Tag: who

WHO Official Testifies That Advice Against Vaccine Passports Was Ignored To Continue Digital Rollout

Dr. Hanna Nohynek, a World Health Organization (WHO) official, has told a court that her recommendation to Finland’s government during the pandemic was that the so-called “vaccine passport” was not necessary.

Nohynek, who is also the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare’s chief physician, testified that as the controversial schemes were being announced, her stance was that Covid vaccines were not effective in stopping the transmission of the virus, and therefore “vaccine passports,” designed to prove somebody’s vaccination status and create a checkpoint society, were superfluous.

Worse still, they provided people with “a false sense of security,” is how the doctor put it, referring to her advice dating back to the end of 2021. As for the awareness that the vaccines did not stop Covid transmission, reports quoting Nohynek’s testimony say the Institute knew this in the summer of that year, and possibly earlier.

But despite Nohynek’s stance and her role at WHO – where she chairs the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE), and is also a member of the Vaccines Together and the International Vaccine Institute boards – the government ignored her.

At about the same time, the UN health agency was going ahead with plans to set up its Global Digital Health Certification Network, enabling the proliferation of digital vaccine passports, while the EU came out with its Digital COVID Certificate Regulation.

Keep reading

Massive Protests Erupt in Japan Over WHO’s Pandemic Treaty

Tens of thousands of protesters swarmed the streets of Japan over the weekend to stand against the World Health Organization’s sweeping pandemic treaty.

The protests reportedly emerged in multiple locations on Saturday, including the “streets of Ikebukuro to the gatherings at Higashi-Ikebukuro Central Park”, with video showing the massive crowds peacefully protesting.

Speakers included Molecular Pathology Professor Masayasu Inoue and modern History Researcher Chikatsu Hayashi, who spoke out against the WHO, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the medical establishment’s experimental COVID mRNA “genetic vaccines.”

From Aussie 17:

The protest not just opposed potential mandatory vaccinations but also the perceived overreach of health authorities and their ties with global pharma, echoing a distressing sentiment of disenfranchisement among the populace. Demonstrators criticized the lack of explanations for a sharp increase in excess deaths and demanded accountability and clarity on vaccine-related casualties.

Eminent speakers, including Professor Masayasu Inoue and modern history researcher Chikatsu Hayashi, provided compelling pre-demonstration speeches that laid bare the concerning dynamics between global health authorities and pharmaceutical agendas.

Professor Inoue highlighted the concerning trend of our health being weaponized in what he termed as “a third world war fought with information.” He urged the public to resist introducing genetic vaccines into their bodies, implicating a significant portion of WHO’s funding comes from pharmaceutical giants and private interests like the Bill Gates Foundation.

Prof. Masayasu Inoue’s impassioned speech highlighted how the COVID pandemic revealed a “third world war fought with information” and the introduction of genetic vaccines “means our health is being used as a weapon.”

Keep reading

WHO Official Admits Vaccine Passports May Have Been A Scam

The World Health Organization’s Dr. Hanna Nohynek testified in court that she advised her government that vaccine passports were not needed but was ignored, despite explaining that the COVID vaccines did not stop virus transmission and the passports gave a false sense of security. The stunning revelations came to light in a Helsinki courtroom where Finnish citizen Mika Vauhkala is suing after he was denied entry to a café for not having a vaccine passport.

Dr. Nohynek is chief physician at the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare and serves as the WHO’s chair of Strategic Group of Experts on immunization. Testifying yesterday, she stated that the Finnish Institute for Health knew by the summer of 2021 that the COVID-19 vaccines did not stop virus transmission

During that same 2021 time period, the WHO said it was working to “create an international trusted framework” for safe travel while EU members states began rolling out COVID passports. The EU Digital COVID Certificate Regulation passed in July 2021 and more than 2.3 billion certificates were later issued. Visitors to France were banned if they did not have a valid vaccine passport which citizens had to carry to buy food at stores or to use public transport.

But Dr. Nohynek testified yesterday that her institute advised the Finnish government in late 2021 that COVID passports no longer made sense, yet certificates continued to be required. Finnish journalist Ike Novikoff reported the news yesterday after leaving the Helsinki courtroom where Dr. Nohynek spoke.

