Tag: who

WHO and European Commission Launch AI System to Monitor Social Media and Online “Misinformation” in Real Time

The World Health Organization has introduced a major overhaul of its global monitoring network, unveiling an AI-powered platform that tracks online conversations and media activity in real time.

Known as Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources 2.0 (EIOS), the system is being presented as a new step in “pandemic preparedness,” but its reach extends well beyond disease surveillance.

The upgrade is part of a growing merger between health monitoring, digital tracking, and centralized information control.

Developed with the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), the new version of EIOS is designed to scan the internet for signals of emerging health threats.

According to the WHO, it now automatically analyzes social media posts, websites, and other public sources to detect possible outbreaks.

Keep reading

World Health Organization Begs Taliban to Accept Female Aid Workers for Earthquake Victims

The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) pleaded Monday with the Taliban junta in Afghanistan to lift its Islamist restrictions against female workers, so that women would be allowed to travel without male guardians and provide humanitarian relief for victims of the devastating September 1 earthquake.

“A very big issue now is the increasing paucity of female staff in these places,” noted the deputy W.H.O. representative to Afghanistan, Dr. Mukta Sharma.

Sharma told Reuters that 90% of the medical staff in the area affected by the earthquake are male, and few of the female staffers were fully qualified doctors. She felt more female doctors would help women in the quake area who were afraid to deal with male physicians. 

Sharma also said the Taliban’s religious edicts against women traveling without male escorts were making it difficult for women to leave the quake area to receive hospital care.

India Today reported on Friday that “Taliban-imposed gender restrictions” are “compounding the tragedy for Afghan women” in other ways as well. 

For example, under the Taliban’s version of Islamic law, women can only make physical contact with their husbands or close male relatives — which means a large number of women are still buried under rubble in villages collapsed by the earthquake, because male rescue workers cannot touch them, and females are not allowed to travel to the disaster area to help.

According to India Today, badly injured female survivors have been left trapped in the debris of collapsed buildings while dead bodies were recovered around them. 

The New York Times (NYT) quoted women who said they were “pushed aside” and “forgotten” while men and boys received treatment for their injuries.

“It felt like women were invisible. The men and children were treated first, but the women were sitting apart, waiting for care,” a male rescue volunteer said.

There are not many qualified female rescue workers to go around, as the Taliban banned women from receiving education in medicine and other advanced fields in 2023. Foreign visitors have observed that hospitals in Afghanistan are almost entirely devoid of female staffers. The NYT said its reporters saw no women among the medical teams treating earthquake survivors.

Maternity care is particularly difficult to come by thanks to the Taliban’s restrictions, and the U.N. estimates there were at least 11,600 pregnant women in the earthquake zone.

The Taliban also banned women from working for foreign humanitarian groups and non-governmental organizations. Even female employees of the United Nations have been harassed and intimidated out of their workplaces.

“The restrictions are huge, the mahram issue continues, and no formal exemption has been provided by the de facto authorities,” Sharma told Reuters. Mahram is the name of the law that requires women to have male escorts when they travel.

“That’s why we felt we had to advocate with (authorities) to say, this is the time you really need to have more female health workers present, let us bring them in, and let us search from other places where they’re available,” she said.

The death toll from the September 1 earthquakes is now over 2,200, plus 3,600 injured. Countless homes were destroyed, leaving survivors to huddle in tents and other temporary structures. Many of the refugees are refusing to return home, now that they have seen how poorly the Taliban junta deals with earthquakes and landslides.

Keep reading

Update on International Health Regulation Amendments

Much has been written on the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), which most countries are making themselves subject to after July 19th (next week). Many raise concerns of loss of sovereignty, censorship, corporate greed, and conflict of interest. But most are missing the main point; the sheer and outright stupidity and fallacy on which the whole pandemic agenda is based.

July 19th is the last day that Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO) can withdraw from the IHR amendments (without entering a multi-year withdrawal process). By failing to withdraw, they will be committing their taxpayers to fund the key surveillance aspects of a rapidly expanding industry that is the pandemic industrial complex. They will be required to set up an extensive network to search for well-established natural phenomena, including the tendency of viruses to mutate into variants. This has been part of the natural world for hundreds of millions of years, but demonstrating it has recently become highly profitable due to a confluence of technological advances and intense marketing.

Firstly, we have developed the ability to detect variants with technologies such as PCR and gene sequencing. This also helps find a lot of viruses that we had not noticed before as they are mostly harmless. Secondly, we have developed digital identification and communications technologies that allow an unprecedented level of mass media coordination and public coercion – what Goebbels could do on a national scale, we can now do almost globally. Thirdly, we have developed pay-to-print modified-RNA medicines (vaccines) that are really cheap but, through the use of fear and coercion, can be injected into almost everyone, returning excellent profits.

Keep reading

US and Argentina announce plan to create an alternative global health system after withdrawing from WHO

The US Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and his Argentine counterpart, Minister of Health Mario Lugones, have signed a joint declaration reaffirming their countries’ withdrawals from the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) and announcing plans to create an alternative international health system.

