{"id":340000,"date":"2023-03-04T10:30:52","date_gmt":"2023-03-04T15:30:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sgtreport.com\/?p=340000"},"modified":"2023-03-04T00:08:49","modified_gmt":"2023-03-04T05:08:49","slug":"the-threat-of-global-tyranny-from-the-whos-pandemic-treaty-draws-ever-closer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sgtreport.com\/2023\/03\/the-threat-of-global-tyranny-from-the-whos-pandemic-treaty-draws-ever-closer\/","title":{"rendered":"The Threat of Global Tyranny From the WHO\u2019s Pandemic Treaty Draws Ever Closer"},"content":{"rendered":"
by Dr David Bell, Daily Sceptic<\/a>:<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The World Health Organisation (WHO) is currently developing two international legal instruments intended to increase its authority in managing health emergencies, including pandemics:<\/p>\n The draft IHR amendments (analysed in detail\u00a0here<\/a>) would lay out new powers for WHO during health emergencies and broaden the context within which they can be used. The draft CA+ (\u2018treaty\u2019; analysed\u00a0here<\/a>) is intended to support the bureaucracy, financing and governance to underpin the expanded IHR.<\/p>\n TRUTH LIVES on at\u00a0https:\/\/sgtreport.tv\/<\/a><\/p>\n These proposed instruments, as currently drafted, would fundamentally change the relationship between the WHO, its Member States and their populations, promoting what can fairly be described as a fascist and neo-colonialist approach to healthcare and governance. The documents need to be viewed together, and in the wider context of the global\/globalist pandemic preparedness agenda.<\/p>\n The exaggerated threat of pandemics<\/strong><\/p>\n The current rapidly increasing funding for pandemics and health emergencies is based on several fallacies, frequently repeated in white papers and other documents as well as the mainstream media as if they were facts, in particular:<\/p>\n The last pandemic to cause major mortality was the 1918-19 \u2019Spanish Flu\u2019,\u00a0estimated<\/a>\u00a0to have killed between 20 and 50 million people. As noted by the National Institutes of Health, most of these people died of secondary\u00a0bacterial pneumonia<\/a>, as the outbreak occurred in the pre-antibiotic era. Prior to this time, major pandemics were due to bubonic plague, cholera and typhus, all addressable with modern antibiotics and hygiene, and smallpox, which is now eliminated.<\/p>\n WHO lists<\/a>\u00a0just three pandemics in the past century, prior to COVID-19: the influenza outbreaks of 1957-58 and 1968-69 and the 2009 Swine Flu outbreak. The former two killed 1.1 million and 1 million people respectively, while the latter killed 150,000 or fewer. For context,\u00a0290,000 to 650,000<\/a>\u00a0people die of influenza every year, and\u00a01.6 million people<\/a>\u00a0die of tuberculosis (at a much younger average age).<\/p>\n In Western countries, COVID-19 was associated with deaths at an average age of about 80 years, and global estimates suggest an overall infection mortality rate of about\u00a00.15%<\/a>, which is similar to that for influenza \u2013 though with considerable local variation.<\/p>\n Thus, pandemics in the past century have killed far fewer people and at an older age than most other major infectious diseases.<\/p>\n The COVID-19 event stands out from previous pandemics due to the aggressive and\u00a0disproportionate responses<\/a>\u00a0employed, instituted contrary to existing WHO guidelines.\u00a0The harms of this response have been discussed extensively\u00a0elsewhere<\/a>, with little doubt that the resultant disruptions to health systems and increased poverty will do considerably more harm than any benefit the responses might have achieved. Despite the historical rarity of pandemics, WHO and partners are pushing forward with a rapid process that will ensure repetition of such responses, rather than first analysing the costs and benefits of the recent example. This is clearly reckless and a bad way to develop policy.<\/p>\n The growing role of WHO in public health<\/strong><\/p>\n The WHO, whilst having a role in coordinating cross-border health emergencies included in its\u00a0Constitution<\/a>, was founded on human rights principles and originally emphasised community and individual rights. These culminated in the Declaration of\u00a0Alma Ata<\/a>, emphasising the importance of community participation and \u2018horizontal\u2019 approaches to care.<\/p>\n Apart from its basis in human rights, this approach has a strong public health basis.\u00a0Improved life expectancy<\/a>\u00a0and major reductions in infectious disease in wealthier populations predominantly occurred through\u00a0improved living conditions<\/a>, nutrition and sanitation, with a secondary impact of improving basic health care and availability of and access to antibiotics. Most vaccines came later, though playing an important role in certain diseases such as smallpox. Basic nutrition and living conditions are still the predominant determinant of life expectancy, with GDP recognised as directly impacting\u00a0infant mortality<\/a>\u00a0in particular in lower income countries.<\/p>\n The emphasis of WHO has changed over the past few decades, associated with two major shifts in funding. Firstly, a\u00a0large proportion<\/a>\u00a0of funding now comes from private and corporate sources, rather than being almost solely country-based at its inception. Secondly, most funding is now \u2018specified<\/a>\u2019, meaning it is given to WHO for specific projects in designated geographies, rather than being used at WHO\u2019s discretion to address the greatest disease burdens. This is reflected in an apparent move from priorities based on disease burden to priorities based on commodities, particularly vaccines, that generate profit for their private and corporate sponsors.<\/p>\n In parallel, other \u2018public-private partnerships\u2019 have arisen, including\u00a0Gavi, the vaccine alliance<\/a>, and\u00a0CEPI<\/a>\u00a0(dedicated solely to pandemics). These organisations include private interests on their governing boards and address a narrow health focus that reflects the priorities of\u00a0private sponsors<\/a>. They influence WHO through direct funding and through funding within WHO Member States.<\/p>\n\n
\n