Quantcast
Channel: Articles – STAND FOR HEALTH FREEDOM
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 20

Biden official says: “If WHO didn’t exist, we’d have to create it.”

$
0
0

In a congressional hearing on December 13, 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Assistant Secretary Loyce Pace told lawmakers in her opening statement, “If WHO didn’t exist, we’d have to create it” to guard global health against the next, inevitable, pandemic.

We can’t think of a better statement to illustrate the urgent importance of keeping health decisions as close to home as possible. Those words show us that our health data and decisions are keys to a digital prison being constructed with one hand, while the other drafts treaties and amendments.

Momentum has been building toward May 2024, the 77th World Health Assembly, where it’s been declared that the unelected representatives will vote on the pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). But before we turn the corner, let’s see how far 2023 has taken us.

First U.S. congressional hearing on the WHO treaty and IHR amendments

On December 13, 2023, the House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held a hearing titled “Reforming the WHO: Ensuring Global Health Security and Accountability.”

A lot of the hearing focused on China’s influence on the World Health Organization (WHO), demonstrated by the WHO’s delay in declaring a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) for COVID, stating there was no human-to-human transmission and allowing China to control the investigation into a lab leak.

When asked if China should be held accountable for their actions in covering up their role in — and the severity of — the outbreak, HHS Office of Global Affairs representative Pace hedged answering and, when pressed, answered that the new IHR and the treaty would ensure something like this never happens again. She refused to be pinned down to saying that China should be held accountable. And that’s chilling, because she’s a lead representative of the United States to an organization that has shown it will bend to China’s will, despite the U.S.’s larger financial contributions. Witness John Nkengasong from the Department of State sang the same song. On the flip side, refreshingly, Dr. Atul Gawande, from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) did not hesitate to call out the failures and lies of China and state they should be held accountable.

The issue of whether the treaty and IHR amendments would threaten American sovereignty was brought up, with predictable dismissive answers that sadly got no follow up. The hearing was titled “Reforming the WHO,” but there was very little talk of what that meant. Pace (who is the signatory on the 2022 IHR amendment package from the U.S.) asserted the WHO has undergone reforms in the past, citing the 2005 IHR amendments after the mishandling of SARS in the early 2000s, and the creation of the WHO Health Emergencies Program after mishandling of Ebola in the 20-teens. She asserts that reform is the reason the U.S. led the way in proposing changes to the IHR. But that assertion conflates expansion of scope and authority with reform. It’s like saying, “You messed up, here’s more responsibility.” Sounds like the CDC, admitting they mishandled COVID, but if they only had more money to spend at their discretion and more data on Americans, they’d be able to get it right. The 2005 amendments greatly expanded the WHO’s scope and authority (by placing National Focal points, creating the PHEIC, and changing the organization from one only authorized to act during specified diseases to authorizing involvement for any potential threat). That’s not reform. At no point did anyone — witnesses nor lawmakers — bring up the corruption at the WHO, such as ongoing exposure of sexual abuses and misconduct, as well as financial abuses. This is the type of reform that’s needed. There was no mention of the simple fact that reelection of Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus,1 from Marxist Ethiopia, is all the proof one needs to see the organization has no intention of “reform” in the sense of cleaning house and getting better. There’s wide consensus the WHO was off the mark with the COVID pandemic, but instead of holding anyone accountable, they reelected the man at the helm. The only “reform” they’re interested in is the type Pace is spearheading — a power grab.

Comments from Gawande were telling. Many of his answers highlighted all the things the U.S. has done in partnership with the WHO over the years: built response capacity to respond to Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo, pushed to create a global health emergencies program, created new committees at the WHO, provided more COVID shots around the world than any other country. If we can do all of this already, why do we need a treaty or updated IHR?

Marjorie Taylor Greene was a shining light during the proceedings. She was the only lawmaker who focused on the IHR, asking about how the U.S. (or any country) would be able to have meaningful input if the WHO declared that the amendments package does not need to be finalized before the World Health Assembly (WHA), as the rules stated. Pace fielded that question by saying she’d protect our sovereignty, and she’s seen the amendments.

