World Health Organization

From Dharmapedia Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations responsible for international public health.[1] It is part of the U.N. Sustainable Development Group. The WHO Constitution, which establishes the agency's governing structure and principles, states its main objective as ensuring "the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health."[2] It is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, with six semi-autonomous regional offices and 150 field offices worldwide.

Since 2017 Tedros Adhanom [archive] was leading the organization as Director-General. Adhanom was a leader in Ethiopia's Tigray People's Liberation Front, a wing of the ruling Marxist Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front. Adhanom served the repressive regime as Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2012 to 2016 after a stint as Health Minister. He was also chair of Gates-funded GAVI.


Neil Seeman, the director of the Canadian Statistical Assessment Service, said May 3, 2003, "Just because a study or pronouncement carries the imprimatur of the WHO should not mean it is sacrosanct," about the WHO.[3] Philip Stevens wrote in December 2005, "[t]he World Health Organization is increasingly working against American values and the interests of the poor, [and] the U.S. should seriously consider cutting back the funds until the WHO adopts a more practical outlook."[4]

WHO, along with the ACLU, Democratic Socialists of America, and the far left Human Rights Watch supports decriminalization of prostitution.[5]

Peter Humphrey, a British investigator who was jailed in China in 2013 had been drugged, chained to a chair, locked in a cage and made to read out a statement written by the police in front of cameras.[6] The anchor who presented the footage, James Chao, is now a goodwill ambassador with the World Health Organization.

Concerns have been raised due to the sources of funding and the election of the Director-General. Massive funding comes from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.[7][8]

Accounting fraud[edit]

The World Health Organization is horribly corrupt. An audit revealed there has been a surge in internal corruption allegations across the whole of the organization with the detection of multiple schemes aimed at defrauding large sums of money from the international body, overwhelming an internal team of full-time investigators. An Associated Press expose in 2017 found that nearly half of the WHO two billion dollar budget went to first-class airfare and five-star hotels, more than its entire budget to combat the AIDS virus. The United States is the largest contributor US taxpayers fund about a quarter of the WHO budget.

Population control[edit]

Robert Kennedy writes: In 1974, USAID and WHO collaborated on the creation of a top-secret “Kissinger Report.”... That report, known as the US National Security Study Memorandum 200,122, 123 outlined the geopolitical incentives for reducing population growth in “less developed countries” (LDCs) to near zero by “reducing fertility” so as to safeguard the economic interests of the United States and other industrialized nations in imported mineral resources... In the years 1993 and 1994, WHO launched antifertility vaccination campaigns in Nicaragua, Mexico, the Philippines, and Kenya in 1995.[9]

Bill Gates committed $10 Billion to the World Health Organization to help usher in “the decade of vaccines.” The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association accused WHO and UNICEF of putting an antigen into vaccines causing miscarriages in 2014, which resulted in 2.3 million women and girls receiving the questionable inoculation.

“We sent six samples from around Kenya to laboratories in South Africa. They tested positive for the HCG antigen,” said Dr. Muhame Ngare of the Mercy Medical Centre in Nairobi to LifeSiteNews. “They were all laced with HCG.”

Dr. Ngare blew the whistle about WHO’s population control agenda in the third-world, which was allegedly pushed under the guise of providing tetanus vaccinations.

“This proved right our worst fears; that this WHO campaign is not about eradicating neonatal tetanus but a well-coordinated forceful population control mass sterilization exercise using a proven fertility regulating vaccine. This evidence was presented to the Ministry of Health before the third round of immunization but was ignored,” said Dr. Ngare, who serves as the spokesman for the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association.[10]

Political Coverups[edit]

There is a debate about radioactive elements in US munitions and if they are responsible for birth defects in Iraq. The WHO arranged and financed a study to report on the high incidence of birth defects in Iraq. That study has apparently been deleted. The WHO was then forced into a comprehensive study of the matter. But immediately, “Many scientists and experts have started questioning the time delay in publishing the study, but there is another aspect that is a cause for concern among some health experts. The report will not examine the link between the prevalence of birth defects and use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions used during the war and occupation in Iraq, according to WHO.” The study was done, but the WHO initially refused to release it, then postponed the release indefinitely, then trashed and replaced it with a brief unsigned version which was clearly rubbish. Susanne Soederberg, a professor and Canada research chair at Queen’s University, said, “I strongly believe that the WHO, like most international organisations, is not a neutral body, but is influenced by the geopolitical powers of its members,” she told IPS. “So, yes, there is reason why a group of very smart scientists are not exploring the ‘why’ question in their study.” “No authors or responsible offices are identified by the report. The dramatic reversal of the results is also alarming . . . for a change of this magnitude extensive data manipulation must have taken place. How and why the data was manipulated to render such drastically different results remains unknown.”[11]

