On day one of his new administration, United States President Donald Trump signed an executive order notifying an intent to withdraw from the World Health Organisation (WHO). This has drawn celebration from some, dismay from others, and probably disinterest from the vast majority of the population more concerned with feeding families and paying off debt. The executive order also leaves much unaddressed, namely the substantive issues that have changed WHO and international public health over the past decade.
Change is certainly needed, and it is good that the WHO’s largest direct funder is expressing real concern. The reactions to the notice of withdrawal also demonstrate the vast gulf between reality and the positions of those on both sides of the WHO debate. The new administration is raising an opportunity for rational debate. If this can be grasped, there is still a chance that the WHO, or an organisation more fit for purpose, could provide broad benefit to the world’s peoples. But the problems underlying the international public health agenda must first be acknowledged for this to become possible.
What actually is the WHO and what did it do?
Despite being the health arm of the United Nations (UN), the WHO is a self-governing body under the 194 countries of the World Health Assembly (WHA). Its 34-member executive board is elected from the WHA. The WHA also elects the Director General (DG), based on ‘one country, one vote’. Its 1946 constitution restricts its governance to states (rather than private individuals and corporations) so in this way it is unique among the major international health agencies. While private individuals and corporations can buy influence, they can be completely excluded should the WHA so wish.
With 8,000 staff, the WHO is split into six regions and a head office in Geneva, Switzerland. The regional office of the Americas, also called the Pan-American Health Organisation (PAHO), is based in Washington DC and preceded the WHO, having been established in 1902 as the International Sanitary Bureau. Like other regional offices, PAHO has its own regional assembly, obviously dominated by the US, and is largely self-governing under the wider WHO and UN system.
The WHO is funded by countries and non-state entities. While countries are required to provide ‘assessed’ or core funding, most of the budget is derived from voluntary funding provided by countries and private or corporate donors. Nearly all voluntary funding is ‘specified’, comprising 75% of the total budget. Under specified funding, WHO must do the funders’ bidding. Most of WHO’s activities are therefore specified by its funders, not WHO itself, with a quarter of this being private people and corporations with strong Pharma interests.
Therefore WHO, while governed by countries, has effectively become a tool of others – both state and non-state interests. The US is the largest direct funder (around 15%), but the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) is a close second (14%), and the partly Gates-funded Gavi public-private partnership (PPP) is third. Thus, Mr Gates arguably has the largest influence in terms of specifying the WHO’s actual activities. The European Union and World Bank are also major funders, as is Germany and the United Kingdom (i.e., the remaining large Western Pharma countries).
In response to its funders, the WHO has shifted focus to areas where large Pharma profits can be accrued. Pharma must insist on this as it has a fiduciary responsibility to maximise return on investment for its shareholders by using its WHO connections to sell more product. The obvious way to make lots of money in Pharma is by spreading fear of vaccine-preventable diseases, and then making vaccines and selling them free from liability to as large a market as possible. This was highly effective during the COVID-19 response, and the WHO is now sponsored by these interests to implement the surveil-lockdown-mass vaccinate paradigm behind the recent amendments to the International Health Regulations and the draft pandemic agreement.
While a shamefully willing tool, the WHO is not driving this. The US started the IHR amendment process and heavily backed it until the recent change of administration. The new administration, while signalling an intent to withdraw from WHO, has not signalled a withdrawal from the pandemic industrial complex the US helped develop.
Critical to understanding the US withdrawal is the fact that the COVID-19 outbreak and response would have looked almost identical if WHO did not exist. WHO was not involved in the gain-of-function research, in vaccine development or in vaccine mandates. It abrogated its own ethical principles and prior recommendations in pushing lockdowns and mass vaccination, and did huge harm in the process. However, it was countries that funded and conducted the virus modification that likely spawned COVID-19. It was countries, in concert with Pharma, that mandated lockdowns on their people and pushed vaccination most heavily (the WHO never recommended the COVID-19 vaccines for children).
This is not a defence of WHO – the organisation was incompetent, dishonest and negligent during COVID-19. It was a public health disgrace. It has continued to deliberately mislead countries regarding future pandemic risk and inflated return-on-investment claims in order to sell the policies that benefit its sponsors. But remove the WHO, the World Bank (the main funder of the pandemic agenda), the PPPs looking to sell pandemic vaccines (Gavi and CEPI), the Gates Foundation, Germany, the UK, the EU and the US health ‘swamp’ itself, and Pharma with its compliant media will still exist. Pharmaceutical companies have other options to bring a veneer of legitimacy to their pillaging through public health.
The US notice of withdrawal
As President Trump’s 20th January order of withdrawal notes, it repeats an executive order from mid-2020 that was subsequently revoked by President Biden. In theory it takes at least 12 months for a withdrawal to take effect, based on the Joint Resolution of Congress in 1948 through which the US joined, subsequently agreed by the WHA. However, as the new executive order is intended to revoke the Biden revocation, the remaining time to run is unclear. The waiting period could also be shortened by a further Act of Congress.
The 2025 notice of withdrawal is interesting, as the reasons given for withdrawal are relatively benign. There are four:
- Mishandling of the COVID-19 outbreak and other (unspecified) global health crises. The “mishandling” is undefined, but may include WHO support for China in obscuring COVID-19 origins as highlighted in the recent COVID-19 House of Representatives sub-committee report. There are few obvious candidates for other truly global health crises that WHO mishandled, except perhaps the 2009 Swine Flu outbreak and monkeypox, unless the executive order refers to any international (global) public health issue (in which case there are many).
- Failure to adopt urgently needed reforms. These are undefined. Of concern, the only reforms the US has been pushing on the WHO in the past few years (pre-Trump administration) were intended to increase the authority of the WHO over sovereign states and the authority of its work. The recent Republican-dominated House sub-committee report recommended the same.
- Inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states. This is presumably aimed at China, but is also concerning, as WHO is subject to its member states through the WHA. It would be strange if the US was hoping to free WHO from such constraints. There is no mention of private sector involvement, now about 25% of WHO funding, that many would claim is the core reason for the corruption and deterioration of the WHO’s work.
- Unfairly onerous payments by the US. The US provides 22% of WHO’s assessed (core funding) but this is only a fraction of US payments. The vast majority of US payments have been entirely voluntary, and the US could presumably choose to stop these at any time, removing most of its funding but not its voting rights. With China listed by WHO as paying less than Somalia and Nigeria in the current 2024-25 biennium (per mid-January 2025), the US has a reasonable gripe here, but a simple one to fix.
Missing from the executive order is any reference to the other promoters of the pandemic or emergency agenda. The World Bank’s Pandemic Fund is untouched by this executive order, as are the PPPs. CEPI (vaccines for pandemics) and Gavi (vaccines in general) provide private industry and investors such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation with direct decision-making roles they cannot ensure through WHO.
The executive order requires the Director of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy to “review, rescind and replace the 2024 US Global Health Security Strategy”. It is hoped that this signals a recognition of the lack of an evidence base and financial rigour around the current policy. Indeed, the policy promoted by the US, WHO, the World Bank and PPPs is irrelevant, by design, to a laboratory-released pathogen such as that which probably caused COVID-19. The actual mortality from natural outbreaks that it is designed for has been declining for over a century.
Implications of withdrawal
A full withdrawal of the US from WHO will presumably reduce US influence within the organisation, enhancing that of the EU, China and the private sector. As it ignores the World Bank and the PPPs, it will not greatly affect the pandemic agenda’s momentum. COVID-19 would still have happened had the US been out of the WHO before 2020, mRNA mass vaccination would still have been driven by countries and Pharma with the help of a compliant media. The WHO acted as a propagandist and helped waste billions, but never advocated vaccine mandates or mass vaccination of children. Though the WHO was appalling, the driving forces behind the wealth concentration and human rights abuses of the COVID-19 era clearly originated elsewhere
If the US withdraws its 15% of the WHO budget – about $600 million per year – others (e.g. EU, Gavi, Gates Foundation) could fill the gap. The executive order mentions withdrawing US contractors, but these are few. Nearly all WHO staff are directly employed, not seconded from governments. The main effect will be to reduce coordination with agencies such as the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The US will have a continuing need to use WHO services, such as for prequalification (regulation) of hundreds of millions of dollars of commodities bought and distributed by USAID and related programmes but not regulated through the FDA. This is not a problem – the WHO lists are public – but the US would simply continue to use WHO services without paying for or influencing them.
The withdrawal notice also mentions cessation of US involvement in negotiating the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and the Pandemic Agreement. The IHR negotiations concluded eight months ago, and the US has until July 19th (10 months after receipt of the WHO’s notification letter of September 2024) to signal rejection. The IHR are separate from WHO membership. The Pandemic Agreement is subject to wide disagreement between countries, and it is unclear whether it will go forward. However, provisions in the FY23 US National Defence Authorisation Act (page 950 to 961) are already stronger than the US would be signing up to with these WHO agreements.
The history of US withdrawals from UN institutions is also one of subsequent re-entry after a change in administration. Leaving the WHO without US influence will presumably make it even less like what the Trump administration would like, should history should repeat itself and the next administration re-join.
The hope is that the US withdrawal will force major reform within the WHO – one of the key reasons provided in the withdrawal notice. However, there is no hint in the executive order of the desired direction of change, or whether the US will adopt a more rational pandemic policy. If such an intent were made clear, other countries would follow and the WHO itself may actually reboot. However, withdrawing without addressing these fallacies underlying the pandemic agenda entrenches the vested interests who profited through COVID-19 and clearly aim to continue doing so.
Being real about reality
The enthusiasm for the WHO withdrawal seems widely to have forgotten two things:
- The pandemic agenda and the COVID-19 response that exemplified it are not primarily WHO programmes. (The WHO said do essentially the opposite in 2019.)
- The actual pandemic industrial complex of surveil-lockdown-mass vaccinate is already essentially in place and does not need the WHO for it to continue.
The WHO Bio-Hub in Germany is largely a German Government and Pharma agency with a WHO stamp; the World Bank pandemic fund is the main current funding source for pandemic surveillance; the 100 day vaccine programme (CEPI) is directly funded by hapless taxpayers; and the Medical Countermeasures Platform is a partnership between countries, Pharma, the G20 and others. These would probably continue irrespective of WHO’s existence. The pandemic industrial complex made hundreds of billions of dollars through COVID-19 and has capacity and incentive to continue.
The complexity of all this is being addressed on social media by statements such as “The WHO is rotten to the core”, “The WHO is unreformable”, or even “Pure evil” – all unhelpful labels for a complex organisation of 8,000 staff, six fairly independent regional offices and dozens of country offices. The WHO’s work on reducing the distribution of counterfeit drugs saves perhaps hundreds of thousands of people each year, and these people matter. Its standards for tuberculosis and malaria management are followed globally, including by the US. In several countries its technical expertise saves many lives.
The organisation desperately needs reform, as President Trump notes. Its current leadership, having spent the last few years blatantly misleading and lying to countries about COVID-19 and pandemic risk, seem unlikely candidates to help. They have played the tune of private interests over the needs of the world’s people. But the WHO’s structure makes it the only major international health institution that countries alone can actually force to reform. It simply needs sufficient member states of the WHA to force exclusion of private interests and to force WHO back to diseases and programmes that actually have a significant bearing on human wellbeing.
Should such reform prove impossible, then the coalition of countries built around the reform agenda can replace it with a new organisation. The massive bureaucracy that global health has become needs to be seen through the same lens as that in the US. The fantasy built around pandemic risk is not substantively different from many similar fantasies on the domestic agenda that the Trump administration is now targeting. It is similarly erosive of human rights, freedom and human flourishing. Addressing this is an opportunity we would be foolish to miss.
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 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.
Do we to talk about this?
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/urgent-the-british-are-dropping-vaccine?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozMTkwNDgwMSwicG9zdF9pZCI6NDEyMDg5MzEsIl8iOiJaMTRoZyIsImlhdCI6MTYzMTQyNzg0NywiZXhwIjoxNjMxNDMxNDQ3LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMzYzMDgwIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.rlA5OXwfquwUVWv5ZYIbP-4OXoeSOz3qbPVfJ0iUvN0
I like Alex Berenson, Twitter were way off the mark banning him.
Twitter are way off the mark … banning just about everybody they’ve banned (including me)… another govt agent fast being replaced by ethical social media platforms who keep their noses out of the trough
Twitter’s stock price has surged 4-fold since it decided to “Play ball” with the powers that be.
I don’t believe our double jabbed, Covid survivor, masked Dictator will ditch the passports. Just more psyops.
