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.
“Top Gear’s Britain no longer exists”
It’s no wonder – most children’s experience of the motorcar is of traffic jams and a stressed out and vacant mum/dad on the school run.
Couple this with an entire generation of teachers who are unwittingly pushing the climate change scam and hatred of all things involving energy and fun, and all you get is a sad, uninspired, lethargic, apathetic, smartphone-obsessed youth.
And that’s before we get on to the impact of the callous, murderous lockdowns…
When I were a lad, motorbikes and sports cars passing the school gates would elicit a frenzy of excitement from boys and girls alike. The thrill of speed (and the potential for it), even experienced second hand, was palpable.
Until recently, I was commuting every day in north Leeds on a Kawasaki and would pass schools much like my own. I rarely received even a glance, never mind a demand for revs with the clutch disengaged, just to piss off Miss!
Zombies, the lot of them. Quite depressing.
We’re in France these days. The 50 and 125cc motos are alive and well with “the youth”. Glorious 2-stroke! I’ll be happy to see our own two little fighters riding them soon.
Italian youth still pretty keen on motorscooters too.
I imagine there’s an element of truth to the article, but where I live pretty much everyone learns to drive as soon as they can and gets access to a car, and young men are still wanting to drive fast and buy silly souped-up Vauxhall Corsas. But then I live in a market town surrounded by countryside, not a city. We used to live in London and lots of kids didn’t bother with cars, which is understandable as they cost a fortune and are honestly not that useful in London most of the time.
Spoke to someone from Wales.
Compares driving in Wales like driving in a funeral procession…
A significant minority here drive exceeding the 20 limits and quite a few deliberately break what would have been the previous 30 limit. Overtaking compliance zealots or those fearful of authority is up as are defacing and removal of the signs. And these include inappropriate 30 and 40 limits that have spung up in the last 5 years. Enough is enough !
Youth has always been dangerous, It’s in its very being! Trying to suffocate the rashness of youth will only ever lead to serious illegal actions or mental instability, it needs to vent itself naturally no matter the dangers!
I always ponder on how I ever made it to this age considering the dumb decisions I made in my teens, but ,that is the way youth HAS to be to learn.
The last term of school back in the seventies was a gloriously hot summer. Two local lads were working on the school roofs and both had long hair and rode Norton Commandos. They were a real inspiration to me and I headed down the road of motorbikes myself soon after I left. Still love old British machinery. Well, Italian and German machinery too but must be old. Not at all moved by modern stuff – it may be fast and loud and have exceptional brakes etc but they’re ugly machines and have no soul and I think that’s it. Our generation’s machinery had soul – electrics and mechanics (maybe electronic ignition!) and that was it!
“Covid hasn’t gone away – we’re still shielding three years on”
So other viruses are not a problem then? And this problem has suddenly appeared due to Covid? I think it can be tough for some people, such as people on chemo who have compromised immune systems. But surely it has always been a problem, and always will be a problem – that is until medical research comes up with a way to boost peoples immune system to treat these things, which I think it is. Whatever, the answer, locking down society ain’t the answer.
Logged in to say this too. These poor people would have been shielding no matter what – or should have been if the advice they’re given is consistent. Receiving abuse in the street for wearing a mask is odious, but if he’s wearing one of those supermarket scraps of plastic that people call ‘surgical’ masks it’s essentially useless.
The point is it’s him and his family who have a very unfortunate problem. What does he want the rest of society to do apart from offer sympathy? It’s not a reason to close down the rest of society.
Check out this for evidence of the damage done by the covid pushers:
(1) Not a lifestyle competition, but a shared vision (reddit.com)
I personally wouldn’t choose to have a go at mask wearers but certainly any of them who are NOT genuinely vulnerable but are just virtue signalling probably should be shamed because if we ever get covid or similar restrictions back it is those people who will be in the vanguard.
I sidestep them. Ostentatiously.