IAEA – Agreement WHA 12–40[edit]

In 1959, the WHO signed Agreement WHA 12–40 with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Reading of this document (clause 3) can result in the understanding that the IAEA is able to prevent the WHO from conducting research or work on some areas. The agreement states that the WHO recognizes the IAEA as having responsibility for peaceful nuclear energy without prejudice to the roles of the WHO of promoting health.[citation needed] The following paragraph adds:[12]

The nature of this statement has led some groups and activists including Women in Europe for a Common Future to claim that the WHO is restricted in its ability to investigate the effects on human health of radiation caused by the use of nuclear power and the continuing effects of nuclear disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima. They believe WHO must regain what they see as independence.[12][13][14] IndependentWHO held a weekly vigil from 2007–2017 in front of WHO headquarters.[15] However, as pointed out by Foreman[16] in clause 2 it states:

Ebola and HIV experimentation[edit]

It has been alleged that the WHO was aware of a Dr. Hilary Koprowski, a doctor allegedly performing research on AIDS and Ebola by deceiving and infecting Africans with a faux polio vaccine. It was estimated that over a million Africans were infected from 1954 to 1957.[12] However, his work having been the cause of any disease has been refuted.[17]

Roman Catholic Church and AIDS[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value). In 2003, the WHO denounced the Roman Curia's health department's opposition to the use of condoms, saying: "These incorrect statements about condoms and HIV are dangerous when we are facing a global pandemic which has already killed more than 20 million people, and currently affects at least 42 million."[18] As of 2009, the Catholic Church remains opposed to increasing the use of contraception to combat HIV/AIDS.[19] At the time, the World Health Assembly President, Guyana's Health Minister Leslie Ramsammy, has condemned Pope Benedict's opposition to contraception, saying he was trying to "create confusion" and "impede" proven strategies in the battle against the disease.[20]

Intermittent preventive therapy[edit]

The aggressive support of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for intermittent preventive therapy of malaria triggered a memo from the former WHO malaria chief Akira Kochi.[21]

Diet and sugar intake[edit]

Some of the research undertaken or supported by WHO to determine how people's lifestyles and environments are influencing whether they live in better or worse health can be controversial, as illustrated by a 2003 joint WHO/FAO report on nutrition and the prevention of chronic non-communicable disease,[22] which recommended that free sugars should form no more than 10% of a healthy diet. The report led to lobbying by the sugar industry against the recommendation, to which the WHO/FAO responded by including the following statement in the report: "The Consultation recognized that a population goal for free sugars of less than 10% of total energy is controversial". It also stood by its recommendation based upon its own analysis of scientific studies.[23] In 2014, WHO reduced recommended free sugars levels by half and said that free sugars should make up no more than 5% of a healthy diet.[24]

2009 swine flu pandemic[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value). In 2007, the WHO organized work on pandemic influenza vaccine development through clinical trials in collaboration with many experts and health officials.[25] A pandemic involving the H1N1 influenza virus was declared by the then Director-General Margaret Chan in April 2009.[26] Margret Chan declared in 2010 that the H1N1 has moved into the post-pandemic period.[27]

By the post-pandemic period critics claimed the WHO had exaggerated the danger, spreading "fear and confusion" rather than "immediate information".[28] Industry experts countered that the 2009 pandemic had led to "unprecedented collaboration between global health authorities, scientists and manufacturers, resulting in the most comprehensive pandemic response ever undertaken, with a number of vaccines approved for use three months after the pandemic declaration. This response was only possible because of the extensive preparations undertaken during the last decade".[29]

2013–2016 Ebola outbreak and reform efforts[edit]

Following the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, the organization was heavily criticized for its bureaucracy, insufficient financing, regional structure, and staffing profile.[30]

