Yes – We absolutely should leave the WHO

Leave a CommentYes – We absolutely should leave the WHOHealth, United Nations

‘World Health Organization (WHO), specialized agency of the United Nations (UN) established in 1948 to further international cooperation for improved public health conditions. Although it inherited specific tasks relating to epidemic control, quarantine measures, and drug standardization…WHO was given a broad mandate under its constitution to promote the attainment of “the highest possible level of health” by all peoples. WHO defines health positively as “a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”’Britannica

“The WHO is not a science based organization and we shouldn’t pay 1.2 billion for politically charged opinions.” Dr. Vinay Prasad

Last week, Reuters reported that President Trump plans on US withdrawal from the World Health Organization as soon as he takes office. Remember, we pay the lion’s share of its funding. As the organization proved during the pandemic, it is not fit for purpose, being a politically driven rather than scientific-based operation. This is Donald Trump on the campaign trail calling it a “corrupt Globalist SCAM” dominated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and global elites such as Bill Gates.

The WHO Review and Why it Matters to You is a scathing critique by Abir Balan, published by the PANDA group, that exposes what it describes as the deep corruption and incompetence of the World Health Organization (WHO) during the Covid-19 and MonkeyPox pandemics. It attempts to empower you with key information to help you assess the World Health Organization’s candidacy as an authoritative global public health organization.

This review isn’t just an analysis; it’s a damnation of WHO’s actions, accusing the organization of betraying its own principles and the global public’s trust.

Key Accusations:

  • Manipulative and Ineffective Response: The document accuses WHO of abandoning its core public health principles, ignoring its own guidelines, and pushing policies like lockdowns, masks, and universal vaccination that were supposedly based on fabricated, poor quality, or non-existent research.
  • Misrepresentation of Data: It claims that WHO deliberately exaggerated the lethality of Covid-19 to push its agenda, manipulating public perception and policy through misinformation.
  • Violation of Health Sovereignty: The review lambasts WHO for infringing on individual and national health sovereignty, suggesting that its recommendations were not only unscientific but also authoritarian, violating human dignity and personal freedoms.
  • Corruption and Conflicts of Interest: There are explicit accusations of WHO being swayed by private interests, with its decisions during the pandemics reflecting not public health needs but political and financial motivations.
  • Failure to Follow Its Own Pre-COVID Guidelines: The critique highlights that WHO’s actions during these pandemics starkly deviated from its 2019 influenza and related disease management recommendations, showing a lack of consistency and integrity.

Evidence and Exposure:

  • Using WHO’s own documents and statements, the review paints a picture of an organization caught in contradictions, where its actions did most definitely not match its words. Visual evidence from WHO’s materials is cited to show how the organization has deviated from its stated mission.

Impact and Call to Action:

  • This document doesn’t just seek to inform; it calls for action. It urges individuals and nations to reclaim health sovereignty, to critically question WHO’s authority, and to prevent such an organization from having unchecked power over global health policy.
  • It’s a wake-up call to the public, suggesting that the WHO has not only failed in its duties but has actively contributed to health crises by promoting ineffective and unethical strategies.

The review concludes with a damning verdict that the WHO should not be trusted as an authoritative figure in global health, accusing it of being a puppet to globalist agendas rather than a guardian of public health. It demands accountability, transparency, and a complete overhaul or rejection of WHO’s influence in future health policies.

This publication is not merely critical; it’s an outright accusation of malfeasance, urging a reevaluation of how global health is managed and who should manage it.

Get your own copy here. https://pandata.org/who-review/