Similar Posts
Reforming the WHO isn’t possible; it’s doing what it was meant to do
The image above is not about the World Health Organization’s (WHO) mishandling of the coronavirus. It’s from an article published in 2015, after the WHO botched their response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. You can see how far we’ve come since then. “Reform” of the WHO has a formula:
22 State Attorneys General Oppose the WHO Treaties
Key reasons provided by the 22 AGs:
First Reason:
“Under proposed IHR amendments and the Pandemic Treaty, however, the WHO’s Director-General would achieve the power to unilaterally declare a “public health emergency of international concern” (PHEIC) in one or more member nations. Such declarations can include perceived or potential emergencies other than pandemics, including climate change, immigration, gun violence, or even “emergencies” involving plants, animals, or ecosystems.”
Who Trusts the WHO? Reforming massive agencies may be a task too great.
The WHO (World Health Organization) took center stage during the COVID pandemic as the global coordinator of effective response. Questions about the organization’s proper role – and competence – preceded and now survive the COVID-19 crisis. Was the WHO effective and apolitical in its response, and can it be trusted with its global medical preeminence?
