9 Things I Don’t Like About the World Health Organization

As you'll see, they don't fulfill their own Constitution, and they don't follow their own rules.

While this article isn’t directly about the Pandemic Treaty or the International Health Regulations (IHR), I just want to clarify something that may be confusing for people: the Pandemic Treaty (or Agreement) is not the same thing as the IHR.

They’re different.

People in our movement interchange the two terms, and may leave themselves open to accusation of misinformation, because they themselves my be uncertain as to which one is which.

I find that I have to be cautious of this.

Anyway, with that said, I’ve been skeptical of the World Health Organization (WHO).

And, the more I learn about them, the more reasons I have for disliking (and even despising) them.

If you watched the video in Thursday’s Stack, you may be familiar with much of the content below. In that Stack, I used some of the same images you see below, but this time, I’ll describe those images.

One of the Main Functions of the World Health Organization

In the Constitution of the World Health Organization, Article 2 says that one of the functions of the WHO is “…to act as the directing and co-ordinating authority on international health work…”

Let’s see how well they’ve been able to live up to that.

What follows are 9 reasons why I don’t like the WHO.

#1: The WHO, to the Best of My Knowledge, Is Not Addressing Today’s Biggest Health Issue

Why are people dying in higher-than-5-year-average numbers?

A few days ago, I took the following screenshot of an Our World In Data page.

Notice that, compared to 2015-2019, Canada and the US are experiencing ~17% and ~11% excess deaths respectively.

To get a feeling for how bad this is, look at January 2020…

…and scan your eyes horizontally to the October 8th 2023 mark.

(To keep things visually simple, I only plotted Canada and the US, but this phenomenon is observable in the charts of many countries.)

We’re worse off now than we were pre-pandemic, even after the so-called “life-saving” “vaccines.”

What’s driving this excess death rate?

(Of course, if you’re reading this, I have a sneaking suspicion you know what it is.)

To the best of my knowledge, the WHO isn’t publicly saying anything about this.

Why?

For an organization that says (on p. 2 of its Constitution) that its objective is “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health,” it sure isn’t doing a good job.

#2: To The Best of My Knowledge, the WHO Didn’t Push the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to Be Transparent

The FDA, in a federal lawsuit, wanted up to 75 years to fully produce the data it relied on to license Pfizer’s COVID-19 “vaccine.”

Why?

If they want to reduce “vaccine hesitancy,” why not just release all of the trial data in one day?

Did the WHO push the FDA to be transparent?

I don’t think so.

#3: The WHO Didn’t Establish Clarity As to Whether a Person Died From COVID-19 Or With COVID-19

According to Article 21 (b) of the Constitituon of the World Health Organization, The Health Assembly has the authority to adopt regulations pertaining to “nomenclatures with respect to diseases, causes of death and public health practices…”

Okay.

You’ve probably heard the question, “From COVID-19, or with COVID-19?”

That question speaks to the confusion of what really may have caused a death.

Not being clear about this is partially what led to headlines like this:

If the WHO did establish some sort of truthful, accurate criteria pertaining to cause of death, why was there confusion and overcounting?

#4 Did the WHO Set a Truthful, Accurate, Cycle Threshold for the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR test)?

First, there’s some debate as to whether the virus itself has been properly isolated and separated. I know that’s probably beyond the scope of this article, and I’m not sure where I stand on the issue, but I know people whom I respect who are skeptical of the notion of viruses.

That aside, the validity of the PCR test itself is, in my opinion, somewhat debatable. Even if it is valid, the whole issue of cycle thresholds (Ct) is problematic.

(If you’re not aware of it, a lot of so-called “positive” tests were probably false positives, because a lot of the time, the Ct settings of the PCR tests was too high/sensitive, and thus, yielded many false-positives.)

In fact, the New York Times had an article on this:

#5: When It Comes to Product Purity, Has The WHO Pressed The Vaccine Manufacturers to Follow Good Manufacturing Practices?

Section (d) of Article 21 of the WHO’s Constitution says that the Health Assembly has the authority to adopt regulations pertaining to “…standards with respect to the safety, purity and potency of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce…”

Guess how well they’ve been meeting that.

You’ve probably heard that a growing number of scientists are finding plasmid DNA in vials of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 “vaccines.”

Pfizer does use plasmid DNA as starting material for its COVID-19 injectable (there’s even a New York Times article on this), but the plasmid DNA isn’t supposed to be in the final product.

But apparently, it is.

#6: Blank Inserts

Article 21, point (e) of the WHO Constitution says that the Health Assembly has the authority to adopt regulations pertaining to “…advertising and labelling of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce.”

Okay…

The above image features Dr. Renata Moon holding up an mRNA product insert. She was testifying to Senator Ron Johnson.

Did the WHO offer any guidance on this?

Probably not. I haven’t seen any indication that they did.

#7: No Mention of Potential Genome Modification

Here’s a screenshot I took from Pfizer.com…

Were people told about this?

Along with concern about plasmid DNA, as well as what’s emerging in the scientific literature, there is a real concern that at least some vaccinees have had their genomes modified.

You’d think that the WHO would be saying something about this, but…nope. I haven’t heard them mention this.

#8: Global Digital Health Certification Network

Need I say more?

#9: They Don’t Follow Their Own Rules

According to James Roguski, “Amendments to the IHR were fraudulently adopted in 2022 without an official vote being conducted.”

And there’s a concern that a similar violation may occur at the May 27th, 2024 meeting.

That’s because, according to Article 55 of the Amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005), “The text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration.” (Bolding mine.)

The Significance of January 27th, 2024

That would mean that, by January 27th, 2024 (which is the date I’m typing this), the proposed amendments should be communicated, but I don’t see any indication that that’s happened.

If I wake up tomorrow, and can confirm that the Director-General hasn’t made such communication, then technically—that is, technically—no decisions on amendments can be made in May.

But…as you may suspect, the WHO doesn’t even abide by their own Constitution, and they may break the rules and try to pretend to pass something.

That’s why we should be vigilant.

I’m sure that, if I were more knowledgeable about the WHO, I could find more reasons why I don’t like the WHO.

March 10th, 2024 update: I can’t believe I forgot to do this, but I’d like to thank James Roguski for personally helping me understand some of the topics around this issue.