Do the words ‘global’ and ‘health’ fit together meaningfully? After COVID-19, a pandemic now announced as essentially over by lockdown zealots such as Jacinda Ardern and Joe Biden (and with even the World Health Organisation saying the “end is in sight”), it is timely to review this aspect of globalisation. On the one hand, it seems obvious that a contagious disease in one country could easily be spread around the world, justifying a concern with health at global level. On the other hand, most people do not go around worrying about, say, the prevalence of diabetes mellitus on a distant continent. They do not lose sleep over something as abstract or nebulous as global health, any more than global happiness or global diet.
The concept of global health needs scrutiny, because as suspected with COVID-19, underlying motives (such as digital identity systems) may be driving its promotion. Despite good intentions, it is now a battering ram in the battle to move the planet towards all manner of initiatives which have less to do with health and more to do with politics. And those politics are ostensibly in pursuance of progressive ideology. In this article we aim to demonstrate the true nature of global health with reference to the World Health Organisation (WHO), Global Health Now, the organ of the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, and the Lancet.
What is global health?
Global health is neither readily definable nor is it clear when the term was first used. Back in the 1950s, some epidemiologists referred to global health but more commonly used the term ‘international health’. The latter remains in use, but while there was a fivefold increase in its frequency of use in academic journals, there was an increase of over 700 times in the use of ‘global health’ by the new millennium.
One study of people in the field of international health showed that “about half felt that there was no need for a new terminology and that the label ‘global health’ was meaningless jargon”. Others who were in favour of the new term “seemed unable clearly to articulate or define it”. The current definition provided in Wikipedia and taken from a 2009 article in the Lancet is “the area of study, research and practice that places a priority on improving health and achieving equity in health for all people worldwide”. That may seem philanthropic, but let’s see how that’s going.
World Health Organisation
If anywhere can be considered the epicentre of global health, it is in Geneva at the offices of the World Health Organisation, which is charged with being:
…the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. It is responsible for providing leadership on global health issues, shaping the health research agenda, setting norms and standards, articulating evidence-based policy options, providing technical support to countries and monitoring and assessing health trends.
As can be seen, ‘global health’ is to the fore here, but it is interesting to examine how WHO sets the agenda. Whereas most people assume that the agency is funded by the constituent countries of the United Nations, this is only partly correct. In the early 1990s, one study showed there was “a crucial shift from predominant reliance on WHO’s ‘regular budget’ – drawn from member states’ contributions on the basis of population size and gross national product – to greatly increased dependence on extrabudgetary funding”.
In the mid-1980s, extrabudgetary funds reached $437 million, which was close to the regular budget of $543 million. However, in the early 1990s, it exceeded the regular budget by $21 million thereby constituting 54% of the WHO budget. Prominent amongst these funders is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which in 2021 contributed $789 million, exceeding the U.S. contribution by $50 million. It is little wonder, therefore, that Bill Gates was able to spearhead the response to COVID-19.
As we will show, the pervasive influence of the Gates Foundation is apparent almost anywhere the term ‘global health’ appears. As well as bankrolling the WHO, the Gates Foundation is a prominent funder of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and it has supported the work of at least two Lancet global health commissions, the Lancet Global Health Commission on High Quality Health Systems in the SDG Era and the Lancet Commission on Education of Health Professionals for the 21st Century. More recently, the undue influence of the Gates Foundation on the universal COVID-19 vaccine rollout was exposed in joint Politico and WELT report titled “How Bill Gates and Partners Used their Clout to Control the Global Covid Response – With Little Oversight”.
The starting premise of the Politico report is that early in the pandemic there was “a steady, almost inexorable shift in power from the overwhelmed governments to a group of non-governmental organisations” and that these organisations “took on roles often played by governments – but without the accountability of governments”. An anonymous former senior U.S. health official is reported to have said: “You have to remember that when you’re dealing with the Gates Foundation, it’s almost like you’re dealing with another major country in terms of their donations to these global health organisations.”
Global Health Now
The Global Health Now newsletter is issued five days per week. Arguably, it is a prime propagandist of the philosophy and practice of global health. Unquestioningly pro-vaccine across the board, it heavily pushed the COVID-19 vaccine rollout and was also an unquestioning supporter of mask mandates, lockdowns and social distancing. For example, while there was no mention of the DANMASK study, the only rigorous population-based trial of face masks (finding that they were not significantly effective), Global Health News reported favourably on the large natural experiment studying face masks in Bangladesh without indicating its manifest flaws and insignificant results. The bulletin extolled the virtues of Finland, where lockdowns were imposed and largely obeyed, and compared it unfavourably with Sweden, which it transpires fared well without them. Global Health News has ignored the ineffectiveness and socio-economic detriment of lockdown. Searching ‘myocarditis’ on its website only brings up reference to post-Covid myocarditis and not the acknowledged link to the COVID-19 vaccines.
Otherwise, Global Health News comments on politically sensitive topics such as gun laws and abortion; favouring more control of the former and greater availability of the latter. Pollution is covered (but without reference to China) and the climate change agenda is accepted uncritically. The scientific case for a climate crisis is easily contestable. ‘Net Zero’ policies will undoubtedly have deleterious effects on health, but Global Health News is singing from the same hymn sheet as other globalist media. Road traffic accidents, which obviously have adverse health consequences are, remarkably, described in one entry as a “public health crisis”. This suggests that there is no limit to the scope of global health pronouncements and programmes.
