What is WHO Doing, Equating Humans with Animals, Plants, and Ecosystems?
In January 2023, The Lancet published an article titled, One Health: a call for ecological equity. “One Health” is a revolutionary idea that has been percolating for more than two decades.
The World Health Assembly (WHA), the forum for governing the World Health Organization (WHO), is poised to enact much of the “One Health” agenda. If this is accomplished, what happens in medical exam rooms and with your personal information — and many points in between — will be radically changed.
According to The Lancet, the One Health High-Level Expert panel defines One Health as:
an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimise the health of people, animals, and ecosystems. It recognises the health of humans, domestic and wild animals, plants, and the wider environment (including ecosystems) are closely linked and inter-dependent.
A Panel of Veterinary Experts
So what is the makeup of this “One Health High-Level Expert panel” (OHHLEP)?
It is co-chaired by virologist Wanda Markotter and molecular geneticist Thomas Mettenleiter, with veterinary epidemiologist Dominique Charron as the rapporteur. Of the 23 remaining members, thirteen are trained in veterinary medicine, four in virology, and five in epidemiology. It is important to note that one of those epidemiologists is a veterinarian epidemiologist, and one, an amphibian epidemiologist. Others are variously trained, from anthropology to environmental and planetary health sciences. Only two are trained in conventional (human) medicine, with a third having “an MD in epidemiology” and a fourth having graduated from a medical university, not with an M.D., but with a Ph.D. More can be learned about them here.
One of the members, Baptiste Dungu, who was trained in veterinary microbiology and vaccinology, was dismissed with cause from his position at Onderstepoort Biological Products, a South African livestock vaccine manufacturing company in 2021.
One Health aims to expand the focus of our concerns from merely humans to animal life and beyond that, to the whole planet. Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation, has been advocating a form of this for decades.
A “Subtle, but Quite Revolutionary Shift”
One Health has even more changes in mind. The Lancet article explains:
Modern attitudes to human health take a purely anthropocentric view—that the human being is the centre of medical attention and concern. One Health places us in an interconnected and interdependent relationship with non-human animals and the environment. The consequences of this thinking entail a subtle but quite revolutionary shift of perspective: all life is equal, and of equal concern.
In light of this proposed move, we need to think deeply and well about who we are as humans. This is indeed a revolutionary shift in perspective from the belief that humans have been created in the image of God. Even for those who see human life as nothing more than “the top tier of the food chain,” this is a radical shift.
Proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) to be considered during the WHA meeting include removing reference to the “full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.” One amendment to Article 3 is as follows (as is common in legalese proposals, changes are noted in strikethroughs and bold font):
The implementation of these Regulations shall be
with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of personsbased on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development. (...)
Note that “human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons,” is being removed. More important, though, if we no longer image God, then whose image will we bear? We will have “equity” and “inclusion” with animals and plants, for “all life is equal and of equal concern.” One meaning of this is that we should decrease our consumption of red meat, sugar, and refined grains. Do we really want UN diktats micromanaging our diets?
And then consider this: if we are equal with both animals and plants, how long will we be allowed to continue eating plants?
Control Freaks on a Global Scale
The WHA has even more in store for us. Articles 23 and 35, for example, which involve health information necessary for international travel, show how the WHO would make travelers’ personal information accessible to any interested state and other parties. Information about identity, as well as medical and health records, are to be in digital form and in a format that can be read by interested authorities, whoever they are, and wherever they are located. A QR code may be required. Where you are shall also be knowable. You will be surveilled, thanks to your “Passenger Locator Form” – digitized, of course.
"Conditioners”
Is there no remedy for this? It is not at all clear that the current U.S. administration is opposed to these changes, but there has been some pushback to date with the House Resolution H.R. 79, WHO Withdrawal Act and Stop Vax Passports. More is needed.
C. S. Lewis had some cogent words for these “man-moulders,” currently personified by the OHHLEP and others at the WHO. He wrote in The Abolition of Man: “For the power of Man to make himself what he pleases means . . .the power of some men to make other men what they please.” Moreover, Lewis warned that “the man-moulders of the new age will be armed with the powers of an omnicompetent state and an irresistible scientific technique: we shall get at last a race of conditioners who really can cut out all posterity in what shape they please.”
There are humanity-moulders in our midst, with their scalpels at the ready to cut out all posterity in their own image. They are arming themselves with an Omnicompetent State, in the form of the WHO, the WHA, the OHHLEP, and a veritable alphabet soup of other operatives of centralized control. We should not allow the constant droning of bureaucratese to lull us into stupor. Our human dignity as well as our human rights are at stake.
Is anyone paying attention?
Related:
D. Joy Riley
