Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

World Council For Health & Others Warn Of Centralized Health Tyranny In New “Treaty” That Would Remove State Sovereignty (Video)

Written by:

Published on: May 11, 2022

At every turn, America is facing attacks on our liberties from within and without.  If it isn’t Convention of States, it’s Soros-funded organizations, and even the corrupt in corporate America.  Still, we are facing an attack now by the World Health Organization in a power play to usurp the US Constitution and our sovereignty.  We can’t let that happen.

The World Council for Health warned about this via a video on their website by Dr. Silvia Behrendt.  According to WCOH:

Dr. Silvia Behrendt is the founder of the Global Health Responsibility Agency for accountability and transparency for health decisions. She was previously a consultant to the WHO on the IHR and wrote her Ph.D. about the executive authority of the WHO-DC during PHEIC.

This is an edited segment from the weekly live General Assembly meeting on May 9, 2022. This presentation is also available on Rumble and on Odysee. The full General Assembly Meeting is available in the Newsroom

Additionally, Dr. Tess Lawrie, co-founder and steering committee member of the World Council for Health, said the experience left her ‘shaken’.

There were 48 people on the call at the time I tuned in. Sixteen of them were WHO staff. Others were from UNAIDS, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), the UN Environment Programme, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

I told them that the World Council for Health does not believe a pandemic treaty is necessary and would not benefit the people of our world. I shared sixteen recommendations which included the need for transparency, a return to open debate and dialogue, respect of our inalienable human rights and civil liberties and the sovereignty of all people and nations. I called for the right to choose and refuse treatments, or medical interventions, including access to repurposed medications. I also called for a rejection of mass experimentation and social engineering, and discrimination based on medical status or choice. And, I enjoined the WHO to promote restoration for harms from medical interventions.

I said our piece, knowing that I speak for all of us – all of you.

Will it make a difference? Honestly, I don’t know. Over the last two days the WHO will have had fewer than 100 video presentations, perhaps as few as 70. Most are asking for more measures, not fewer.

This is what we are up against. This is what we must fight. If you’re feeling despondent or worried after reading this, I understand. I felt that way too. But we have to remember our power, and we have to use that power as much as we can.

Dr. Tess Lawrie

Dr. Lawrie went on to provide a statement about the WHO treaty.

The World Council for Health believes that good health, human rights, autonomy, national sovereignty, free speech, and right of association are central to any agreement in the interests of the people. Simultaneously, conflicts of interest, corruption and censorship are barriers to public trust. 

While the WCH does not believe a pandemic treaty is necessary, nor would it truly benefit the people of our world, we are aware that the WHO intends to push through a treaty, and therefore share 16 recommendations

1. On Awareness, inter alia:
  • Open debate and varied perspectives and opinions must be normalised

  • A return to traditional & scientific definition of “Pandemic” is essential

  • Transparency on models and tests is the basic tenet of any agreement

  • Cost benefit analysis must be made public before any recommendations

2. On Preparedness, inter alia:
  • All conflicts of interest must be immediately disclosed to the public

  • Documents and data relevant to decision-making must be disclosed

  • Open and uncensored dialogue must include critical non-state actors

  • Traditional and natural health care must be respected by the WHO

3. On Response, inter alia:
  • Inalienable human rights and civil liberties must be respected

  • Sovereignty of all people and nations must be unfailingly upheld

  • Public participation in decision-making must be robust and clear

  • The right to choose and refuse treatments or medical interventions, including access to repurposed medications, must be respected

  • Discrimination based on medical status or choice must be rejected

  • Mass experimentation and social engineering must be rejected

  • States of emergency, lockdown, and emergency use authorizations are the decisions of sovereign counties, in a public participation process

  • Restoration for harms from medical interventions must be promoted

In Conclusion: 

The current public participation process by the WHO, announced just last week, does not uphold access to information, the right to make decisions, and other civil rights democratic pillars. Nevertheless, all submissions are now part of the public record, and any valid agreement must include terms that uphold natural law, the Siracusa principles, and the Hippocratic Oath.

I thank you.

Dr. Tess Lawrie, Co-Founder, World Council for Health
WCH Steering Committee Member

Just as bad as our representatives selling us out on our supplements is this disastrous treaty. The WHO should be unfunded and given a deaf ear anytime they have anything to say.  They care not for the people of the world, but how to enrich and empower themselves only.

Become an insider!

Sign up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media.

Don't forget to like on Facebook and Twitter.
The opinions expressed in each article are the opinions of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of

Trending on The Sons of Liberty Media