[ad_1]
The last contradiction was in “Case of Sweden”. “A role model on the path to a new normal”: That’s how Mike Ryan, head of the World Health Organization’s emergency health program, defined it at a press conference on April 30. However, since the beginning of the emergency, the agency has supported the effectiveness of the “opposite Chinese model.”In other words, a reaction to the epidemic focused mainly on very strict closure measures. Attacking the World Health Organization, calling it “pro-Chinese”, has been in recent weeks above US President Donald Trump. , who has suspended the payment of membership fees.
But criticism has arisen on several fronts in the direction of the agency, whose mandate includes monitoring and prevention of global health emergencies. The masks: first defined as “useless”, then recommended after a long time; recommending tampons only to those who already have obvious symptoms, first, then take a sharp turn and suggest doing as much as possible; WHO’s overall slowness in declaring global alert states one after another which led to a pandemic “that is far from being defeated” (hence the agency’s director, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus). Could WHO be more effective in fighting coronavirus?
An agency that is too “pro-Chinese”
The most political charge is that of being too “pro-Chinese”. The President of the United States, Donald Trump, has suspended the WHO’s US funds (that’s 17 to 18 percent of the budget), which he calls “succubus for China”; but also Japanese Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso has controversially suggested changing the name of “Chinese Health Organization”. The Taiwan problem, not yet accepted among the member states of the WHO (because the Republic de facto not recognized by China) despite exemplary containment of the epidemic, it has had wide international resonance at this juncture, and a harsh editorial by the Wall street journal he called the WHO “lost in Beijing”, lost in Beijing.
Delays in the subject of the transmission “man to man”
The virus is first sequenced in a Wuhan lab on December 27. China sends the data to the UN two weeks later: on January 10. But CEO Ghebreyesus tweeted: “China’s speed and transparency in this situation have been impressive.” In those days, Taiwan warned (in vain) the organization of the danger of human transmission, and so did doctor-hero Li-Wenliang (who later died in Covid-19): nothing to do. On January 14, Ghebreyesus tweets again. “There is no evidence that the virus is transmitted from man to man”. He just met Xi Jinping in Beijing, praising his transparency. Later, although the entire world distrusts the official data communicated by the People’s Republic (whose authorities, in April, will review it even moderately upwards), the World Health Organization continues to take them forever: including Wuhan’s comments on transmission of the virus between humans. “The WHO had no means to verify on the ground,” said WHO official Larry Gostin, al. New York Times. “Or, if we want to be less compassionate, she has not done enough to do so, and has trusted China.”
Asymptomatic patients
Also in the early stages of the pandemic, Hong Kong research challenges Chinese data: Asymptomatic patients don’t count. but A WHO report: “Asymptomatic patients are rare and hardly transmit the disease”. In March, a study published in the journal Science attributed 80% of infections to asymptomatic patients. Thereafter, WHO stops minimizing its role, and on April 1, WHO epidemiologist Maria van Kerkhove recommended, at the Geneva briefing, “the importance of tracking even the asymptomatic, who sooner or later develop symptoms.”
The delay in saying “it’s a pandemic” and the (vain) forecast for September
The same definition of “pandemic”, which only the WHO is officially responsible for giving, emerged when it was long clear that all areas of the planet were affected by the emergency: March 11. Before, there had been a series of reassuring reports: Only on January 28 did the threat of the Chinese epidemic become “high”, from “moderate” to the rest of the world. However, as early as September, in a report titled “A World at Risk,” the World Health Organization also prophesied the “very real” threat of “a highly lethal pandemic of a respiratory pathogen, which could kill up to 50-80 millions of people and wipe out 5% of the world economy. “The hypothetical causes: mainly the accidental or deliberate spread of respiratory viruses sequenced in the laboratory.” The world is not ready for this, “the report concluded. The alarm fell in deaf ears, outweighed by reality: the worldwide coronavirus pandemic that occurred then came very early, just a few weeks later.
Returning to the pads
Finally, there is also criticism of the confusion of the WHO guidelines on serological tests, swabs and masks. On tampons: The first WHO guidelines, which perhaps also influenced the dramatic shortage of tests and tampons in many countries, such as Italy, were to administer “only to suspected cases.” That is, people with acute respiratory symptoms or known positive contacts, or both. On March 16 alone, Director Ghebreyesus tweeted, “There is only one message for all of our member states: test, test, test.” Andrea Crisanti, a microbiologist at the University of Padua who coordinated Veneto’s response to the epidemic, criticized the WHO for not immediately recommending asymptomatic swabs.
The opposite in masks.
Even in the need to wear masks, the WHO communication and its country guidelines have often been contradictory. In the initial stages of the pandemic, the agency expressed itself clearly: they are useless to protect themselves and leave them in the hands of doctors and nurses. Still on April 6, Ghebreyesus recommended: “We recommend the use of medical masks to those who are sick or who have to care for a sick person, or in countries where measures such as washing hands and staying away are difficult to apply. We are concerned that the massive use of these masks by people may exacerbate their scarcity. ” Then invest. Two days after WHO expert Mike Ryan explains, “They can help in the context of the global fight against the pandemic.” On April 13, WHO spokesman David Navarro said “bringing them in will have to become the norm.”
The cured “are not immune”
Finally, the latest controversy is over immunity acquired by the healed: The WHO said a few days ago that there is no evidence that people recovered from Covid-19 have antibodies that can protect against a second infection. At this point in the pandemic, “there is insufficient evidence about the effectiveness of the immunity given by the antibodies to guarantee the accuracy of an” immunity passport “or a” freedom of risk certificate “.” But it would be good prudence only in theory, according to many immunologists: to date there would be no evidence of people sick with Covid twice. And a recent study from the magazine.Natural medicine notes that “in all patients, the antibodies are found within 19 days of starting Covid.”
May 2, 2020 (change May 2, 2020 | 06:48)
© RESERVED REPRODUCTION
[ad_2]