The Lancet
The prestigious medical journal, the Lancet, is another major mouthpiece for the global health agenda. With its generic coverage, the Lancet makes an important contribution to all areas of healthcare, but there is a strong and perhaps hubristic editorial commitment to the global health agenda. One of us (RW) attended a conference at National University of Singapore in 2014 that was jointly addressed by previous JAMA editor Howard Bauchner and long-standing Lancet editor Richard Horton. The audience was told by Horton that the Lancet is less a medical journal and more of an NGO.
A recent report by the Lancet, resulting from one of their many commissions, into the international response to COVID-19, lambasted many governments for their inadequate and poorly coordinated responses. Inevitably, the claim was made that a multitude of lives would have been saved if governments had locked down sooner and harder. The report continues to recommend masks and social distancing, despite the abject lack of evidence. The WHO comes in for some criticism, also for acting tardily and with insufficient vigour to the emergence of COVID-19. Nevertheless, the Lancet report, among other things, recommends positioning WHO as the lead institution for responding to emerging infectious diseases and reforming its governance to create a new WHO Global Health Board to support decision making in urgent and controversial matters. This was all enthusiastically reported in Global Health News.
Conclusion
The bodies described here are not the only ones concerned with global health, but they are certainly three of the most prominent. What we see is analogous to the Woozle phenomenon in academic publishing, so described in Winnie The Pooh when Pooh and Piglet keep going in circles under the impression they are hunting Heffalumps and Woozles, only to find that the footsteps they are following are their own. In the field of global health, the impression is given that there are many independent entities involved, but scratching the surface shows that some of these are hydra heads with the same body. In this case the common denominator is the Gates Foundation.
Global health could be a boon for the progress of humanity, but it depends on who is funding and managing it. All that is global is not gold. Arguably, the response to COVID-19 showed that powerful actors in the health domain have been building a Tower of Babel. And we know what happened to that globalist project.
Both Professor Roger Watson and Dr. Niall McCrae are Registered Nurses.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Many say he’s a psychopath. I think he’s just a bit thick.
His own blog shows this very clearly. Especially this little article, from 2016:
https://www.gatesnotes.com/development/smells-of-success
Read that and tell me he’s intelligent.
And the fact he hasn’t removed it. No wonder India has banned the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation from operating in India.
Sorry Joe I started reading it and then realised I couldn’t be arsed. I did have a brief flick through his book in Waterstones it was incredibly simplistic and the illustrations were infantile. Not really the type you would want influencing “world health”. The only thing he is interested in is power and wealth and the covid scam (he helped create) has given him the perfect opportunity to increase both. He doesn’t give two flying f**ks about anybodies health.
Oh I couldn’t agree more, Jabba. Just disputing the psychopath assertion.
I owe my career to Microsoft, so I used to respect him, and used to read his blog.
Then, in 2016, reading that article, I woke up.
And then when in February 2020, he resigned completely from Microsoft to “focus on humanitarian efforts”, I was certain about his idiocy and myopia.
I think he got interested in helping ‘those poor Africans’ about 20 years ago, when he realised he had more money than sense. I think this started out as being a ‘give something back’ type interest, but he’s just been overtaken by it. Its well beyond his scope and expertise, and he’s just a dangerous meddler, as you often find in people who are geniuses* in their own field, they seem to imagine that it is magically applicable to every other challenge on the planet.
*I am a survivor of Windows Vista. So ‘genius’ comes with some caveats…
Agreed, possibly not a psychopath but certainly paranoid, demonstrating a textbook example of the Messiah Complex.
And congratulations to India for their common sense. Possibly the result of having hosted too many dodgy fakirs in their time?
“The directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system”.
Yes. Which means their recommendations will tend towards creating an increased role for the UN, the same as with the environment and the climate scare.
As for Billy boy, people like him are a poison in the body of science and health. He is a known eugenicist and using his clout to continue the failed policies of the 1930s by other means and on record as wanting to reduce the world population, and also has a serious conflict of interest with big pharma.
People like the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service should be given more of a say on public health but won’t be, and not for scientific reasons
orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v16n04.shtml
No, vitamin C and vitamin D won’t turn a nice profit for Billy boy and, shock horror, might prevent governments giving experimental medication emergency authorisation (and liability exemption for big pharma). Hence those rigged vitamin D trials (and the nonsense about ivermectin – except in Uttar Pradesh), and maybe the death of Tanzania’s president and his on-message replacement.
And by the way, what is Paypal doing defunding TDS (See GB News, “Mark Steyn” (hosted by Mark Dolan) show tonight) ? Maybe these twerps should tell us what financial interests they have in the matter?
Be very clear, Paypal can for now be considered enemies of free speech, and should be avoided where possible.
Maybe we should have a story on what some of these tech companies are up to?
NB Paypal have basically said no comment. Let’s hear what these muppets are really up to. Toby has rightly said he will have no more to do with them, and I suggest others follow suit.
