Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 135 posts

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#21

Post by tcmart14 »

wesleywt wrote: post #17
hikergirl1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by a small committee of elites is an abuse of power waiting to happen.

A terrible take. We are fully connected to a point that national borders mean practically nothing. Only a coordinated response and open sharing of information can stop a disaster.

Really the big one here, I feel, is the open sharing of information. This is probably the single most effective thing there is. Free and open information that anyone has access to. If there is one thing WHO should be, is an international database for medical researchers, advisers and professionals around the world.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#22

Post by ed25519FUUU »

wesleywt wrote: post #19
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they still saying it’s “impossible” the virus escaped from a Chinese weapons lab?

As a biologist looking at comments like these make me concerned that the general public has not learned its lesson on pandemics yet. It is far more concerning our destruction of the environment and our encroachment of habitats will lead to way more pandemics.

I’m very much concerned with our government funding gof research in a foreign and adversarial weapons laboratory. Stopping that research would be a very important lesson to learn in this pandemic because it might actually be able to stop the next covid 19.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#23

Post by fennecfoxen »

wesleywt wrote: post #17
hikergirl1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by a small committee of elites is an abuse of power waiting to happen.

A terrible take. We are fully connected to a point that national borders mean practically nothing. Only a coordinated response and open sharing of information can stop a disaster.

If the WHO actually prioritized "sharing information" over the political machinations of the Chinese government, you wouldn't have the spectacle of Bruce Aylward pretending to have technical difficulties when someone mentions the word 'Taiwan' on a call, and the fear of political oppression by committee would be a lot less credible.

This situation is, of course, a tragedy, but it is also what we have.

I'm sure plenty of authoritarian regimes would love to have information on all sorts of things that health agencies could be made to collect by treaty. How about just "travel?" Let's track the movement of every person from place to place. It's for the pandemic! It's definitely is not part of a surveillance apparatus meant to stifle dissent, not in the slightest.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#24

Post by hanniabu »

AJ007 wrote: post #14
hikergirl1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by a small committee of elites is an abuse of power waiting to happen.

From telling people it wasn’t airborne and they shouldn’t wear masks to saying no booster shots, their credibility is toast.

All those points are taken out of context and are misleading.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#25

Post by topspin »

nscalf wrote: post #12

An honest question, how do you feel about the WHO? I personally have severe distrust in them, at least the leadership. They have show they are heavily influenced by China, and that should be enough to remove them. They really botched early covid.

There is no evidence that anything has changed. Moon et al. figure enough time has passed that they may resume the grift. Let's look at some of the top line items:

> They also point to conflicts over the lack of transparency and information sharing, particularly by China.

Right. The problem is not the actual lack of transparency but rather "conflicts over the lack of transparency." And no, I do not allow that NPR writers are somehow oblivious to the distinction; they mean exactly what is written.

> Some countries were accused of hoarding of medical supplies.

WHO shall decide how little medical supply the US is allowed to buy or keep.

> Then when vaccines were finally developed, poorer nations have complained that they weren't shared equitably.

WHO shall decide how long the US is made to wait for vaccine.

> A final concern, the experts say: The global response to the crisis is led by an underfunded World Health Organization that has no power to force any nation to do anything.

Give WHO more money. Give WHO more power. No assurances that performance will be any less abysmal are to be expected.

Should make a nice photo op when Biden signs it.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#26

Post by tcmart14 »

golemotron wrote: post #9
ethbr0 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the problems international cooperation could tackle, pandemics seem like they should be the easiest. Either you are dealing with one, or you aren't. Pretty stark contrast. So should make countries more comfortable ceding sovereignty, knowing it's going to be only in exceptional circumstances. Coupled with the fact that SARS-CoV-2 has proven that even the most stringent border lockdowns fail in the face of high…

> Either you are dealing with one, or you aren't. Pretty stark contrast. So should make countries more comfortable ceding sovereignty, knowing it's going to be only in exceptional circumstances. Without a hard metric it's a slippery slope and governments will not cede emergency powers. That's been the history of nearly all emergency powers. Ask yourself how long this pandemic will last and whether anyone will agree u…

I feel like this argument is still in bad faith. A co-worker last year was talking about how a mask mandate was the biggest violation of freedom ever in American history. So I kindly reminded my co-worker, internment camps for Japanese-americans were less of a violation? Lincoln suspending Habeas Corpus during the civil war? Those are just two examples of many. These were all moves made by emergency powers that were...... given up by government when the situation ended.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#27

Post by labster »

systemvoltage wrote: post #13
nscalf wrote: post #12

An honest question, how do you feel about the WHO? I personally have severe distrust in them, at least the leadership. They have show they are heavily influenced by China, and that should be enough to remove them. They really botched early covid.

What WHO needs to do is revisit their mistakes and acknowledge meddling with Chinese leadership, win public trust. It's not the same 80's World Health Organization that made profound impact in the health of many nations. Some of that work continues to happen, but as you said the leadership needs to come out clean or they're going to have a problem with people trusting the entire organization.

One potential outcome of the treaty would be a reformation or replacement of WHO. I don’t know if there is political will to do that, or if it’s even a good idea. But something needs to be done, because when times got tough every country chose to “defect” instead of “cooperate”, even with their closest allies.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#28

Post by 737min »

nscalf wrote: post #12

An honest question, how do you feel about the WHO? I personally have severe distrust in them, at least the leadership. They have show they are heavily influenced by China, and that should be enough to remove them. They really botched early covid.

Very good point. It appears to many observers that it has been subverted by the Beijing regime, so any new initiatives are naturally going to be treated with suspicion by much of the free world.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#29

Post by toolz »

wesleywt wrote: post #17
hikergirl1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by a small committee of elites is an abuse of power waiting to happen.

A terrible take. We are fully connected to a point that national borders mean practically nothing. Only a coordinated response and open sharing of information can stop a disaster.

Centralization is a surefire way to fail at pandemic response. You will necessarily be pressuring the wrong intervention measures on people who don't want them when they could stand to intervene in a better way for their own region and serve as a datapoint for the rest of the world to learn from.

You can't sacrifice the superior computational power of decentralized peoples acting in their best interest and substitute it with some truly wishful thinking that there will exist some superior knowledge that just needs centralized power in order to control a pandemic.

Re: The WHO is seeking a new treaty on handling future pandemics

#30

Post by labster »

wesleywt wrote: post #17
hikergirl1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by a small committee of elites is an abuse of power waiting to happen.

A terrible take. We are fully connected to a point that national borders mean practically nothing. Only a coordinated response and open sharing of information can stop a disaster.

Climate scientist here. I have some bad news for you… Don’t expect open sharing of information to stop your disaster any time soon.
Post reply on HN