FROM MERCOLA Global Expansion of Mass Surveillance Technology

[carol ann parisi]

Global Expansion of Mass Surveillance Technology

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked 

• January 11, 2023

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• An investigation by The Associated Press reveals pandemic-era mass surveillance technologies are being utilized as instruments of control
• In China, COVID-19 QR codes have been used to restrict movement, protests and other forms of dissent
• In Israel, the Shin Bet security agency used COVID-19 contact tracing technology to send text messages accusing innocent people of acts of violence
• There is fear that COVID-19 mass surveillance technologies will become a measure for widespread social control in which health data, housing information, financial profiles and more are used to create a comprehensive profile of each individual on earth
• The solution to opting out of the madness and protecting your personal privacy and liberties as much as possible is not to voluntarily give up your control and information

Much like air travel was fundamentally changed post-9/11 — justified by national security and the “war on terror” — the world is now profoundly different than its pre-COVID-19 state. Freedoms taken for granted in 2019 were abruptly taken away in 2020, again justified by national security and public health.

But now, even with COVID-19 neutralized, technologies supposedly put in place to monitor and track the virus haven’t gone away. On the contrary, they’re still being used and expanded throughout the world, revealing that mass monitoring of the global population wasn’t about COVID-19 after all but something much bigger, with the potential to eliminate freedom as we know it.

COVID-19 Technologies Being Used for Control

A year-plus investigation by The Associated Press reveals a concerning trend worldwide in which pandemic-era mass surveillance technologies are being utilized as instruments of control.

“In the pandemic’s bewildering early days, millions worldwide believed government officials who said they needed confidential data for new tech tools that could help stop coronavirus’ spread. In return, governments got a firehose of individuals’ private health details, photographs that captured their facial measurements and their home addresses,” AP noted.¹

Now individuals are finding that data is being used against them — restricting travel and activism, in law enforcement cases and even being shared with spy agencies. As John Scott-Railton with internet watchdog Citizen Lab told AP, “Any intervention that increases state power to monitor individuals has a long tail and is a ratcheting system. Once you get it, is very unlikely it will ever go away.”²

Surveillance in China Used to Stifle Dissent

In China, citizens were required to install cellphone apps that produce QR codes depending on health status. A green result, based on PCR test results, allows a person to move about freely while a yellow or red result restricted travel or required home confinement. Following widespread demonstrations, the country stated it would no longer enforce national-level health codes to open up travel between provinces.

But Beijing was still requiring local codes for admittance into restaurants, gyms, offices and more. At times over the last three years, entry to a supermarket could be restricted unless a green code was presented, and residents could be quarantined if they were a close contact to someone who tested positive for COVID-19.

The AP investigation, supported by the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, also revealed that the government used COVID-19 codes to stop dissent:³

“In early September, former wealth manager Yang Jiahao bought a train ticket to Beijing, where he planned to lodge various complaints with the central government. The night before, a woman he described as a handler invited him to dinner. Handlers are usually hired by state security as part of ‘stability maintenance’ operations and can require people to meet or travel when authorities worry they could cause trouble.

Yang had a meal with the handler, and the next morning Guangzhou health authorities reported a COVID-19 case less than a kilometer from where they dined, he said. Based on city regulations, Yang’s code should have turned yellow, requiring him to take a few COVID tests to show he was negative.

Instead, the app turned red, even though tests showed that he didn’t have COVID. Yang was ordered to quarantine and a paper seal was placed on his door.”

In another example, bank customers who were unable to access their online bank accounts attempted to travel to Zhengzhou to protest. When they arrived at the train station, their QR codes turned red and they were escorted by police to quarantine in the basement. In all 1,317 people traveling to the city to protest the banking commission received red codes — picked up at the high-speed rail train station, the airport and the highway.⁴

Israel’s Shin Bet Security ‘Repurposing’ Surveillance Tech

A similar trend is occurring in Israel, where the Shin Bet security agency repurposed phone surveillance technology used to monitor militants for COVID-19 contact tracing. It’s since been repurposed again and has sent text messages accusing innocent people of acts of violence during a period of unrest in May 2021 at the Al-Aqsa Mosque and vowing, “We will hold you accountable.”