I ditched PayPal when they did the same thing to the FLCCC several months ago. This latest thing comes as no surprise and I now wouldn’t touch them with a bargepole.
Very difficult to contact them in order to give them the benefit of your opinion, though.
check the online reviews of PayPal at TrustPilot. 1/5 usually.
That high??
All these global bodies hate ordinary people. Every crisis is being manufactured.
WE need to keep protesting and spreading the message
Yellow Boards By The Road
There are wolves and sheep. We are the sheep dogs.
Thursday 22nd September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A30 London Rd &
A325 Portsmouth Road
Camberley GU15 3UZ
Friday 23rd September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction Long Hill Road, New Forest Ride &
A329 London Rd (near Mercedes Benz)
Bracknell RG12 9FR
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
This 2 minute vid sums up the corruption involved in the WHO and how ‘Teddy boy,’ of all people, was appointed its leader;
https://rumble.com/vuqft6-who-is-w.h.o.-.html
I’m not sure why the author assumes that the “global health” racket he describes is based on good intentions.
I have yet to encounter a racket that wasn’t intended primarily to benefit the racketeers.
I knew Bill Gates was a danger to humanity the moment I saw him in early 2020 do the rounds on network television advocating lockdowns.
It’s good to see some momentum gathering against him. He needs to be stopped.
He’s a Chunt but moving on I’ve just watched Tobias 77th Elwood on Mark Dolans GB news talking bollocks about our billions of squid going to Ukraine , he’s well dodgy ! Also any views on the silencing of Alex Belfield for 5,1/2 long years ???…
Re Alex I am truly gutted about it. In the words of Ian Hislop if this is justice then I am a banana.
We need to support Toby and this website
‘Something more sinister is going on’ | Toby Young on Paypal shutting down payments to his websites
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tmDLssmC68
‘This is the new battlefront in the ongoing war against free speech… financial services being withdrawn from people.’ Founder of the Free Speech Union and the Daily Sceptic, Toby Young, speaks to Mark Dolan about his organisations being blocked by Paypal.
GBNews
Hold your head high and don’t let yourself get depressed
Even though the world is getting crazier each day, you can keep sane by doing Yellow Boards By The Road
There are wolves and sheep. We are the sheep dogs.
Thursday 22nd September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A30 London Rd &
A325 Portsmouth Road
Camberley GU15 3UZ
Friday 23rd September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction Long Hill Road, New Forest Ride &
A329 London Rd (near Mercedes Benz)
Bracknell RG12 9FR
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
coercive control is characterised by a pretence of ‘helping’ the victim, while simultaneously causing injury to the victim.
Dr David Bell wrote a very good short piece about the state of global public health;
https://www.pandata.org/the-naked-absurdity-of-global-public-health/
I trust Bill Gates rather less than the Chinese Communist Party.
After all, the latter has people who may be evil but are intelligent.
Interesting bit of Gates gossip in this vid – back in 2017 Trump was prompted to investigate vaccine damage. gates advised him ‘that would be a dead end’ *of course*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXHT8-pN5H4
advised by no less than RFK Jr
What does evil look like? Bill Gates. He locked up the world to enrich himself and most likely raped young girls on Epstein’s island.
We’re looking at a modern dictator, with the intention of superceding democracy, in effect.
Resident Biden tells us the (Hoax) er, the pandemic is over. His mail in the voting scam is done
It’s utterly frightening that this narcissistic psychotic can wield such power because of the amount of money he has. This is the same man who told us the scamdemic wouldn’t be over until we had vaccinated the world!….
Well Africa seems to have done very well without the ‘magic potion’, and yet they are still insisting on making them take it….money allows coercion of the worst kind..
I have tried but can see nothing but illegitimate power, profit and evil emanating from this man and everything he touches…
“the area of study, research and practice that places a priority on improving health and achieving equity in health for all people worldwide”
I find the work equity when used in relation to healthcare chilling. Having worked in a Cinderella service within the NHS since 1985 I know all too well about the pressure to provide an ‘equitable’ service. Way back in 1990 the demand for community SLT was so high that waiting times were in the order of 6-8 months as the service was grossly underfunded (caseloads carried by each SLT for a full-time post was between 100 – 150). The boss’ solution to this was to have her clinician’s work their sessions from one or two clinics so that they weren’t spending their time travelling when they should have been eating or could have been carrying out clinical work. She identified clinics with an appropriate room (not a cupboard as had been offered – I kid you not), with good bus links & all referrals were offered a choice of clinic. Some refused to travel to the nearest clinic as it was too far away. Their choice. Others complained that they couldn’t be seen locally whilst refusing to travel & the majority opted for the clinic location offered.
The boss put her foot down & gave the management a headache by stating that they had three options: continue with the status quo & provide the best quality service even if it wasn’t the most equitable; provide an equitable but poor quality service whilst running her clinical staff into the ground or they could expand the service to ensure a quality equitable service. She however refused to run with the second option.
Guess what? We had 4 new WTE posts created within 3 months!!!
Equity in healthcare in my experience usually correlates with crap healthcare provision. But hey! Its equitable.