And I’m not sure Mr Boxall’s poor wife is getting much benefit from her seven vaccines either.
And hiding yourself away for the rest of your life, is no way of living in my book.
Allow a surgeon to state his case on masking up…
A big part of the problem is how gas-lighted people have been – and still are being – into believing they are vulnerable and therefore must hide away from society without being given the full facts. For instance, Prof Angus Dalgleish, in his discussion with John Campbell, explains how some of his long-term melanoma patients were ok when exposed to “Covid” because their immune systems had been boosted by the immune-enhancing therapy he administers to such patients. We should all be better informed about our vulnerabilities and the risks – as well as the potential treatments. For example, the problem for many Covid patients is not the viral infection in our airways but the pneumonia that follows and timely treatment with Vit C, antibiotics, etc is then needed. So many of us have been fooled into thinking the medical establishment has our best interests at heart when the reality is that most in the NHS don’t think to question what they are told (and that is limited to looking for a “disease” and prescribing a pharmaceutical). The current situation where people are being encouraged to take “boosters” that are damaging their immune systems and encouraging turbo-cancers is criminal and those administering them have no excuse for killing people.
….my friend, who is a cancer survivor, as part of her long-term regime, has also been prescribed Vit D for quite a while, which also helps.
I have said this before, but like everything with Convid, a lot of it seems to be based on very little evidence, and a lot of assumption. Where exactly are the studies showing that Convid is worse for the immuno-compromised…and exactly how much worse is it..if at all?
As we have know for a very long time now, Convid is something like flu, in so much as it’s much worse for the very elderly and very poorly…but for everyone else … not so much…
….was all this palaver going on all the time for flu?…and if not, why are they doing it now?
This is an awfully sad article..and I would say that all three of them are suffering more from mental illness than actual physical illness….I don’t know what they actually think anyone can do for them…?
My friend is also a cancer survivor, the second time having been treated during Convid ..she’s unvaxxed and getting on with life….as are many other cancer survivors…the fact that this man’s wife isn’t is not anyone else’s fault…
..and I can’t see any reason for his daughter, who has cerebral palsy, to be any more prone to Covid than anyone else?
I suspect more than anything that the massive Government/MSM Psy-ops has done its job.
“How Hamas-supporting medics are lurking within our NHS”
So what would happen if the Palistinian doctor/nurse had to treat a British Jewish patient? With such unhidden hatred, I wouldn’t want to be that patient! Welcome to the all encompassing and successful multiculturalist modern Britain!
So what would happen if the Palistinian doctor/nurse had to treat a British Jewish patient?
For that matter what would happen if they had to treat an Israeli Jewish patient?
In the olden days, before the plandemic revealed the deeply corrupt nature of medicine, I would have said that medical staff would have put their Hippocratic Oath first and treated according to need, not race, creed, colour or belief. I’m sure many still do. But given how some revealed their prejudices against the unvaxxed/unmasked – and were given carte blanche to do so – now I’m not so sure….
I can’t go along with this entirely as it conflates two entirely separate thing in my opinion. I think that illegal immigration is one thing…but in answer I would say..
…presumably the same thing that would happen as if a Jewish doctor was treating an Arab or Palestinian patient…or a Russian doctor was treating a Ukrainian, or a Chinese doctor was treating an American patient?
…what on earth is the basis for this nonsense? Have we had a spate of doctors killing their patients because of nationality or religion that I’m unaware of??
Fair point, but we may not be aware of the more subtle interactions between doctors with a bias veiw and patients!
We are only human after all!
‘Luton airport fire’
Something doesn’t add up!
-The fire was clearly on the top, outside level
-the culprit car was on the level below with at least 10″ of concrete between it and the top level
-the culprit car was in the middle of the access road, not in a parking bay
– the culprit car was a diesel range rover which seemed to burn like a petrol car or ev would, but generally not like diesel does! which is ‘combustible’ not ‘flammable’
– no sprinkler systems in a new car park?
