Skip to main content

Enormous move to build global pharmaceutical hospital emergency industrial complex

By Deepika* 
On June 2, 2024, at the World Health Assembly (WHA77), the International Health Regulations (2005) Amendments were adopted and the World Health Organization (WHO) made concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year.
What does the adoption of the IHR amendments mean?
The recently adopted amendments will facilitate an enormous global build up of the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex which seeks to trigger ongoing “pandemic emergencies” that will be made even worse by “relevant health products.”
  1. Pandemic emergencies as we have learnt since the last four years have been a total failure, however these amendments seem to be steps to further repeat the same mistakes committed rather than learning from the same.
  2. The spread of an infectious disease spanning geographical and international boundaries is highly overrated given that the climatic and living conditions in different countries are varied and calling for a “One Health” approach is neither scientific nor rational.
  3. Complying with the health measures recommended by WHO is unjustified as decisions regarding containment of diseases should be subject to local factors.
  4. Unnecessary travel restrictions which are implied by these amendments is unjustified as well, given that the science behind the spread of diseases is still being debated.
  5. The idea of vaccine passports is totally flawed and there are multiple examples of the failure of vaccine passports. Also coercing the travellers to get vaccinated is a violation of informed consent.
  6. State imposed isolation and quarantine have not been proven to help disease eradication or contain spread of diseases but has led to mental trauma, depression etc. It has been proven that social distancing and masking did not stop covid.
India is supposed to have played a “constructive role” helping countries agree to the adoption of International Health Regulations (IHR 2005). Earlier in Feb 2024, Rajya Sabha MP Shri Aneel Hegde had raised concerns about the Pandemic Treaty and the IHR amendments. Despite the series of correspondence that took place between him and Dr Mansukh Mandaviya, it seems like the concerns have not been addressed.
Hegde had highlighted potential threats to national sovereignty and constitutional rights, citing the undue influence of pharmaceutical interests and lack of transparency in WHO decision-making. Mandaviya responded on March 1, 2024, defending the WHO’s role and emphasizing its support for member states’ sovereignty.
Complying with WHO health measures is unjustified as decisions regarding containment of diseases should be subject to local factors
Also, in an open letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with copies to concerned Cabinet ministers, bureaucrats and MPs, health rights network People’s Alliance for Public Health (PAPH alias JanSwasthya Morcha), has urged that India should not be a signatory to the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic Agreement and Amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005.
The countries who objected/restricted to the adoption of the IHR amendments were Japan, Slovakia, Argentina, Russia, Iran and Costa Rica. Costa Rica cited the following “the prolongation & the uncertainty of a potential pandemic treaty will only serve to worsen the existing polarization that affects the well being of my population.” Iran said “The outcome text of the IHR does not fully address the long-standing concerns raised by a number of states and is far from what we expected through this process, namely equity & development related issues". Argentina said “We lament that the amendments which are ample and complex, have been finished at the last moment.” Japan rejected because the attendance was less than 1/3.
The desperation of WHO in passing the Pandemic Treaty and adopting the IHR amendments can be well understood from Dr Tedros’ own words at WHA77 when he said “It’s time to get aggressive with anti- vaxxers”.
---
*Digital marketing and content management professional with keen interest in public health policies

Comments

Post a Comment

TRENDING

Xi Jinping’s visit to USA: Recognition that China can't be contained?

By Vijay Prashad   President Xi Jinping’s forthcoming visit to the United States must be understood as more than an encounter between two heads of state, but it must be seen as an encounter between two possible futures. In one future, the United States imposes a spiral of confrontation against China. Trade disputes harden into economic warfare, then economic warfare intensifies into technological blockades, technological blockades produce military encirclement, and finally military encirclement creates incidents, and incidents the danger of becoming an unimaginable war.
Post a Comment
»

Swaminarayan, untouchability and the 'we are not Hindu' argument

By Rajiv Shah   Following my blog on why the Eiffel Tower authorities should take all the blame for giving in to the Swaminarayan sadhus ’ bizarre demand to “invisibilise” women, including its female staff, during their visit to the internationally renowned Paris tourist centre on September 5, an interesting comment by one of the top academics drew my attention to something I vaguely knew about one of India’s most powerful and richest religious sects.
Post a Comment
»

From margins to microphones: The rise of Dalit hip-hop in India

By Tersina Maria Toppo*  A protest does not always arrive as a slogan shouted from a street corner. Sometimes, it arrives on a beat. A microphone replaces the megaphone, a music video becomes a public square, and the smartphone becomes the space where a history once pushed to the margins is narrated, debated, and shared.
2 comments
»