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.

[Tippaporn]

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

Horse dewormer, hydrochloroquine, vaccines are not safe, etc...

 

That is so 2021, candide.  It's been four years since the rollout of the mRNA gene editing therapy.  The volume of research done over that time is staggering.  Your statement appears to come from someone who has been living in a cave all this time.

 

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

Horse dewormer . . .

 

That you still identify, and tout, Ivermectin strictly as an animal product is to falsely portray it as a pejorative.  It's human uses have long been hailed.  This is straight up shameless dishonesty from you.

 

Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Ser. B, Physical and Biological Sciences

2011 Feb 10;87(2):13–28. doi: 10.2183/pjab.87.13

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective

 

[. . .]

 

Ivermectin proved to be even more of a ‘Wonder drug’ in human health, improving the nutrition, general health and wellbeing of billions of people worldwide ever since it was first used to treat Onchocerciasis in humans in 1988. 

 

[. . .]

 

In reality, ivermectin’s role in human medicine effectively began in April 1978 inside the Merck company, several years before the drug emerged on the Animal Health market. The highly potent bioactivity of a fermentation broth of an organism isolated by the Kitasato Institute in Tokyo, which had been sent to Merck’s research laboratories in 1974, was first identified in 1975. The active compounds were identified by the international multidisciplinary collaborative team as the avermectins, with the subsequently-refined ivermectin derivative being designated the optimal compound for development. 

 

[. . .]

 

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3043740/#:~:text=Originating from a single Japanese,for Animal Health in 1981.

 

Scroll down to the section entitled "Development of ivermectin for human use."  No one was laughingly and pejoratively referring to Ivermectin as a horse dewormer back in '88 when Ivermectin began relieving the millions of sufferers of onchocerciasis, or river blindness, in many parts of the undeveloped world.

 

Consequently, in December, he [director of Merck scientists Dr. William Campbell] proposed to the Merck Laboratories’ Research Management Council that “an avermectin could become the first means of preventing the blindness associated with onchocerciasis” and that “discussions be held with representatives of WHO to determine the most appropriate approach to the problem—from the medical, political and commercial points of view”.

 

You, candide, have had every opportunity to avail yourself of this information but chose instead to do nothing more than ignorantly parrot the narrative of "officialdom" and their propaganda bullhorn, the MSM.

 

You ask me:

 

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

. . . vaccines are not safe . . . Are you serious?

 

I turn the question back to yourself.  Four years have passed since the rollout of the mRNA gene editing therapy and you are here suggesting the impossible as a valid reality.  That given the immense volume of research performed in that time not one stitch, not one iota of negative, counter-narrative findings has any merit.  All of it is 100% false.  The probability of that being true is a literal impossibility.  If the true definition of "conspiracy theorist" is the act of promoting an impossibility as an actual reality then does that definition not fit you?  I would say so.

 

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

Your claims are not supported by the scientific community.

 

Views within science are eternally in conflict.  As it should be.  What your intention with the above statement is meant to achieve is to divide those conflicting views into two camps:  one group who hold one view and another group who hold an opposite view.  Since you fall into one of those groups then you consider your group as the legitimate scientific community and the other group you label as the pseudo scientific community.  By what authority?  Why the authority which you've vested in yourself by yourself.  I challenge your self anointment.  If you don't like it, well, tough on you.  You ain't not God.  And neither did any god grant you that sole authority.  That truth hurts immensely as you kick and scream that your "truth" is the truth.

 

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

You are just parroting the propaganda fed to you.

 

We're about to find out soon which is the true propaganda.  My bets are that the one doing the parroting is you.  And if I had to provide evidence for that it would be the fact of your highly disingenuous "horse dewormer" label for Ivermectin.  Whilst true it is, however, not the whole story.  The MSM has done a fabulous job of keeping the rest of the truth of that story out of public consciousness.  And you fell for it.  Shame on you.

 

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

Exoerts [sic] used by WHO are usually provided by their resprctive [sic]  natioal [sic] health organisations. That includes countries such as the U.S., Germany Japan. etc...

 

Well, then, inform us as to who these individuals are.  Of course you can't.

 

Without any knowledge of who these experts are  . . . most critically their names, their funding sources, and their professional and personal affiliations (not merely confined to institutions but other individual players in the field - directly or indirectly - as well)  . . . your statement is absolutely meaningless.  For it is based entirely on assumptions of a most general and broad nature.  Perhaps the gravest faulty assumption being that all of these experts are infallible.  The second one being that they are all incorruptible and purely altruistic.  The third being that they are beyond any pernicious influence.  The fourth being . . .

 

On 12/26/2024 at 3:48 PM, candide said:

The experts you indirectly mentioned have been discredited in their own country.

 

No, they haven't been discredited by their own countries.  They've been discredited only . . . only . . . only by the opposing camp.  Your camp.  Since your camp is the one who is broadly and currently in power then that allows you to illegitimately declare what is truth and what is not truth.  You've thus far have been able to get away with it.  The MSM bullhorns and censorship have been your greatest assets, along with the stupidity of so many of the plebes.  When the power eventually shifts, though, and as people become informed to heightened levels, there will be a drastic reordering ot the "truth."  And there will be hell to pay.  Unfortunately, I suspect you will find yourself on the wrong side of history.

[candide]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Well, then, inform us as to who these individuals are.  Of course you can't.

Too long to reply to all your comments at the same time, so let's start with the most simple one.

 

You are again showing your ignorance of the WHO despite making definitive judgments about it.

 

You just need to look at its website.

 

https://www.who.int/groups/covid-19-ihr-emergency-committee

 

https://www.who.int/groups/covid-19-infection-prevention-and-control-guidance-development-group

 

https://www.who.int/about/governance/executive-board

(the positions are rotated at the board, so it may not be the same persons as in 2020/21).

[jas007]

On 12/26/2024 at 9:15 AM, Tippaporn said:

 

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.

There has been a shift in public awareness, to be sure, but I think the "perps" are just getting started.  They may never be held to account. They're already supposedly working on mRNA treatments that spread from person to person.  They're trying to treat the food supply.  I stopped thinking about it all because there's not much I can do but stay as far away as possible, stay healthy, get lots of sunshine and Vitamin D, and make sure my immune system is working well.  

[Tippaporn]

13 minutes ago, candide said:

Too long to reply to all your comments at the same time  . . .

 

LOL.  How convenient of an excuse so as not to have to address salient points.  It's typical, though.  Raise any facts for which there are no legitimate counters and they end up being ignored via turning the discussion in another direction.

 

Well, what say you now about Ivermectin?  Do you still consider it strictly a horse dewormer, thus being an animal product then use for humans for any purpose is, well, laughable?  Simple question.  I assume you read the link.  It was quite informative.  Has that new information changed your mind?  Or at least inserted some formerly absent doubt about the narrative being pushed regarding it?

[Patong2021]

On 12/24/2024 at 12:08 AM, RichardColeman said:

As a UK person I think we should leave the corrupt WHO, the ECHR and  all the rest of those left wing agenda nutcase organisations

 

Actions have consequences. What is your alternative? Think it through. MPox, Ebola are just some of the infectious diseases which  have entered the USA and  Europe.  How would you control and prevent the diseases from spreading? WHO is the only entity which sends  people to keep the diseases from spreading.  And before you say travel restrictions, consider the practicality of enforcement. Near impossible.  UK has thousands of nationals who visit high risk regions and who return. Thousands more visit places like Thailand and are exposed to people who  are infected. That is how much of the covid infection came to the UK.

[candide]

15 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

LOL.  How convenient of an excuse so as not to have to address salient points.  It's typical, though.  Raise any facts for which there are no legitimate counters and they end up being ignored via turning the discussion in another direction.

 

Well, what say you now about Ivermectin?  Do you still consider it strictly a horse dewormer, thus being an animal product then use for humans for any purpose is, well, laughable?  Simple question.  I assume you read the link.  It was quite informative.  Has that new information changed your mind?  Or at least inserted some formerly absent doubt about the narrative being pushed regarding it?

My comment on Ivermectin was about Covid-19. I did not comment about ither use.

Every time I replied to you, you have been proven wrong. More coming later.

 

[Tippaporn]

28 minutes ago, candide said:

. . . so let's start with the most simple one.

 

You are again showing your ignorance of the WHO despite making definitive judgments about it.

 

You just need to look at its website.

 

https://www.who.int/groups/covid-19-ihr-emergency-committee

 

https://www.who.int/groups/covid-19-infection-prevention-and-control-guidance-development-group

 

https://www.who.int/about/governance/executive-board

(the positions are rotated at the board, so it may not be the same persons as in 2020/21).

 

Great.  We've got names.  That's a start.  And their current positions.  Okay.  If you were hiring and that's all an applicant listed on their CV then that would be good enough for you to make a determination as to whether to hire them or not?  The links are worthless as they don't provide any real information about these people.

 

At least you could have commented on my point about making assumptions.  For it certainly seems all of these characters meet with your approval based solely on name and current position.  I take it all else about them are glowing assumptions.  Or do "seals of approval" suffice for you and automatically relieve you of any responsibility to dig a bit deeper?  But I guess that's the purpose of "seals of approval."  You don't have to think about it any further yourself.  You can simply give your blind trust, then sit back and enjoy your cold beers and whatever else occupies you without any worry.  All is in good hands.

 

Do you see any potential problem with that attitude?  I do.

 

Now that's what I would call ignorance.  Purposeful at that.

[candide]

15 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Great.  We've got names.  That's a start.  And their current positions.  Okay.  If you were hiring and that's all an applicant listed on their CV then that would be good enough for you to make a determination as to whether to hire them or not?  The links are worthless as they don't provide any real information about these people.

 

At least you could have commented on my point about making assumptions.  For it certainly seems all of these characters meet with your approval based solely on name and current position.  I take it all else about them are glowing assumptions.  Or do "seals of approval" suffice for you and automatically relieve you of any responsibility to dig a bit deeper?  But I guess that's the purpose of "seals of approval."  You don't have to think about it any further yourself.  You can simply give your blind trust, then sit back and enjoy your cold beers and whatever else occupies you without any worry.  All is in good hands.

 

Do you see any potential problem with that attitude?  I do.

 

Now that's what I would call ignorance.  Purposeful at that.

Have you looked at the lists?

 

Here are the first two names on the first list.

Dr Didier Houssin

President AP-HP International, Subsidiary of Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris France

Members

Dr Martin Cetron

Director, Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

If it's not enough for you, I guess you are able to use Google and find more details, such as below:

 

Dr. Didier Houssin

President of the French Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education (AERES), since May 
2011. Former Director General for Health, France Ministry of Health (2005-2011). A Surgery 
Professor at Paris's Descartes University since 1988, Professor Housin returned recently to the 
Research and higher education Fields after many years in the Public Health sector. A liver surgery and 
transplant Specialist, including for children, he served as Executive Director of the Établissement 
Français des Greffes (the French transplant agency) from 1994 to 2003, as surgery Head at Paris's 
Cochin hospital, from 1998 to 2003, as the Paris Hospitals' medical policy Director, from 2003 to 
2005, and as Health Director General at the French Ministry of Health in March 2005, a position he 
kept until May 2011. During this last period, he was also the interministerial delegate for Pandemic 
Influenza in France.
Professor Houssin has a wide ranging experience in the research and higher education: researcher
fields at the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research (1982-1988), as university
surgeon leading a surgical research laboratory (1985-1996), and director of the French national
doctoral training in surgical sciences (1991-1995). He authored several original scientific publications 
on liver transplants and surgery, transplant immunology, and gene therapy, as well as two books: a 
document on Organ transplantation and an essay on the phenomenon of Emergenc

[Tippaporn]

21 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Actions have consequences. What is your alternative? Think it through.

 

April 7, 1948.  That is the date of the WHO's birth.

 

Question:  How has it been possible that the world survived pre-WHO?  There's an old adage that says no one is indispensable.

 

Question:  Did the WHO put an end to the Covid-19 pandemic?  Or did it naturally run it's course.

 

Think it through is right.

 

28 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

MPox, Ebola are just some of the infectious diseases which  have entered the USA and  Europe.

