Several editorials have recently been released by mainstream journals chastising crafters of the Pandemic Treaty for cutting out “accountability mechanisms” that would have put sovereign states under the review of the World Health Organization (WHO) in the case of a pandemic.

The Lancet claims that politicians in G7 countries are “sabotaging the best chance to translate the lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic into legally binding commitments that will protect us all. The treaty is an opportunity that must not be squandered”.

Meanwhile, another editorial written by Nina Schwalbe, Elliot Hannon, and Susanna Lehtimaki for the BMJ also insists that governance and compliance mechanisms must be inserted into the Pandemic Treaty draft. The authors state, “This oversight must be corrected. A treaty without a robust compliance mechanism built-in is simply a well-meaning piece of paper.”

The latest draft of the Pandemic Treaty may be accessed here.

Editor’s Note: While we do not agree with some of the points raised in the articles cited above, we are nonetheless to see these articles. It is proof of what we have been saying in the past: the pandemic is a business, and there are private and state actors profiting off diseases.

It is also proof that the campaign for freedom is winning, as politicians, particularly in the West are starting to back off the One Health approach which would have given the WHO the power to overrule sovereign states during health emergencies.

The articles are trying to virtue signal in the hopes of convincing well-meaning politicians to “do what is right, to prioritize the health of the rest of the world”. But we must be smart about this. If the wealthy countries will not commit to a problematic Pandemic Treaty, then why would our leaders willingly sacrifice our well-being?

The World Health Assembly is close, and so much can happen in just a few days. We hope that you continue to be vigilant and monitor the progress of the talks. Remember: our future depends on it.

Read Original Article