An internal WHO report on the Ebola response pointed to underfunding and the lack of "core capacity" in health systems in developing countries as the primary weaknesses of the existing system. At the annual World Health Assembly in 2015, Director-General Margaret Chan announced a $100 million Contingency Fund for rapid response to future emergencies,[31][32] of which it had received $26.9 million by April 2016 (for 2017 disbursement). WHO has budgeted an additional $494 million for its Health Emergencies Programme in 2016–17, for which it had received $140 million by April 2016.[33]

The program was aimed at rebuilding WHO capacity for direct action, which critics said had been lost due to budget cuts in the previous decade that had left the organization in an advisory role dependent on member states for on-the-ground activities. In comparison, billions of dollars have been spent by developed countries on the 2013–2016 Ebola epidemic and 2015–16 Zika epidemic.[34]

FCTC implementation database[edit]

The WHO has a Framework Convention on Tobacco implementation database which is one of the few mechanisms to help enforce compliance with the FCTC.[35] However, there have been reports of numerous discrepancies between it and national implementation reports on which it was built. As researchers Hoffman and Rizvi report "As of July 4, 2012, 361 (32·7%) of 1104 countries' responses were misreported: 33 (3·0%) were clear errors (e.g., database indicated “yes” when report indicated “no”), 270 (24·5%) were missing despite countries having submitted responses, and 58 (5·3%) were, in our opinion, misinterpreted by WHO staff".[36]

IARC controversies[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value). The World Health Organization sub-department, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), has been criticized for the way it analyses the tendency of certain substances and activities to cause cancer and for having a politically motivated bias when it selects studies for its analysis. Ed Yong, a British science journalist, has criticized the agency and its "confusing" category system for misleading the public.[37] Marcel Kuntz, a French director of research at the French National Centre for Scientific Research, criticized the agency for its classification of potentially carcinogenic substances. He claimed that this classification did not take into account the extent of exposure: for example, red meat is qualified as probably carcinogenic, but the quantity of consumed red meat at which it could become dangerous is not specified.[38]

Controversies have erupted multiple times when the IARC has classified many things as Class 2a (probable carcinogens) or 2b (possible carcinogen), including cell phone signals, glyphosate, drinking hot beverages, and working as a barber.[39]

Taiwanese membership and participation[edit]

Between 2009 and 2016 Taiwan was allowed to attend WHO meetings and events as an observer but was forced to stop due to renewed pressure from China.[40]

Political pressure from China has led to Taiwan being barred from membership of the WHO and other UN-affiliated organizations, and in 2017 to 2020 the WHO refused to allow Taiwanese delegates to attend the WHO annual assembly.[41] On multiple occasions Taiwanese journalists have been denied access to report on the assembly.[42]

In May 2018, the WHO denied access to its annual assembly by Taiwanese media reportedly due to demands from China.[43] Later in May 172 members of the United States House of Representatives wrote to the Director General of the World Health Organization to argue for Taiwan's inclusion as an observer at the WHA.[44] The United States, Japan, Germany, and Australia all support Taiwan's inclusion in WHO.[45]

Pressure to allow Taiwan to participate in WHO increased as a result of the 2019–2020 coronavirus pandemic with Taiwan's exclusion from emergency meetings concerning the outbreak bringing a rare united front from Taiwan's diverse political parties. Taiwan's main opposition party, the KMT, expressed their anger at being excluded arguing that disease respects neither politics nor geography. China once again dismissed concerns over Taiwanese inclusion with the Foreign Minister claiming that no-one cares more about the health and wellbeing of the Taiwanese people than China's central government.[46] During the outbreak Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau[47] voiced his support for Taiwan's participation in WHO, as did Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.[40] In January 2020 the European Union, a WHO observer, backed Taiwan's participation in WHO meetings related to the coronavirus pandemic as well as their general participation.[48]

In an 2020 interview, assistant director-general Bruce Aylward appeared to dodge a question about Taiwan and when the question was repeated, the connection was "cut off" blaming internet connection issues.[49] When the video chat was restarted, he was asked another question about Taiwan but he claimed to have already answered the question and formally ended the interview.[50]

Taiwan’s effective response to the coronavirus outbreak has bolstered its case for WHO membership. Taiwan’s response to the outbreak has been praised by a number of experts.[51][52]

Travel expenses[edit]

According to The Associated Press, the WHO routinely spends about $200 million a year on travel expenses, more than it spends to tackle mental health problems, HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria combined. In 2016, Margaret Chan, Director-General of WHO from November 2006 to June 2017,[53] stayed in a $1000-per-night hotel room while visiting West Africa.[54]

Robert Mugabe's role as a goodwill ambassador[edit]

On 21 October 2017, the Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus appointed former Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe as a WHO Goodwill Ambassador to help promote the fight against non-communicable diseases. The appointment address praised Mugabe for his commitment to public health in Zimbabwe.

The appointment attracted widespread condemnation and criticism in WHO member states and international organizations due to Robert Mugabe's poor record on human rights and presiding over a decline in Zimbabwe's public health.[55][56] Due to the outcry, the following day the appointment was revoked.[57]

2019–21 COVID-19 pandemic[edit]

The WHO's handling of the epidemic has come under criticism amidst what has been described as the agency's "diplomatic balancing act" between "China and China's critics," including scrutiny of the relationship between the agency and Chinese authorities.[58] Initial concerns included the observation that while WHO relies upon data provided and filtered by member states, China has had a "historical aversion to transparency and sensitivity to international criticism".[59] While the WHO and some world leaders have praised the Chinese government's transparency in comparison to the 2003 SARS outbreak,[60] others including John Mackenzie of the WHO's emergency committee and Anne Schuchat of the US' CDC have shown skepticism, suggesting that China's official tally of cases and deaths may be an underestimation. Other experts, including David Heymann, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, have said in response to skepticism on transparency that "China has been very transparent and open in sharing its data … they’re sharing it very well and they opened up all of their files with the WHO present."

In response to the criticisms, Director-General Tedros has stated that China "doesn't need to be asked to be praised. China has done many good things to slow down the virus. The whole world can judge. There is no spinning here,"[61] and further stating that "I know there is a lot of pressure on WHO when we appreciate what China is doing but because of pressure we should not fail to tell the truth, we don't say anything to appease anyone. It's because it's the truth."[62]

Some observers have accused the WHO of being unable to risk antagonizing the Chinese government, as otherwise the agency would not have been able stay informed on the domestic state of the outbreak and influence response measures there, after which there would have "likely have been a raft of articles criticizing the WHO for needlessly offending China at a time of crisis and hamstringing its own ability to operate."[62] Through this, experts such as Dr. David Nabarro have defended this strategy in order "to ensure Beijing's co-operation in mounting an effective global response to the outbreak".[63] Osman Dar, director of the One Health Project at the Chatham House Centre on Global Health Security defended the WHO's conduct, stating that the same pressure was one "that UN organisations have always had from the advanced economies."[58]

The inclusion of the "Taiwan region" in the WHO's daily situation reports, which resulted in Taiwan receiving the same WHO "very high" risk rating as the mainland despite only a having a relatively small number of cases on the ROC-governed island has led to protests by Taiwan who says that the rating has led to it receiving travel bans as a result.[64][65] Further concerns regarding Taiwan's non-member status in the WHO has been on the effect this has on increasing Taiwan's vulnerability in the case of an outbreak in the region without proper channels to the WHO. In response, the WHO has said that they "have Taiwanese experts involved in all of our consultations ... so they're fully engaged and fully aware of all of the developments in the expert networks."[66]

The controversy was furthered when Canadian WHO epidemiologist Bruce Aylward, head of the WHO's 2019–20 COVID-19 response team, refused to answer questions from RTHK reporter Yvonne Tong about Taiwan's response to the pandemic and inclusion in the WHO, leading to accusations about China's political influence over the international organization.[67][68]

On April 14, 2020 President Trump announced that he would stop United States funding of the WHO while reviewing its role in what he described as “severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus.”[69] On April 7 President Trump had criticized WHO for "missing the call' on the coronavirus pandemic and threatened to withhold U.S. funding to the organization during a press briefing. On the same day, Trump tweeted, "The WHO really blew it. For some reasons, largely funded by the United States, yet very China centric."[70] The U.S. Congress has already allocated about $122 million to WHO for 2020 and Trump had previously proposed in the White House's 2021 budget request to reduce WHO funding to $58 million.[71]

Tadros Adhanom was the director-general of the WHO at the time of the CCP virus pandemic. Adhanom was a leader in Ethiopia's Tigray People's Liberation Front, a wing of the ruling Marxist Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front. Adhanom served the repressive regime as Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2012 to 2016 after a stint as Health Minister. As a candidate for the top post, The New York Timers accused Tad Adhanom of covering up at least three epidemics.[72] Adhanom was elected WHO director-general with the Chinese Communist Party's support. One of Adhanom's first actions as director-general was to name the repressive Marxist-Leninist dictator Robert Mugabe as a WHO Goowill Ambassador.[73]

Tad Adhanom criticized travel bans to and from China where the deadly outbreak first occurred saying, "There is no reason for measures that unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade." The WHO was not allowed into China by the Marxist regime until February 10, 2020, more than two months after the virus was first discovered.

Adhanom praised the Chinese Communist Party's response: "We appreciate the seriousness with which China is taking this outbreak, especially the commitment from top leadership and the transparency they have demonstrated," and "China is actually setting a new standard for outbreak response." Film clips of Adhanom were shown on Chinese television saying, "China took action massively at the epicenter at the source of the outbreak. This is heroic. The actions of China is making us safer."

For whatever reason the WHO misinformed the planet about the pandemic, the simple fact remains that the WHO did not apply science or the scientific method to determine the gravity of the outbreak, but rather took on faith the word of a totalitarian regime notorious for human rights abuses and held to that position for months.

The WHO is working with Google to ensure that people get information from the UN health agency first when they search for information about the virus.

The story so far : a global coup is being led by Bill Gates through the WHO, national governments have capitulated to a surrender treaty with Bill Gates in which in the next declared pandemic all power is transferred to the WHO including decisions of mandatory vaccinations.

WHO changes definition of pandemic, vaccine and herd immunity[edit]

The long-held definitions of key words all changed, with immense ramifications for public health policy in the midst of COVID-19.[74]

Also the CDC changed its definition of "vaccine". As explained by Sharyl Attkisson:[75]

WHO disinformation on testing[edit]

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis. The WHO calls for “Retesting”, which is tantamount to “We Screwed Up”. [76]

WHO disinformation campaign against Ivermectin[edit]

On 25 May 2021, the Indian Bar Association (IBA) served a 51-page legal notice on Dr Soumya Swaminathan, the Chief Scientist at the World Health Organisation (WHO), for: [H]er act of spreading disinformation and misguiding the people of India, in order to fulfil her agenda.”

The Mumbai-based IBA is an association of lawyers who strive to bring transparency and accountability to the Indian justice system. It is actively involved in the dissemination of legal knowledge and provides guidance and support to advocates and ordinary people in their fight for justice.

The legal notice says Dr Swaminathan has been:

Running a disinformation campaign against Ivermectin by deliberate suppression of effectiveness of drug Ivermectin as prophylaxis and for treatment of COVID-19, despite the existence of large amounts of clinical data compiled and presented by esteemed, highly qualified, experienced medical doctors and scientists,”

And: Issuing statements in social media and mainstream media, thereby influencing the public against the use of Ivermectin and attacking the credibility of acclaimed bodies/institutes like ICMR and AIIMS, Delhi, which have included ‘Ivermectin’ in the ‘National Guidelines for COVID-19 management’.”

The IBA states that legal action is being taken against Dr Swaminathan in order to stop her from causing further damage to the lives of citizens of India.[77]

Pierre Kory says, the WHO is probably the most captured agency, they are completely under the influence of their founders, and their founders tend to be rich countries and vaccine money.[78] He further says, I think that the states in India that broke free from the WHO saved hundreds of thousands of lives. I think the leader in India in use of Ivermectin in their public health response in the pandemic is Uttar Pradesh and I think they have outperformed almost anywhere in the world. The most forward thinking and the ones that broke free from the WHO they did phenomenal well and I think they should be an example to the rest of India.[79]

Rajiv Malhotra says, in some states Ivermectin is not available ... it used to be part of the treatment plan of the Indian health ministry and then WHO came and changed it, in some states they listened to the WHO and so now WHO is at the center of controversy in India because they have interfered and changed what the Indian authorities and government and states were doing... Here is this Big Brother WHO with a big stick able to switch Indian policies.[80]

Pandemic WHO treaty[edit]

  • “In accordance with the global contract that is being signed in each country, if WHO Director-General Tedros and the heads of member states agree, they will be able to force all member country citizens to be inoculated with the mRNA biological experiment. As we know, these ‘vaccines’ are blueprints for genetically engineered spike proteins encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles. The priority of the agenda is to micro-manage every member of society by taking away our natural biological immunity. It is a protection racket, and the price is high. Our rights to life and property.”[4] [archive]


Related Organizations[edit]

