Connect with us

Health

WHO’s Global Digital Health Certification Network

Published

14 minute read

Remember when the World Health Organization was an offshoot of the United Nations serving impoverished nations around the world?  Well that’s over. The World Health Organization is looking to get ‘way’ more involved in your business. This week, the World Health Organization and the European Union announced they have partnered up to create a global digital vaccine passport system for future pandemics.  Get ready for a new and permanent vaccine passport.
In their own words, the Global Digital Health Certification Network builds on the success of the EU’s digital vaccine passport from the COVID pandemic. “With 80 countries and territories connected to the EU Digital COVID-19 Certificate, the EU has set a global standard. The EU certificate has not only been an important tool in our fight against the pandemic, but has also facilitated international travel and tourism. I am pleased that the WHO will build on the privacy-preserving principles and cutting-edge technology of the EU certificate to create a global tool against future pandemics” Thierry Breton, Commissioner for Internal Market.
Reading between the lines, the passport… er Global Digital Health Certification Network, will be used to ‘facilitate’ travel and tourism.  But that’s not all.  The press release goes on to reveal the WHO’s plan is not just to track your vaccine status when the next pandemic strikes, but “This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, which may include, for example, the digitisation of the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for citizens across the globe.”
As British Health Researcher Dr. John Campbell explains, the plan is for the Global Digital Health Certificate to monitor the health status of everyone on the planet, and use this information to “facilitate global mobility”.  In other words there are plans to use your health status to determine your ability to travel, and to participate in other aspects of regular life.

 

With notes from the World Health Organization website,  Dr. John Campbell explains the WHO’s Global Digital Health Certification Network.  To see the WHO’s press release click here or scroll below the video where it is attached.


From the youtube channel of   Dr. John Campbell

Press release from the World Health Organization

The European Commission and WHO launch landmark digital health initiative to strengthen global health security

5 June 2023

News release
Geneva/Brussels
Reading time: 3 min (815 words)

The World Health Organization (WHO) and European Commission have announced today the launch of a landmark digital health partnership.

In June 2023, WHO will take up the European Union (EU) system of digital COVID-19 certification to establish a global system that will help facilitate global mobility and protect citizens across the world from on-going and future health threats, including pandemics. This is the first building block of the WHO Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) that will develop a wide range of digital products to deliver better health for all.

“Building on the EU’s highly successful digital certification network, WHO aims to offer all WHO Member States access to an open-source digital health tool, which is based on the principles of equity, innovation, transparency and data protection and privacy,” said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “New digital health products in development aim to help people everywhere receive quality health services quickly and more effectively”.

Based on the EU Global Health Strategy and WHO Global strategy on digital health, the initiative follows the 30 November 2022 agreement between Commissioner Kyriakides and Dr Tedros to enhance strategic cooperation on global health issues. This further bolsters a robust multilateral system with WHO at its core, powered by a strong EU.

“This partnership is an important step for the digital action plan of the EU Global Health Strategy. By using European best practices we contribute to digital health standards and interoperability globally—to the benefit of those most in need. It is also a powerful example of how alignment between the EU and the WHO can deliver better health for all, in the EU and across the world. As the directing and coordinating authority on international health work, there is no better partner than the WHO to advance the work we started at the EU and further develop global digital health solutions,” said Stella Kyriakides, Commissioner for Health and Food Safety.

This partnership will include close collaboration in the development, management and implementation of the WHO GDHCN system, benefitting from the European Commission’s ample technical expertise in the field. A first step is to ensure that the current EU digital certificates continue to function effectively.

“With 80 countries and territories connected to the EU Digital COVID-19 Certificate, the EU has set a global standard. The EU certificate has not only been an important tool in our fight against the pandemic, but has also facilitated international travel and tourism. I am pleased that the WHO will build on the privacy-preserving principles and cutting-edge technology of the EU certificate to create a global tool against future pandemics,” added Thierry Breton, Commissioner for Internal Market.

A global WHO system building on EU legacy

One of the key elements in the European Union’s work against the COVID-19 pandemic has been digital COVID-19 certificates. To facilitate free movement within its borders, the EU swiftly established interoperable COVID-19 certificates (entitled ‘EU Digital COVID-19 Certificate’ or ‘EU DCC’). Based on open-source technologies and standards it allowed also for the connection of non-EU countries that issue certificates according to EU DCC specifications, becoming the most widely used solution around the world.

