Trump’s Transition Team Eyes Swift WHO Exit, Sparking Global Health Concerns

[Tippaporn]

2 hours ago, ricklev said:

They will probably also throw out any USA strategies for dealing with future pandemics and any funding for implementation when a new pandemic occurs.  Why?  Because they are ideologues and sycophants in the service of an uneducated, uncaring and uninterested leader.   

 

One other point about your support of the WHO as the world organisation meant to keep the world safe from pandemics.

 

WHO Declares COVID-19 a Pandemic

 

The World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic (1).

 

[. . .]

 

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7569573/#:~:text=Maurizio Vanelli,-1Editors of&text=Received 2020 Mar 12%3B Accepted,Mar 13%3B Issue date 2020.&text=The World Health Organization (WHO,a global pandemic (1).

 

Seems to me that by the time the WHO finally got around to publicly declaring a pandemic it was already common knowledge globally.  Johnnie come lately and they got paid for what?

 

Also, there's the question of what the WHO did to mitigate the Covid-19 pandemic as it was ongoing.  I know what they didn't do.  Which would have been to take the common sense action of assembling health experts from multiple fields with various backgrounds from around the globe to bang heads together to seek remedies and mitigation strategies.  I'd love if someone could point me to any actions that the WHO took during the pandemic to decrease deaths and to find solutions.

 

Seems to me that the WHO is little more than a global bureaucratic body sucking money unto itself from every member nation to enrich the bureaucrats running the place whilst having nothing of real value to offer.  I'm sure some folks will strongly disagree with me but then please show me the real, concrete, evidence based, numbers based benefits that the WHO has produced for the world.  I'm from Missouri, the Show Me State.

[thaibeachlovers]

15 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Seems to me that the WHO is little more than a global bureaucratic body sucking money unto itself from every member nation to enrich the bureaucrats running the place whilst having nothing of real value to offer. 

Good description of governments as they have become in 2024.

 

Welcome back. I missed your contributions during the election season.

 

The God thread died not long after you departed.

 

 

[Tippaporn]

13 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Good description of governments as they have become in 2024.

 

Welcome back. I missed your contributions during the election season.

 

The God thread died not long after you departed.

 

 

 

Hey TBL.  Interestingly enough SunMaster, Red Phoenix and I just got together for dinner for the first time this past Monday.  It was grand.  In fact your name came up at dinner.

 

I tired of the God thread.  I guess some subject matter is simply best left to oneself.  Very, very few people are willing to even consider different ideas, no matter how sensible they are.  Most are only interested in abuse.

 

I agree with your post except I'd make one edit.  Remove the 2024.  Governments the world over have always been a magnet for the worst that humanity has to offer.  They have their eye on a nation's treasury with designs to skim for themselves, and power which they can use to benefit themselves in multiple ways as well.

 

Good to see you still posting, too.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I guess some subject matter is simply best left to oneself.  Very, very few people are willing to even consider different ideas, no matter how sensible they are.  Most are only interested in abuse.

Ain't that the truth. I miss the God thread. I learned so much, but like everything the end comes eventually and after Sunmaster and the Italian guy ( I'm getting so forgetful as I near the end )- you know who I mean, left I saw no point in regurgitating the same thing over and over, so i left too.

 

10 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Governments the world over have always been a magnet for the worst that humanity has to offer.  They have their eye on a nation's treasury with designs to skim for themselves, and power which they can use to benefit themselves in multiple ways as well.

Agree on that. Statesmen are nowhere to be found anymore. It's all about power and wealth- how they can get as much of that as possible without being overthrown in a rebellion or going to jail.

 

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Interestingly enough SunMaster, Red Phoenix and I just got together for dinner for the first time this past Monday.  It was grand.  In fact your name came up at dinner.

Not in a bad way I hope.

I am still here, too much so in fact, but it helps to pass the time before time is called for myself.

[Tippaporn]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not in a bad way I hope.

 

Not at all.  You were a respected poster with a lot to offer.  I'm grateful to you.  Were you in Thailand you would have been invited.

[spidermike007]

2 hours ago, atpeace said:

What were liberals doing about obesity and poor health other than promoting pharmaceutical remedies.  My health 101 - get healthy. 

 

I  remember on this forum that if you even hinted that healthy people were rarely having Covid issues, you were chased incessantly by vaccine is the savior crowd.  I just want to be able to have an opinion that isn't popular and not be slammed by internet tyrants.

I remember that very clearly there was no willingness or ability to discuss the possibility that  severe obesity and a very poor diet had any connection to one susceptibility to a virus which is utterly insane. 

[atpeace]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

Firstly your source has this as its mission. 

"FEE’s mission is to inspire, educate, and connect future leaders with the economic, ethical, and legal principles of a free society.

These principles include: individual liberty, free-market economics, entrepreneurship, private property, high moral character, and limited government."

 

Hardly objective is it 

 

Secondly this is not true.

"In March of 2017, the Associated Press reported that the World Health Organization spent more for the travel of 7,000 staffers than it did for countering malaria, tuberculosis, fighting AIDS and hepatitis, and on tackling mental health and substance abuse."

The header of the link to which your source refers says 

"Health agency spends more on travel than AIDS", the text says.

"According to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press, the United Nations health agency routinely has spent about $200 million a year on travel expenses, more than what it doles out to fight some of the biggest problems in public health, including AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined.".

 

I agree the travel expenses are ridiculously high, there is no need to nisinform.

Sorry, read your post twice and not sure what your are you insinuating? In preferably one sentence tell me where I have misinformed.  I'm far from perfect and definitely could have but it wasn't intentional 🙂

[connda]

If the world governments are worried about pandemics, then they should close all of their bio-weapons labs being run under the cover of "gain-of-function" research. 

"We need to be ready for the next pandemic!!!  Grrrrr"

Yeah - by creating the pathogen that will be "accidentally" released from a L4 gain-of-function lab, and surprise, surprise - big pharma just happens to have "vaccines" ready for distribution.  $$$Cha-Ching$$$

The Who!  I liked them as a band.  As a global health organization they suck!

[connda]

8 hours ago, BritManToo said:

WHO has always been a political leftie organization, best not to finance your enemies.

I'd suggest they leave NATO and the UN as well, as they're all a waste of money.

........ and forget Climate Change .........

Amen! Oh - Merry Christmas by the way. 🎄 🎅

[candide]

9 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

 

One other point about your support of the WHO as the world organisation meant to keep the world safe from pandemics.

 

WHO Declares COVID-19 a Pandemic

 

The World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic (1).

 

[. . .]

 

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7569573/#:~:text=Maurizio Vanelli,-1Editors of&text=Received 2020 Mar 12%3B Accepted,Mar 13%3B Issue date 2020.&text=The World Health Organization (WHO,a global pandemic (1).

 

Seems to me that by the time the WHO finally got around to publicly declaring a pandemic it was already common knowledge globally.  Johnnie come lately and they got paid for what?

 

Also, there's the question of what the WHO did to mitigate the Covid-19 pandemic as it was ongoing.  I know what they didn't do.  Which would have been to take the common sense action of assembling health experts from multiple fields with various backgrounds from around the globe to bang heads together to seek remedies and mitigation strategies.  I'd love if someone could point me to any actions that the WHO took during the pandemic to decrease deaths and to find solutions.

 

Seems to me that the WHO is little more than a global bureaucratic body sucking money unto itself from every member nation to enrich the bureaucrats running the place whilst having nothing of real value to offer.  I'm sure some folks will strongly disagree with me but then please show me the real, concrete, evidence based, numbers based benefits that the WHO has produced for the world.  I'm from Missouri, the Show Me State.

You're just showing your ignorance

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/interactive-timeline#!

 

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/situation-reports-archive

[Tippaporn]

8 hours ago, candide said:

You're just showing your ignorance

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/interactive-timeline#!

 

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/situation-reports-archive

 

Admittedly, it looks to be a pretty chart, coloured very nicely.  Now show me in quantifiable terms the impact the WHO had on reducing the loss of life during the pandemic.

 

This one is interesting:

 

 

18 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I know what they didn't do.  Which would have been to take the common sense action of assembling health experts from multiple fields with various backgrounds from around the globe to bang heads together to seek remedies and mitigation strategies.

 

The WHO failed badly on the most common sense action they should have taken.  In fact they acted against common sense and went in the opposite direction.  Instead of working with those who were actively seeking mitigations other than the mRNA gene therapy they focused on denouncing those who did have successes.  And they did nothing to quell the active suppression of those good people who were experiencing success.  Rather, as they themselves show in their pretty chart, they jumped on the bandwagon of suppression.  Go ahead and defend the indefensible if you like.

 

The WHO pushed the mRNA gene therapy solution as the only solution just as much as pharma, who had much to gain, did.  Why?  If you wish to argue that in a world where there is always more than one way to skin a cat that in the case of the pandemic the mRNA gene therapy was the only solution possible in all of existence then by all means, knock yourself out convincing yourself of that.  But you won't convince me.  I'm of the opinion that the mRNA gene therapy was pushed as the only solution for a number of nefarious reasons, for which volumes of evidence exist that you refuse to look at.  And as long as you refuse then you cannot consider yourself to be an objective analyst.

 

Neither did I see any effort by the WHO whatsoever to assemble information from around the globe to see what countries were experiencing success and promote their best practices.  Sweden, for instance.  Or those countries who were dispensing Ivermectin to their citizens, whilst the entire West was in unnatural lockstep to ban it.

 

On a final note, if a person or entity is accused of failure, or even malfeasance, that person or entity would be the last whom I would be asking for explanations and then taking their explanations as gospel truth.  That goes against all common sense.  But here you are, slavishly doing just that.

 

Anyway, dispense with all of the pretty charts and stacks of reports produced by the culprits themselves.  Show me some quantifiable evidence of the WHO's efforts reducing fatalities.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Not at all.  You were a respected poster with a lot to offer.  I'm grateful to you.  Were you in Thailand you would have been invited.

Thank you for your kind words. I assure you that not all share your opinion. I'm sure a few would prefer that I vanish without trace.

 

Regardless, my life would be a lot more organised if I spent less time on here.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I'm of the opinion that the mRNA gene therapy was pushed as the only solution for a number of nefarious reasons, for which volumes of evidence exist that you refuse to look at.  And as long as you refuse then you cannot consider yourself to be an objective analyst.

Sometimes a conspiracy theory is actually fact.

 

I have the opinion that it was a test to see how much control the sheeple would tolerate before they rebelled. Overlords 1 sheeple 0.

 

I'm not a scientist so I can not prove that the vaccine ( apart from not being very effective ) isn't what it is claimed to be, but it's a fact that I didn't catch covid till AFTER I had the vaccine ( basically forced to do so ). Even the flu jab requires only one dose per year, unlike the covid one which requires a booster every 5 minutes and then doesn't actually stop one getting sick. I guess I'm lucky that the flu jab does work.

[Red Phoenix]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I guess I'm lucky that the flu jab does work.

When the manufacturers of the flu-jab are 'lucky' that by the time their product is being administered, that the flu-strain on which it is based is still dominant, then the flu-jab 'works'.  It would lead to far here to mention all the down-sides of taking it, even if you take it in a 'lucky' year when the manufacturers guessed more or less right.

Strengthening your immune-system is a far more effective and much safer way to deal with flu than taking the yearly guess-work shots, that contain also dangerous and harmful contaminants.  Only in very specific cases, e.g. where catching the flu would have grave consequences for the person whose immune system is so weak that it would not be able to overcome the infection, one could consider taking the flu-jab. 

But promoting it for everybody irrespective of their age/condition is madness and only 'healthy' for the financial balance-sheets of the vax industry.

 

[Tippaporn]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sometimes a conspiracy theory is actually fact.

 

I have the opinion that it was a test to see how much control the sheeple would tolerate before they rebelled. Overlords 1 sheeple 0.

 

I'm not a scientist so I can not prove that the vaccine ( apart from not being very effective ) isn't what it is claimed to be, but it's a fact that I didn't catch covid till AFTER I had the vaccine ( basically forced to do so ). Even the flu jab requires only one dose per year, unlike the covid one which requires a booster every 5 minutes and then doesn't actually stop one getting sick. I guess I'm lucky that the flu jab does work.

 

In my opinion the Overlords ultimately failed.  The people did rebel as evidenced by the massive protests in every western country against forced shots and penalties if resisted.  Towards the end Austria was a case in point.  They were ready to roll out stiff penalties for those who would defy their tyrannical edict.  They caved shortly before it was to go into effect.

 

The Overlords certainly had success early on.  But in the end they failed.  Accountability comes next.

[impulse]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

 

In my opinion the Overlords ultimately failed.  The people did rebel as evidenced by the massive protests in every western country against forced shots and penalties if resisted.  Towards the end Austria was a case in point.  They were ready to roll out stiff penalties for those who would defy their tyrannical edict.  They caved shortly before it was to go into effect.

 

The Overlords certainly had success early on.  But in the end they failed.  Accountability comes next.

 

 

That was just one round.  (But certainly not round 1).  They'll look at what worked and what didn't and be back.  After they quietly pass laws and implement new rules they can threaten us with next time.

 

Before it's all said and done, they'll be chipping newborns, monitoring exhaled air in public places, and calling again for vaccine passports to move freely.

 

Edit:  Rand Paul, in his 2024 Festivus Report, revealed the gub'ment was spending $millions to develop butt (anal) recognition technology, so they can tell who pinched that last loaf in public toilets.

 

[Tippaporn]

30 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

 

That was just one round.  (But certainly not round 1).  They'll look at what worked and what didn't and be back.  After they quietly pass laws and implement new rules they can threaten us with next time.

 

Before it's all said and done, they'll be chipping newborns, monitoring exhaled air in public places, and calling again for vaccine passports to move freely.

 

Edit:  Rand Paul, in his 2024 Festivus Report, revealed the gub'ment was spending $millions to develop butt (anal) recognition technology, so they can tell who pinched that last loaf in public toilets.

 

 

I dunno.  I'm sensing a major shift in public awareness that's very real.  If the perps in this crime do get held to account I would say that there will be no more bite at the apple for these people.  Largely due to the fact that they'd be behind bars for a very long time.  I predict this con could only ever be repeated once enough time has elapsed to where this episode has passed from the consciousness of future generations and the world is awash with a new stock of unsuspecting suckers.  As they say, history doesn't repeat but it sure does rhyme.

 

I personally believe that this shift in public awareness will put an end to much, much more of this liberal madness that has seemed to take hold of the world in an iron grip.  An infinite number of genders, for instance.  Porn in schools, for example.  Big changes coming, in my view, as long as us folks don't let up on the gas pedal.

[candide]

5 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Admittedly, it looks to be a pretty chart, coloured very nicely.  Now show me in quantifiable terms the impact the WHO had on reducing the loss of life during the pandemic.

 

This one is interesting:

 

 

 

The WHO failed badly on the most common sense action they should have taken.  In fact they acted against common sense and went in the opposite direction.  Instead of working with those who were actively seeking mitigations other than the mRNA gene therapy they focused on denouncing those who did have successes.  And they did nothing to quell the active suppression of those good people who were experiencing success.  Rather, as they themselves show in their pretty chart, they jumped on the bandwagon of suppression.  Go ahead and defend the indefensible if you like.

 

The WHO pushed the mRNA gene therapy solution as the only solution just as much as pharma, who had much to gain, did.  Why?  If you wish to argue that in a world where there is always more than one way to skin a cat that in the case of the pandemic the mRNA gene therapy was the only solution possible in all of existence then by all means, knock yourself out convincing yourself of that.  But you won't convince me.  I'm of the opinion that the mRNA gene therapy was pushed as the only solution for a number of nefarious reasons, for which volumes of evidence exist that you refuse to look at.  And as long as you refuse then you cannot consider yourself to be an objective analyst.

 

Neither did I see any effort by the WHO whatsoever to assemble information from around the globe to see what countries were experiencing success and promote their best practices.  Sweden, for instance.  Or those countries who were dispensing Ivermectin to their citizens, whilst the entire West was in unnatural lockstep to ban it.

 

On a final note, if a person or entity is accused of failure, or even malfeasance, that person or entity would be the last whom I would be asking for explanations and then taking their explanations as gospel truth.  That goes against all common sense.  But here you are, slavishly doing just that.

 

Anyway, dispense with all of the pretty charts and stacks of reports produced by the culprits themselves.  Show me some quantifiable evidence of the WHO's efforts reducing fatalities.

You are making stuff up. 

 

The warning you pointed out was about faksified vaccines as clearly expressed. AstraZeneca was the second vaccine approved by WHO in February 2021. It was lso included in the COVAX initiative.

WHO is by definition a forum in which what you claimed was not discussed was actually discussed.

 

The functioning of the WHO was certainly not perfect, but it didn't happen as you claimed it did.

[Tippaporn]

2 hours ago, candide said:

You are making stuff up. 

 

Am I?

 

2 hours ago, candide said:

The warning you pointed out was about faksified vaccines as clearly expressed. AstraZeneca was the second vaccine approved by WHO in February 2021. It was lso included in the COVAX initiative.

 

Falsified vaccines?  Never heard of them.  What are they?  Was China making knockoffs again?

 

The warning was for bogus products for prevention, treatment, detection and cures, using the WHO's own vernacular.  In other words, targeting mitigations using Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, for instance.  Or rather, especially.

 

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Hydroxychloroquine

28 March 2023

 

WHO does not recommend hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19. This recommendation is based on findings from 30 trials with more than 10 000 COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine did not reduce mortality, the need for or duration of mechanical ventilation.

 

https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-hydroxychloroquine#:~:text=WHO does not recommend hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID,or duration of mechanical ventilation.

 

WHO advises that ivermectin only be used to treat COVID-19 within clinical trials

31 March 2021

 

The current evidence on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients is inconclusive. Until more data is available, WHO recommends that the drug only be used within clinical trials.

This recommendation, which applies to patients with COVID-19 of any disease severity, is now part of WHO’s guidelines on COVID-19 treatments.

 

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-advises-that-ivermectin-only-be-used-to-treat-covid-19-within-clinical-trials

 

The WHO continues to make these claims to this day:

 

COVID-19 vaccines are safe.

Strict precautions are in place to help ensure the safety of all COVID-19 vaccines.

Before receiving validation from WHO and national regulatory agencies, COVID-19 vaccines were subject to rigorous testing in clinical trials to prove that they meet internationally agreed benchmarks for safety and efficacy.

 

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/covid-19-vaccines/advice

 

Given the data on adverse events and deaths linked to the mRNA gene editing therapy it is preposterous that the WHO continues to not only make the claim that the "vaccine" is safe but even more so is the claim of meeting benchmarks for efficacy.  Come on, candide.  We all know that the "vaccine" has been a total flop on efficacy.  It neither prevents transmission or ensures protection against the virus.

 

Setting aside all other issues concerning the WHO, the mere fact that they are still making these claims and still pushing the drug is reason enough to completely write off this bureaucratic organisation as credible, let alone effective.

 

3 hours ago, candide said:

WHO is by definition a forum in which what you claimed was not discussed was actually discussed.

 

I have no doubt that the WHO did have their cadre of experts but they shunned and excluded so many respectable experts because those experts would not automatically fall in line.  So they had panels of yes men.  They refused to listen to anyone with different ideas.  Kinda like you, eh?  My claim is valid.

 

3 hours ago, candide said:

The functioning of the WHO was certainly not perfect, but it didn't happen as you claimed it did.

 

Well, kudos for begrudgingly admitting at least that much.  LOL.  "Not perfect."  I like your euphemism.  I would use stronger language that would more accurately describe their performance.

 

Our differences of "opinion" will never get resolved on this forum.  Perhaps only in courts of law.  That is my sincere hope.  This crime cannot be treated as water under the bridge.  If no crimes then why the call for amnesty?  You're well aware of how this call was resoundingly rejected by the public.  For damn good reasons.

 

Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty

Let’s focus on the future, and fix the problems we still need to solve.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

[candide]

11 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Am I?

 

 

Falsified vaccines?  Never heard of them.  What are they?  Was China making knockoffs again?

 

The warning was for bogus products for prevention, treatment, detection and cures, using the WHO's own vernacular.  In other words, targeting mitigations using Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, for instance.  Or rather, especially.

 

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Hydroxychloroquine

28 March 2023

 

WHO does not recommend hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19. This recommendation is based on findings from 30 trials with more than 10 000 COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine did not reduce mortality, the need for or duration of mechanical ventilation.

 

https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-hydroxychloroquine#:~:text=WHO does not recommend hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID,or duration of mechanical ventilation.

 

WHO advises that ivermectin only be used to treat COVID-19 within clinical trials

31 March 2021

 

The current evidence on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients is inconclusive. Until more data is available, WHO recommends that the drug only be used within clinical trials.

This recommendation, which applies to patients with COVID-19 of any disease severity, is now part of WHO’s guidelines on COVID-19 treatments.

 

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-advises-that-ivermectin-only-be-used-to-treat-covid-19-within-clinical-trials

 

The WHO continues to make these claims to this day:

 

COVID-19 vaccines are safe.

Strict precautions are in place to help ensure the safety of all COVID-19 vaccines.

Before receiving validation from WHO and national regulatory agencies, COVID-19 vaccines were subject to rigorous testing in clinical trials to prove that they meet internationally agreed benchmarks for safety and efficacy.

 

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/covid-19-vaccines/advice

 

Given the data on adverse events and deaths linked to the mRNA gene editing therapy it is preposterous that the WHO continues to not only make the claim that the "vaccine" is safe but even more so is the claim of meeting benchmarks for efficacy.  Come on, candide.  We all know that the "vaccine" has been a total flop on efficacy.  It neither prevents transmission or ensures protection against the virus.

 

Setting aside all other issues concerning the WHO, the mere fact that they are still making these claims and still pushing the drug is reason enough to completely write off this bureaucratic organisation as credible, let alone effective.

 

 

I have no doubt that the WHO did have their cadre of experts but they shunned and excluded so many respectable experts because those experts would not automatically fall in line.  So they had panels of yes men.  They refused to listen to anyone with different ideas.  Kinda like you, eh?  My claim is valid.

 

 

Well, kudos for begrudgingly admitting at least that much.  LOL.  "Not perfect."  I like your euphemism.  I would use stronger language that would more accurately describe their performance.

 

Our differences of "opinion" will never get resolved on this forum.  Perhaps only in courts of law.  That is my sincere hope.  This crime cannot be treated as water under the bridge.  If no crimes then why the call for amnesty?  You're well aware of how this call was resoundingly rejected by the public.  For damn good reasons.

 

Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty

Let’s focus on the future, and fix the problems we still need to solve.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

Horse dewormer, hydrochloroquine, vaccines are not safe, etc...  Are you serious?

Your claims are not supported by the scientific community. You are just parroting the propaganda fed to you.

 

Exoerts used by WHO are usually provided by their resprctive natioal health organisations. That includes countries such as the U.S., Germany Japan. etc... The experts you indirectly mentioned have been discredited in their own country.