Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

snot

(11,207 posts)
2. What the amendments say, and a thought:
Sat Jul 19, 2025, 01:54 PM
Saturday

Here's a summary, though I'm not certain if it's the best available: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9550/ .

Note, it says:

Reports suggest that the main contentious issues in negotiations were over the sharing of pandemic-related health products via donations and affordable / not-for-profit pricing for developing states, and the corresponding sharing of pathogen data, known as the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System. .... "Claims that the draft agreement will cede sovereignty to WHO and will give the WHO secretariat power to impose lockdowns or vaccine mandates on countries are false and have never been requested nor proposed. This agreement will not, and cannot, grant sovereignty to WHO."

If those characterizations are accurate, I can't help wondering whether our or other advanced countries' real objections might relate to their so-called "defensive" bioweapons research. I think the consensus accepted even by US authorities at this point is that Covid-19 probably did result from a leak from the Wuhan lab, which we were funding. For better or worse, requirements that we "share pathogen data" could be seen as a problem for those, likely including the U.S., who want to continue such research.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»US rejects WHO pandemic c...»Reply #2