Posible protest over amendments to WHO, vote on May 28/29 2022

Amending existing International Health Regulations.

The right media claim is that current administration is preparing to give the country’s (USA) sovereignty over health issues to the World Health Organization (WHO), granting the organization the power to implement its own lock-downs.

To be balanced on these reports on another site I read:
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2022/05/21/fact-check-us-backing-who-takeover-national-health-policies/9859660002/


"Bachmann said "the Biden administration is bringing amendments that would propose that all nations of the earth cede their sovereignty over national healthcare decisions to the WHO."

The Biden administration proposal is publicly available online. It seeks to compel the WHO to engage more assertively when a health risk emerges, and to share any information it gleans with the international community more quickly. It requires the WHO to recommend actions to the affected country, and offer expertise. The sanction for nations who reject WHO assistance is public exposure.

Nothing in the Biden administration proposal matches Bachmann’s interpretation.

We rate this claim False."

 

Anyone else remember the "FEMA death camps"? This kind of propaganda isn't new, only the boogeyman changes.

 

If the world takes the WHO recommendations, there will be no control group and no alternative responses ( like Sweden ). I speculate Sweden faired the best of the western nations. Critics say with one approach and a bad decision - we will all suffer in ignorance.
They question if the WHO recently known for good scientific approaches. Or is it all about money and control.
The supporters state that WHO is using scientific approach.
And the whole move is to implement lessons learned so next Pandemics or deadly mutation are better handled saving lives.

 

Sadly, we only have Pete Townshend and Roger Daltrey remaining. Still, I cannot understand why any nation would cede any national health care authority to a pair of aging rockers. Really. I love the music. Even though it was often depressing. Where did these two Find the time to become healthcare experts?

 

You don't have to speculate, we've been collecting data for years.



Not...great.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5

 

Do I read the document correctly?

The "state" gives up much of its sovereignty and it is potentially penalized for months or up to 24 months if it does not comply to the WHO.
Is there financial penalty for not following WHO? Will UN and NGO's get involved by WHO?
The document is attached.

 

My reading is that it has to do with reporting information. I see no where does WHO have any powers to force lock-downs. Fear mongering BS from the right again is what it looks like to me.

 

IIRC, Sweden was openly allowing people in nursing homes to die, even if the patient was otherwise fine. Not even palliative treatment in some cases. I don't remember for certain if they also withheld food & water from elderly persons who got a positive covid test, but I seem to remember that being a policy in some places. That's not okay.

 

Just wondering how will WHO become empowered to be more assertive, what is changing?

What is lacking in the charts is the demographics of the deaths.
Sad as it may be, the deaths might have been due to high risk individuals.

Where all deaths true covid or were all deaths recorded as covid?

As to the document

"If a State is not able to adjust its domestic legislative and administrative arrangements fully with these Regulations or amendments thereto within the periods set out in paragraph 2 of this Article, as applicable, that State shall submit within the period specified in paragraph 1 of this Article a declaration to the Director-General regarding the outstanding adjustments and achieve them no later than 12 months after the entry into force of these Regulations or the amendments thereto for that State Party. "

How to understand the above
- who is calling the shots??? Who is accountable to whom??

 

Reads to me more like China not Sweden.

The critics say:
Consider how effective the WHO was in recognizing prophylactics, masks, ventilators, working with china to discover where and how it started, etc.
Do you think that money and influence had any thing to do with this ? Does china have any influence with the WHO?

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/scathing-evaluation-swedens-covid-response-reveals-failures-control/story?id=83644832
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5

https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-been-so-so-surreal-critics-sweden-s-lax-pandemic-policies-face-fierce-backlash

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/sweden-failed-protect-elderly-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-2020-12-15/

 

Even if that were an explanation - and it isn't - "high risk individuals" are still human beings who are dead from COVID. Without COVID, they wouldn't be dead. What is wrong with you?

 

WHO needs to report on potential new illness to the world member countries. That is their job. There was a change that the country of origin was supposed to respond to WHO questions within a fixed timeframe in order to get that information included in the WHO report. So it would just make it harder for the country of origin to sit on the WHO report and keep it from being sent out.

I don't remember reading anything else that could be interpreted as "empowering WHO to be more assertive".

The place that you read this about WHO taking over countries was it social media? And did it include any conspiracy theory involving Bill Gates? Just curious.

 

Exactly, that what I meant, such individuals were given priority during the COVID vaccination cycles. I'm a high risk individual. This is a term used in medical community.

People who are considered at high risk may develop more serious symptoms of COVID-19. Serious symptoms may cause a person with COVID-19 to go to the hospital, be admitted into intensive care, need help breathing, and have a greater risk of death. Being at high risk depends on their health history and how long they have had COVID-19 symptoms.

 

Bill,

The proposed U.S. amendments seek to strengthen requirements for reporting such emergencies. I think post COVID its the correct approach.
The U.S. amendments to the IHR tighten requirements for reporting information to the WHO surrounding public health emergencies of international concern.

So at this time - reiterated that the WHO “has zero enforcement, police or punitive powers.”
They can’t sanction a country, they can just say ‘hey you signed this treaty, you’re supposed to abide by this treaty,

Maybe empowering is not the best word to use, but from what I read President Biden words were that part of the amending was in
expecting WHO to be more assertive. I remember reading an article quoting the President. Will try to find a link.

As to opposition, its not theory of Bill Gates, but concern of representatives and other leaders on the right that they are publicly express.

Washington, May 17, 2022

WASHINGTON - Today, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) issued the following statement opposing Biden’s amendments to the World Health Organization’s International Health Regulations.

“The World Health Organization (WHO) is an arm of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and should have zero say over any policy related to our nation. The response by the WHO amid the pandemic made it clear that they are a sham organization that prioritizes the needs of our adversaries, not the American people. Any plan by the Biden administration to defer control over our national pandemic response to an international organization in the name of 'pandemic prevention' is an alarming dereliction of duty and against the interest of our country. Any action by President Biden should be in tandem with the Legislative Branch, particularly the United States Senate, under Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution.”

 

"12 of the 13 amendments submitted by the President Biden administration for a vote in the World Health Assembly this week in Geneva have been removed from consideration.

https://timenewsdesk.com/2022/05/who-withdraws-12-biden-sovereignty-amendments-amid-fierce-opposition/

I see this web site for a first time so don't know its reliability.

"The amendments were publicized only last month, and it was the advocacy of independent researcher James Roguski that alerted the public to the implications for U.S. sovereignty, prompting a groundswell of popular opposition, largely in the past week.

Roguski, who has been monitoring the WHA proceedings, which began Sunday, said the withdrawal appears to be the result of “the massive response from people all over the world in opposition to the amendments to the International Health Regulations, along with legal actions in the U.K. (and a whole lot of prayer).”

The U.K. Government Legal Department of the Secretary of State for Health and Social care replied to Cox that the appeal was without merit because 12 of the 13 proposed amendments had been removed from consideration. That was due, the government said, to the fact that the WHO’s Working Group for Pandemic Response was “unable to reach a consensus.”

The working group had the task of shepherding the amendments through a process in preparation for them to be presented to the World Health Assembly.""

 

You embarrass yourself when you do this.

Roguski sells books about how cholesterol is a scam and TimeNewsDesk shows up on at least one list of unreliable right-wing news sources, which is its only mention online outside of right-wingers reposting what are likely fake stories.

If the stories were true, you could find a reliable source. It's not enough to say "I don't know" before you amplify another bunch of fake news.

There's a term for this: sealioning. You're "just asking questions", "just repeating what I heard", "just reposting an article." It's in bad faith.