/2022/06/25/who-monkeypox-outbreak-not-yet-a-global-health-emergency/
June 20, 2022 - "Covid lockdowns have created a 'global crisis for mental health', the World Health Organization has admitted. An international report by the UN agency found two years of restrictions have led to 'significant mental health consequences', especially for young people. The WHO now estimates more than a billion people around the world are living with a mental health disorder as a result, a quarter more than pre-Covid. It said there had been an even bigger rise among children, 'potentially reflecting the deep impact of school closures'....
"The WHO World Mental Health Report was published on June 16 by the WHO's mental health and substance division.... It said more than one billion people are now living with a mental health condition, after increasing by more than 25 per cent dung the first year of the pandemic. The most common types include anxiety, depression and developmental disorders like autism. But children were worst affected by restrictions, officials said, with rates of bullying and abuse at home increasing and a lack of social interaction causing isolation during school closures.
"The report said: 'Restrictions imposed during the Covid pandemic for example had significant mental health consequences for many, including stress, anxiety or depression stemming from social isolation, disconnectedness and uncertainty about the future.' It added: 'Globally there was also a greater change in prevalence among younger age groups than older ones, potentially reflecting the deep impact of school closures and social restrictions on youth mental health.... For some children and adolescents, being made to stay at home is likely to have increased the risk of family stress or abuse, which are known risk factors for mental health problems.'
"The WHO's mental health and substance division is responsible for helping prevent mental, neurological and substance use disorders and was not in charge of the WHO's Covid response. It was signed off by Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the WHO, who faced heavy criticism for his handling of the pandemic, which was deemed to be very 'China-centric', heaping praise on China's communist party for its response to the Covid outbreak.... But he has since been censored by Chinese state media for criticising the country's current zero Covid policy in May this year....
"Before the pandemic, the WHO estimated as many as one in seven (14 per cent) of children had a mental health disorder. The report did not estimate the current rate but said the 25 per cent increase in disorders across the world was even higher in children. It said: 'Extended school and university closures interrupted routines and social connections, meaning that young people missed out on learning and experiences expected for healthy development.... Disruption and isolation can fuel feelings of anxiety, uncertainty and loneliness, and can lead to affective and behavioural problems.'
"Boris Johnson closed England's 24,000 schools for the first time in March 2020, with some children returning briefly from June that year. Classes were then shut again in January 2021 at the start of the Alpha wave before reopening on March 1. Overall, schools in England were shut for longer than in any other European country. Several studies since then have shown young people's mental health deteriorated while learning at home. A study led by University College London researchers showed nearly five times as many children died of suicide compared to the virus during the first year of lockdowns....
"[The WHO report] comes after a new book claimed ministers ignored warnings that continued school closures would cause an upswing in mental health problems for children. The book, written by the founders of the UsForThem campaign, revealed Anne Longfield, then Children’s Commissioner, spent ‘weeks and weeks’ arguing that children should return to school.... Ms Longfield told the authors it was ‘absolutely unnecessary’ to keep schools closed until the last weeks of the summer term in 2020. She said: ‘It added a huge additional detriment to those children and was completely irresponsible and virtually criminal for those children.’"
