The World Health Organisation is gearing up to persuade the world’s governments to sign a new pandemic treaty in May that would allow the unelected body to seize power over nation states in future pandemics, warns Matt Ridley in the Mail. Here’s an excerpt.
Though called an ‘accord’ so as not to frighten democrats who still like that old-fashioned thing called accountability, it is a significant power grab by an unelected body that seems determined now to set down rules for how countries should react to future pandemics. Never waste a good crisis, as the saying goes.
Yet the WHO has a terrible track record in managing epidemics, not least in its response to COVID-19, where it made a series of bad mistakes and did China’s bidding. The Pandemic Accord would be a reward for failure.
Last month Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s Director-General, tweeted plaintively: “There’s a litany of lies and conspiracy theories about the #PandemicAccord.
“Let me tell you what the accord is about — it’s a set of commitments by countries to strengthen the world’s defences in several areas: prevention with a One Health approach; health and care workforce; research and development; access to vaccines, treatments and tests; sharing of information, technology and biological samples. What is so problematic about those commitments?”
This sounds lovely. But buried within the proposed treaty, and a parallel set of recommended changes to the International Health Regulations, is a grant to the WHO of power to instruct governments on how to manage societies during a pandemic, vesting that power in the Director-General.
These undertakings would be “legally binding” as the G20 leaders stated in Bali in 2022 and New Delhi in 2023.
The suggested amendment leaves little doubt as to who would be in charge: “States… recognise WHO as the guidance and coordinating authority of international public health response during public health Emergency of International Concern and undertake to follow WHO’s recommendations in their international public health response.”
What would this mean for the Swedish Government, which decided against fully locking down society and closing schools, avoiding the devastating economic consequences of lockdown without suffering worse excess deaths than other countries? Could it do so next time?
The accord would oblige countries to greatly increase funding of the WHO in the event of a pandemic, to pay for the “containment of spill-over at source” and to hand over products such as vaccines “in accordance with timetables to be agreed between the WHO and manufacturers”. Would Britain under such strictures be permitted to roll out its vaccine programme with the remarkable efficiency it did from 2021 onwards?
Countries would also agree to limit criticism of the WHO in order to “combat false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”. This very article could in theory be censored by our government at the behest of the WHO.
The recent track record of the body to which our Government is about to hand such powers and funds does not inspire confidence.
Worth reading in full.
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.
Well done both of you, you have my gratitude and admiration for the path you are taking.
Seconded
being deselected from attending an event show the range of censorship being applied to those who step out of line and off message. As for Ms Harries, hopefully there is a place somewhere warm for her in the afterlife.
meanwhile, please keep up the good work. Thank you
We may assume the event was tax payer funded so a Parliamentary question ought to be asked about why you were excluded, why they did not sell all the tickets and what was the purpose and outcome.
Indeed, furthermore deselected from an event to which only invited are those with vested interested in pushing vaccines, and nobody who would caution against their rampant use… A nice balanced discussion it must have been, of course!
Could have been an April Fool’s joke, of course. If so it is one of the worst in history!
You deserve the title “Doctor”, Doctor Dalgleish.
But. There. Was. No. Pandemic!
There was a “pandemic”, but only under the new definition of pandemic which reduces the threshold of severity for it to be categorized as such. Furthermore, it’s a “pandemic” we have to be told about: Of course many people are bereaved and my heart goes out to them, but have we really experienced a “pandemic”? I would say no. Many years in the recent past have witnessed excessive spikes in death levels due to being a bad flu year. If our metric for classing an event as a pandemic is the collapse of the health services, then at least this country has experienced a “pandemic” every winter for as long as I can remember!
With all due respect the “science” here on DS has long been settled:
“There. Was. No. Pandemic!”
I was a bit wary when reading this article, on account of the date! April fools day in the morning. However, a possible answer to the first question is that they need to shift the stock they purchased before it all goes off, after it’s “shelf life”. The usual UK shenanigans across the fiscal year boundary might have had an effect as well.
Yeah, roll on summer, warm days, barmy nights, BBQs, holidays, on the beach, swimming in the sea, ice creams, fish and chips and who could forget summer boosters.
An excellent article, thank you. The Uriah Heep School of Obsequiousness; perfection.
I’m not sure these pharmafia minions are in denial, so much as fully aware of their collusion/collaboration, standing with their fingers in their ears saying la la la and hoping the dam doesn’t breach before they’ve taken their swag and fully retired.
It’s a bit like Custer’s Last Stand. Or are they between Roche and a hard place?
I posted this article in the NR yesterday so it’s good to see it being given an editorial push.
Are your death jab boosters in the UK being recommended for anyone who wants them or only those deemed ”high risk” from Covid? Over here the authorities are saying only those at high risk of getting ill should get any more as everyone else has immunity and the virus is now endemic.