Treaty

The most recent draft of the treaty was released in October, referred to as the “negotiating text.2 The name has been changed to the “WHO Pandemic Agreement.” The agreement would create a liability shield for vaccine manufacturers, mimicking the U.S. 1986 Act (The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act which removed liability from manufacturers). The treaty (and the IHR) uses a “One Health” approach, a term coined by EcoHealth Alliance3 (NIH grantee for gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China4). One Health sweeps all aspects of life under the public health umbrella5 communications, mental health, travel, food, agriculture, surveillance, economies, environment, medicines, and more.6

Most troubling is the proposal to create a “Conference of the Parties” (COP) which would be an additional body that would operate outside of the World Health Assembly, create and adopt its own rules and procedures, determine ways to enforce them, and even request “services and cooperation of” other bodies including the United Nations. (Article 21.7(d) on page 24)

The treaty working group (called the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body) is scheduled to meet again February 19 and March 18, 2024 where the text will be finalized for the May 2024 World Health Assembly. 

Given the amount of overlap between provisions in the treaty and the IHR amendments, and the fact that the treaty is much harder to pass, some are already wondering if the treaty may either not come to a vote or will not pass and instead we will see treaty provisions in the IHR amendments.

The treaty requires two-thirds adoption by the World Health Assembly, then it must be accepted in home countries.

The IHR amendments require only a simple majority (over 50%) to pass and are presumed adopted unless countries specifically opt out through a formal rejection.

IHR amendments

2022 amendments

In 2022, after the pandemic treaty drafting and negotiating had already begun, the U.S. submitted about a dozen amendments to the existing IHR. Only one was adopted, which speeds up the timeline of making amendments in the future. The process was shortened from 18 months to accept or reject amendments, to only 10 months (though notably, the U.S. pushed for an even shorter timeline of six months). 

In the World Health Assembly, countries are deemed to have adopted amendments if they do not reject them by a certain time. That time was December 1, 2023. As of this writing, there’s no evidence that any country rejected the timeline (though there are many individuals in various governments who may have personally rejected it and are at odds with their own government). A group from the European Parliament rejected the vote altogether, failing to find evidence it was properly conducted. The group submitted a written request to the DirectorGeneral to produce such evidence of a proper vote and, getting no response, submitted a second letter declaring the 2022 amendments null and void. We can assume the WHO will assert that the amendment was accepted, but we can also anticipate continued pushback from activists.

More amendments

The 2022 proposed amendments from the U.S. were unexpected, and many countries were upset they did not have an opportunity for similar input. Therefore, most of the amendments were held for further input. The initial proposed changes, plus over 300 more, have now been proposed by member states around the globe.7 The Working Group for the IHR was expected to have the amendments consolidated and ready to report on for vote four months before the meeting, as per the IHR, and as instructed in the document that created the group. But on October 6,2023, one of the co-chairs of the group announced the amendments would not be ready in time. The lawyer for the WHO was prepared with a statement to declare the IHR does not apply to the group. So, while the WHO is working to strengthen the rules for everyone around the globe, it has simultaneously decreed that the rules do not apply to them.

It is the position of Stand for Health Freedom, as well as many other groups and professionals, that the amendments to the IHR need to be considered a treaty. In fact, other countries and lawmakers have the same opinion. One member of the Dutch Parliament, Wybren van Haga, sent a reservation to the WHO saying the amendments were a treaty and could not be adopted by the Netherlands until they had their own vote, which had not occurred.8 Eleven members of the Estonian Parliament also submitted a rejection letter asserting the treaty needed to be ratified and had not been, but the rest of the Parliament issued a letter saying they did not reject the IHR amendments. This is a developing situation and SHF is vetting the information (which is in many different languages). 

