The North American Preparedness for Animal and Human Pandemics Initiative may empower the World Health Organization (WHO) to impose global control measures like vaccine passports and new policies targeting the 'infodemic'.

Childrens Health Defense - org

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.

Infowars - com

<p>The recent announcement of the North American Preparedness for Animal and Human Pandemics Initiative (NAPAHPI) has sparked concerns about potential global control measures, including vaccine passports and policies targeting the 'infodemic'. Critics, such as epidemiologist Nicholas Hulscher, have expressed deep concerns about the initiative, suggesting it may empower the World Health Organization (WHO) to impose such measures.</p>
<p>The initiative, launched by the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, aims to unite the countries’ public health agencies around a 'One Health' approach to addressing future pandemics. The One Health approach considers the relationships between the health of humans, animals, and the environment. This holistic strategy is designed to better prepare for and respond to future health threats, including zoonotic diseases that can cross from animals to humans.</p>
<p>Hulscher's claim that the initiative may lead to vaccine passports and global control measures is largely speculative. The official documents from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other participating agencies do not explicitly mention vaccine passports or global control measures. Instead, they focus on strengthening regional health security through a coordinated approach to various health threats.</p>
<p>The HHS report does mention 'border health measures', which could include screening of passengers, vaccination requirements, quarantine, and entry restrictions. However, these measures are described as 'evidence-based' and aimed at slowing the spread of pathogens. There is no indication that these measures will be implemented in the form of vaccine passports or that they will be used to impose global control.</p>
<p>Hulscher also raises concerns about the 'infodemic', referring to the spread of misinformation and disinformation on health-related topics. The WHO defines the infodemic as 'too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak'. While the initiative does aim to tackle the infodemic, it is not clear that this will involve abolishing free speech or imposing draconian measures.</p>
<p>It is important to note that the initiative is based on a long-standing trilateral collaboration and builds on lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and other health security events. The focus is on strengthening regional capacities for prevention, preparedness, and response to a broad range of health security threats.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that the North American Preparedness for Animal and Human Pandemics Initiative will lead to vaccine passports and global control measures is not supported by the available evidence. While the initiative does aim to strengthen regional health security and may involve border health measures, there is no explicit mention of vaccine passports or global control measures in the official documents.</p>
<p><strong>References:</strong></p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/one-health">WHO: One Health</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://ipac-canada.org/one-health">Public Health Canada: One Health</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2024/10/23/united-states-canada-mexico-unveil-efforts-strengthen-regional-health-security.html">HHS: U.S., Canada, Mexico Launch Pandemic Preparedness Initiative</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://openwho.org/channels/infodemic-management">WHO: Infodemic Management</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Are Vaccine Passports Just Around the Corner?

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The article from The Expose claims that the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the World Health Organization (WHO) employ 200 fortune tellers to find the pathogen that could cause the next pandemic. This claim is misleading and inaccurate. Let's delve into the details to understand the truth behind this claim.</p>
<h2>Understanding the Claim</h2>
<p>The article suggests that CEPI and WHO are using unscientific methods, akin to fortune-telling, to predict the next pandemic pathogen. It also implies that these efforts are driven by the vaccine industry and individuals like Bill Gates.</p>
<h2>The Truth Behind the Claim</h2>
<p>CEPI and WHO are indeed involved in efforts to prepare for future pandemics. However, these efforts are based on scientific research and collaboration, not fortune-telling. The WHO R&amp;D Blueprint for Epidemics is a global platform for research and development collaboration, focusing on medical countermeasures, including vaccines.</p>
<p>The report mentioned in the article is the result of a meeting held in May 2024, where over 200 scientists from more than 50 countries collaborated to evaluate the evidence related to 28 Viral Families and one core group of Bacteria, encompassing 1,652 pathogens. The goal is to investigate entire families of pathogens that can infect humans, develop knowledge and tools for entire pathogen families, foster research that generates knowledge, tools, and countermeasures that can be rapidly adapted to emerging threats, and encourage globally coordinated research efforts.</p>
<h2>Scientific Basis</h2>
<p>The approach taken by CEPI and WHO is grounded in scientific principles. Pathogen prioritisation is a process aimed at categorising pathogens according to their public health importance, antimicrobial resistance, and potential for epidemic or pandemic spread. This is not fortune-telling but a systematic and evidence-based approach to prepare for future health threats.</p>
<p>For example, a study published in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0895-3">Nature Medicine</a> discusses the importance of preparedness for future pandemics through scientific research and collaboration. The study highlights the need for a proactive approach to identify and mitigate potential pandemic threats.</p>
<h2>Addressing Misconceptions</h2>
<p>The article from The Expose misrepresents the efforts of CEPI and WHO by comparing them to fortune-telling. This is a misleading analogy that undermines the scientific basis of these efforts. The claim that these efforts are driven by the vaccine industry and individuals like Bill Gates is also unfounded. While it is true that CEPI was co-founded and co-funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, among others, this does not imply that the efforts are unscientific or driven by profit motives.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that CEPI and WHO employ 200 fortune tellers to find the pathogen that could cause the next pandemic is false. The efforts of CEPI and WHO are based on scientific research and collaboration, aimed at preparing for future pandemics through a systematic and evidence-based approach. The misleading and inaccurate claims in the article from The Expose should be disregarded.</p>

Claim Review: CEPI and WHO Employ 200 Fortune Tellers to Find the Pathogen That Could Cause the Next Pandemic

