THAT is funny!!!
Chris, this one is for you.
there has been a lot of controversy how in the US Trump is trying to get restrictions lifted by May 1, and some such as Dr. Fauci are saying that that is premature.
We here in Canada have issues between the provinces and federal government as to the same question, as this article describes:
Also in, Trump is now threatening to halt funding for the World Health Organization, saying that they didnāt alert the world soon enough to mitigate properly Covidl-19 effects.
I know that early on, I think in January if I am correct, they declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. After the virus started appearing in significant case amounts elsewhere, they declared a public health emergency.
Was Trump in these initial instances chomping at the bit to take heavy action?
1 Like
Oh no no - theyāve got blood on their hands as theyāve been helping China in the coverup , falsely claiming that thereās no conclusive proof of human-to-human transmission despite knowing otherwise.
Also, they pretty much ignored Taiwan.
Nope. He banned flights from China to pander to his base and that was it. Yellow peril and all that.
Now he and his acolytes are attacking the WHO in order to distract from his complete inaction (except the travel ban) in January and February and tweets such as these:
1 Like
I think of the WHO as a charity which also helps the USA. But itās main goal is to help 3rd world countries. If the WHO is defunded, there better be another organization out there that will do an equal or better job of identifying and mitigating the next pandemic and/or infectious disease outbreaks. Otherwise we just shot ourself in the foot.
Defunding the WHO in the teeth of a historic pandemic is terrible timing. I hope it doesnāt have dire consequences. They may not be as good as they claim, but they sure are better than the next optionā¦ Which as far as I know, is nothing. With hindsight, 2013 would have been a great year to defund. With forsight, 2021 would be a good year to defund. But not 2020- the year of the CV pandemic.
I just heard a few seconds ago on CBC front burner that the WHO praised Chinaās efforts in order to placate them so that they would cooperate internationally.
Agree, the timing is bad. I still donāt understand why we have to provide the majority of the funding.
Well the general idea is that if people have to die from a blood boiling flesh putrefying virus itās better if they do it on the banks of the river Ebola where itās endemic and not on the streets of NYC.
Thatās the general idea in theory behind a global response to a pandemic - address it at the source, something that emphatically hasnāt been done with Covid-19.
Oceans and walls cannot protect you, as the Spanish Flu and Covid-19 have shown.
We are the biggest, richest country that gives a shit about humans. Pretty simple. We also benefit the most from a healthy, thriving world. Chinese people will weather sickness, hardship and shit conditions a lot better than soft, fat Americans will. And the Chinese govt knows that, and will exploit that.
Also, not everything needs to be an economic cost/benefit analysis. Especially with humanitarian programs, which the WHO absolutely is.
Do you agree, or disagree that there needs to be a neutral organization which focuses on worldwide health like the WHO does? Regardless of how it is run, do you think the idea of a WHO is a good/neccessary organization?
In an ever-shrinking globalized world, why is the US footing the majority of the bill? Why isnāt the EU or China or private organizations? Why arenāt they at least funding at the same level?
Itās not really that simple. We pick and choose what humans we āgive a shit aboutā and often when we give a shit as well.
So weāre being exploited?
Gonna have to disagree. If my tax dollars are funding an organization I want to know if theyāre worth the money. The WHO might be, Iām not arguing either way.
We know people take advantage of hardship. People immediately started mass buying masks, soap, disinfectants, etcā¦ to resell at a premium.
It is as important if not more so to make sure an organization is using donated money for the good of their purpose when itās humanitarian in nature, imo.
Does there need to be one? No, I donāt think there needs to be one. Is it a good idea to have one, assuming theyāre actually neutral, yes I think so. I certainly donāt have a problem with an organization like the WHO existing especially if itās privately funded, but Iām also fine with it being taxpayers subsidized if theyāre doing what theyāre supposed to be doing.
I just donāt understand why, yet again, the US is funding an organization designed to impact global issues more so than all the other countries involved. Particularly China moving forward considering this did originate on their soil.
The idea is good, in the sense that an organization like the WHO will presumably catch, stop, or mitigate the spread of an epidemic/pandemic, but Iād say how it is run is pretty important in being āgoodā in this context. Perhaps they are, but the WHO should be held accountable for their efforts (audited annually at a minimum).
I agree America is being exploited. But itās our own fault. Our lowest acceptable level of health, living, safety, etc is waaaay higher than the Chinese peopleās, so we foot the extra bill to raise the standard. Itās not fair, but it is in our interest to pay more.
Similarly, I do the large majority of the dishes in my house because my fiance just isnāt a tidy person, but it really bothers me to live/cook in a messy house. Itās not worth it to fight about it everytime, and if I stop doing dishes she is perfectly happy to let dishes pile up indefinitely.
I hope cutting the WHO funding is a scare tactic to get them to make changes to get their shit together, and we resume funding shortly.
I wonder what the reason was for the apparent ineptitude of the WHO early on in the CV saga. Maybe we tie resumption of funding to a self report/analysis of what went wrong, and changes to implement.
3 Likes
The only country(with believable stats) that has had 0 cases this weekā¦
ISNāT A MEMBER OF THE WHO.
lmfao
3 Likes
Nothing huge in Germany for a long while. If I remember right they quickly banned meetings of over two people?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-sports-cancellations/a-52569936
4 confirmed cases in Hong Kong.
All imported.
Hong Kong and Taiwan have learnt 2 things in the couple of decades.
- Donāt trust China.
- Donāt trust your own government to not fuck things up.
5 Likes
Thanks! I was wondering what they decided to pick for the antigen and if they had a specific strategy in mind. I find it interesting that they decided to adapt from MERS instead of SARS, which I would have guessed based on genome homology.
Tons of unknowns here. I wish them the best! Vaccine development is tricky at the best of times.
1 Like