I think it’s only a brief pause until the next assault on the population. They haven’t got the honesty or integrity to admit they were wrong about everything to do with Covid.
If it’s about arse covering then we suggested about a year ago that the natural path of the virus would allow them to claim Vax victory. If it’s about social credit then yeah, we fucked, just watch for the other shoe to drop.
I agree. That’s why I brought it up. I think he is going to go hard with school vaccines and reintroducing masking at school and is easing back on the other sheite in order to release pressure with one hand while tightening with the other.
This is largely due to the teaching unions….
No. The teaching unions have no excuse. But it is down to government. Don’t get distracted.
“Don’t get distracted” from RickH = “don’t notice things RickH finds it politically inconvenient for you to notice”.
You are dim, Mark, when you so completely miss the point I’m making. You seem actually illiterate in not being able to read my first sentence. Quote back at me any posting I’ve made about the current behaviour of unions that fulfills your imaginary ‘charge’.
… or you’re just erecting straw men – as politically senile obsessives from Plant Zog do, lacking any grasp of reality and real argument.
It’s also pot and kettle stuff – with your hypocrisy (or raddled thinking) reaching no bounds in trying to make this current shit-show fit your past-sell-by-date politics.
Onanism and analysis are two different activities – the former less embarrassing if done in private
“You are dim, Mark, when you so completely miss the point I’m making. You seem actually illiterate in not being able to read my first sentence. Quote back at me any posting I’ve made about the current behaviour of unions that fulfills your imaginary ‘charge’.”
On the contrary, my point was spot on. You merely seek to deny what you are doing.
The only real question here is: are you aware of it and knowingly dishonest, or so profoundly unselfaware that you genuinely do not understand your own behaviour?
You transparently seek to deflect blame from the teaching unions for their clear and obvious appalling behaviour and its equally clear and obvious malign consequences for children’s education. In response to someone pointing out those clearly relevant and vitally important facts about what has happened in this country’s education system, you insisted (as usual) that we should ignore these facts “Don’t get distracted“. As though highlighting vital and core acts by key players in the covid disaster in our education system is somehow a “distraction” from the aforementioned disaster!
What it is a “distraction” from, of course, is your endless quest to focus blame on the political party you hate and have spent your life hating, and to deflect it from parties you see as sympathetic.
“politically senile obsessives from Plant Zog do, lacking any grasp of reality and real argument….Onanism and analysis are two different activities – the former less embarrassing if done in private”
More playground abuse – your primary stock in trade when confronted with discussion you can’t cope with intellectually or emotionally, it appears.
But were they ‘wrong’? (In their terms)
Telegraph reporting some power being dropped and now this, I’ve learn not to dare hope but, what if!?!
I’ve been using Mr Gums nom de plume on the Telegraph for the last couple of weeks and have enjoyed some trolling! If the comments are anything to go by, and the assumption is that the Telegraph is read by the Tory voter, then he’s in trouble. Other than a few obvious trolls no one has a good word to say about him, his so called Government, vaccines, passports, masks….etc.
Correct about the trolls, they are moronic and intolerable, branding all criticism of Kim Jong-Johnson as Marxist.
The real Kim Jong Il aka #FatBoyKim looks quite snappy these days. His dose of covid seems to have done him no end of good, weight-wise.
He also has a decent barber.
If Kim Jong Johnson threw his full weight behind Kim Jong-Un, the North Korean would be smashed into five million pieces……..
I don’t either.. On the other hand a recent poll (yes, I know they’re rubbish) has put tories two points down on labour, and the points lost didnt go to labour or to libdems, they went to Reform UK, who was 1 point above libdems and 3 above the greens.
I think the fat controller thinks he can regain the support lost from his hike in NI.
They claim the drop is due to taxes. I suspect it’s to do with vaxes.
I doubt however those of us that dropped support due to the latter are likely to EVER go back to the fat dictator.
I completely agree with you and our fat controller would not wish to have a group of MPs in parliament who would be guaranteed to back up a backbench rebellion in his own party.
This is the only political hope – the rise of a more genuinely conservative party to represent the currently unrepresented.
He’s neither double jabbed nor a covid survivor. It simply makes his nefarious business easier to sell to the hordes if they believe it. However, dictator he certainly is, and he has to go.
He’s been triple jabbed, hasn’t he?
