Last week, amid fanfare from both advocates and opponents of centralisation of future pandemic management, the world continued its unfortunate stumble back to old-fashioned public health fascism. The World Health Assembly (WHA) adopted the package of amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), apparently just hours after a final text had been agreed by its IHR working group. The amendments were watered down from previous proposals under which countries would undertake to place areas of their citizen’s health and human rights under the direction of a single individual in Geneva. Nonetheless, they lay vital groundwork for the further subversion of public health towards a recurrent and lucrative cycle of fearmongering, suppression and coercion.
A day previous, the draft Pandemic Agreement (treaty) had been put back for further negotiation for up to 12 months, undoubtedly a set-back for the World Health Organisation (WHO) Director General and his major private and national donors. Chief among the reasons seems to be a continuing reluctance of African countries (and some others) to roll back healthcare to a pre-WHO colonialist model. This is understandable, but African countries are heavily indebted, especially since the economy-shattering response to COVID-19 that WHO and others convinced, or coerced, them to follow.
It seems likely that a reformed Intergovernmental Negotiation Body (INB) will be more circumspect in the way it manages debate over coming months, and external pressure on countries will be ramped up. There is much at stake, hundreds of billions in profit per pandemic if COVID-19 is a guide. Countries with major Pharma interests take this seriously. So do the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, who have previously signalled strong support.
The key IHR amendments were adopted
The IHR amendments passed by the WHA appear mostly innocuous and have been widely reported as such. They add catch phrases like equity in a context of intent to push commodity-based responses and restrictions of freedom that clearly increase inequity, and emphasise the needs of low-income countries whilst commoditising pandemic responses to the benefit of Western institutions. However, the important gain for the WHO and its backers (almost 80% of the WHO’s work is specified directly by its funders) is the wording that further strengthens surveillance (Annex 1) – the key element on which the rest of the business case around future pandemics hinges. This is adopted, and there is a willing workforce to make it happen.
Surveillance ─ identifying threats early and responding ─ seems an obvious thing to support. Doubtless most country delegations were supporting them on that basis. It is particularly aimed at detecting passage of potential pathogens from animals to humans, as in the current publicity around avian (bird) flu. This seeming obvious public good is why this whole agenda has got so far, and why it is so easy to sell to anyone who has not stopped to think.
The justification for increased surveillance put forward by the WHO is hollow. COVID-19 now looks almost certain to have resulted from gain of function research and a subsequent lab leak. The U.S. congressional hearing currently underway is demonstrating that prominent scientists who wrote letters denigrating the rather obvious lab-origin hypothesis agreed in early 2020 that this was indeed likely. You don’t stop the next Covid-like event, therefore, by spending tens of billions per year on surveillance of wet markets, farms and forest dwellers. You just watch a few labs, improve lab security or, if you are serious, stop gain of function research. The other justification behind the WHO’s agenda, that outbreak risk is increasing, is demonstrated to have been grossly misrepresented by WHO, the World Bank and the G20 High Level Panel. The last major acute natural pandemic, as the WHO generally defines them, was the Spanish Flu over a century ago.
‘Spillover’ of potential pathogens from animals underlay the pre-antibiotic Spanish Flu, and also the probable origin of HIV from a simian (primate) immunodeficiency virus. The main spillover event of HIV is considered likely to have occurred before WHO was inaugurated over 75 years ago. Apart from relatively minor influenza outbreaks (that we already have a surveillance operation to deal with), other zoonotic-spillover outbreaks have had relatively tiny mortality since.
The West African Ebola outbreak, while bad locally, killed fewer people than four days of tuberculosis. The first SARS outbreak in 2003 resulted in just eight hours of tuberculosis deaths. However, funding from tuberculosis management, which deteriorated since the onset of Covid, will be further diverted to this surveillance operation for hypothetical natural threats that have not eventuated in over a century.
Basic nutrition funding also declined during COVID-19, despite the number of children with malnutrition rising. The WHO’s agenda, tightly controlled by its funding, is inevitably shifting from population health to the health of Pharma and laboratory research. The Western research community has simply proven more powerful than the communities that WHO was supposed to serve. Money has a way of salving pricks of conscience, and people need a job.
Building the industry’s foundations
So, to understand what is going on here, the original programme within the proposed Pandemic Agreement and IHR amendments must be understood. A massive surveillance operation will be monitored and directed by the WHO, or a committee under WHO oversight. Its main focus will be the identification of viral variants that spillover from animals to humans (‘zoonotic spillover’) or have potential to do so. Many will be found, because this is nature. Sixty years ago, such outbreaks were hidden in the background of disease noise, but now we have clever technology to distinguish them. The IHR will ramp up the use of these technologies and publicise ‘threats’ ─ and a ‘threat’ is all that is needed to trigger a ‘Pandemic Emergency’ response.
Once a threat is identified, the Director General can recommend a series of measures including border closures, quarantine and mandated medical examinations. These were once considered extreme, but became mainstream in 2020 for a virus that kills mostly chronically-sick people at an average age of about 80. The media, heavily sponsored by Pharma, supports this approach, while social media companies have signalled that proclamations from the WHO shall be considered the dominant, and perhaps only, allowable narrative. An IHR amendment noting the importance of suppressing contrary opinion was among those accepted in Geneva.
The WHO will share samples of newly identified viral variants with its preferred pharmaceutical companies. It will then manage the regulatory passage of their 100-day mRNA vaccines (with taxpayer support) and arrange both the market (freedom through vaccination) and liability protection (through publicly-funded insurance schemes). At least this is the intent ─ as described elsewhere. The delay in the proposed Pandemic Agreement has slowed down parts of the whole, but the 100-day vaccine programme is well underway.
So, the groundwork is laid for the ‘surveillance-declare threat-lockdown-coerced mass vaccination’ approach that has been in brewing as an idea among Pharma-related circles for over a decade, and forms such an unbeatable way of extracting money from others, whilst appearing on a superficial level to be altruistic. There are solid reasons why penalties for fraud are seen by Pharma as just another business expense. There are also reasons why coercion and conflict of interest were once considered incompatible with public health. However, the growing army of public health bureaucrats and researchers now dependent on this model have a strong interest in making it happen and are vocal in their support.
Returning public health to its unedifying roots
COVID-19 proved this paradigm can concentrate wealth and power at an unprecedented rate. The WHO, transformed over recent decades from an international organisation answerable to all Member States to a public-private partnership directly responsive to its major funders, is the obvious tool to bring this together. But the World Bank has its own pandemic fund, the World Economic Forum of private rich people has cemented its influence over national leaders, and the United Nations Secretariat has its coming Summit for the Future in September 2024. The noise in Geneva over the past two weeks constitutes just a part of this behemoth of centralised control and, of course, centralisation of wealth.
Colonialism in the 19th century was built on ‘equity and inclusion’. The colonies needed to be conquered and suppressed so that the benefits of another’s superior civilisation could be foisted on them for their own good. Slavery was sometimes justified in a similar manner. European fascism and the eugenics and technocracy movements of early 20th century North America were based on similar principles. What we are seeing from the international public health establishment is no different, and will be no less nasty in its outcomes. The IHR amendments we have just seen adopted, like the early policies of Mussolini, will be important in building the machine required to run it.
We have just taken a further step down the road to a world built on false claims and the rule of self-declared experts. This is not something that can be ‘won’ but an unending battle against human greed and self-interest that will always be with us. The hard part is to recognise the intent through the mix of fear (keep watching bird flu) and flowery verbiage. When those who advocate a change are the ones who stand to gain at others’ expense, and when they misrepresent the risks of failing to follow their lead, we should start to understand. Greed is not a new problem.
The recent months of negotiations have shown that many involved in the process are recognising potential harms, and a few countries are raising reservations. However, self-interest, coercion and propaganda are a powerful combination. Those pushing medical fascism, and those enchanted by it, are very much in control. A further step down this fascist road is no victory. But if we keep exposing false narratives and refuse to comply with stupidity, there are signs that the worst of the current agenda may yet be derailed. Truth remains the chief enemy of all that is currently being forced on the world by a self-entitled few.
Dr. David Bell is a clinical and public health physician with a PhD in population health and background in internal medicine, modelling and epidemiology of infectious disease. Previously, he was Director of the Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in the USA, Programme Head for Malaria and Acute Febrile Disease at FIND in Geneva, and coordinating malaria diagnostics strategy with the World Health Organisation. He is a Senior Scholar at the Brownstone Institute.
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.
Can the Democrats really be that damn stupid? By making Trump a convicted criminal in the eyes of a hot and horny Democrat court, whilst the Biden laptop scandal was knowingly buried, they make the guy a living martyr. It can only serve to bolster the Republican vote by adding a small handful of Democrats still remotely capable of thought (good luck finding any). I can’t help thinking that those involved have just excitedly experienced their first beer goggle-fuelled one night stand and must have woken up, slipped on their rainbow pyjamas, and ruefully began wiping up the mess with their Ukrainian flag whilst trying to dismiss the feeling of having done something horribly wrong.
There are reports that the Democrats, and co, had a plan that might have worked, if Hillary had won in in 2016, but someone pipped her to the post.
And it appears the ‘greatest political minds’ (on the Left) created a Plan that could not be ammended, leading to the result that we are witnessing.
But it is only a report.
