The World Health Organization (WHO) released its “Zero Draft” of the Pandemic Treaty in February 2023.
At the time, the Draft was considered a “WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response (WHO CA+).”
Many have warned that U.S. freedoms would be at stake if the nation enters into the treaty. The Biden administration, however, seems to be keen on entering a “global health security partnership,” according to a December 30, 2023 fact sheet.
“The Biden-Harris Administration continues to prioritize global health security as a critical component of national biodefense,” the fact sheet reads, adding, “The United States partners with countries around the world to build stronger global health security capacity – the ability to prevent, detect, rapidly respond to, and recover from new and emerging public health threats and prevent their spread across borders. Partnering with countries to stop infectious disease threats at their source, including by strengthening equitable health systems in their own countries and across regions, effectively protects the health of Americans and people across the world.”
“By 2025, the United States is committed to directly supporting at least 50 countries to strengthen and achieve regional, national and local capacity in five critical areas to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats,” the fact sheet notes.
American Faith previously reported that future WHO proposals could result in unprecedented authority being given to the organization, jeopardizing medical freedom.
Former World Health Organization (WHO) medical officer Doctor David Bell and Chair in Global Health Policy at the University of Leeds, Director of the World Health Organization Collaborative Centre on Health Systems and Health Security Professor Garrett Wallace Brown spoke to members of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (AAPG) regarding the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).
“The WHO was established in 1946 with the best of intentions, to help coordinate responses to major health issues and advise governments accordingly,” Bell told the APPG. “Over the decades we have seen a significant change in direction as funding streams have shifted to private ‘specified funding,’ particularly from private donors.”
“This has led to the WHO becoming a far more centralized and externally-directed body in which private and corporate funders shape and direct programs. What we have also seen shifting is the definition of a health emergency, making it extremely broad,” Bell continued.
He voiced his concerns: “It is a worrying background against which the IHR amendments and the Treaty are being negotiated.”
The WHO’s director general, Tedros Ghebreyesus, recently called for a pandemic treaty in response to an unknown “Disease X.”
“There are things that are unknown that may happen, and anything happening is a matter of when, not if, so we need to have a placeholder for that, for the diseases we don’t know,” he said.
He explained that a global agreement can “help us to prepare for the future in a better way,” adding, “The pandemic agreement can bring all the experience, all the challenges that we have faced and all the solutions into one.”
