The WHO Debate

If it hadn’t been for Covid-19 and the role the World Health Organization played in mandates, lockdowns, and the vaccines, this specialized UN agency might not be in the news. As a result of the Trump administration, a sharpened focus is on the attempt of the WHO to take primacy over individual nation states when/if another pandemic occurs. But first, a quick reminder of WHO’s history.

WHO’s Founding

The WHO was created by the UN on April 7, 1948, by combining several entities into the larger organization to promote health and safety while helping the “vulnerable” worldwide. Its stated purpose is “to achieve the highest possible health for the world’s population through the control of epidemics and medical treatment of disease, support training in public health, and define the international standards for biological products.”

Here is perhaps one of WHO’s most successful campaigns listed in Wikipedia.  After two decades of millions of people dying of smallpox, WHO invested in various approaches including a disease surveillance system run by consultants who assisted countries in setting up containment activities. The last European outbreak was in Yugoslavia in 1972. In 1979, a Global Commission declared the disease had been eradicated, making it the first in history to be eliminated by human effort.

WHO’s Funding

The health agency gets funding from member states paying dues  called “assessed contributions,” or a percentage of a country’s GDP agreed upon every two years. Usually, these sums cover less than 20%  of WHO’s total budget. That means over 80% comes from “voluntary contributions” from member states, NGOs, philanthropic organizations, or other private entities. These contributions are typically earmarked for specific projects or diseases, meaning  WHO has full control over only about a quarter of its budget. This gives primacy to wealthier nations and private philanthropies, like the Gates Foundation. Gates alone is responsible for over 88% per cent of the total amount donated by philanthropic foundations. Other contributors include the Bloomberg Family Foundation, the Wellcome Trust , and the Rockefeller Foundation. All of these have deep financial interests in the pharmaceutical industry.

Today, questions are being asked by both the U.S. and other countries as to whether the WHO has overstepped its role. Has it become the global governing body rather than a partner? This concern has been raised for several reasons:

• The WHO has come to play a central role in the success of the pharmaceutical industry. The concern is that WHO’s funding/profit-seeking might end in expensive products being pushed and promoted over cheaper alternatives and natural non-patentable remedies.
• Are the interests to improve the health of populations worldwide truly being served? WHO has played a crucial function in the availability and procurement of medical products, especially in times of crisis, like the Covid pandemic. With its influence on information and public health policy, WHO has managed to create a centralized, world-wide control network.

Professor Connor Fuchs, of the Purdue University Law School, raises another concern. “Although the goal of the WHO is not to supplant national drug regulatory authorities, its Prequalification of Medicines Programme has become the de facto drug approval authority for essential medicine manufacturers operating in many low- and middle-income countries.” As the number of pharmaceuticals and medical products has soared internationally, the rush to market and lack of test and potential injury data has become problematic. Shouldn’t the low- and middle-income countries have the same guarantees of safety and efficacy?

We Interrupt This Membership….

Early in 2025, the U.S. withdrew from the World Health Organization.  The primary reasons were the WHO’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic, its failure to adopt reforms, and perceived political influence from member nations. Additional reasons were: a lack of independence and transparency, susceptibility to political influence from China, and perceived as unfair financial demands on the U.S. On the flip side, there are concerns that the withdrawal from the WHO could impact the U.S. with the potential loss of access to crucial information and expertise related to global health issues. It also limits the U.S.’s influence on international health policy and negotiations. 

The new Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. recently highlighted the reasons for the U.S. withdrawal. China’s false reports about the origins of Covid-19, that country’s lack of transparency, and heavy influence on the WHO leadership were among the reasons. HHS has found that corporate interests (and profits for investors like Gates), over the last decades has resulted in corporate medicine, not health. He said that the U.S. is now focused on chronic diseases that take the largest toll on the federal budget and the health of Americans.

RFK Jr. also announced that the U.S. rejected “A draconian new WHO pandemic treaty, giving it the power to declare lockdowns, censor speech, institute vaccine passports, and lay the groundwork for global medical surveillance. Nations who accept the new regulations are signing over their power in health emergencies to an unelected international organization. In fact, it doesn’t even need to declare an emergency. The new regulations employ extremely broad language that gives the WHO unprecedented power, opening the door to the kind of narrative management and propaganda and censorship that we saw during the Covid pandemic. And lays the groundwork for global medical surveillance of every human being.”

My Bias: While I’m certainly not an expert, as a citizen who lived through a time when there was nearly a total loss of autonomy enforced by my own government and the WHO, I support Secretary Kennedy in his concerns and hope that other countries will follow suit. At this point, any international proposal Bill Gates champions is, in my mind, suspect.

“Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.” ~ Mark Twain

Photo Credits: Dollars – elena-mozhvilo, Question mark – matt walsh, Stop sign – jose-aragones.