Funnily enough just been reading this in the Telegraph, no signs of stopping the child jabathon though? As Boris can’t move his lips without lying, I’m not sure if this is just a carrot before a big stick!
“no signs of stopping the child jabathon though?”
Exactly. Classic distraction.
Well, he ain’t distracting me. This is my absolute line in the sand and my 12 y/o is not being jabbed- even if it costs me everything, (which it might as my wife sees no harm in it, but unfortunately she has to work with loads of covid hysterics and it does have an effect on her). I could never live with myself if anything happened as a result of just going along with it for the easy life. I’m completely befuddled by parents actively lining their kids up for this ‘to keep them safe’. If they’re so easily terrified and herded they probably belong in a pen- they certainly shouldn’t be parents.
Interesting article but I have to comment on the use of “immune evasion”: there is no immunity given with the vaccines and none of them intended there to be. Every manufacturer stated that their aim was to mitigate the symptoms i.e. try to alleviate the symptoms so people did not die. Not one manufacturer ever stated “immunity”.
A single jabbed, double jabbed, quadruple jabbed person is every bit as likely to catch or transmit Covid as I am and I wouldn’t go near a Covid vaccine if paid to.
Absolutely – you’ll be surprised how many people out there think that the vaccine stops them from getting the virus – it won’t and was never intented to stop people getting the virus – as you rightly say it was developed to alleviate possible severe symptoms of the virus – people are very surprised when you inform them of this important fact – hence why we are seeing an exlosion of new cases in some of the most vaccinated places in the world – these jabs can actually give a false sense of immunity.
And what’s more, we know that the data that supported the claim that the jabs alleviate symptoms, was a) carried out by the manufacturers and b) only concerned participants who had mild symptoms and c), rendered useless in the medium-to-long term because they gave the control group the jabs.
Yes, agreed, the manufacturers have not claimed that the vaccine stops or reduces transmission. They haven’t claimed it will stop hospitalisation or death. As you say all they have claimed is some efficacy in treating some of the symptoms of Covid…does that make it the most fricking expensive LemSip ever?
It is Government and their official bodies who have raised people’s expectations, and fiddled the data to make it seem much more effective.
https://drtrozzi.com/2021/09/the-covid-19-injection-is-not-a-vaccine/#comment-2860
… and minimally less likely to die at best. Again – keep the reality in mind :
The only thing vaccines ever give is immunity, they’re neither pain killers (which sometimes do and sometimes don’t kill pain and nobody really knows how) nor antibiotics. Virus infections cause symptoms due to replication. Hence, no symptoms or mild symptoms means little or nor replication. And this can only happen due to the immune system killing viruses and infected cells (in absence of antiviral medication).
“Virus infections cause symptoms due to replication.”
Ditto bacterial infections. Ditto fungal infections. Ditto parasite infections. The only 100% way to stay safe is to die. Guaranteed end of pathogen replication – once those responsible for decomposition have done their work.
more dramatis the deaths blamed on covid peaked at the same time but plummeted far more dramatically
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/
…
..
Hugotalks is reporting another Danish footballer collapsed on the pitch yesterday. Although, I believe the media were quick to say that it wasn’t a heart attack but a seizure…. So that’s alright then.
I would urge everyone from assuming that every adverse event being reported is due to any vaccine that the person may or may not have had, Hugo talks has been doing this recently.
Also please do not conflate sudden cardiac arrest with a heart attack, they are not necessarily the same. A heart attack is when the heart loses its blood supply due to blockage of one or more coronary arteries, which can lead to cardiac arrest; sudden cardiac arrest is due to a fault in the electrical conduction system causing the normally regular signal to become erratic or stop completely, causing the heart to stop pumping blood effectively. Look at c-r-y.org.
Thank you for the information re heart attack v cardiac arrest, although as a retired nurse I am aware of the difference, I should have put a ‘cardiac event’.
I do not assume that every adverse event is due to vaccination, however I’m sure even you will agree that there have been more of these events reported in the past few weeks than we would normally hear about over the course of a year.
Unfortunately when the TPTB are actively suppressing information regarding vaccine adverse events there is always the risk that everything will be attributed to them and they have only themselves to blame.
