What is next for the Pandemic Treaty
and more from the World Health Assembly! 

A Voice for Choice Advocacy works closely with Stand for Health Freedom, and is their representative organization in California.  Their Policy Analyst, Valerie Borek, J.D., has been following the World Health Organization (WHO) meetings and keeping tabs on what they are up to.  Below is an update Stand for Health Freedom sent out with respect to the World Health Organization Meetings at the end of May, that AVFCA wanted to share with you.

“Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”

When you hear that phrase, you know someone has raised an objection to what's happening at the World Health Organization (WHO) or it's parent organization, the United Nations (UN).  Declaring an all-or-nothing approach to policy smacks of a drive to stamp out dissenting views.  Those pauses are the cracks where the light can shine through.

This phrase is peppered throughout discussions of the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR); the pandemic treaty; and the Political Declaration on Pandemic Preparedness, Preparation, and Response (PPPR) from the United Nations.  SHF followed the World Health Assembly in 2023, and has reported on background that lead us here We've summarized here, or you can easily find more at SHF’s WHO Reference Page when you want to refresh or to share the information, or find the the copy of this email in the form of an article, to share with others, here: https://standforhealthfreedom.com/blog/who2022/

As hinted at by a smattering of read-between-the-lines comments during the WHA, countries around the world are not all in lockstep on these global health and governance agreements.  This unrest goes well beyond public objections from multiple African nations over the last year, and is not being reported in mainstream media.  For example, U.S.  Ambassador to the U.N.  Dan Fogarty, expressed “concerns with the process” to create the U.N.  Political Declaration.  The “text was not properly negotiated” he said, and the curious timeline of trying to get a U.N.  declaration in place before the WHO gets their ducks in a row in 2024 was notable, leaving countries around the world unable to fully express their needs or opinions.  Interestingly, the U.S.  did not co-sponsor the resolution at the U.N.  in September 2022 to adopt a new Political Declaration on PPPR, even while emphatically supporting the pandemic treaty and amendments to the IHR. 

So, where are we now, after the 76th World Health Assembly has wrapped up? Here’s a list of things on the SHF radar and a timeline of what to look for in the next year.

1.           “The Big Catch-up” is a global vaccination campaign in response to the fact that overall uptake of routine shots has taken a steep dive since COVID locked us down and gave us time to ask questions.  Now the powers that be are bringing in the big guns to get everyone around the globe up to date with recommended shots in a campaign fronted by Chelsea Clinton.  In this same vein, SHF is also seeing an uptick in focus on vaccinating pregnant women in the name of conferring immunity to their infants.  (Most recently, RSV for pregnant women was approved by the FDA in May and the RSV shot is on the agenda for the CDC in June.)

2.           Primary health care visits are being touted as a way to increase vaccine uptake, capture data that goes beyond health decisions, and take their place as the planned cornerstone of universal health care in the name of “pandemic preparedness.” (Questions like “Is there a gun in your home?” are known as “social determinants of health” and can covertly capture personal data.) Can you see how easily this “gateway provider” can be used for so much more than insurance decisions?

3.           You may have heard the recent White House warnings that social media is harming the mental health of children.  We got a foreshadowing of this via Biden-administration comments on Big Tech at this year’s State of the Union address.  Now that the cat is out of the bag that the White House used social media to censor speech of Americans during the declared pandemic, it seems the romance is over.  Expect to see more moves in the name of mental health for children.  (Advocacy tip: Watch for new programs, grant money, and focus on your local schools in the name of mental health!)

4.           We already know the Biden administration thinks it’s ok for Americans to carry health credentials for international travel.  Based on what we hear from the U.N.  and global public-private partnerships, we can expect the digital identity to be pushed as a “human right.”

5.           Climate change as a threat to health is a trending topic.  Last year saw the Biden administration create an Office of Climate Change within Health and Human Services rather than the Environmental Protection Agency.  At the WHA it was noted that the annual Conference of Parties (COP) that discusses climate change will dedicate a day to health for the first time in its 28-year history.