Robert F Kennedy writes about the NIAID: Most of us would like “America’s Doctor” to properly diagnose our illnesses using the best science, and then instruct us on how to get healthy. What if, instead of spending their entire budgets developing profitable pharmaceutical products, Dr. Fauci and the heads of other NIH institutes deployed researchers to explore the links between glyphosate in food and the explosion of gluten allergies, the link between pesticide residues and the epidemic of neurological diseases and cancers, the causal connections between aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease, between mercury from coal plants and escalating autism rates, and the association of airborne particulates with the asthma epidemic? What if NIH financed research to explore the association between childhood vaccines and the explosion of juvenile diabetes, asthma, and rheumatoid arthritis, and the links between aluminum vaccine adjuvants and the epidemics of food allergies and allergic rhinitis? What if they studied the impacts of sugar and soft drinks on obesity and diabetes, and the association between endocrine disruptors, processed foods, factory farms, and GMOs on the dramatic decline in public health? What would Americans look like if, for fifty years, we had a public health advocate running one of our top health agencies—instead of a Pharma shill? What would have happened if we’d spent that hundreds of billions dollars on real science, instead of drug development? Dr. Fauci seems willing only to give us diagnoses and cures that benefit Big Pharma—instead of public health—and to cover his trail with artifice.[81]

The FDA gets 45% of it's budget from Vaccine or Pharmaceutical Companies. The CDC spends $4.9 billion of the $12 billion budget buying and distributing vaccines, so it's technically a vaccine company, not a regulatory agency. Tony Fauci's agency owns half of the Moderna vaccine patent, and stands to make billions and billions of dollars on sales from the moderna vaccine

Since Fauci started in 1968 we went from 6% of Americans having a chronic disease, to 54% by 2006. For baby boomer generation, 1 in 10,000 had autism. Millenial generation it is 1 in 34, according to the CDC. Baby boomer generation took 3 vaccines. Kids now take 72 doses of 17 different vaccines