Apologies, I didn’t intend to patronise you in any way, but I didn’t realise you were a retired clinician, as am I. The issue I have is that these types of event are being reported when a couple of years ago they wouldn’t have warranted making the national news. The Joe Humphries case was only reported in the Leicester Mercury and I was only aware because I had worked alongside two people involved in the Joe Humphries foundation, the 17 year old footballer was reported in the local paper and the clubs website, my paramedic colleague of course was not reported, I only know because I was part of the resuscitation team. Why was the West Bridgford players collapse and subsequent death reported on the main BBC website as well as the East Midlands website?
Good points. Rationalists need to guard against the same data blindness (single cases gaining undue significance through the act of reporting) that they criticize Covid maniacs for.
How many professional footballers or other sportspeople have you heard of collapsing on the pitch? Prior to this year and the vaccine the only time I can remember was Fabrice Muamba who collapsed playing for Bolton Wanderers in 2012. How many such events have we had in the last few months? I’ve lost count but similar events are being reported quite frequently now, seems more than just a coincidence to me.
Youtube actually has videos of sudden collapses by players during matches!
There was the player in the recent Euro, which is mentioned on the c-r-y website, so likely cardiac arrhythmia/arrest unlinked to vaccination.
The player from West Bridgford who had a sudden cardiac arrest in a match against Boston United in the FA youth cup, who sadly died two days later, Hugo talks intimated that it was a Boston player who had had the jab. If you look hard enough you can find these events.
Since Muamba these are the cases that I am aware of Joe Humphries collapsed and died whilst jogging here in Leicestershire, he was 14; a 34 year old paramedic had a cardiac arrest in an urgent care centre the day after completing a long cycle ride, resuscitated with single shock from defibrillator, ICD inserted; a 17 year old female footballer collapsed and died after training with professional football club.
A few years back (2014 I think) there was a seminar at my local university about cardiac problems in elite athletes as the university is renowned for its sports, speakers included a cardiologist and a consultant paediatrician from Glenfield and Leicester royal infirmary.
You don’t give the timescale for the cases you have mentioned. If they were all within the space of a few weeks then they would back your theory of previous under-reporting, however if they were a few years apart then I’m afraid they do not support your theory at all. I would also highlight that the majority of those that have happened recently have been in players/sports people in high profile teams and therefore most definitely do warrant reporting in the MSM.
The point I was making is that those cases, which were spread over a period of a few years, but within a relatively small geographical area. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_footballers_who_died_while_playing
https://blog.10med.com/death-on-football-pitch-the-challenge-of-diagnosing-sudden-cardiac-arrest-in-athletes/
John is correct to highlight (as he has here before) that this has always been a known occasional event for sports participants, and that it is not correct to simply assume that any reported incident now is due to the vaccines.
As Malcolm Kendrick pointed out a while back (COVID19 – the spike protein and blood clotting), it is precisely the treatment consequences that cause an increase in an already relatively common problem that are the hardest to pick out in the early days. It takes long term careful analysis of the numbers to identify whether there is a true signal or merely a noticing of events that passed unnoticed previously.
The problem is that such analysis is precisely what is most efficiently suppressed or manipulated by corrupt and partisan elites.
So arguably what is needed is populist coverage – the kind of stuff Johh is criticising that makes unwarranted but superficially reasonable implications of causation – to balance out the vast amount of exactly that kind of coverage on the other side.
There is a genuine dilemma here. On the one hand we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard, but on the other hand we need to counter the propaganda of the other side.
It’s heads we lose, tails they win, but that’s how life is. Unfair.
Hmm.
It is nice that there’s now a recognition forming that covid waves are natural and self-exhausting.
But too many people are still clinging onto the ‘SIR’ model of viral disease (aka the ‘measles model’). We’re not getting a series of waves that generate herd-immunity only for it to be lost, IMO. It looks far more like the disease is following the Hope-Simpson model of viral infection, where we have a small number of superspreaders and the wave dissipates when all people susceptible to being superspreaders has temporally run out.
We’ve currently got a nice test-case in New Zealand. It looks very much like they have recently (17th August to 5th September) had a single superspreader in south Auckland. According to the superspreader theory there is a ‘good chance’ that new superspreaders will be infected as a result. If they have, they’ll start a new in the very near future (before the end of September).
