COVID-19
WHO member states agree to develop legally-binding pandemic treaty
Article submitted by The Counter Signal
By MIKE CAMPBELL
The World Health Organization (WHO) announced that member states inched closer to developing a legally binding global pandemic treaty.
“I welcome the agreement by @WHO Member States to develop a zero draft of a legally binding #PandemicAccord designed to protect the world from future pandemics and to continue discussions on the draft in February 2023,” said WHO CEO Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
The development follows a third meeting from WHO member states to develop a global pandemic treaty. The first meeting was in December 2021, and the second was in March 2022.
It’s unclear how the WHO’s pandemic treaty will affect its 194 member states, including Canada.
The WHO states the global pandemic treaty will determine future pandemic requirements for individual countries, such as lockdowns, and that these requirements will be “legally binding.”
The WHO says the treaty will be a “legal instrument, rooted in the WHO Constitution, designed to protect the world from future pandemics.”
Article 21 of the WHO’s constitution states the WHO has “authority to adopt regulations concerning (a) sanitary and quarantine requirements and other procedures designed to prevent the international spread of disease.”
“Other procedures” presumably include global vaccine passports, which member states have already supported.
However, the WHO also claims the pandemic treaty will “respect sovereignty.”
The draft that resulted from this third meeting includes a provision that reads:
“States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health, notably pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems pursuant to their own policies and legislation provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to other States and their peoples.”
Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis has been outspoken regarding the potential impact a global pandemic treaty could have on Canadians.
In April, she said the treaty would allow the WHO to determine what a pandemic is and when one is occurring — even over something non-viral like an obesity crisis.
Earlier this year, the WHO and the German health minister said that countries disobeying regulations dictated by the WHO through their pandemic treaty might need to be sanctioned.
The Counter Signal contacted the WHO for comment but did not receive a response by publication.
COVID-19
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’
From LifeSiteNews
The director of National Intelligence revealed gain-of-function ties to US funding, which could indicate that the US helped bankroll the supposed COVID lab leak.
In this segment of a remarkable interview by Megyn Kelly, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard discusses the current Intelligence Community (IC) research into the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (aka, COVID-19).
Gabbard talks about the U.S. government funding of “gain-of-function” research, which is a soft sounding phrase to describe the weaponization of biological agents.
Gabbard notes the gain-of-function research taking place in the Wuhan lab was coordinated and funded by the United States government, and the IC is close to making a direct link between the research and the release of the COVID-19 virus.
Additionally, Gabbard explains the concern of other biolabs around the world and then gets very close to the line of admitting the IC itself is politically weaponized (which it is but would be stunning to admit).
From LifeSiteNews
A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna
A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.
The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:
Study Overview
- Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
- Intervention: Two doses of either:
- BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
- mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
- Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
- Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
- Main Outcomes:
- All-cause mortality
- Cardiovascular mortality
- COVID-19 mortality
- Non-COVID-19 mortality
All-cause mortality
Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.
- Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)
Cardiovascular mortality
Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)
COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)
Non-COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)
Biological explanations
The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:
The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:
- Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
- Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions
Final conclusion
Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.
Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.
As the authors conclude:
These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.
New Alberta Election Act bans electronic vote counting machines, lowers threshold for recalls and petitions
Hours after Liberal election win, Alberta Prosperity Project drumming up interest in referendum
NDP Floor Crossers May Give Carney A Majority
It’s On! Alberta Challenging Liberals Unconstitutional and Destructive Net-Zero Legislation
-
International1 day agoPentagon Salivates Over ‘Expensive’ Weapons While China Races Into Future With Iron Grip Over Cheap Drone Tech
-
Crime2 days agoCanada Blocked DEA Request to Investigate Massive Toronto Carfentanil Seizure for Terror Links
-
Business2 days agoTop Canadian bank ditches UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate goals it helped create
-
Alberta1 day agoPierre Poilievre will run to represent Camrose, Stettler, Hanna, and Drumheller in Central Alberta by-election
-
COVID-192 days ago
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’
-
Business1 day agoFederal government’s accounting change reduces transparency and accountability
-
Health1 day agoRFK Jr. orders placebo safety trials for all new vaccines in major policy decision
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoMark Carney vows to ‘deepen’ Canada’s ties with the world, usher in ‘new economy’