If you thought the last two years were a wild ride, buckle up because the World Health Organization (WHO) and its entourage are gearing up for a new showstopper. Picture this: international bureaucracy, a dash of power play, and just enough ambiguity to rival the script of a mystery novel. It’s the impending revamp of global health governance, and spoiler alert– it’s no laughing matter … okay, maybe a little.
The landscape of global health governance is undergoing a transformative shift. Propelled by the World Health Organization (WHO) and collaborating interational bodies, the proposition and negotiation of two pivotal instruments aim to overhaul pandemic management and restructure facets of worldwide public health. These proposed changes carry the potential to significantly augment the existing international administrative framework, which has evolved over the last decade in anticipation of and response to pandemics, primarily focusing on the development and utilization of vaccines.
Empowered by the WHO, this burgeoning bureaucratic apparatus is increasingly subject to influence from private entities, corporations, and dominant authoritarian regimes, wielded through funding and political sway.
The envisioned regulations and frameworks, upon adoption, will orchestrate a fundamental realignment in global public health priorities. The focal point will pivot frome commonplace endemic ailments towards sporadic eruptions of novel pathogens, thereby fostering an industry that could perpetuate itself.
Concurrently, it will engender amplified external participation in decision-making arenas typically reserved for elected governments in most constitutional democracies, accountable to their populace.
Central to this transformation is the absence of explicit delineations by the WHO concerning the terms ‘pandemic’ and ‘public health emergency,’ which these nascent agreements, designed to exert authority under international law, endeavor to tackle. Implementation hinges upon the discretion of designated individuals– the Director-General (DG) of the WHO, Regional Directors, and an advisory panel whose recommendations may be embraced or disregarded.
Within the WHO’s lexicon, a ‘pandemic’ lacks a stipulation of severity, predominantly encapsulating widespread dissemination– a characteristic commonplace among respiratory viruses. This ambiguity provides substatial leeway for the DG to declare emergencies, thereby setting in motion responses reminiscent of those experimented with over the past couple of yeasr.
These responses, characterized by their unprecedented curtailment of fundamental peacetime human rights, have been acknowledged by the WHO, Unicef, and other United Nations (UN) agencies as having caused extensive harm.
This paradigm shift presents an opportunity for Big Pharma and its stakeholders, who have profited considerably during the preceding years, consolidating private wealth while amplifying national indebtedness and undoing prior advancements in poverty alleviation.
However, this paradigmatic evolution did not manifest suddenly and does not portend immediate subjugation. To confront this challenge and reinstate equilibrium and rationality in public health discourse, comprehensive comprehension of the situation is imperative.
You know there’s trouble brewing when a game of Pandemic seems less daunting than the global health governance overhaul in the works. Strap in for a rollercoaster of bureaucratic jargon and WHO-led drama that might just make you wish you were playing the board game instead!
Free Speech and Alternative Media are under attack by the Deep State. Chris Wick News needs reader support to survive and thrive.
We are a privately owned website funded solely by donations from our readers, Every dollar helps. Contributions help keep the site active and help support the author (and his medical bills)
