4 ms·
"why can't each individual country decide what standards to apply by themselves" A number of replies to this effect have appeared, and they seem to misundersta
by endorphone 8y ago
"why can't each individual country decide what standards to apply by themselves"
A number of replies to this effect have appeared, and they seem to misunderstand the whole purpose of the World Health Organization. You can disagree with the notion of scientific consensus regarding human health and condition (which has no state boundaries), but this falls entirely within the purview of the WHO, and is the sort of thing that is the reason for its very existence.
- ekianjo 8y ago> but this falls entirely within the purview of the WHO, and is the sort of thing that is the reason for its very existence. Oh, like when they declared that bacon was carcinogen? Yeah, that's pretty much part of their core mission.
- endorphone 8y agoWhat is the point of that comment? I get that you're an anti-globalist kind of person, but at least stick to the discussion without flailing about for some sort of cartoonish misdirection. But yes...things that have correlations with cancer (a massive killer) is a part of their mandate. Do you really think it isn't for some reason? Is that truth so uncomfortable that you need to redefine reality around it? I still love me some bacon, but have no issue with a health organization pointing out the problems of processed meats.