<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />


<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. Jan 24, Published; 2019 (2019-01-24). "The U.S. Government and the World Health Organization" [archive]. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved 2020-03-18.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  2. "WHO Constitution, BASIC DOCUMENTS, Forty-ninth edition" [archive] (PDF).<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  3. [archive] WHO Says What?
  4. [archive] WHO’s in Charge?
  5. [archive]
  6. [archive]
  7. [archive]
  8. [archive]
  9. (Children’s Health Defense) Robert F. Kennedy - The Real Anthony Fauci_ Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health-Skyhorse (2021)
  10. [archive]
  11. [archive] New Study Documents Depleted Uranium Impacts on Children in Iraq
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 Independence for WHO. "Appeal by Health Professionals for Independence of the World Health Organization" [archive] (PDF). Retrieved 19 April 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  13. Women in Europe for a Common Future. "Open letter on the WHO/IAEA Agreement of 1959" [archive] (PDF). Retrieved 19 April 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  14. "World Health Organization Accomodates [sic] Atomic Agency" [archive]. Activist Magazine. 3 June 2007. Archived from the original [archive] on 28 September 2007. Retrieved 27 March 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  15. "The World Health Organisation (WHO) is failing in its duty to protect those populations who are victims of radioactive contamination" [archive]. IndependentWHO. 2020. Retrieved 2020-04-08.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  16. M.R.StJ. Foreman, Cogent Chemistry, Reactor accident chemistry an update, 2018, 10.1080/23312009.2018.1450944, [archive]
  17. Science, American Association for the Advancement of (30 October 1992). "Panel Nixes Congo Trials as AIDS Source". Science. 258 (5083): 738–739. doi:10.1126/science.258.5083.738-d [archive]. ISSN 0036-8075 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  18. "Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids" [archive]. The Guardian. 9 October 2003.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  19. "Pope claims condoms could make African Aids crisis worse" [archive]. The Guardian. 17 March 2009. Retrieved 31 March 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  20. "World Health Assembly: Pope Benedict "wrong"" [archive]. Agence France-Presse. 21 March 2009. Retrieved 31 March 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  21. McNeil, Donald G. (16 February 2008). "Gates Foundation's Influence Criticized" [archive]. The New York Times. Retrieved 9 February 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  22. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003 (WHO Technical Report Series 916).
  23. Mann, Jim (2003). "Sugar revisited – again" [archive] (PDF). Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 81 (8).<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  24. Briggs, Helen (5 March 2014). "WHO: Sugar intake 'should be halved'" [archive]. BBC.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  25. "Tables on clinical evaluation of influenza vaccines" [archive]. World Health Organization. Retrieved 13 December 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  26. "WHO declares pandemic of novel H1N1 virus" [archive]. CIDRAP. Retrieved 13 December 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  27. "Pandemic (H1N1) 2009" [archive]. World Health Organization. Retrieved 13 December 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  28. WHO admits errors in handling flu pandemic: Agency accused of overplaying danger of the virus as it swept the globe. [archive] Posted by NBC News
  29. Abelina A; et al. (2011). "Lessons from pandemic influenza A(H1N1) The research-based vaccine industry's perspective" [archive] (PDF). Vaccine. 29 (6): 1135–1138. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.11.042 [archive]. PMID 21115061 [archive]. Archived from the original [archive] (PDF) on 9 October 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  30. Hoffman, SJ; Røttingen, JA (February 2014). "Split WHO in two: strengthening political decision-making and securing independent scientific advice". Public Health Journal. 128 (2): 188–194. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2013.08.021 [archive]. PMID 24434035 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  31. "Report of the Review Committee on the Role of the International Health Regulations (2005) in the Ebola Outbreak and Response" [archive] (PDF). 13 May 2016. Retrieved 27 May 2016.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  32. Gostin, Lawrence. "WHO Calls For $100 Million Emergency Fund, Doctor 'SWAT Team'" [archive]. NPR.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  33. "Reform of WHO's work in health emergency management / WHO Health Emergencies Programme" [archive] (PDF). 5 May 2016. Retrieved 27 May 2016.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  34. "WHO Aims To Reform Itself But Health Experts Aren't Yet Impressed" [archive]. NPR.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  35. "Archived copy" [archive]. Archived from the original [archive] on 20 February 2011. Retrieved 13 August 2015.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  36. Hoffman S.J.; Rizvi Z. (2012). "WHO's Undermining Tobacco Control" [archive]. The Lancet. 380 (9843): 727–728. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61402-0 [archive]. PMID 22920746 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  37. Yong, Ed. "Beefing With the World Health Organization's Cancer Warnings" [archive]. The Atlantic. Retrieved 29 April 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  38. "Pourquoi les fausses sciences gouvernent le monde (et pourquoi il faut mettre un terme à ce règne)" [archive]. Slate (in français). Retrieved 29 April 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  39. Kelland, Kate (6 October 2016). "Exclusive: U.S. lawmakers to investigate funding of WHO cancer agency" [archive]. London, U.K. Reuters. Retrieved 28 November 2016.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  40. 40.0 40.1 "Japan PM Abe calls for Taiwan's participation in WHO as coronavirus spreads" [archive]. Kyodo News. Retrieved 30 January 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  41. "China warns Taiwan of continued lockout from WHO assembly" [archive]. The Washington Post. 21 May 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  42. "WHO Bows to China Pressure, Contravenes Human Rights in Refusing Taiwan Media" [archive]. 18 May 2018. Retrieved 22 May 2018.