From the onset of the pandemic, WHO engaged with all WHO Regions to define overall guidelines for such certificates. To help strengthen global health preparedness in the face of growing health threats, WHO is establishing a global digital health certification network which builds upon the solid foundations of the EU DCC framework, principles and open technologies. With this collaboration, WHO will facilitate this process globally under its own structure with the aim to allow the world to benefit from convergence of digital certificates. This includes standard-setting and validation of digital signatures to prevent fraud. In doing so, WHO will not have access to any underlying personal data, which would continue to be the exclusive domain of governments.

The first building block of the global WHO system becomes operational in June 2023 and aims to be progressively developed in the coming months.

A long-term digital partnership to deliver better health for all

To facilitate the uptake of the EU DCC by WHO and contribute to its operation and further development, WHO and the European Commission have agreed to partner in digital health.

This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, which may include, for example, the digitisation of the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for citizens across the globe.

This cooperation is based on the shared values and principles of transparency and openness, inclusiveness, accountability, data protection and privacy, security, scalability at a global level, and equity. The WHO and the European Commission will work together to encourage maximum global uptake and participation. Particular attention will be paid to equitable opportunities for the participation by those most in need: low and middle-income countries.


Dr. John Campbell’s Presentation notes:

WHO’s Global Digital Health Certification Network https://www.who.int/initiatives/globa…

WHO has established the Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN). Open-source platform, built on robust & transparent standards, that establishes the first building block of digital public health infrastructure, for developing a wide range of digital products, for strengthening pandemic preparedness

Background Member States used digital COVID-19 test and vaccine certificates As the directing and coordinating authority on international health work, at the onset of the pandemic, WHO engaged with all WHO Regions to define overall guidance for such certificates and published the Digital Documentation of COVID-19 Certificates

https://www.who.int/publications/i/it… https://www.who.int/publications/i/it… there is a recognition of an existing gap, and continued need for a global mechanism, that can support bilateral verification of the provenance of health documents

The GDHCN may include Digitisation of the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis, verification of prescriptions across borders

International Patient Summary Verification of vaccination certificates within and across borders Certification of public health professionals (through WHO Academy) Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for people across the globe.

The GDHCN has been designed to be interoperable with other existing regional networks EU-WHO digital partnership https://www.who.int/news/item/05-06-2…    • LIVE: WHO and @EU…   https://commission.europa.eu/strategy… WHO and the European Commission have agreed to partner in digital health.

This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, In June 2023, WHO will take up the European Union (EU) system of digital COVID-19 certification to establish a global system, that will help facilitate global mobility

This is the first building block of the WHO Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN)

Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus WHO aims to offer all WHO Member States access, On the principles of equity, innovation, transparency and data protection and privacy Stella Kyriakides, Commissioner for Health and Food Safety

This partnership is an important step for the digital action plan of the EU Global Health Strategy, we contribute to digital health standards and interoperability globally

Thierry Breton, Commissioner for Internal Market The EU certificate … has also facilitated international travel and tourism I am pleased that the WHO will build on …. cutting-edge technology … to create a global tool against future pandemics

One of the key elements in the European Union’s work against the COVID-19 pandemic has been digital COVID-19 certificates. WHO will facilitate this process globally under its own structure … allow the world to benefit from convergence of digital certificates. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for citizens across the globe.

The WHO and the European Commission will work together to encourage maximum global uptake and participation.

 

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

Health

Dr. Pierre Kory Exposes the Truth About the Texas ‘Measles Death’ Hoax

Published on

The Vigilant FoxThe Vigilant Fox

She did not die of measles by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she died of pneumonia. But it gets worse than that…”

Turn on the news today, and you’ll hear about a measles outbreak in Texas. The headline? A 6-year-old girl has “died from measles.” The coverage is nonstop. And the goal is simple: to make you angry and afraid.

But here’s what they’re not telling you.

That little girl should still be alive. She should be at home with her mom, dad, and siblings. But their unconscionable loss, which is being heavily politicized, is not what the mainstream has led us to believe. Her death was the result of medical error. Plain and simple.

And you should be angry.

Join 100K+ Substack readers and 1.6 million 𝕏 users who follow the work of Vigilant Fox.

Subscribe for top-tier news aggregation and exclusive stories you won’t find anywhere else.

When this case first made the news, little was known. But those who know it’s okay to ask questions began asking them.

Was she vaccinated for measles? If so, was the vaccination done recently or while she was ill? What treatment did she receive, if any? Was she infected with the wild type, or was this due to a leaky vaccine? Did she die with measles or from it?

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) stepped up and interviewed the mourning parents to uncover the truth about what really happened to their 6-year-old daughter.

Headlines

Parents of Child Who Died During Texas Measles Outbreak Speak Out

Mar 18
Parents of Child Who Died During Texas Measles Outbreak Speak Out
This article originally appeared on The Defender and was republished with permission.

The emotional interview reveals the child was not vaccinated for measles. She fell ill, and while the spots faded quickly, her breathing was affected. Her parents became concerned and took her to the emergency room at Covenant Children’s Hospital in Lubbock, Texas.

It was all downhill from there. And before long, their daughter was gone.

Dr. Pierre Kory Shares Disturbing Information

In a display of journalistic integrity, CHD obtained the 6-year-old’s medical records from her parents. Dr. Pierre Kory, a critical care physician, had a chance to analyze the records and shared his thoughts with CHD.

According to Dr. Kory, the child “did not die of measles by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she died of a pneumonia. But it gets worse than that, because she didn’t really die of pneumonia. She died of a medical error.”

Let that sink in.

Loving parents just lost their young child due to a medical error. But not only that, their story is being twisted and used to spread fear about measles and to push the measles vaccine—two things this family does not appear to agree with.

As it turns out, their four other children came down with measles following their sister’s death. All four were treated with cod liver oil (vitamin A) and budesonide (a steroid). And all four recovered quickly. No vaccination necessary.

Kory calls the case “absolutely enraging.”

“When you admit someone to the hospital for pneumonia, what you need to do is you treat what’s called empirically, meaning you put them on antibiotics that you think will cover the most common organism.”

Covenant Children’s Hospital failed to do this.

“I mean, this is like medicine 101. You put them on two antibiotics to cover all the possibilities. It’s a grievous error, and it’s an error which led to her death.”

Not only did Covenant Children’s Hospital fail to provide the appropriate antibiotics, when they noticed their error, they dragged their feet and delayed another 10 hours.

“By that time, she was already on a ventilator. And approximately 24 hours later, actually less than 24 hours later, she died.”

And she did not pass away peacefully. According to Kory, “she died rather catastrophically.”

“I can only surmise that she died of a catastrophic pulmonary embolism.”

Kory calls the whole thing “disturbing.

And it is. What happened to this young girl at Covenant Children’s Hospital was indeed disturbing. But the way this tragedy is being portrayed in the media and used inappropriately and inaccurately to cause fear and push the measles vaccine is downright disgusting.

Gone are the days when people seek help from local media to expose injustices. The media machine has one job and it isn’t to help you.

This young girl should still be here. Hugging her parents and giggling with her siblings. Enjoying the start of Spring and looking forward to celebrating Easter.

Instead, the media is exploiting this family’s unimaginable loss to push an agenda, and social media is swirling with nasty criticisms.

We can only hope this poor family receive justice and support as they combat the unwarranted attacks on their character, choices, and way of life.

“Pray. Just pray for us. That’s the best you can do, for now,” the father said.


Share

Subscribe to The Vigilant Fox.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Addictions

There’s No Such Thing as a “Safer Supply” of Drugs

Published on

By Adam Zivo

Sweden, the U.K., and Canada all experimented with providing opioids to addicts. The results were disastrous.

[This article was originally published in City Journal, a public policy magazine and website published by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. We encourage our readers to subscribe to them for high-quality analysis on urban issues]

Last August, Denver’s city council passed a proclamation endorsing radical “harm reduction” strategies to address the drug crisis. Among these was “safer supply,” the idea that the government should give drug users their drug of choice, for free. Safer supply is a popular idea among drug-reform activists. But other countries have already tested this experiment and seen disastrous results, including more addiction, crime, and overdose deaths. It would be foolish to follow their example.

The safer-supply movement maintains that drug-related overdoses, infections, and deaths are driven by the unpredictability of the black market, where drugs are inconsistently dosed and often adulterated with other toxic substances. With ultra-potent opioids like fentanyl, even minor dosing errors can prove fatal. Drug contaminants, which dealers use to provide a stronger high at a lower cost, can be just as deadly and potentially disfiguring.

Because of this, harm-reduction activists sometimes argue that governments should provide a free supply of unadulterated, “safe” drugs to get users to abandon the dangerous street supply. Or they say that such drugs should be sold in a controlled manner, like alcohol or cannabis—an endorsement of partial or total drug legalization.