Note that the Hope-Simpson superspreader is asymptomatic — it isn’t clear why this should be be the case, but it might be associated with relative differences in the innate immune system, local (to the lung mucosa) antibodies and circulating antibodies — a poor local (to the lung) immune system coupled with a strong central (blood plasma) antibody response might suppress the normal symptoms associated with upper respiratory tract infections (which are a function of the immune system not the virus itself) but protect against the disease becoming systemic (and thus reduce the risk of there being a ‘cytokine storm’). The consequence of this would be that these individuals would have high levels of infection, as measured by random testing to identify the asymptomatic, but low levels of hospitalisation/death — sound familiar?
The current New Zealand outbreak might also inform as to whether vaccination increases the chances of being a superspreader — this will be reflected in the initial rate of change (first week) if we get a new wave forming there in the next few weeks. A case load of >250 cases per day at about the +1 week point would suggest that the vaccines are increasing this risk.
According to this model we should get a new covid wave in the UK around mid December. This will be considerably more damaging than this summer’s wave (seasonality) but may or may not be worse than last winter’s wave (dependent on the characteristics of the next variant to take hold).
Yes – only there wasn’t really a ‘wave’ this summer – just an insignificant uptick. Again, we would expect a seasonal upturn in infection, building through December into January. Undoubtedly, this normal seasonality will be attributed to Covid – but whether that will represent reality is moot.
Again – look at that last line graph, and massively extend the y-axis to represent the absolute scale of 1,000,000, and you get a better idea of what these ‘waves’ entail! More sort of ‘ripples’ on a very flat sea.
Again – too much credence given to duff data about PCR+ results. I fear that giving such house room – even in a critical way – adds to The ‘Narrative’s’ credibility.
There needs to be a concerted return here to Farr’s observation that all, other than death, is an assumption. Only such a basis will make for consistent comment in real perspective.
Why do you think the most used data by the fictionalizers is ‘case’ or ‘infection’ data? Doh!!!
55,000 healthy people reportedly infected with something (from a population of about 60 million) is not a surge. That’s the branch covidians (another term I like) going through the house with a looking glass in the hope to find something which would enable them to sell more face masks (or – in the case of Viral Trisha – force other people to buy something she hopes will help against her own mysopohbia).
It is an important part of understanding the coronavirus fraud that we also understand how 9/11 was brought about by the “deep state” in order to invade and asset strip the middle east.
These people are remorseless. The AE9/11 truth website is good to start with but it is extremely depressing and frightening to see the chaos and destruction they are prepared to bring about. True evil exists.
https://www.ae911truth.org/news/775-the-censorship-of-spike-lee-s-nyc-epicenters-is-a-tragically-fitting-end-to-the-last-20-years
If you want an insight into True Evil, see Ronald Bernard’s videos for an almost-but-not-quite-full insider’s view of Big Finance – the level of finance where a whole country can be destroyed by coordinated financial warfare. In his 4 part series, he gives details of the initiation ‘ceremony’ into the top level.
https://www.youtube.com/c/RonaldBernard/videos
“The Sharp Decline in Infections in Florida and the Southern U.S. Shows Once More That Covid Surges Peak and Decline Naturally Without Interventions”
Well that is totally surprising – not.
SARS-CoV-2 has mutated into an endemic for that allows it to co-exist with its host. There will be seasonal ups and downs just like the other endemic respiratory infections – the common cold (coronavirus) and the flu (also still mutating)
The Western World was pulled for the sake of a not-very-effective cold vaxxine.
Thanks to evolutionary pressure caused by ‘vaccinating’ during a pandemic (as opposed to once it has naturally faded) is that variants that ‘escape’ will be produced and some may become dominant as a new wave.
It is beyond ironic that infighting for awards (Nobels) in the US National Institutes by the likes of Fauci and Gallo has deprived the world of paradigm busting antivirals and anti cancer drugs by suppression of publication and prevention of approval to develop. They did it with the whole HIV debacle but when called out, nothing changed. And we are here again. Sheesh.
It’s endemic.
In the long run I come down on the side that the (leaky) vaccines and stupid interventions will make it worse than need be.
But … remember COVID is just a tool.
That was quick. Vaccine Passports off the the this morning, back on the table by this evening.
You are all going to get jabbed, and you will all soon be holding your shiny new Vaccine Passport.
That’s really what it has come to.