Anyway, on the subject of increased cancer rates…no surprises really given what we now know about how the clot shots are responsible for screwing up people’s immune systems. Here’s an account from an ex-pharma exec, looking at the increase in cancer drug sales as further evidence rates are increasing;
”In the last two months, I had three family members diagnosed with cancer (thankfully, none have dropped dead suddenly). All of them are triple-jabbed with the Pfizer mRNA experiment.
It made me curious because I was expecting more cases of Myocarditis and cardiac-related issues to crop up. Still, from my direct personal social circles, it looks like the cancer is accelerating.
In-Market Sales data shows a more accurate demand for drugs because hospitals, clinics and pharmacies purchase them. Usually, they keep a fixed level of stock (for example, 30 days’ worth of inventory), and they do some forecast to ensure stock levels stays stable. If a particular drug is used up faster than expected, they will purchase more in the next cycle.
Since governments are hell-bent on fudging/delaying diagnosis data, we can use in-market sales to examine what’s happening in the market.”
https://pharmafiles.substack.com/p/explosive-dataset-showing-increase
Thanks for this. I didn’t know or had forgotten that EU big cheese Fonda Lyin’s husband is a doctor who runs a pharma co subsidiary of fizer. https://twitter.com/Resist_05/status/1583065527483715584
Small world ain’t it?
It’s all a hideous spider’s web, a la judge’s brooch.
The last time I heard anything about it was for age over 75. Admittedly that was on the BBC R4 world propaganda programme early this morning.
In the UK the booster vaccines are available for the most vulnerable to medical propaganda, such as residents in care homes:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65138237
The MHRA say SAEs of 1 in 800 is rare? If everyone in this country had the jab, that would be 85,000 people either dead, disabled or hospitalised with serious injury. That’s pretty much a 2023 Turkish earthquake here in the UK.
Their definition of “safety” is weird. It’s as if the pharmaceutical and medical trade is in a foreign country, compared with many branches of engineering that deal with safety related systems. There is a well established numerical methodology called ‘Safety Integrity Level’ (SIL); Lot’s of info about that lot, e.g. https://www.crossco.com/resources/articles/determining-safety-integrity-levels-for-your-process-application/ That one is about industrial processes. The general concept is valid in all sorts of modern system design.
Note the function between frequency and hazard severity. They don’t talk about this concept in medicine, at least not when dealing with the general public.
I think it’s even worse than that because the 1 in 800 figure relates to the number of injections. According to the Government’s website there have been approximately 145 million injections administered in England, which would work out to approximately 181,000 serious adverse events. But if Dr Dalgleish and others are correct that the boosters are more harmful than the first two doses, then the number of serious adverse events would be higher still. As if that’s not enough, I don’t think the 1 in 800 figure includes SAEs that occur after a period of months.
If I am wrong about this, I am happy to be corrected.
I just found my husband’s vaccine card: Spaces for 6 jabs, 5 filled out with Moderna since April 2021. So CDC printed those cards knowing there’d be numerous jabs given. So far, he doesn’t have any side effects that he’s told me about. (We don’t discuss covid anymore). He even had the flu-covid double jab, one in each arm in January, right before the “whoops, taking the flu and covid jabs at the same time increases risk of stroke” announcement. He’s 59, healthy and fit. Ridiculous that an intelligent man fell for all this.
Oh dear, and yet they are intelligent men just don’t want to consider that the status quo which has always been on their side up until now might possibly be harmful to them!!!!
But some still insist the whole thing, is down to error, hasty decisions in the face of the unknown, bumbling incompetence, some Ministers drunk with power.
It is evil and an organised attempt at power and control by a few over the masses on a global scale.
Well if a picture is worth a thousand words then this graph kind of says it all. I’ll be interested to see if births go back up to normal levels this year in the UK and elsewhere. 2022 could be just a blip, after all…;
https://docbrown77.substack.com/p/the-decrease-in-births-in-2022-in
What a good spot. Talk about the UKHSA not seeing the wood for the trees!
The tide has changed. In 2021 and 2022 I was receiving formal complaints for my attitude to Covid rules and vaccination harms. Now most patients are grateful to have their post vaccine problems taken seriously.
Last Thursday I received an invitation from the National Death Service for a “spring booster”. Naturally I declined. Yesterday I got a text asking if I wanted to avoid future invitations. Naturally I accepted! Perhaps that was their idea of an April Fool’s joke
This aligns almost exactly with what Andrew Bridgen said in his speech to an empty parliament when all but 2 politicians who weren’t there by the need to follow procedure decided to show no interest in their constituents’ health by their mass exit from the chamber.
This demonstrates what a despicable bunch of morons our politicians are and none of them not present for this speech deserve our vote.