Keep reading

Exactly What Are WHO Member States Voting for?

With Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO) negotiating new agreements to centralize management of pandemics with an annual budget of over $31.5 billion, it would be reasonable to assume that everyone was clear on what a pandemic actually is. Surprisingly, this is not the case. Although countries will be voting in two months on a new Pandemic Agreement and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) to grant the WHO wide authority over pandemic management, there is no universally-agreed definition of “pandemic.” What degree of severity is required? How widespread must it be? What proportion of the population must be at risk? 

An outbreak of common cold crossing borders fits many pandemic definitions, as does a repeat of the medieval Black Death. International agreements are normally formed around a definable problem, but the world is about to invest tens of billions without a solid basis to predict costs and benefits. In other words, there is no clear agreement on what the World Health Assembly is actually agreeing to.

Keep reading

WHO’s proposed IHR amendments and Pandemic Treaty will create perverse incentives to declare pandemics

The World Health Organisation (“WHO”) will present two new texts for adoption by its governing body, the World Health Assembly, in Geneva on 27 May – 1 June.

The new Pandemic Treaty needs a two-thirds majority for approval and, if and once adopted, will come into effect after 40 ratifications. The amendments to the International Health Regulations (“IHR”) can be adopted by a simple majority and will be binding on all states unless they recorded reservations by the end of last year.

Note: WHO’s Pandemic Treaty is also referred to as the Pandemic Accord and WHO Convention Agreement + (“WHO CA+”).

WHO describes the IHR as “an instrument of international law that is legally binding” on its 196 states parties, including the 194 WHO member states, even if they voted against it. Therein lies its promise and its threat.

The new regime will change WHO from a technical advisory organisation into a supranational public health authority exercising quasi-legislative and executive powers over states; change the nature of the relationship between citizens, business enterprises, and governments domestically, and also between governments and other governments and WHO internationally; and shift the locus of medical practice from the doctor-patient consultation in the clinic to public health bureaucrats in capital cities and WHO headquarters in Geneva and its six regional offices.

From net zero to mass immigration and identity politics, the “expertocracy” elite is in alliance with the global technocratic elite against majority national sentiment. The Covid years gave the elites a valuable lesson in how to exercise effective social control and they mean to apply it across all contentious issues.   The changes to global health governance architecture must be understood in this light. It represents the transformation of the national security, administrative, and surveillance state into a globalised biosecurity state.

The IHR amendments will expand the situations that constitute a public health emergency, grant WHO additional emergency powers and extend state duties to build “core capacities” of surveillance to detect, assess, notify and report events that could constitute an emergency.

The existing language of “should” is replaced in many places by the imperative “shall,” of non-binding recommendations with countries will “undertake to follow” the guidance. And “full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons” will be changed to principles of “equity” and “inclusivity” with different requirements for rich and poor countries, bleeding financial resources and pharmaceutical products from industrialised to developing countries.

With a funding model where 87 per cent of the budget comes from voluntary contributions from rich countries and private donors like the Gates Foundation, and 77 per cent is for activities specified by them, WHO has effectively become a system of global public health patronage.

Human Rights Watch says the process has been “disproportionately guided by corporate demands and the policy positions of high-income governments seeking to protect the power of private actors in health including the pharmaceutical industry.”

The victims of this Catch-22 lack of accountability will be the peoples of the world.

Keep reading

Two weeks after the first “covid death” in China, 33 “vaccines” were already in development according to WHO document

Seventeen days after the first covid death worldwide was reported and before the first “covid death” outside China, the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) published a document that showed 33 covid “vaccines” were already under development.

On 11 January 2020, Chinese state media reported the first known death from an illness caused by a novel virus.  Seventeen days later, on 28 January, WHO published a document showing that 33 covid “vaccines” were in development.

According to WHO’s document, two of the vaccines were already in Phase 1 trials and were being tested in humans: a DNA vaccine developed by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (“NIAID”) and an inactivated virus vaccine developed by Sinovac Biotech, the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.