COP 28 first-ever Health Day

Remember that term, “Conference of the Parties,” that’s a proposed creation in the treaty? It’s not a new term for those associated with the United Nations. There has been a yearly climate change Conference of the Parties, known as COP, where leaders in the climate change space meet to set the agenda for the coming year. 

This year, at the 28th COP, they held the first-ever “Health Day.” If you’re confused about why a climate change conference would have a health day, it’s because climate is increasingly tied to public health under that One Health umbrella being used as a framework for all public health. The Biden administration has gone all in with the One Health approach by opening an Office of Climate Change and Health Equity as a part of HHS in 2021.9

During the Health Day on December 3, 2023, more finances were pledged toward “environmental determinants of health.” The U.S. pledged $300 million to a global fund. The day culminated in a new pledge: the Declaration on Climate and Health, signed by 124 countries. 10

Here’s what the Director General of the WHO had to say about this new declaration:11

UN Political Declaration on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness, and Response

In 2023, we saw a notable increase in the presence of the United Nations in global public health. The COP 28 Health Day is one example of a U.N. initiative for climate wrapping its tentacles around health. The pandemic treaty’s proposed Conference of the Parties for global health would also be able to call on the United Nations for assistance in implementing whatever they may write on the blank check they’re attempting to obtain. 

To leave no doubt that the United Nations is not going to stand by idly while the World Health Organization takes center stage, they threw their weight around this fall by creating and adopting a High-level Political Declaration on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness, and Response.12

At this point in time, the WHO may not have “teeth” to enforce its IHR, but we must remember its parent organization, the United Nations, does. Until now, the U.N. has been so distant from the WHO’s doings that most people don’t even know the WHO is part of the U.N. That’s changing now, as the U.N. has surely observed the massive power grab that is taking place in the name of safety from “the next inevitable pandemic” that generates the fear needed for compliance.

What’s on deck for 2024?

The main event is the 77th World Health Assembly, scheduled for May 27 – June 1, 2024. This is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak, on the global health security state that has been building for the last three years with the documents mentioned above. The treaty is scheduled to be finalized for a vote, and the IHR amendments should be compiled into a package for vote as well. 

The U.N. Summit of the Future is scheduled for September 2024. This conference is meant to have a multi-generational reach and to bolster Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals, which are foundational to the global health security state being built out right now.

And, last but not least, 2024 is a big election year for the United States! Be sure to follow Vote for Health Freedom. And check out SHF’s timeline, which is regularly updated.


  1. https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/ethiopia-accuses-who-chief-links-rebellious-tigrayan-forces-2022-01-14/ ↩︎
  2. https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb7/A_INB7_3-en.pdf ↩︎
  3. https://globalhealthnow.org/2017-09/whats-difference-meaning-one-health ↩︎
  4. https://oversight.house.gov/landing/covid-origins/ ↩︎
  5. https://merylnass.substack.com/p/why-countries-must-leave-the-world?utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fcountries%2520that%2520followed%2520WHO%2520guidance%2520had%2520worse%2520outcomes&utm_medium=reader2 ↩︎
  6. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/363518/9789240059139-eng.pdf?sequence=1 ↩︎
  7. https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/pdf_files/wgihr1/WGIHR_Submissions_Original_Languages.pdf ↩︎
  8. https://merylnass.substack.com/p/a-member-of-the-dutch-parliament?publication_id=746368&post_id=139274870&isFreemail=true&r=rgolm ↩︎
  9. https://www.hhs.gov/climate-change-health-equity-environmental-justice/climate-change-health-equity/actions/index.html ↩︎
  10. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/climate-change/cop28/cop28-uae-climate-and-health-declaration.pdf?sfvrsn=2c6eed5a_2&download=true ↩︎
  11. https://www.cop28.com/en/news/2023/12/Health-Declaration-delivering-breakthrough-moment-for-health-in-climate-talks ↩︎
  12. https://standforhealthfreedom.com/wha/ ↩︎

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 20

Trending Articles