Majd Ramlawi was among those who received the text. He’s a barista at a coffee shop outside the mosque compound, an area peppered with security cameras. “It’s like the government is in your bag,” Ramlawi told the AP. “When you move, the government is with you with this phone.” AP reported:⁵

“The Shin Bet’s domestic use of the technology has generated an uproar over privacy and civil liberties within Israel, as well as questions about its accuracy. The Ministry of Communications, which oversees Israel’s telecommunications companies, refused a request seeking further details submitted for the AP by the Movement for Freedom of Information, a nonprofit that frequently works with media organizations.

Gil Gan-Mor, an attorney with the nonprofit Association for Civil Rights in Israel, estimates that hundreds of Arabs in Jerusalem received the threatening message during the unrest and said the mass text message blast was unprecedented. ‘You cannot just say to people, ‘We are watching you ... and we will get revenge,’ he said. ‘You cannot use this tool to frighten people. If you have something against someone, you can put them on trial.’”

Surveillance Overreach Is a Global Problem

The AP obtained documents via the Freedom of Information Act, revealing that countries around the globe are engaging in mass surveillance of their citizens.⁶

• Mexico — In the Mexico City suburb Huixquilucan, a surveillance tool was implemented during the pandemic that transmits location, live video and audio of emergency callers to authorities. The technology was said to be necessary for public safety.
• Pakistan — The country used military spyware and intelligence services to create an app that identified people infected with COVID-19 as well as those nearby. The Radius Alert function was criticized for privacy violations and leaving users vulnerable to tracking and cyberattacks.
• South Africa — Authorities used technology developed to track wildlife poachers for pandemic contract tracing. Movement restrictions were enforced and “smart policing” technologies, including facial recognition and automatic license plate scanners, were implemented in certain cities.
• Indonesia — The Health Ministry’s eHAC app collected passport numbers, government IDs and COVID-19 testing status from users as a requirement for travel to or within Indonesia. Data from 1.3 million people on the app was left exposed to potential fraud on an open server.
• Singapore — Data collected by Singapore’s Trace Together COVID-19 app is available to law enforcement to investigate certain crimes designated serious offenses.

In India, meanwhile, facial recognition technologies were used to enforce mask mandates, with police taking pictures of people not wearing the masks, or wearing them incorrectly. Such technologies have been rapidly expanded since the pandemic, and now a patrolling officer can randomly scan a person’s face in public and use an app to check for any past criminal activity. According to the AP:⁷

“[Hyderabad] Police Commissioner C.V. Anand said the city has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years on patrol vehicles, CCTV cameras, facial recognition and geo-tracking applications and several hundred facial recognition cameras, among other technologies powered by algorithms or machine learning. 

Inside Hyderabad’s Command and Control Center, officers showed an AP reporter how they run CCTV camera footage through facial recognition software that scans images against a database of offenders … Officers decide who they deem suspicious, stoking fears among privacy advocates, some Muslims and members of Hyderabad’s lower-caste communities.”

Apps in Australia were also implemented to collect data and notify people if they were in the vicinity of someone who tested positive for COVID-19. But the data was later collected by intelligence agencies. At the local level, citizens used a check-in app that would notify them if a COVID-19 outbreak occurred in their area. But law enforcement used the data for criminal investigations and contact tracing.

There is fear that the technologies will become a measure for widespread social control, in which health data, housing information, financial profiles and more are used to create a comprehensive profile of each individual on earth.

“Surveillance today is being posed as a technological panacea to large social problems in India, which has brought us very close to China,” Apar Gupta, executive director of the New Delhi-based Internet Freedom Foundation, told AP. “There is no law. There are no safeguards. And this is general purpose deployment of mass surveillance.”⁸

Pandemic Accelerated Mass Collection of Data in US

In 2020, the U.S. gave $24.9 million to data analytics software company Palantir Technologies to support the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ COVID-19 response. AP reported:⁹

“Documents obtained by the immigrant rights group Just Futures Law under the Freedom of Information Act and shared with the AP showed that federal officials contemplated how to share data that went far beyond COVID-19. The possibilities included integrating ‘identifiable patient data,’ such as mental health, substance use and behavioral health information from group homes, shelters, jails, detox facilities and schools.”

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also purchased cellphone location data in 2021. The “mobility insights” data revealed the daily locations of at least 20 million cellphones, courtesy of “device IDs” provided by data broker Cuebiq. The ID can link information to individual cellphones and could be used to assess the effects of lockdowns and business closures, among many other more nefarious uses.

As Scott-Railton with Citizen Lab told AP, “What COVID did was accelerate state use of these tools and that data and normalize it, so it fit a narrative about there being a public benefit. Now the question is, are we going to be capable of having a reckoning around the use of this data, or is this the new normal?”¹⁰

Are They Watching Your Every Move?