 

Oh, no!  New diseases!  That's a first in this world.  How did the world cope previously?  Or are these "red alerts" merely given to ensure the eternal need for the WHO?  Self preservation?  We all know how that works.  A different example to perhaps bridge the understanding.  Show me a military that plans for peace.  As soon as they did so they'd be planning for their obsolescence.

 

33 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

How would you control and prevent the diseases from spreading? WHO is the only entity which sends  people to keep the diseases from spreading. 

 

They did a crack up job on Covid-19.  Yup.  They sent people and stopped it before it ever got out of China.  Okay, they didn't.  But they did after it got to Thailand.  No?  How about Italy?  Nope.

 

Theory is all well and good but it's reality that matters.  And the reality is that the WHO failed to stop the spread of Covid-19 globally.  They couldn't even slow it.  But they're sure to get it right next time.  All you need is faith.

 

47 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

And before you say travel restrictions, consider the practicality of enforcement. Near impossible.  UK has thousands of nationals who visit high risk regions and who return. Thousands more visit places like Thailand and are exposed to people who  are infected. That is how much of the covid infection came to the UK.

 

The world can be a scary place.  Keep yourself safe.  Ultimately it's up to you anyway.

[Tippaporn]

I've gotta say, candide, you grade very poorly at answering direct questions or addressing inconvenient but salient points.  But to your credit you do excel at keeping the conversation on specific topics and issues for which you already have scripted answers.  It's beginning to feel like I'm on a merry-go-round with you where it's impossible to resolve any difference of opinion because nothing ever gets fully addressed.

 

You once again failed to answer direct questions.  In fact, thus far you've completely skipped over responding to my post previous to the one you are replying to now.  What gives?  Why the avoidance on your part.  I have no problem addressing your posts line by line.

 

29 minutes ago, candide said:

Have you looked at the lists?

 

Here are the first two names on the first list.

Dr Didier Houssin

President AP-HP International, Subsidiary of Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris France

Members

Dr Martin Cetron

Director, Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

Yes.  I have.  Yet again, the lists are meaningless as name and rank tell you nothing.  If you were to be captured in a war and all you gave was name and rank you'd be asking to be tortured.  It's information which illuminates very little.  I've already explained this to you.  No comment from you, though.

 

34 minutes ago, candide said:

If it's not enough for you, I guess you are able to use Google and find more details, such as below:

 

Dr. Didier Houssin

President of the French Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education (AERES), since May 
2011. Former Director General for Health, France Ministry of Health (2005-2011). A Surgery 
Professor at Paris's Descartes University since 1988, Professor Housin returned recently to the 
Research and higher education Fields after many years in the Public Health sector. A liver surgery and 
transplant Specialist, including for children, he served as Executive Director of the Établissement 
Français des Greffes (the French transplant agency) from 1994 to 2003, as surgery Head at Paris's 
Cochin hospital, from 1998 to 2003, as the Paris Hospitals' medical policy Director, from 2003 to 
2005, and as Health Director General at the French Ministry of Health in March 2005, a position he 
kept until May 2011. During this last period, he was also the interministerial delegate for Pandemic 
Influenza in France.
Professor Houssin has a wide ranging experience in the research and higher education: researcher
fields at the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research (1982-1988), as university
surgeon leading a surgical research laboratory (1985-1996), and director of the French national
doctoral training in surgical sciences (1991-1995). He authored several original scientific publications 
on liver transplants and surgery, transplant immunology, and gene therapy, as well as two books: a 
document on Organ transplantation and an essay on the phenomenon of Emergenc

 

If there is any information about any of these people that is damning then you won't be able to "use Google."  Which is the point of doing research.  To find that information about these people that they will never tell.  Such as where their funding comes from.  Or what affiliations they have with others in the industry which could be conflicts of interest.  And so much more.

 

Pre-Covid you could find similarly glowing backgrounds of people like Michael Yeadon, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Joseph Mercola, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Paul Marik, Dr. Peter McCullough, and many other respectable doctors, researchers and experts who have been attacked and vilified because they had different views on many of the issues concerning the pandemic.

 

So what does your provided information about these two individuals tell you?  Nothing.