This was 5 days before the first reported covid death outside China.

Keep reading

Report: ‘Healthcare workers’ raped innocents; UN ‘peacekeepers’ shelled civilians

Healthcare rapists

As shocking as the revelations about mass rapes of women and children by UN “peacekeepers” and “teachers” may be, even more distressing is that UN employees supposedly dedicated to healthcare have carried out those very same atrocities and are led by an actual terrorist.

As Frontline News previously reported, the World Health Organization (WHO), a UN agency, is headed by a terrorist who keeps rapists and pedophiles on staff giving them the power to abuse the poorest people in the world.  He even flies these staff members to towns in the developing world, with fancy rental cars and hotel rooms waiting for them, and with far more cash than the local residents have – a perfect recipe for exploitation.

Actual terrorist at the helm

Even hardcore anti-globalists might be tempted to write off such charges as ludicrous, yet it is hard to ignore the evidence Frontline News has detailed about WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’s past:

Tedros [was] a leader of Ethiopia’s brutal minority party, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, a wing of the ruling Marxist-rooted Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front …The United States State Department has categorized TPLF as a terrorist organization due to its “violent activities …

During his tenure as Ethiopia’s health minister and then foreign minister, Tedros risked the health of citizens for political gain:

[H]ealth experts in Ethiopia noticed a strange phenomenon: The government was refusing to acknowledge cholera outbreaks. Instead, the authorities labelled the outbreaks as “acute watery diarrhea” … the Ethiopian government was pressuring its health workers to avoid any mention of cholera, which could damage the country’s image and deter tourists.

That’s from Tedros’ pre-WHO days. What of Tedros today?

Actual rapists on the healthcare staff

Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts argued on the floor of Parliament that the WHO, far from having well-meaning leaders unaware of the child rapes carried out by their subordinates, “is rotting from the head,” Frontline News reported. Here’s his textual introduction to the video of his speech, posted on his YouTube Channel:

Former terrorist Tedros Ghebreyesus will not fire 83 WHO staff engaged in abuse including rape and forced abortions, with one victim 13, claiming rape and forced abortion do not violate WHO’s policies because the victims were not receiving WHO aid. [Emphasis added.]

Keep reading

WHO “pandemic treaty” normalizes bioweapon development and vaccine experiments, incentivizes nations to share data on “gain-of-function” research

In an effort to normalize bioweapon development and predatory vaccine experiments, the World Health Organization (WHO) is pushing every nation to sign a “Pandemic Treaty” that would require each nation to participate in bioweapons development, gain-of-function data sharing and DNA surveillance.

Critics of the treaty warn that this global pact is nothing but a power grab that incentivizes the creation of a biomedical police state. Critics also warn, that by centralizing gain-of-function data, it would be impossible to trace the source of future biolab leaks. The treaty would enable perpetual experimentation on human populations, through pandemic propaganda campaigns or through new vaccine and testing programs that are mandated into existence.

The WHO’s pandemic treaty would continue to disguise bioweapon and vaccine profiteering as “pandemics” that require fearful obedience

With WHO and its financiers calling the shots, all future biolab leaks could be hidden and disguised. Any investigation into misconduct at these biolabs would be forbidden. WHO would immediately call lab leaks “conspiracy theory” or “misinformation.” This is currently how WHO and its body of experts handle any inquiry that comes their way about COVID-19, and it is exactly how the WHO helped quash investigation into the very real possibility of a laboratory leak for SARS-CoV-2.

Director-General of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has struggled to garner global support for the globalist’s “pandemic treaty.” The treaty would help normalize predatory testing and vaccine development, which requires gain-of-function research to understand how pathogens will infect and harm human populations.

The WHO claims the treaty will help “prevent future pandemics.” However, as seen during the covid-19 scandal, there are several multinational business interests that seek to capitalize on pandemic messaging, fear-based propaganda and the ensuing hysteria. COVID-19 testing programs, which failed from the start, are just one of the lucrative business plans built into the “pandemic treaty.” Further mRNA experiments will continue to bring in billions of dollars for pharmaceutical companies, as governments are leveraged to enforce unlawful mandates onto populations.

