In recent times, there has been growing concern about the potential consequences of the World Health Organization's (WHO) international pandemic treaty. A renowned expert in biowarfare and epidemics, Meryl Nass, has raised alarms regarding a globalist agenda aimed at establishing a One World Government. This article delves into the key points of Nass's concerns and sheds light on the implications of the proposed treaty.
The WHO's Expanding Authority
Meryl Nass has pointed out that the current draft of the WHO's international pandemic treaty and proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) could lead to a significant shift in global governance. One of the most contentious aspects of these proposals is the mandate for mandatory mRNA-based vaccinations. These vaccines, Nass asserts, are developed at breakneck speed, bypassing traditional human trials and reducing safety and efficacy testing to a minimum.
Unprecedented WHO Powers
The treaty, if adopted, would grant the director-general of the WHO substantial powers to determine which medications can be used during medical emergencies. This move would effectively place the WHO at the helm of healthcare decisions in various nations, compelling local healthcare practitioners to adhere to their directives.
Another concerning aspect of the treaty is the WHO's intention to implement nationwide biosurveillance programs. These programs would aim to identify potential pandemic-causing pathogens by testing humans, domesticated and farm animals, as well as inspecting various facilities such as farms and factories. Additionally, wastewater and other sources would be subject to scrutiny. This comprehensive approach could have far-reaching implications for individual privacy and data security.
Pandemic Declarations and Social Media Control
Under the proposed treaty, the WHO director-general would have the authority to declare a pandemic, even in the absence of predefined criteria. This flexibility raises questions about the potential for overreach. Moreover, the treaty places an obligation on nations to monitor and censor social media, essentially serving as a vehicle for advancing the WHO's narrative.
Perhaps one of the most contentious elements of the treaty is its encouragement of "gain-of-function" research. This term, often a euphemism for biological warfare research, involves actively seeking out pandemic-causing pathogens and sharing them globally. While the goal may be to predict future pandemic threats or potential bioweapons, it also carries significant risks. By incentivizing this research, the treaty inadvertently increases the likelihood of accidents and intentional leaks, endangering global security.
A Call for a Different Approach
In summary, the WHO's proposed international pandemic treaty has sparked concerns regarding medical freedom, privacy, and global security. To effectively prevent pandemics, some experts argue that it's crucial to halt gain-of-function research rather than encourage its proliferation. Controlling these potentially dangerous pathogens should take precedence over their distribution.
As the world grapples with the implications of this treaty, it is essential to consider the broader implications of these decisions on public health, privacy, and global security. The path forward requires careful examination and thoughtful consideration of the potential consequences of such a significant shift in global health governance.
The freedom of speech and alternative media face challenges from powerful entities. Real Raw News relies on reader support to flourish and endure.
Kindly refrain from funding websites or channels that unlawfully duplicate our original content. We invest extensive time in verifying, researching, and crafting our work. Your contribution matters greatly. Every dollar aids in maintaining the site's vitality and assists the author, including covering medical expenses. https://gogetfunding.com/realnewscast/