The United States has officially withdrawn from the World Health Organization (WHO), and many other countries are also reconsidering their participation. This decision may change with future administrations, but the WHO itself will not disappear. Therefore, understanding why the U.S. needed to exit this organization and cut off all funding is crucial. Goodbye, WHO.
Countries following in our footsteps and exiting this organization is paramount. Worse still, the World Health Organization has now become a symbol of hypocrisy. Last weekend, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of the WHO, stated, “While WHO recommends the use of masks, maintaining social distancing, and vaccination, it has never recommended that governments mandate mask use or vaccination, nor has it ever recommended implementing lockdowns.”
This statement appears feeble and easily refutable. The evidence of WHO’s support for lockdowns dates back to January 29, 2020, when Tedros praised the Chinese government, particularly Xi Jinping, for their response to the global pandemic, which included keeping people locked in their homes, arresting, and potentially killing those who defied authorities.
Never in modern history has any country seen such actions. Yet the World Health Organization wholeheartedly endorsed these measures.
Shortly after this celebratory press conference, the WHO embarked on a visit to Wuhan in Hubei Province, along with several other cities in China. Personnel from the UK, EU, and the U.S. were also part of this visit. American immunologist and then-presidential health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci’s senior aide, Clifford Lane, and several other Americans participated. Following this multi-city visit, a report was drafted praising China’s response to the outbreak but diverging from all principles of public health.
This occurred before the implementation of any lockdown measures in the US and UK. The report from February 28, 2020, praising China’s extraordinary containment measures is still available on the WHO’s website. The report lauded the unity and determination of the Chinese people in facing the threat, highlighting the support for vulnerable communities at the provincial and municipal levels.
Further into the story, the WHO spokesperson Dr. Bruce Aylward declared after the Wuhan visit in February 2020, “Emulate China’s approach in responding to the COVID-19 outbreak.” This praise was applauded by the Chinese regime. Unbelievably, the WHO’s influence on the world was so immense that 194 countries mimicked this model, implementing corresponding measures such as issuing stay-at-home orders and closing businesses, churches, and schools.
The World Health Organization not only endorsed lockdown measures but, under the guise of public health, urged the world to adopt these measures following China’s lead. In fact, this report served as the basis for the US and UK to implement lockdowns and provided cover for such unprecedented violations of human rights.
When Italy enforced another lockdown, the WHO also commended this decision. Hans Kluge, the WHO Regional Director for Europe, expressed full support, stating, “We fully support Italy’s measures to tackle the emergency situation caused by the new coronavirus and express the World Health Organization’s readiness to provide comprehensive cooperation!”
In mid-March 2020, the US and most countries began implementing lockdowns. Within just a week or two, the disaster had spread around us. A month later, the WHO urged countries not to lift restrictions prematurely, issuing notices demanding the implementation of policies such as universal contact tracing, testing, providing full sets of protective gear, maintaining social distancing, and engaging in extensive fear and hate propaganda activities.
In other words, though the WHO acknowledged the mental breakdown people experienced during lockdowns, they refused to recognize the necessity of freedom. Instead, they doubled down on authoritarianism, surveillance, and control, believing these were the right methods to control the virus.
A month later, the WHO warned against lifting lockdowns as it would only lead to more infections and risks. They posted on social media, “We have issued further guidance that outlines key issues countries should consider before lifting lockdowns: Is the epidemic under control? Does the health system have the capacity to respond to potential case resurgences after easing certain measures?”
Later that month, the WHO stated that lockdown measures were actually very good as they helped address climate change. Quoting Tedros on social media, they declared, “This pandemic has shown us what our world could look like if we take the necessary bold action to curb climate change and air pollution.”
By mid-summer, the WHO suggested that while lockdown measures were good, they were not enough. All governments should engage in widespread contact tracing to control this virus that infects everyone.
In October 2020, following the Great Barrington Declaration on October 4, 2020, the WHO once again supported lockdown measures. On October 12, 2020, citing Tedros, the WHO stated, “We recognize that in some situations, countries have no choice but to issue stay-at-home orders and other lockdown measures to buy time.”
This was not an accidental message but part of the WHO’s consistent policy.
After the November election and the beginning of vaccine rollout, the WHO promptly altered the definition of herd immunity, disregarding the possibility of natural immunity. Previously, the WHO stated that herd immunity could be achieved through vaccination or infection transmission. However, they suddenly removed the latter, claiming vaccine injection was the sole pathway.
This WHO document effectively erased the delicate history of the millennia-long back-and-forth between humans and pathogens. Hence, one can only conclude that we are all blank sheets, unalterable, at the mercy of the pharmaceutical industry’s whims.
Additionally, this recent edit by the WHO ignores or even erases a century of medical advancements in virology, immunology, and epidemiology. This is entirely unscientific, as conspiracy theorists would claim that the WHO has been cheerleading for the vaccine industry from the beginning.
As the virus weakened to the point of being no more severe than the common cold, the WHO continued its rhetoric. “We are concerned that in some countries, a narrative has emerged suggesting that stopping the spread of the virus is no longer possible or necessary due to the existence of vaccines, as well as the high transmissibility and lower pathogenicity of the Omicron vaccine. This is not the case,” the WHO statement claimed.
This is worse than poor health and policy recommendations. The World Health Organization has become a tool for global authoritarian control. Many countries have trusted this organization and followed its advice. This has been a disaster for both health and freedom. The U.S. cannot be a member of such an organization.
While the WHO has played pivotal roles in the past and those roles remain relevant, every country should uphold its health sovereignty based on its own needs. In short, there is no such thing as global health or world health. Therefore, every country should withdraw from the World Health Organization. This organization once hailed the Chinese regime and later promoted a dangerous product, tarnishing its reputation beyond repair.