Just a little puzzled!
My idea is the upper floor was already ablaze due to the source of the fire, then someone came back to their car to find this ongoing situation and tried to get their already burning vehicle out of the danger area only to get one level down before realising it was hopeless and abandoning their car in the middle of the access road.
Then the fire above caused the the partial collapse afterwards.
“U.K. Technology Minister holds urgent meeting on violent content”
Cue even MORE censorship…..
Findings from Monday’s World Council for Health emergency conference:
https://worldcouncilforhealth.substack.com/p/wch-expert-panel-finds-cancer-promoting
“Findings from Monday’s World Council for Health emergency conference:
Bacterial DNA (plasmids) has been found in mRNA vaccine vials.”
This blows the bloody roof off!
Many thanks for posting.
Ta. The conference is worth watching especially McKernan’s brilliant segment, once they’ve spliced up each presentation (the whole thing was 4 hours).
👍👍
But we knew this already. It’s been talked about at length on here. It also won’t make a blind bit of difference as we know the stuff will not get removed from the market. Now had there been contamination found in any type of food product they’d all be recalled right away because food manufacturers don’t enjoy the same luxury of indemnity from liability that Big Pharma does. The latter evidently have carte blanche to harm us whilst making mega profits.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/why-todays-philanthropists-dont-cut-the-mustard/
And this provides an interesting adjunct to the above.
LOL…somebody inform the Nobel Prize Committee…STAT!!
Can I just ask the question that must be on everybody’s lips?
Who gives a flying f**k what Gary Lineker or Emma Thomson think about… ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING?…
I have to agree. The less we see and hear of these degenerates the better, particularly that tax leech Lineker.
Oooh, but Lineker is an award winning human rights commentator, doncha know, and Thomson is….is…. Nanny McPhee!
😀😀😀
Is the point not that we do want to see their hypocrisy exposed – because the resulting humiliation might shut them up in the future?
I, for one, enjoyed Emma Thompson trying to justify flying back from LA in first class in order to attend an Extinction Rebellion protest. “I’m in the very fortunate position of being able to offset my carbon footprint, but most people can’t.” – she argued.
I would never spoil anyone else’s fun..if that is what floats your boat, as they say.
…but for myself, I’m pretty sure I know exactly what they are going to say, and about what..and I’d rather poke sticks in my eyes than give them the satisfaction of looking like I gave two flucks …LOL!!
In BBC world, stating a plain fact can be seen as partial, it seems…
So..as far as I can see it’s the story of Covid throughout the world from day one??
…and the end of the article?? Get boosted!! LOL!
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/older-adults-make-thirds-covid-hospitalizations-year-cdc/story?id=103749710
5th October 2023..
Adults aged 65 and older made up 62.9% of all COVID-19-associated hospitalizations between January and August 2023, a report published Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found..
During the week ending Aug. 26, the hospitalization rates for those 65 and older was 16.4 per 100,000, which is nine times higher than the rate for adults aged 18 to 64 and 16 times higher than the rate for those under age 18.
Hospitalization rates were highest among adults aged 85 and older at 42.2 per 100,000 and lowest among those aged 65 to 74 at 8.6 per 100,000.
Senior citizens also accounted for 61.3% of admissions to the intensive care unit and 87.9% of in-hospital COVID deaths in the first half of 2023, the report said. There were no statistically significant differences when it came to subgroups of patients in this age bracket.
Data showed nearly all adults aged 65 and older — 98.5% — had at least one underlying condition, and 90.3% had two or more conditions, including diabetes, kidney disorders, coronary artery disease, chronic heart failure and obesity.
After adjusting for factors including age, sex, and race or ethnicity, senior citizens with two or more underlying conditions were at four times greater risk of hospitalization.
COVID-19–associated hospitalisations continue to predominantly affect adults aged ≥65 years