6.           We lost count of how many people pushing more power for the WHO and the U.N.  urged and supported the creation of a centralized Global Health Threats Council.  The zero draft of the pandemic treaty referred to this as a “supreme” governing body.

7.           Last, but most importantly, be on guard against fearmongering about “the next pandemic.” Those who want this global health architecture to move forward are itching to get it in place as quickly as possible.  Many countries have been calling for putting the brakes on the process in the name of transparency and fairness.  It is too much, too quickly for all the nations of the world to be able to have a voice, and for all provisions to be vetted properly.  (Remember, one of the co-chairs of the IHR amendments drafting team said the document already has what it needs!)  If a treaty or amendments to the IHR are adopted at the next World Health Assembly in 2024, any president that comes after Joe Biden might not be able to easily withdraw the U.S.  from the legally binding agreements.  This is because the timeline for objecting was changed at last year’s WHA from two years to six months and because the new documents could make withdrawing from the WHO even more difficult.  Legal scholars are debating how this provision will be enforced because of the newness of this in international law, but it can reasonably be anticipated the “quick” timeline will be supported by the Biden administration that proposed it.  HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra recently told reporters that an “accord” (they never use the word treaty) will be adopted in 2024 “if everyone realizes that our window before this next pandemic, this next health threat, is probably not far away.”

These are just some of the cogs in the machine to be aware of as the current White House unwaveringly pledges support to the process of giving the WHO and the U.N.  more power, alongside unelected officials and public-private partnerships.

Linda Thomas Greenfield, U.S.  Ambassador to the U.N., declared in 2022 that the Biden administration is committed to seeing this agenda through, including changing national policy to support it. (If you haven’t read SHF’s background on Joe Biden’s commitment to the U.N. since his days in the Senate, click here! https://standforhealthfreedom.com/storage/2023/05/WHO_treaty-timeline.pdf

The U.S.  HHS Office of Global Affairs (OGA) will be holding two “stakeholder listening sessions” about the upcoming WHO documents intended to set up the global health architecture.  On June 20, 2023, the IHR amendments are up for discussion  If you’d like to attend or speak at the session, keep in mind that the deadlines to register are June 13 and 14.  On June 28, 2023, the topic will be the pandemic treaty.  Register to speak or to listen in by June 23 and 26.  SHF has registered to speak at each session but hasn’t yet gotten confirmation. 

Conclusion

Time seems to be a rinky dink in the oven as we move toward the global plan for a pandemic treaty and everything else that leads to a global architecture for human surveillance in the name of health by mid-2024.  But the more effort put into global health surveillance, the more hope we have.  The harder they must fight, the more we know they have something to fight against Did COVID advance the global government agenda or did it slow it down? Who is asking questions? How many people have seen through the lies because things got so extreme? This is a time for hope and action.

Make sure you’re following AVFCA.  With our partners at Stand for Health Freedom will be vigilant on global health, watching to see what the federal government is trying to commit Americans to, and how that can manifest in your state (where health decisions belong).  We’re dedicated to preserving the idea that health belongs at home, just like our U.S.  Constitution and Bill of Rights protected the police power of states to protect the health and welfare of citizens.

This is the hour the U.S.  Constitution was written for.  Our founding contract does not require that everyone agrees on everything before we can reveal our American agenda.  Our Constitution protects freedom at its most basic levels and was designed to include and honor different opinions, while respecting the individual, and enabling a collective American culture to thrive.

It’s time to stand up for health freedom.  We’ll do it together.  Will you join us in educating lawmakers to protect Americans from the WHO? Your support makes all of this possible.  Click the buttons below to help.

SHF and AVFCA will continue to monitor the World Health Assembly through the week and send a final update after it’s over. 

If you found this information helpful and appreciate the work A Voice for Choice Advocacy is doing, please support us by making a donation today.

Together we can make change happen!

C

Christina Hildebrand
President/Founder
A Voice for Choice Advocacy, Inc.
[email protected]
www.AVoiceForChoiceAdvocacy.org