Japan Today
health

WHO says COVID emergency is over. So what does that mean?

19 Comments
By MARIA CHENG

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


19 Comments
Login to comment

But... but... but... What about all those who remain unvaccinated in the Global South? We were told time and time again that the unvaccinated were "variant factories", that hybrid-immunity from vaccination and recovering from infection was far superior to natural immunity, and that to end the pandemic everyone needed to get the vaccine. How can it be over with billions still unjabbed?

5 ( +8 / -3 )

It means wait until there is another chance for this group to collude with China.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

It is very telling that the first photo accompanying this article is from China.

So what does it mean that the WHO says the Covid emergency is over? Only the WHO knows what it means to them.

The world doesn't pay attention to that organization.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

I never listen to the WHO because they gave what I believe to be bad advice once.

That is not really a reasonable attitude, and advice based on the best available data is not "bad", even if it can be corrected later for better advice if it is the best that can be one at that moment then there is no better option.

I still don't trust them either, since their parroting of Chinese propaganda early on

When the only country that had information about covid was China it was necessary to at least appear grateful for the very limited information being provided, this meant a complete different approach could be used by the rest of the world and the very real possibility of saving uncountable amount of lives. Being unnecessarily confrontative at that point would have not resulted in more information being shared. Once other countries had access to the data this need disappeared, and much more realistic criticism was repeatedly done for the way China mishandled the original outbreak.

And who can forget the WHO's Bruce Aylward refusing to acknowledge Taiwan's existence, pretending not to be able to hear, then hanging up on the interviewer?

This comes as a consequence of the international community that stripped the small degree of political power the WHO had since 2009, when the funding countries (mainly the US) ganged and made it so the WHO had no way to oppose any country they made sure the global authority could only agree with what the country governments demanded from it, which meant relenting to the Chinese demands about Taiwan, hypocritically the same countries that cornered the WHO to this situation are the ones that criticize it for being in this situation.

Another ridiculous article. It means it’s over what else should it mean? 

There is a part where they explian the practical effects of the declaration, why ask something that the article makes a real effort in explaining?

But... but... but... What about all those who remain unvaccinated in the Global South? 

Their populations had to lose countless lives unnecessarily, vaccines were never the "only" way to get a population immune enough to reduce the risk from covid, it was just the best possible way to do it without people having to die without need. Many of those countries are still trying to get more vaccines, specially for their more vulnerable population.

It means wait until there is another chance for this group to collude with China.

Collude as in repeatedly criticizing the country about how they originated the pandemic and dealt with it? because that is not something that could be said about how the WHO and China relationship have been.

Covid has been a non issue ever since Omicron emerged.

For most countries omicron was the strain that caused the most deaths, immunity (specially from vaccines) is what have helped the most to reduce the risk, the public health organizations of the world readily recognize the huge value the WHO has, not only about covid but other diseses as well. Pretending a political decision made to secure as much information as possible somehow reflects the whole of the WHO activities during the pandemic is not logical.

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

Perhaps... but being 'nice' to China didn't work 

Which is why it ended up being repeatedly criticized. At that point there were only two choices one that may have resulted in some cooperation and another that was guaranteed to alienate the CCP and stops completely any kind of sharing of information at a time where that information could save a lot of lives. In a way they held invaluable data as hostage.

China needs to be called out and shamed for its disgraceful behavior at every turn.

The WHO have done that repeatedly, clearly criticizing the Chinese government for their role hiding the original outbreak, its almost complete lack of cooperation in the investigation of the origin, their deeply unscientific approach to the control of the pandemic and the obvious disaster that could have been prevented when they suddenly stopped their zero covid policy.

Accusing the WHO of being together with China requires ignoring everything that has been said during the whole pandemic that clearly goes against this.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

A neighbor who works as a hospital nurse told me that Covid sufferers are still their most numerous ICU patients.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

While their is a lot of bad feelings between China and some outside of China, I recall that one of the reasons that the mRNA vaccines were able to be developed so quickly, outside of China, is that Chinese scientists shared what they knew about the virus with scientists in Europe and the USA. That sharing of knowledge saved a lot of duplicate work, and saved a lot of lives.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

there, not their

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

This is very clearly a false dilemma. It wasn't a binary choice.

What other option do you think was available then? it was either paint the very limited Chinese cooperation in a positive light or to alienate the Chinese government by calling it what it was, insufficient and limited.

To argue this is a false dilemma you would first need to prove there were other options (as in significantly different, not just changing the degree of criticism).

 For that, China must continue to be called out.

And the WHO is part of the international community of experts that have been doing it since the moment it could get information about covid from other sources.

No, it clearly does not. It doesn't ignore Tedros' initial stance or Aylward's shameful comments - it very obviously takes them into account.

It is very easy to find out several instances where the WHO has called the Chinese government for their role in hiding the initial spreading, or how they dealt with the cases, systematically hid cases and deaths etc.

This obvioiusly completely contradicts what you said the WHO did during the pandemic, so in order for you to make that argument you need to pretend none of these actions ever took place, so the argument clearly holds true.

 I recall that one of the reasons that the mRNA vaccines were able to be developed so quickly, outside of China, is that Chinese scientists shared what they knew about the virus with scientists in Europe and the USA

Most of the work that vaccines are based upon depended on research done long before the pandemic, characterizing antigens, neutralizing activity, etc. was based on previously isolated highly-pathogenic coronaviruses. The final piece was the genetic sequence of the virus, which is precisely what the WHO most directly praised as a significative cooperation effort, unfortunately it was later revealed that even this sequence was not divulged as soon as obtained but that it was purposefully delayed by the Chinese authorities until they were sure it would not lead to political damage.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Hopefully it means we learn from our mistakes but honestly, I'm not holding my breath.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I never listen to the WHO because they gave what I believe to be bad advice once. 

Are you saying we should stop listening to people who give bad advice once? I'd be listening to nobody.

Here's one comedian's thoughts on the whole lockdown saga. He mentions the WHO. But I laughed most at his thoughts on how religion reacts to science. (Strong language warning.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKVd-0Btm_Y

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Collude as in repeatedly criticizing the country about how they originated the pandemic and dealt with it? because that is not something that could be said about how the WHO and China relationship have been.

No no no. Collude as in assisting a country in promoting a false narrative.

Here are some facts (as you supplied none):

"We've seen no obvious lack of transparency."

WHO Praises China as Country That Deserves 'Gratitude and Respect' As Some Question Coronavirus Transparency

https://www.newsweek.com/who-praises-china-country-that-deserves-gratitude-respect-some-question-coronavirus-1484716

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites