From Alison Ryan
Negotiating Text of the WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response
(WHO Pandemic Agreement)
Advanced unedited version – 16 October 2023
This document is very similar to the June 2 “Bureau Draft” of the Treaty.
It needs to be understood that this treaty is based on fantasy, as none of its foundational assumptions is accurate. The Pandemic Treaty intends to create a complicated managerial structure with a new WHO Secretariat and Conference of the Parties to perform activities that have never been shown to prevent or respond to pandemics effectively or provide any other benefits. In fact, these efforts are most likely to increase pandemics and encourage the use of hasty regulatory structures and problematic, liability-waived drugs and vaccines produced too quickly.
All the Pandemic Treaty drafts so far rely on a set of incorrect assumptions. They include the following:
· The WHO is the directing and coordinating authority on international health.
· International spread of disease demands the widest international cooperation, ignoring the fact that international spread may be limited to only a few countries and will demand a different level of response, depending on the circumstances.
· Nations retain national sovereignty through their ability to pass health laws, while they will simultaneously be bound and accountable to obey the directives from the WHO on health.
· We were unprepared for COVID and this caused the pandemic’s suffering, but now we know how to prepare for pandemics and simply need a central authority to direct us.
· Lack of equity led to failure to share drugs, vaccines, PPE–ignoring the fact that no nation had sufficient PPE or tests early in the pandemic, and that it was nations withholding generic drugs from their populations, not lack of equity causing many treatment shortages.
· Pandemics invariably arise at the animal-human interface, are natural in origin, and the vaguely defined “One Health approach” can prevent or detect them early.
· Increasing the capture and study of “potential pandemic pathogens” can be done safely and provide useful pandemic products, when neither has been true in the past.
· Pharmaceutical manufacturers will agree to give up some intellectual property rights. In fact, a Pharma manufacturers’ association said this week it would prefer no treaty to this one.
· The UN adopted a declaration on pandemic preparedness on September 20, 2023. In fact, 11 countries objected and the declaration was only approved by the UN Secretary-General.
· Censorship of “infodemics” is legal and desirable.
· Nations and the WHO must apply the “One Health approach,” which includes efforts related to climate change and sustainable development, for health promotion.
· Health “coverage” (insurance) will provide the world’s citizens access to a broad range of health care.
Here are some specific examples of what is wrong with the Treaty.
Article 3, #2. Sovereignty
“States have, in accordance with the charter of the United Nations and the general principles of international law, the sovereign right to legislate and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health policies.”
This language fails to address the issue of the WHO assuming sovereignty for health matters over states through this treaty. P/2 link at bottom