But “safe” is a relative term: the drugs championed by these activists include pharmaceutical-grade fentanyl, hydromorphone (an opioid as potent as heroin), and prescription meth. Though less risky than their illicit alternatives, these drugs are still profoundly dangerous.

The theory behind safer supply is not entirely unreasonable, but in every country that has tried it, implementation has led to increased suffering and addiction. In Europe, only Sweden and the U.K. have tested safer supply, both in the 1960s. The Swedish model gave more than 100 addicts nearly unlimited access through their doctors to prescriptions for morphine and amphetamines, with no expectations of supervised consumption. Recipients mostly sold their free drugs on the black market, often through a network of “satellite patients” (addicts who purchased prescribed drugs). This led to an explosion of addiction and public disorder.

Most doctors quickly abandoned the experiment, and it was shut down after just two years and several high-profile overdose deaths, including that of a 17-year-old girl. Media coverage portrayed safer supply as a generational medical scandal and noted that the British, after experiencing similar problems, also abandoned their experiment.

While the U.S. has never formally adopted a safer-supply policy, it experienced something functionally similar during the OxyContin crisis of the 2000s. At the time, access to the powerful opioid was virtually unrestricted in many parts of North America. Addicts turned to pharmacies for an easy fix and often sold or traded their extra pills for a quick buck. Unscrupulous “pill mills” handed out prescriptions like candy, flooding communities with OxyContin and similar narcotics. The result was a devastating opioid epidemic—one that rages to this day, at a cumulative cost of hundreds of thousands of American lives. Canada was similarly affected.

The OxyContin crisis explains why many experienced addiction experts were aghast when Canada greatly expanded access to safer supply in 2020, following a four-year pilot project. They worried that the mistakes of the recent past were being made all over again, and that the recently vanquished pill mills had returned under the cloak of “harm reduction.”

Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.

Most Canadian safer-supply prescribers dispense large quantities of hydromorphone with little to no supervised consumption. Patients can receive up to 40 eight-milligram pills per day—despite the fact that just two or three are enough to cause an overdose in someone without opioid tolerance. Some prescribers also provide supplementary fentanyl, oxycodone, or stimulants.

Unfortunately, many safer-supply patients sell or trade a significant portion of these drugs—primarily hydromorphone—in order to purchase more potent illicit substances, such as street fentanyl.

The problems with safer supply entered Canada’s consciousness in mid-2023, through an investigative report I wrote for the National Post. I interviewed 14 addiction physicians from across the country, who testified that safer-supply diversion is ubiquitous; that the street price of hydromorphone collapsed by up to 95 percent in communities where safer supply is available; that youth are consuming and becoming addicted to diverted safer-supply drugs; and that organized crime traffics these drugs.

Facing pushback, I interviewed former drug users, who estimated that roughly 80 percent of the safer-supply drugs flowing through their social circles was getting diverted. I documented dozens of examples of safer-supply trafficking online, representing tens of thousands of pills. I spoke with youth who had developed addictions from diverted safer supply and adults who had purchased thousands of such pills.

After months of public queries, the police department of London, Ontario—where safer supply was first piloted—revealed last summer that annual hydromorphone seizures rose over 3,000 percent between 2019 and 2023. The department later held a press conference warning that gangs clearly traffic safer supply. The police departments of two nearby midsize cities also saw their post-2019 hydromorphone seizures increase more than 1,000 percent.

The Canadian government quietly dropped its support for safer supply last year, cutting funding for many of its pilot programs. The province of British Columbia (the nexus of the harm-reduction movement) finally pulled back support last month, after a leaked presentation confirmed that safer-supply drugs are getting sold internationally and that the government is investigating 60 pharmacies for paying kickbacks to safer-supply patients. For now, all safer-supply drugs dispensed within the province must be consumed under supervision.

Harm-reduction activists have insisted that no hard evidence exists of widespread diversion of safer-supply drugs, but this is only because they refuse to study the issue. Most “studies” supporting safer supply are produced by ideologically driven activist-scholars, who tend to interview a small number of program enrollees. These activists also reject attempts to track diversion as “stigmatizing.”

The experiences of Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Canada offer a clear warning: safer supply is a reliably harmful policy. The outcomes speak for themselves—rising addiction, diversion, and little evidence of long-term benefit.

As the debate unfolds in the United States, policymakers would do well to learn from these failures. Americans should not be made to endure the consequences of a policy already discredited abroad simply because progressive leaders choose to ignore the record. The question now is whether we will repeat others’ mistakes—or chart a more responsible course.

Our content is always free –

but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism,

consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X