An unwillingness to admit that “the system” or some individual within it has done something horribly wrong is a major cause of the crisis the UK, and I suspect the US, is currently facing. I keep finding cases where junior employees of some public body are fully aware that there has been the most almighty cock-up, which is publicly denied, though privately accepted, by senior employees. The UK system requires that everybody participate in a cover-up. At junior level this is might be collusion with an erring work colleague to falsify or lose documentation; at senior level whole ministries, NGOs and judges can be brought into play to cover each other’s backside and maintain the illusion of government competence, beneficence and integrity. The US seem to have a similar problem, but with more lawyers and money involved.
I’m not so sure.
Trump needs “moderates” to win.
I am.not so sure how moderates are going to feel about voting for someone who will now be repeatedly referred to as a convicted felon.
It’s a level of cognitive dissonance that will be hard for many ti deal with.
Up to now it has been possible for people to support Trump on the basis that Biden is a bad choice, that Trump has good ideas, basically they can convince themselves that Trump for all his flaws might still be a better choice.
Now, to continue supporting him means accepting that the legal system. Is a sham and that their beloved America is no better than a banana republic.. That is a big step for many.
No doubt his hard core supporters are unfazed, they already think their country has gone to the dogs. But so called moderates that he needs aren’t quite there. And whether they will mentally cross over remains to me a big question.
A question to which I do not know the answer is whether Americans have more faith in their government and judicial system than the British have in theirs. I float the idea that citizens of both have great confidence in their own “system” until one day they come into conflict with that system and suffer the numerous tricks it can play to ensure its continuance in power regardless of its drift into insanity and towards collapse.
The Establishment will do what they have to do to prevent Trump from winning the Presidency.
I think trying to win back or secure the votes of moderates is Plan A for the Democrats. If they can keep it close, they can engage in vote-rigging as necessary to secure the Election.
But, if that doesn’t transpire and Trump is well ahead in the polls over the next couple of months (which I think is likely), then Plan B comes into play. Alex Jones on Twitter believes the Democrats are planning a false-flag terrorist event which would be pinned on Trump’s supporters. This could be used as the premise to declare a state of emergency, allowing the Election to be suspended.
It’s an interesting point. Personally, I think any possible loss of votes from those weak-minded people will be more than countered by an increase in votes from minority groups who will feel the system is against them and now see Trump as one of them – someone at odds with the system. I guess we’ll see.
Is this really the state of beautiful Dublin nowadays? And where are all these people meant to be housed because they can’t camp on the pavements long-term? Any inside intel, Dings?
”Dublin, traditionally a city of vibrant nightlife and rich cultural heritage, is now confronting a challenging reality as makeshift encampments of African migrants appear along the grand Liffey River.
Originating from the U.K., these newcomers are estimated to be around 2,000 by the Irish Refugee Council, with media reports indicating a weekly influx of approximately 250 new arrivals. The presence of these encampments is drawing parallels with the infamous migrant camps in Calais, France, sparking fears among local business owners that the central city area might deter tourists.
The influx of migrants to Dublin is linked to a deal between the U.K and Rwanda, which proposes deporting boat arrivals from France to Rwanda, where they would await asylum processing. In reaction to this news, many migrants have moved to Ireland, anticipating that they will not be sent to Rwanda from there.
The Irish government, caught between a humanitarian approach and public discontent, is pressuring London to take back the unwanted migrants, who represent over 90 percent of the 7,000 illegal migrants who have arrived in Ireland this year after having previously applied for asylum in England or Scotland.”
https://rmx.news/commentary/paranoia-flourishes-tension-grows-in-ireland-as-tent-encampments-spread-throughout-dublin/
Within that re-mix article we find
Originating? I don’t think so.
That article – despite it stating “LAST UPDATED: MAY 29, 2024″ – is out of date:
On 1st May, this happened:
‘Irish police have begun clearing the “shanty town” of asylum seekers living in tents outside the International Protection Office in Dublin.
The operation to dismantle the so-called “tent city” housing about 200 migrants on lower Mount Street in the city centre began at 6.30 am on Wednesday.
Taoiseach Simon Harris told the Irish Parliament on Tuesday that the tents would be cleared and not be allowed to return.
“We need to make sure that the laws of the land are applied and it is not allowed to happen again because we do not live in a country where makeshift shanty towns are allowed to just develop,” he said.
The asylum seekers will be moved to safer, more sanitary accommodation, he said.
…“It’s also really important that we don’t see scenes like we’re seeing now at Mount Street again, that it cannot re-emerge, that we have hundreds of tents – not just outside the international protection office – but outside people’s homes, outside people’s businesses,” said Helen McEntee, the justice minister, on Tuesday night.’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/01/irish-authorities-clear-asylum-seekers-tents-dublin/
Some migrant tents returned, only to be cleared again:
’30 May 2024
Around 100 tents being used by asylum seekers have been removed from Dublin’s Grand Canal.
The operation, which is the third of its kind in the area so far this month, began on Thursday morning.
Contractors began erecting metal barriers around the site from 05:00 BST, while the operation to remove tents began at around 06:30 BST.