Keep reading

Global network to monitor safety of vaccines has failed governments and citizens around the world

Three years ago, the Global Vaccine Data Network (“GVDN”) was granted unfettered access to health records by numerous governments.  Yet, GVDN has failed to produce any full and meaningful analysis of covid vaccine injuries.

There is a need for a comprehensive health service audit, Dr. Guy Hatchard says.  “It is time for governments to insist that health services provide them with up-to-date information on the extent of healthcare usage and all-cause mortality, and that also needs to be related to covid vaccine status.”

What is GVDN?

GVDN is a global partnership to monitor the safety and effectiveness of vaccines across hundreds of millions of people rather than just the tens of thousands involved in large clinical trials. GVDN covers 31 sites in 26 countries across six continents, representing more than 300 million people.

It is a member of the World Health Organisation’s (“WHO’s”) Vaccine Safety Net which means it has been evaluated by WHO and meets WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (“GACVS”) criteria for “good information practices.”

GVDN received seeding money from the Gates Foundation in 2019. According to an extract from a GACVS meeting in June 2019:

GACVS was informed about a new global vaccine data network (GVDN) … An inaugural meeting was held in Annecy (France) in January 2018* … Representatives from academia, research centres, industry and GAVI in 16 countries in all 6 WHO regions attended.

[Note: GVDN’s website states that the inaugural meeting was held in January 2019.]

The meeting reached agreement on a collaborative model for conducting studies of vaccine safety, efficacy and risk-benefit; a governance model that ensures full participation of sites and efficient development of study protocols; data models to protect individual privacy but allow collaborative agreements on common data models (standardisation of data to allow pooling of results); and a pilot study to investigate the link between influenza vaccines and Guillain–Barré syndrome.

The advantages for countries would be access to the entire GVDN. [GACVS] also considered that the regulatory imperative for post-licensure surveillance could sustain support for a GVDN through a common pool. The requirement for this type of active surveillance in GAVI-eligible countries as a condition for receiving vaccines could drive capacity-building in those countries.Use of distributed data networks, World Health Organisation, 2019

In April 2021, the GVDN received significant funding from the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) for the project over three years, entitled Global Covid Vaccine Safety (“GCoVS”). In August 2022, the CDC granted additional funding to extend the GCoVS project by two years and expand the number of sites participating globally.

GVDN relies on research grants for specific vaccine safety monitoring projects and is hosted by UniServices, a not-for-profit stand-alone company that is wholly owned by the University of Auckland.  Funding for New Zealand-focused research has been received from Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand, previously the New Zealand Ministry of Health.

Keep reading

WHO Report Proposes Working With Social Media Providers and Law Enforcement To Control “Disinformation”

The United Nations (UN) in general has in the past years proved to be a fine yet unfortunate example of the degradation of an institution that was conceived as an international forum for settling disputes and establishing cooperation and mutual trust between countries – without denting their sovereignty or agency.

Yet from that, it has been turning into another “brick in the globalist wall” – instead of providing a level playing field and ensuring trust, the UN is prostrating itself and its various agencies – these last years very notably the WHO (World Health Organization) – before the global agendas.

Therefore, it’s really unsurprising that the World Health Organization continues to dabble in online information suppression and even censorship, and keeps talking about “disinformation.”

As well, a recent WHO statement gives away that the UN wouldn’t mind following in the footsteps of governments who collude with Big Tech. After all, the UN has been pejoratively referred to as “the world government.”

These days, WHO’s top-of-mind goes this way, as per the post. It’s not the actual health issues, but – “cyber-attacks on health care (and) disinformation.” And these are treated as “health security risks.”

So, not health risks – but “health security risks.” There is also talk about “enhancing cyber-maturity.” It will be a cold day in hell before most people catch up with corporate/globalist newspeak anyway, but this time in a post on the WHO blog, the agency at least listed everyone involved in this curious endeavor.

It’s no less that Interpol (a global police organization), the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the UN Office of Counter-terrorism, the UN International Computing Center (UNICC), the UN Inter-regional Crime and Justice Research Institute, and the CyberPeace Institute.

Keep reading