The new system aims to be grounded in scientific integrity, transparency, sovereignty and accountability, with Kennedy and Lugones stating that their withdrawal from WHO marks the beginning of a new path towards building a modern global health cooperation model.

During his visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina, Kennedy met with Lugones and Argentine President Javier Milei to discuss key health priorities – including healthcare reform, addressing chronic disease and their new global health collaboration – to define a joint work agenda that will strengthen transparency and trust in the health system.

Lugones expressed his shared vision with Kennedy, stating that they believe in the future of collaboration in global health and have similar visions about the path forward, with the declaration expressing a shared vision of the challenges facing the region’s health systems and the measures needed to transform them.

Keep reading

New WHO Guidance Calls for Injectable Contraceptives for Kids

The World Health Organization (WHO) released a new guideline on preventing adolescent pregnancies in low and middle-income countries. The proposed framework advances a vision of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for young people that promotes controversial ideas, and norm changes inconsistent with what governments have agreed to.

Revised for the first time in over a decade, the guideline focuses almost exclusively on preventing adolescent pregnancies through increased and prolonged contraception use, including “self-administered injectable contraception,” and access to sexuality education.

In its recommendations, the WHO frames adolescents’ choice to discontinue “contraceptive use due to side-effects, and due to changing life circumstances and reproductive intentions” in a negative light and as an obstacle to overcome.

The framework calls on mobilizing “[p]olitical, governmental, religious, traditional and other influential leaders” to “support the access to, uptake of, and continued use of contraceptives.”

The guideline also asks policymakers to ensure that laws on age and consent related to sexual activities are designed in such a way as to promote adolescents’ access to contraception. Such a move could mean lowering the age of legal consent or making regulations more flexible to enable young people’s access to contraception without stigma.

Critics note that an exclusive focus on mass contraceptive use among adolescents monopolizes the discourse on how to best prevent adolescent pregnancies and undermines efforts to tackle the problem holistically.

The 112-page guideline does not mention the merits of raising awareness about the negative consequences of nonmarital sexual behavior through programs centered around abstinence and delay of sexual debut.

Critics also disagree with the WHO framing adolescents’ opposition to contraceptives due to side effects or religious beliefs as based on myths and misinformation.

Beyond its recommendations on contraceptives, the guideline promotes adolescents’ access to sex education, saying that “[m]any adolescents are unaware…[on how] to have sex safely and pleasurably.”

The document references the latest UN inter-agency technical guidance on comprehensive sexuality education (CSE), which has helped shape sexuality education curricula and materials in many countries around the world.

The technical guidance dedicates an entire section to the “Social Construction of Gender and Gender Norms,” teaching children aged 5-8 the difference between biological sex and gender and encouraging them to “reflect on how they feel about their biological sex and gender.” The same section says children aged 9-12 should be able to “explain how someone’s gender identity may not match their biological sex” and “acknowledge that masturbation does not cause physical or emotional harm.”

Another goal laid out in the CSE guidance is that children aged 12- 15 are able to state that sexual “fantasies and desires are natural and not shameful and occur throughout life.”

Keep reading

Media Hypes New COVID Variant NB.1.8.1 Just ONE WEEK After WHO Member States Signed Pandemic Agreement

Dozens of mainstream media outlets published articles this week warning readers of a new COVID-19 variant spreading throughout China, Europe and the U.S.

Several headlines about the NB.1.8.1 variant also pointed out the Trump administration is restricting access to COVID shots for healthy citizens, attempting to tie the decision to the new strain’s spread.

“Today, the ‘Covid Vaccine’ for healthy children and healthy pregnant women has been removed from the CDC recommended immunization schedule…” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Tuesday.

The variant just happens to be making headlines across the globe just a week after the World Health Organization adopted the world’s first Pandemic Agreement.

“The world is safer today thanks to the leadership, collaboration and commitment of our Member States to adopt the historic WHO Pandemic Agreement,” said Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “The Agreement is a victory for public health, science and multilateral action. It will ensure we, collectively, can better protect the world from future pandemic threats. It is also a recognition by the international community that our citizens, societies and economies must not be left vulnerable to again suffer losses like those endured during COVID-19.”  

The U.S. did not sign onto the agreement as it did not have representatives present during the vote with President Donald Trump announcing in January America officially left the WHO.

While current data does not indicate the NB.1.8.1 strain causes more severe illness than prior variants, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine, told CBS News in an emailed statement that “it may spread more easily.”

Keep reading

RFK Urges Other Countries to Join the U.S. in Leaving the WHO: «We Don’t Have to Suffer the Limitations of a Dying WHO»

In an unprecedented act of political courage, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., current U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, has openly challenged the World Health Organization (WHO), describing it as “dying” and accusing it of being riddled with corruption and influenced by political interests—particularly those of China.

