4 ms·
Most commenters' opinions are based on deformations of what WHO really said. US media seem to negatively interpret the indeciseness of WHO, even if all individu
by henearkr 7y ago
Most commenters' opinions are based on deformations of what WHO really said. US media seem to negatively interpret the indeciseness of WHO, even if all individual countries' health organizations hardly knew better: at the beginning, very few was known about the virus (partly because China did not share everything they new on it, but that was still not revealed).
An example, WHO really said:
"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission"
which is realistic and prudent. But in this thread an in every other place on internet, it is interpreted by US people as:
"there is no human-to-human transmission"
which is downright crazy.
Also, I see a lot of mixing with Taiwan issues, even though the particular data about the pandemics in this country (and yes I am in favor of Taiwan independence, but that does not matter, and that's my point) did not change at all the scientific and public health conclusions and advises to be taken. In other words, to do their public health job, the WHO had absolutely no need to quote Taiwan in particular. Of course they also considered not angering China and so refrained to speak of Taiwan because of that too, but it would be the same for any of the UNO Security Council countries' delicate issues, including US.
If WHO was to be rebuilt upon better bases, everybody would benefit from it. But cutting its funds?? It's stupid.
PS: another point, UNO scientific organs really are just the sum of their individual countries' parts. It should not, it should be larger and better than its parts, but that's just not the case. Their is no "WHO laboratory" etc, there are just specialists from participating countries that share their own labs data (or not). To change that, it would need more funding (not less!) to own its own labs, facilities, research programs, etc.
- craftinator 7y agoCurious question: what does the WHO do with all of the funding it gets? It receives funding from many nations and individuals, in no small amount. If it doesn't have labs to do testing... What exactly does it do with that funding?
- henearkr 7y agoAfter searching on WHO site, it seems that they do surveys of each countries health system, and pushing them to develop steady healthcare systems, and to adapt their practices to available medical knowledge. The pushing of WHO to develop healthcare available including to the poorest may have been what Trump disliked, after all. The WHO seems to compensate partly for the absence of universal healthcare in the poorest countries, by direct investment. I suspect that it is also directed towards communication and information. Like teaching the developping world the known techniques to mitigate malaria, the primary hygienic gestures's importance (like using soap to wash hands), etc. And of course the importance to have protected sex to fend off AIDS, etc. (which is an upstream battle given the religious and traditions resistance to many of these advises)
- klipt 7y ago> And of course the importance to have protected sex to fend off AIDS, etc. (which is an upstream battle given the religious and traditions resistance to many of these advises) Like when the Republicans wasted billions of dollars promoting abstinence as the solution to AIDS: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/05/03/476601108/u-s-spent-1-4-billion-to-stop-hiv-by-promoting-abstinence-did-it-work https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/05/03/4766011...
- henearkr 7y agoThat's happens when launching one-sided projects from some particular country's ideology, instead of going through consensual WHO projects. The AIDS projects from WHO would never dare consider abstinence. They already have the hardest job countering all the traditions and superstitions, even for the simplest thing as not to kiss the dead relatives, so how could they succeed in asking people not to have sex?
- craftinator 7y agoInteresting, thanks for the summary. I had no idea they did direct investment, though that seems like the only way to improve health in some parts of the world.