Irish broadcaster RTÉ reported that 109 individuals were offered accommodation.
There has been a multi-agency effort to remove tents from around Dublin City in recent months.
Tents at the encampment close to the Baggot Street Bridge along the Grand Canal were dismantled and loaded onto a lorry.
The asylum seekers were given letters explaining that it is an offence if they continue to stay along the canal, RTÉ reported.’
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1wwgwgjjl1o
My reply is “Awaiting approval”. Here it is without the two links causing it to be “Awaiting approval”:
That article you posted, Mogwai – despite it stating “LAST UPDATED: MAY 29, 2024″ – is out of date.
On 1st May, this happened:
The Telegraph:
‘Irish police have begun clearing the “shanty town” of asylum seekers living in tents outside the International Protection Office in Dublin.
The operation to dismantle the so-called “tent city” housing about 200 migrants on lower Mount Street in the city centre began at 6.30 am on Wednesday.
Taoiseach Simon Harris told the Irish Parliament on Tuesday that the tents would be cleared and not be allowed to return.
“We need to make sure that the laws of the land are applied and it is not allowed to happen again because we do not live in a country where makeshift shanty towns are allowed to just develop,” he said.
The asylum seekers will be moved to safer, more sanitary accommodation, he said.’
Some migrant tents returned, only to be soon cleared again:
BBC News:
30 May 2024
‘Around 100 tents being used by asylum seekers have been removed from Dublin’s Grand Canal.
The operation, which is the third of its kind in the area so far this month, began on Thursday morning.
Contractors began erecting metal barriers around the site from 05:00 BST, while the operation to remove tents began at around 06:30 BST.
Irish broadcaster RTÉ reported that 109 individuals were offered accommodation.
There has been a multi-agency effort to remove tents from around Dublin City in recent months.
Tents at the encampment close to the Baggot Street Bridge along the Grand Canal were dismantled and loaded onto a lorry.
The asylum seekers were given letters explaining that it is an offence if they continue to stay along the canal, RTÉ reported.’
Well Putin and every dictatorship will be proud of the US for criminally convicting the main opposition leader.
An interesting article with some humorous examples, but I strongly disagree with the following line:
Yes, that’s a minor glitch because nobody except a retarded 3 year old would follow that advice. Maybe they’re helping to clean the gene pool.
Will Donald Trump get a refund on Stormy Daniels’ hush money.
The Trump case reminds me of that of Dominique Gaston André Strauss-Kahn, former managing director of the International Monetary Fund. He was controversial and found himself in court on confected allegations. If you are leader of a white-collar gang you risk attack from a rival gang during a turf war, or from your own gang if you dissent from the party line during a policy schism. Either way you can expect to wind up in court on a contrived case or die suddenly, possibly in woodland or under a window. What happens subsequently depends on how successfully and for how long the regime in power can keep the truth hidden.
Strauss-Kahn is a really good example. And gang warfare is the perfect way to see this.
They’ll go to war and “kill” figuratively or physically if they can get away with it whoever they need to to hold on to theor turf.
The rules and laws aren’t for them, they are to keep the plebs under control.
The Trump conviction, while I knew it was coming, fills me with dread.
It’s one more blow to the liberal democracy I thought I would always live in. It is yet more evidence that established power will destroy everything around it if that is what it takes to hang in.
For me the perfect example and precedent was Hitler continuing to fight and see Germany destroyed and thousands more killed long after it was clear the war was lost. He preferred to see everything razed to the ground until they were metres from his bunker than step down.
That in effect is what I’m observing with respect to “western civilisation”. The people in power will destroy it before giving up their power.
The BBC has an article: Heat kills at least 15 in India as temperatures near 50C
The article is clearly slanted to suggest that unusually high temperature in India has killed people. However, it is well known that deaths rise higher in colder periods and fall in warmer periods.
The chart shows the difference in weekly death rate from the long term trend for an average year in England and Wales. For example, typically in week 2 of each year 0.12% more of the population aged 85plus die than the long term average. At current population levels that represents about 1,800 more grandads and grannies dying in one week. As can be seen from the shape of the chart older people are worse affected by winter/summer variability.
Updated to add: Warmer is better
“Delhi’s “record-high” 52.9C currently doing the AGW-rag rounds was posted by a faulty temperature probe… It’s snowing in Northern India.”
Electroverse – Documenting Earth Changes During The Next Grand Solar Minimum
“Tucker Carlson warns Trump will win election if he’s not killed first”
Oh the irony! Let’s change the wording, shall we, Tucker?
“Tucker Carlson warns Navalny will win election if he’s not killed first”.
There, fixed it for ya.
“The Right must unite”
Yes, Douglas Murray, The Right must unite AGAINST the Leftist LibLabConGreen Traitors.
The Reform Party does not need the Tories or any other Fake Conservatives.