In a recorded message delivered during the World Health Assembly in Geneva, Kennedy called on other countries to follow the United States’ lead and withdraw from the organization. According to Kennedy, the WHO mishandled the COVID-19 pandemic by concealing information about human transmission of the virus and promoting false theories about its origin.

He also criticized the new pandemic treaty adopted by the WHO, calling it a perpetuation of systemic dysfunction. In response, the Trump administration has begun forming a new global health alliance with countries such as Argentina, Italy, and Israel.

Keep reading

WHO’s Pandemic Agreement is adopted despite concerns about unelected institutions imposing global policies

Members of the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) adopted a global pandemic accord on Tuesday, 20 May 2025; 124 countries voted in favour, no countries voted against, while 11 countries abstained and 46 countries were not present.  The total votes cast don’t add up, but those are the numbers WHO has declared.

For the countries that abstained – of which, shamefully, the UK was not one – their concerns included loss of national sovereignty, lack of legal clarity and the risk of unelected institutions imposing policy.

Please note: The Pandemic Agreement has been called various names over the years.  It has also been referred to as the Pandemic Treaty, Pandemic Accord and WHO Convention Agreement + (“WHO CA+”). 

To ensure the Pandemic Agreement was adopted by the easiest possible route, WHO had determined that a vote need not take place, and instead it would be adopted by “consensus.”

Surprised that a “democratic institution” did not want to have a vote, Slovakia requested that a vote on the draft Pandemic Agreement take place, which Tedros the Terrorist attempted to stop hours before the vote was scheduled.

Keep reading

World Health Organization Approves Pandemic Agreement

The World Health Organization (WHO) on May 20 approved a pandemic agreement that is aimed at preventing, preparing for, and responding to future health emergencies.

The treaty says countries shall adopt a “One Health approach” by taking measures to identify and address factors that start pandemics. It says that countries must train workers to prepare for and respond to health emergencies and take steps to strengthen health systems, including improving vaccine coverage.

One section outlines how pharmaceutical companies that volunteer will provide the WHO with 20 percent of their vaccines, medicines, and tests. The WHO will then distribute the products “on the basis of public health risk and need, with particular attention to the needs of developing countries.”

The exact process will be laid out in a future agreement that will be considered at the 2026 World Health Assembly.

The consensus vote took place during the assembly on Tuesday, a day after a committee meeting in which 124 countries voted in favor, zero objected, and 11 abstained.

The approval of the agreement followed three years of negotiations.

Keep reading

The WHO Cannot Be Saved

As humans, we commonly consider ourselves, our beliefs, and our work of particular importance. It is not surprising, then, that when we form institutions, those within them seek to promote the institution’s relevance, expand their work, and centralize decision-making within their own ‘particularly important’ group.

Few want to divest power and resources, let alone put themselves and their colleagues out of a job. This fatal flaw infects all bureaucracies, from local to national and regional to international.

It is unsurprising, then, that the World Health Organization (WHO), an international health bureaucracy of over 9,000 staff, a quarter of them in Geneva, should suffer the same problems. The WHO was originally intended primarily to transfer capacity to struggling states emerging from colonialism and address their higher burdens of disease but lower administrative and financial capabilities. This prioritized fundamentals like sanitation, good nutrition, and competent health services that had brought long life to people in wealthier countries. Its focus now is more on stocking shelves with manufactured commodities. Its budget, staffing, and remit expand as actual country need and infectious disease mortality decline over the years.

While major gaps in underlying health equality remain, and were recently exacerbated by the WHO’s Covid-19 policies, the world is a very different place from 1948 when it was formed. Rather than acknowledging progress, however, we are told we are simply in an ‘inter-pandemic period,’ and the WHO and its partners should be given ever more responsibility and resources to save us from the next hypothetical outbreak (like Disease-X). Increasingly dependent on ‘specified’ funding from national and private interests heavily invested in profitable biotech fixes rather than the underlying drivers of good health,  the WHO looks more and more like other public-private partnerships that channel taxpayer money to the priorities of private industry.

Pandemics happen, but a proven natural one of major impact on life expectancy has not happened since pre-antibiotic era Spanish flu over a hundred years ago. We all understand that better nutrition, sewers, potable water, living conditions, antibiotics, and modern medicines protect us, yet we are told to be ever more fearful of the next outbreak. Covid happened, but it overwhelmingly affected the elderly in Europe and the Americas. Moreover, it looks, as the US government now makes clear, almost certainly a laboratory mistake by the very pandemic industry that is promoting the WHO’s new approach.

Collaborating on health internationally remains popular, as it should be in a heavily interdependent world. It also makes sense to prepare for severe rare events – most of us buy insurance. But we don’t exaggerate flood risk in order to expand the flood insurance industry, as anything we spend is money taken from our other needs.

Public health is no different. If we were designing a new WHO now, no sane model would base its funding and direction primarily on the interests and advice of those who profit from illness. Rather, these would be based on accurate estimates of localized risks of the big killer diseases. The WHO was once independent of private interests, mostly core-funded, and able to set rational priorities. That WHO is gone.

Keep reading