| | | |

The comparison: IHR amendments as proposed in February 2023 and adopted on June 1, 2024.

Share this article

Here are the proposed and adopted articles 1,2,3 and 6. I think the onus should be on those who claim this is a disaster, to show their evidence. I am getting tired of repeating myself.

The IHR amendments were adopted because after 2 years of negotiations, the WHA had to adopt something to save face, and it had become apparent to the globalists that they would not do any better if they delayed a decision. This was very good.

The pandemic treaty will continue to be negotiated, but it has been mostly defanged too. Yet we won’t know for a year what the final form of the treaty will be. We will remain vigilant. We will continue to educate about pandemic preparedness

Here is the original Feb. 2023 suggestion for the IHR amendments, said by the WHO staff to have been developed from 307 amendments proposed by nation states (300) and the WHO bureaucracy (7):

This specific reference to gene therapy was in Article 1, but is GONE from the adopted draft:

“health products” include therapeutics, vaccines, medical devices, personal protective equipment, diagnostics, assistive products, cell- and gene-based therapies, and their components, materials, or parts.”

The elimination of the word “non-binding” twice is GONE.

OLD:

ADOPTED:

Article 2 attempted to a) expand the response to disease to a response to all risks with a potential to impact public health and b) allowed interference with human rights , livelihoods, and equitable access to health care when necessary. Both are GONE from the adopted draft.

OLD:

ADOPTED:

Article 3 attempted to remove dignity, human rights and freedom of persons from the IHR. This is gone from the adopted draft.

OLD:

ADOPTED:

Note that paragraphs 2-4 of Article 3, which were widely criticized, are pre-existing and were adopted many years ago.

Article 6 expected nations to provide WHO with samples (clinical data) and genetic sequence data of pathogens found in their territory, which would be added to WHO’s BioHub network and pathogen access and benefit sharing system. This is not required in the adopted draft.

OLD:

ADOPTED:

Similar Posts

  • My talk on the COVID plandemic, the Bogus and Expensive BioSecurity Agenda, Tricks Globalists Play to Get Experimental Vaccines into Arms, and How to Move Forward and End This Mess

    Share this article

    The globalists rely on lies, tricks and misdirection to accomplish their goals, but people hate being tricked and fooled.
    Not only was Fauci aware of at least 6 areas on the COVID genome that looked engineered on February 1, 2020—but he had Ralph Baric secretly listening in to the call who probably already knew what the others might identify as engineered sequences and was helping to plan the cover-up. Ralph Baric’s hidden presence suggests that he and Fauci already knew the virus was engineered, and may have been trying to get a bead on what strategies they would need to use to hide it. This is also a hint that Baric had something to do with developing the COVID virus, or knew who did.

  • NACs- Natural Asset Companies – what are they?

    Share this article

    Share this article And why are we concerned? (Read update at bottom: the rule change has been withdrawn,…

  • Happy Halloween

    Share this article

    Share this article Dear Friends, Happy Halloween! Amidst all the goblins and gremlins, I wanted to share an…