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  43. "UN: World Health Organization Shuns Taiwan and Its Journalists" [archive]. Freedom House. 16 May 2018. Retrieved 30 January 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  44. "172 Members Push for Taiwan's Participation at World Health Assembly" [archive]. 16 May 2018. Retrieved 22 May 2018.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  45. Aspinwall, Nick. "Taiwan Picks Up International Support After Being Barred from World Health Assembly" [archive]. The Diplomat. Retrieved 30 January 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  46. Blanchard, Ben (24 January 2020). "Parties unite over Taiwan's exclusion from WHO anti-virus planning" [archive]. Reuters. Retrieved 30 January 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  47. Everington, Keoni. "Canada's Trudeau supports Taiwan involvement in WHO" [archive]. Taiwan News. Retrieved 30 January 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  48. Everington, Keoni. "EU backs Taiwan's inclusion in WHO" [archive]. Taiwan News. Retrieved 31 January 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  49. Griffiths, James (April 5, 2020). "Taiwan's coronavirus response is among the best globally" [archive]. CNN.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  50. Grundy, Tom. "Video: Top WHO doctor Bruce Aylward pretends not to hear journalist's Taiwan questions, ends video call" [archive]. Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 28 March 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  51. Sui, Cindy. "Taiwan's coronavirus success bolsters case for joining WHO, experts say" [archive]. NBC. Retrieved 14 April 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  52. Liu, Natalie. "Taiwan's WHO Ambitions Get Boost from Coronavirus Success" [archive]. VOA. Retrieved 14 April 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  53. "World Health Assembly elects Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus as new WHO Director-General" [archive]. Geneva: World Health Organization. 23 May 2017. Retrieved 25 May 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  54. Cheng, Maria (22 May 2017). "Health agency spends more on travel than AIDS" [archive]. Associated Press. Retrieved 27 June 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  55. "Robert Mugabe's WHO appointment condemned as 'an insult'" [archive]. BBC News. 21 October 2017. Retrieved 22 October 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  56. "WHO chief 'rethinking' appointment of Zimbabwe's Mugabe as 'goodwill ambassador' after widespread condemnation" [archive]. The Globe and Mail. Associated Press. 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  57. "WHO cancels Robert Mugabe goodwill ambassador role" [archive]. BBC News. 22 October 2017. Retrieved 22 October 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  58. 58.0 58.1 Boseley, Sarah (18 February 2020). "China's handling of coronavirus is a diplomatic challenge for WHO" [archive]. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077 [archive]. Retrieved 28 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  59. Griffiths, James. "WHO's relationship with China under scrutiny due to coronavirus crisis" [archive]. CNN.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  60. "Wuhan lockdown 'unprecedented', shows commitment to contain virus: WHO representative in China" [archive]. Reuters. 23 January 2020. Retrieved 28 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  61. "WHO head again praises China and Xi Jinping on response to outbreak" [archive]. South China Morning Post. 13 February 2020. Retrieved 28 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  62. 62.0 62.1 Griffiths, James. "WHO's relationship with China under scrutiny due to coronavirus crisis" [archive]. CNN. Retrieved 28 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  63. "Mission impossible? WHO director fights to prevent a pandemic without offending China" [archive]. Science | AAAS. 10 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  64. Health, Sarah Boseley, ed. (18 February 2020). "China's handling of coronavirus is a diplomatic challenge for WHO" [archive]. The Guardian.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  65. "WHO head again praises China and Xi Jinping on response to outbreak" [archive]. South China Morning Post. 13 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  66. "Health Concerns Meet Politics Amid Taiwan's WHO Exclusion" [archive]. The New York Times. Associated Press. 14 February 2020.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  67. "The Pulse:Coronavirus situations in New York city, London and Lombardy, Italy & interview with WHO Bruce Aylward" [archive]. YouTube. Interview by Yvonne Tong. RTHK VNEWS. 2020-03-28. 16:35 to 20:59. Archived [archive] (MPEG4) from the original on 2020-03-29. Retrieved 2020-03-29.CS1 maint: others (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  68. Wulfsohn, Joseph (March 28, 2020). "WHO accused of 'carrying China's water' after official refuses to acknowledge Taiwan during bizarre interview" [archive]. Fox News. Gordon G. Chang. Aylward's behavior reminds us that either we remove #China's pernicious influence in multilateral institutions like the #WorldHealthOrganization or the world's free states defund them and start over.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  69. [archive]
  70. "Trump threatens to cut off WHO funding over agency's handling of outbreak" [archive]. South China Morning Post. 2020-04-08. Retrieved 2020-04-08.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  71. "Trump announces, then reverses, freeze on funding for World Health Organization" [archive]. Politico. Retrieved 2020-04-08.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  72. [archive]
  73. [archive]
  74. [archive]
  75. [archive]
  76. [archive]
  77. [archive]
  78. Is Big Pharma lobby blocking treatments? | Rajiv Malhotra & Dr. Pierre Kory FLCCC [1] [archive] at 30-32
  79. Is Big Pharma lobby blocking treatments? | Rajiv Malhotra & Dr. Pierre Kory FLCCC [2] [archive] at 42-44
  80. Is Big Pharma lobby blocking treatments? | Rajiv Malhotra & Dr. Pierre Kory FLCCC [3] [archive] at 40-44
  81. (Children’s Health Defense) Robert F. Kennedy - The Real Anthony Fauci_ Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health-Skyhorse (2021)

See also[edit]

External links[edit]

These links are being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by Dharmapedia of any of the products, services or opinions of the corporation or organization or individual. Dharmapedia bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content.
other health agencies [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive] [archive]

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.