<h1>Claim Review: Cellphone Radiation and Brain Cancer</h1>
<p>The claim that cellphone radiation may cause brain cancer has been a topic of debate for many years. Several peer-reviewed studies have been conducted to investigate this claim, but the evidence is not conclusive. While some studies show a link between cellphone radiation and brain cancer, others do not.</p>
<p>A recent study published in Environmental Health analyzed 24 studies and found significantly higher risks for malignant brain tumors, meningioma, and glioma on the side of the head where cellphones were held. The study also found that heavy, long-term cellphone use was linked to an increased risk of glioma. This study brings the number of meta-analyses published since 2016 linking cellphone radiation to an increased risk of brain cancer to seven.</p>
<p>However, a recent WHO-led study claimed there’s no evidence of a link between cellphone radiation and brain cancer. Some experts have suggested that the WHO picked industry-biased researchers to conduct its review. Lennart Hardell, a leading scientist who found a link between cellphone use and gliomas, agreed that the WHO study authors should be responsible for their fraudulent behavior violating human health and the environment.</p>
<p>Brain tumor rates are on the rise in Denmark, which is known for its high-quality tracking of cancer cases. This data contradicts the notion that the rate of brain tumors isn’t on the rise, which has been used to claim that cellphone use is not linked to an increased risk of brain tumors or cancers in general. A 2023 study on brain cancer rates worldwide from 1990-2019 found a significant rise in brain cancer among both men and women in nearly all parts of the world.</p>
<p>The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) claims there’s not enough scientific evidence to link cellphone use to health problems, including brain cancer. However, the FDA rejected the findings of a $30 million study it commissioned on the topic, which concluded there was 'clear evidence' that male rats exposed to high levels of wireless radiation like that used in 2G and 3G cellphones developed cancerous heart tumors, and 'some evidence' of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while some studies suggest a link between cellphone radiation and brain cancer, the evidence is not conclusive. The World Health Organization and other health agencies have not found sufficient evidence to support this claim. More research is needed to fully understand the potential risks.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-024-01117-8">Relationship between radiofrequency-electromagnetic radiation from cellular phones and brain tumor: meta-analyses using various proxies for RF-EMR exposure-outcome assessment</a> - Jinyoung Moon, Jungmin Kwon &amp; Yongseok Mun, Environmental Health volume 23, Article number: 82 (2024)&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Cellphone Radiation and Brain Cancer

<p>The claim that the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) report confirms fluoride exposure is associated with lower IQ in children has been circulating widely. This claim is based on a report by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), which was delayed and finally released in August 2024. The report presents a comprehensive evaluation of the scientific evidence associating fluoride exposure with cognitive and neurodevelopmental health effects.</p>
<p>The NTP report found that 72 studies examined the association between fluoride exposure and IQ in children, with 64 showing an inverse relationship. This means that higher fluoride exposure was linked to lower IQ scores. Even at lower concentrations, fluoride exposure was associated with lower IQ. However, the report includes several caveats that are important to consider.</p>
<p>Firstly, the report mentions 'higher estimated fluoride exposures,' which are at drinking water fluoride concentrations that exceed the World Health Organization Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality of 1.5 mg/L of fluoride. The NTP scientists call for more studies to fully understand the potential for lower fluoride exposure to affect children's IQ. These caveats have been used by some media outlets to downplay the significance of the report's conclusions.</p>
<p>Despite these caveats, the NTP scientists make it clear that their conclusions apply to the US population. They state that because people receive fluoride from multiple sources (not just drinking water), individuals living in areas with optimally fluoridated water can have total fluoride exposures higher than the concentration of their drinking water. Additionally, there are people living in the United States who live in areas with naturally occurring fluoride in drinking water that is higher than 1.5 mg/L.</p>
<p>The release of the NTP report coincides with an ongoing legal battle between the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Fluoride Action Network (FAN). The lawsuit began following the EPA's 2016 decision to deny the plaintiff's petition under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). FAN is attempting to prove that fluoride is a neurotoxin and should be regulated or banned under the TSCA.</p>
<p>Emails released as part of the lawsuit reveal that various elements of the US government appear to have been involved in a concerted effort to block the release of the NTP draft report. The emails show that NTP scientists believed their work was completed and set a date for May 2022 for publication. However, leadership at the top levels of the Department of Health and Human Services intervened to stop the report from being released.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that the US Department of Health and Human Services report confirms fluoride exposure is associated with lower IQ in children is partially true. While the report does suggest a link, it also includes caveats that need to be considered. The report calls for more studies to fully understand the potential for lower fluoride exposure to affect children's IQ. Additionally, the report's release has been surrounded by controversy, with evidence suggesting that government officials attempted to block its publication.</p>
<p>For more information, you can refer to the following studies:</p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6478697/">Fluoride exposure and neurodevelopmental outcomes in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2748634">Association Between Maternal Fluoride Exposure During Pregnancy and IQ Scores in Offspring in Canada</a></li>
</ul>
<p>These studies provide a more detailed analysis of the association between fluoride exposure and neurodevelopmental outcomes in children.</p>

Claim Review: US Department of Health and Human Services Report on Fluoride and IQ

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "The North American Preparedness for Animal and Human Pandemics Initiative may empower the World Health Organization (WHO) to impose global control measures like vaccine passports and new policies targeting the 'infodemic'." is Mostly False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: