The World Health Organisation is on the brink of ratifying a treaty that would grant it authority to demand 20% of Britain’s vaccines and drugs during a pandemic. The Telegraphhas the story.
In March 2021, leaders including Boris Johnson announced plans for a new agreement that would bind countries in tackling global health emergencies.
The treaty was criticised for removing sovereign powers, raising fears that Britain would risk signing away its control over pandemic policy to unelected health officials. It has been substantially watered down in the final draft, released this month.
However, under the terms of the new agreement Britain would be obliged to give up 20% of “pandemic-related health products” and prevented from stockpiling supplies.
The updated document says countries must grant “at a minimum… in the event of a pandemic, real-time access by WHO to 20% (10% as a donation and 10% at affordable prices to WHO) of the production of safe, efficacious and effective pandemic-related health products”.
It states that parties should “set aside a portion of its total procurement of relevant diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccines in a timely manner for use in countries facing challenges… and avoid having national stockpiles of pandemic-related health products”.
But the scheme was criticised as “token” and there were fears it could mean vaccines being taken from where they are most needed and sent to areas not at risk, with foreign populations eligible to receive U.K.-manufactured vaccines before the British public.
Dr. David Bell, a global health expert and former WHO medical officer said: “The problem is that it bears no relationship to need. It seems token. As an example, COVID-19 was barely a problem in sub-Saharan Africa other than South Africa, as there is less than 1% of the population over 75, half are below 20 and metabolic disease rates are low.
“These things are best worked out in the context of the specific disease and population. I am unclear why this is in a treaty, as it is a general principle that is already followed and best addressed on a case-by-case basis. Otherwise, it forces an inappropriate allocation of resources. It seems arbitrary, which is not a good basis for a treaty.”
Britain was among the first countries to develop and roll out a Covid vaccine, the AstraZeneca jab, made at Oxford University, but was criticised by the global health community for holding on to its supply of jabs until it had a healthy surplus and offering a second dose before some poorer countries had been given a first.
You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.
Agreed.
And also throw all the traditional ones in at the same time, and those who promote them.
The world and its children would be in a much healthier state –
Britain was among the first countries to develop and roll out a Covid vaccine, the AstraZeneca jab, made at Oxford University, but was criticised by the global health community for holding on to its supply of jabs until it had a healthy surplus and offering a second dose before some poorer countries had been given a first.
Given the atrocious adverse effects and deaths those things caused from the get go, I’d say poorer countries got a lucky break.
I’ve not seen anything like enough evidence to justify the assumption that there is such a thing as a “covid vaccine”. There were products marketed as such, but sticking a label on something doesn’t make it the thing it claims to be. “Covid” itself is such a vague concept I am not sure how you could demonstrate that you had a “vaccine” against it – at least not in the traditional sense of how people understand the word “vaccine”.
Worth bearing in mind that “pandemics” of viral respiratory illness do not happen as Dr Mike Yeadon has stated repeatedly so there is no need for the taxpayers of this country to foot the bill for other countries “medicines,” witches brews.
Some of us have been warning about the loss of sovereignty for months. Pretending it is not going to happen especially with Kneel in Downing St is the height of dishonesty. We are going to be properly screwed over.
Agreed, but there have been changes to the definition of the term “vaccine”, without actually explaining it to the general public, perhaps to exploit common understanding to assist a products acceptance. There are many places where you can explore why it has been done, however, this site: https://vaccineknowledge.ox.ac.uk/how-do-vaccines-work still says on that page “Vaccines are designed to prevent disease, rather than treat a disease once you have caught it.” Of course, the product under consideration does not comply with that; at best it’s a trial drug to mitigate the symptoms, by the look of it. I suspect labelling it as a V is a get around method to cut corners on traditional new drug assessment & authorisation.
A minor update: the page I posted a link to was last updated on 3/1/2019. They haven’t got round to updating or deleting it yet. Maybe they’re too busy, a cynic might observe.
If you wanted to treat the symptoms, then people should have just taken Paracetamol or Ibuprofen, not some experimental untested concoction.
I apparently had it, but it was just an annoying cough, like many I’ve had previously. To keep the peace in the family (and save Christmas 2022) I very reluctantly agreed to a PCR test. They failed to mention the number of amplifications used on my test, I’m sure it was just an oversight on their part.
Actually paracetamol and ibuprofen are not to be encouraged either; they rot your liver and depressing a fever can lead to chronic illness later in life.. Best to have hot honey and lemon and maybe whisky and go to bed until you feel better…
“The World Health Organisation is on the brink of ratifying a treaty that would grant it authority to demand 20% of Britain’s vaccines and drugs during a pandemic”
Only 20%? They can can have the whole lot as far as I’m concerned. Good riddance to a dangerous waste.
wryobserver
1 year ago
This is a fine example of oxymoronic medicine. The UK is criticised for not releasing vaccine to poor and needy countries. Had it done so, it would have been pilloried for inflicting serious side effects on poor and needy citizens (I should add they were not needy of the vaccine because they were not at risk from COVID anyway). So instead of suffering abuse for enabling post colonial open trials it visited the side effects on its own people. I am sure that was not the altruistic motive of the government but that is the effect.
marebobowl
1 year ago
Yes britain killed many with the
wonderful Astra zeneca vaxx. Do you have any idea what the damages from the az covid vaxxes have done or will cost? People killed. I hope the U.K. gives away 100% of their vaxx supply. They harm and kill millions.
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.
Throwing 100% in the bin would be the safe and effective option.
Agreed.
And also throw all the traditional ones in at the same time, and those who promote them.
The world and its children would be in a much healthier state –
http://vaccinepapers.org/
You stole my thunder!
And mine.
But if they supplied to a third party it could also be remunerative – not that I’m recommending it’s production at all!
I wonder how much the WHO intends paying British taxpayers for handing over the jabs?
Let me guess …..
Mind you, I’m quite happy for them to have my one since I won’t be using it. I won’t even send them a bill.
Thus saving many thousands of UK lives..
Would be better if we had to hand over ALL of them…
Britain was among the first countries to develop and roll out a Covid vaccine, the AstraZeneca jab, made at Oxford University, but was criticised by the global health community for holding on to its supply of jabs until it had a healthy surplus and offering a second dose before some poorer countries had been given a first.
Given the atrocious adverse effects and deaths those things caused from the get go, I’d say poorer countries got a lucky break.
I’ve not seen anything like enough evidence to justify the assumption that there is such a thing as a “covid vaccine”. There were products marketed as such, but sticking a label on something doesn’t make it the thing it claims to be. “Covid” itself is such a vague concept I am not sure how you could demonstrate that you had a “vaccine” against it – at least not in the traditional sense of how people understand the word “vaccine”.
My thoughts exactly tof.
Worth bearing in mind that “pandemics” of viral respiratory illness do not happen as Dr Mike Yeadon has stated repeatedly so there is no need for the taxpayers of this country to foot the bill for other countries “
medicines,” witches brews.Some of us have been warning about the loss of sovereignty for months. Pretending it is not going to happen especially with Kneel in Downing St is the height of dishonesty. We are going to be properly screwed over.
Agreed, but there have been changes to the definition of the term “vaccine”, without actually explaining it to the general public, perhaps to exploit common understanding to assist a products acceptance. There are many places where you can explore why it has been done, however, this site: https://vaccineknowledge.ox.ac.uk/how-do-vaccines-work still says on that page “Vaccines are designed to prevent disease, rather than treat a disease once you have caught it.” Of course, the product under consideration does not comply with that; at best it’s a trial drug to mitigate the symptoms, by the look of it. I suspect labelling it as a V is a get around method to cut corners on traditional new drug assessment & authorisation.
So called covid “vaccines” were only ever authorised under emergency use which is just a catch-all for legitimising any old junk.
A minor update: the page I posted a link to was last updated on 3/1/2019. They haven’t got round to updating or deleting it yet. Maybe they’re too busy, a cynic might observe.
If you wanted to treat the symptoms, then people should have just taken Paracetamol or Ibuprofen, not some experimental untested concoction.
I apparently had it, but it was just an annoying cough, like many I’ve had previously. To keep the peace in the family (and save Christmas 2022) I very reluctantly agreed to a PCR test. They failed to mention the number of amplifications used on my test, I’m sure it was just an oversight on their part.
Actually paracetamol and ibuprofen are not to be encouraged either; they rot your liver and depressing a fever can lead to chronic illness later in life.. Best to have hot honey and lemon and maybe whisky and go to bed until you feel better…
Yes that was my grandmother’s recipe.
“The World Health Organisation is on the brink of ratifying a treaty that would grant it authority to demand 20% of Britain’s vaccines and drugs during a pandemic”
Only 20%? They can can have the whole lot as far as I’m concerned. Good riddance to a dangerous waste.
This is a fine example of oxymoronic medicine. The UK is criticised for not releasing vaccine to poor and needy countries. Had it done so, it would have been pilloried for inflicting serious side effects on poor and needy citizens (I should add they were not needy of the vaccine because they were not at risk from COVID anyway). So instead of suffering abuse for enabling post colonial open trials it visited the side effects on its own people. I am sure that was not the altruistic motive of the government but that is the effect.
Yes britain killed many with the
wonderful Astra zeneca vaxx. Do you have any idea what the damages from the az covid vaxxes have done or will cost? People killed. I hope the U.K. gives away 100% of their vaxx supply. They harm and kill millions.