Measures toward authoritarian control and mass surveillance have been increasing worldwide, and in the U.S. Silicon Valley and the national security state are now fused, according to one of my favorite independent journalists, Whitney Webb.¹¹

The decades-long wars against domestic dissidence have always involved technology like databases, and now it’s progressing to technology like facial recognition apps and widespread use of cameras.

The Chinese government has given billions to the video surveillance company Hikvision, for instance, whose cameras have spread throughout the globe. Their low costs, courtesy of Chinese subsidizing, allowed them to outpace their competition, but concerns have risen that they’re ushering in a police state and may act as a “backdoor to Beijing.”

The company is a heavyweight in the industry, capable of producing 260,000 cameras daily, which works out to two for every three people born each day.¹² In Britain, 6 million cameras are in use — most of them provided by Hikvision — while the company’s presence has also increased, increasing from 70 U.K. staff members in 2018 to 128 in 2021. Among Hikvision’s technologies widely used in Britain were heat detection cameras brought on to detect COVID-19 symptoms in 2020.¹³

Worldwide, millions of Hikvision’s cameras are in use, concentrating in major cities, including more than 750,000 devices in the U.S.¹⁴ Hikvision also has a U.S. subsidiary called EZVIZ, which is based in California and calls itself a “global smart home security brand” that creates a “safe, convenient and smart life for users through its intelligent devices, advanced AI technologies and cloud services.”¹⁵

Many people have embraced the convenience of “smart” devices in their homes and wearable devices, but there are dangers in intertwining mass surveillance systems with daily living, whether they’re made by Hikvision or another company. The solution to opting out of the madness, and protecting your personal privacy and liberties as much as possible, is to not voluntarily give up your control.

They’re counting on you taking your cellphone with you everywhere, and adopting other forms of digital control, like vaccine passports, smart devices and central bank digital currencies. When given the choice to opt in to the latest privacy-sapping technology, don’t.

[carol ann parisi]

Why Has COVID Spared Africa?

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

• January 12, 2023

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• There are clear contradictions between the World Health Organization’s directives regarding the need for COVID shots in Africa and the actual situation on the ground
• The WHO is still calling on all countries to get the COVID jab into at least 70% of their populations, and warns that developing countries are at grave risk due to low jab rates. Meanwhile, Africa, where less than 6% of the population is jabbed, has fared far better than countries with high injection rates. A large-scale survey in Uganda also shows COVID is no longer a clinical issue
• Variants have also gotten milder (less pathogenic) with each iteration, yet the WHO warns that new variants may create “large waves of serious disease and death in populations with low vaccination coverage”
• The explanation for the disconnect between the WHO’s priorities and what’s happening in Africa can be explained when you look at the focus of the WHO’s Catastrophic Contagion exercise. It focused on getting African leadership trained in following the pandemic script. The WHO needs additional pandemics in order to justify its pandemic treaty, which will give it sole power to dictate countermeasures, and it needs to eliminate the African control group, which shows the COVID “vaccines” do more harm than good
• The WHO also has every intention of implementing climate lockdowns once it has the power to do so. To that aim, the WHO’s director of Environment and Health has suggested combining health and climate issues into one

In the video above, John Campbell, Ph.D., a retired nurse educator, compares the contradictions between the World Health Organization's directives regarding the need for COVID shots in Africa and the actual situation on the ground.

As of December 12, 2022, the WHO was still calling on all countries to get the COVID jab into at least 70% of their populations.¹ Its original deadline for meeting this 70% threshold was mid-2022, but by June 2022, only 58 of 194 member states had reached this target.²

According to the WHO, jab supplies, technical support and financial support were lacking during the early days of the injection campaign but, now, those obstacles have been resolved. As a result, all countries now have the ability to meet the global target of 70%.

Low Jab Rates Threaten Low-Income Countries, WHO Claims

The "overarching challenge" right now is the administration of the shots, actually "getting shots into arms."³ To address that, the WHO suggests integrating COVID-19 injection services "with other immunization services and alongside other health and social interventions." This, they say, will maximize impact and "build long-term capacity."

The WHO also stresses that "As people's risk perception of the virus wanes, careful risk communication and community engagement plans need to be adapted to enhance demand for vaccination." To ensure low-income countries get onboard to meet the 70% target, the WHO also launched The COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery Partnership in January 2022.

This is an international effort "to intensify country readiness and delivery support" in 34 countries with low COVID jab uptake. Partners include UNICEF, Gavi and the World Bank. According to the WHO:⁴

"Despite incremental success since its launch in January 2022, low and lower-middle income countries are facing difficulties to get a step change in vaccination rates.

This represents a serious threat to the fragile economic recovery, including due to the risk of new variants creating large waves of serious disease and death in populations with low vaccination coverage.

It also means accelerating the delivery of other COVID-19 tools and treatments is a crucial priority to help the world build up multiple layers of protection against the virus. Concerted and urgent action from countries, international partners and agencies, along with G20 Finance Ministers is required to increase vaccination levels and expedite access."

In short, the WHO is really concerned that countries with low COVID jab rates will suffer lest they meet or exceed the target goal of jabbing 70% of their populations. But what is that concern based on? Certainly not the real world.

WHO's Statements Contradict Real-World Situations

The statements made by the WHO contradict a number of real-world situations. For starters, while developed nations with high jab rates struggled with COVID-19 throughout much of 2021 and 2022, Africa avoided this fate, despite its single-digit jab rate.

Scientists are said to be "mystified" as to how Africa fared so well, completely ignoring data showing that the more COVID shots you get, the higher your risk of contracting C... and ending up in the hospital.

Over the past year, researchers have been warning that the COVID jabs appear to be dysregulating and actually destroying people's immune systems, leaving them vulnerable not only to COVID but also other infections.⁵ It stands to reason, then, that Africa with its low injection rate would not be burdened with COVID cases brought on by dysfunctional immune systems.

Secondly, variants have gotten milder (less pathogenic) with each iteration, albeit more infectious (i.e., they spread easier). So why is the WHO worried about "the risk of new variants creating large waves of serious disease and death in populations with low vaccination coverage"? What is that "risk" based on?

And, since COVID infection keeps getting milder, and has had a lethality on par with or lower than influenza^6,7,8,9,10 ever since mid-2020 at the latest, why is it still a "crucial priority" to accelerate delivery of COVID treatments?

As a reminder, according to a September 2, 2020 study in Annals of Internal Medicine, the overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio for COVID was a mere 0.26%. Below 40 years of age, the infection fatality ratio was just 0.01%. Meanwhile, the estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza is 0.8%.¹¹

Report From Uganda

Campbell goes on to cite a large-scale survey by a community health partner in Uganda, which surveyed doctors, nurses and medical officers across the country, and "basically, they don't see any COVID anymore," he says.

They're not getting the jab and they're not getting tested for COVID either. There's no need, because no one is getting sick with COVID — at least not to the point they need medical attention.

The Ugandan government has even stopped publishing COVID guidelines. From their perspective, the pandemic is over. The same sentiment appears common in other African countries as well. Given the situation on the ground, is it really a pressing need to jab 30 million people in Uganda against a disease they're not getting sick from?

What Uganda does need is malaria treatments, mosquito nets, clean drinking water and antibiotics. "That is what the priorities on the ground seem to be," Campbell says. So, what's with the apparent disconnect between the WHO's priorities and what's actually happening in areas with low COVID jab rates? The WHO's Catastrophic Contagion exercise^12,13 clues us in.

The Disconnect Reveals the WHO's True Intentions

October 23, 2022, the WHO, Bill Gates and Johns Hopkins cohosted a global challenge exercise dubbed "Catastrophic Contagion,"^14,15 involving the outbreak of a novel pathogen called "severe epidemic enterovirus respiratory syndrome 2025" (SEERS-25).

Tellingly, this tabletop exercise was focused on getting African leadership involved and trained in following the pandemic script. Participants included 10 current and former health ministers and senior public health officials from Senegal, Rwanda, Nigeria, Angola and Liberia. (Representatives from Singapore, India and Germany, as well as Gates himself, were also in attendance.)

African nations just so happened to go "off script" more often than others during the COVID pandemic and didn't follow in the footsteps of developed nations when it came to pushing the jabs. As a result, vaccine makers now face the problem of having a huge control group, as the COVID jab uptake on the African continent was only 6%.¹⁶

They cannot reasonably explain how or why Africa ended up faring so better than developed nations with high COVID jab rates in terms of COVID-19 infections and related deaths.¹⁷

The WHO's pandemic treaty is the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime. But to secure that power, they will need more pandemics.

The WHO desperately needs to get rid of this control group, so they're enlisting and training African leaders how to push for widespread vaccination using the WHO's talking points. This, I believe, is the only reason the WHO is still speaking about COVID-19 in catastrophic terms.

The WHO Needs Additional Pandemics to Secure Its Power Grab

At this point, it's quite clear that "biosecurity" is the chosen means by which the globalist cabal intends to usher in its one world government. The WHO is working on securing sole power over pandemic response globally through its international pandemic treaty which, if implemented, will eradicate the sovereignty of member nations.

The WHO's pandemic treaty is basically the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime. But to secure that power, they will need more pandemics. COVID-19 alone was not enough to get everyone onboard with a centralized pandemic response unit, and they probably knew that from the start.

So, the reason we can be sure there will be additional pandemics, whether manufactured using fear and hype alone or an actual bioweapon created for this very purpose, is because the takeover plan, aka The Great Reset, is based on the premise that we need global biosecurity surveillance and a centralized response.

Biosecurity, in turn, is the justification for an international vaccine passport, which the G20 just signed on to, and that passport will also be your digital identification. That digital ID, then, will be tied to your social credit score, personal carbon footprint tracker, medical records, educational records, work records, social media presence, purchase records, your bank accounts and a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Once all these pieces are fully connected, you'll be in a digital prison, and the ruling cabal — whether officially a one world government by then or not — will have total control over your life from cradle to grave.

The WHO's pandemic treaty is what sets this chain of events off, as it will have the power to implement vaccine passports globally once the treaty is signed. The WHO will also have the power to mandate vaccines, standardize medical care and issue travel restrictions.

This treaty will likely pass this year, which means the WHO will either need to ramp up the COVID narrative again, or switch to another pandemic in order to justify these kinds of actions.

The Pandemic Treaty Is the Death Knell to Freedom Worldwide

It's important to realize that the WHO's pandemic treaty will radically alter the global power structure and strip you of some of your most basic rights and freedoms. It's a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.

Once signed, all member nations will be subject to the WHO's dictates. If the WHO says every person on the planet needs to have a vaccine passport and digital identity to ensure vaccination compliance, then that's what every country will be forced to implement, even if the people have rejected such plans using local democratic processes.

There's also reason to suspect the WHO intends to extend its sovereign leadership into the health care systems of every nation, eventually implementing a universal or "socialist-like" health care system as part of The Great Reset. WHO Director-General Tedros has previously stated that his "central priority" as director-general of the WHO is to push the world toward universal health coverage.¹⁸

Prediction: Climate Lockdowns Are Next

Considering the WHO changed its definition of "pandemic" to "a worldwide epidemic of a disease,"¹⁹ without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity,^20,21 just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion. This means that once they're in power, they won't need to rely exclusively on pathogenic threats.

They could also declare a global pandemic for a noninfectious threat, like global warming, for example. Such a declaration would then allow the WHO to circumvent laws that are in place to preserve our freedom, and allow for the implementation of tyrannical measures such as lockdowns and travel restrictions.

Indeed, the notion of "climate lockdowns" has already been publicly flouted on multiple occasions.²² As reported by The Pulse:²³

"Climate lockdowns and other restrictions will be framed as saving the people of the world from themselves. Who would ever disagree with such measures when it is framed under the guise of good will?

Like we saw with COVID mandates, if climate mandates ever take place they will be promoted as an extremely noble and necessary action. Those who disagree and present evidence that such actions are not useful or impactful, and instead cause more harm, will most likely be silenced, censored and ridiculed …

What would a climate lockdown look like? Well, if such an initiative were to take place, governments would limit or ban the consumption of many foods. They would ban or limit private-vehicle use, or limit the distance one can travel in a gas powered car or perhaps even by plane.

Working from home could eventually become the permanent norm if special carbon taxes are put in place. Such taxes could be imposed on companies, limiting driving or air miles, and extend to individual employees … Schools, especially those heavily influenced by teachers' unions, could impose permanent online-only days."

Officials Around the World Have Suggested Climate Lockdowns

As noted by The Pulse, a number of officials around the world have voiced support for climate lockdowns, completely ignoring the devastating effects the COVID lockdowns have already had. This just goes to show lockdowns were never about public health and never will be.

Among the climate lockdown enthusiasts we have Germany's health minister Karl Lauterbach, who in December 2020 proclaimed that addressing climate change would require restrictions on personal freedom, similar to those implemented to "flatten the curve" of COVID.²⁴

British economics professor Mariana Mazzucato is another advocate for climate lockdowns, who in September 2020 warned that "In the near future, the world may need to resort to lockdowns again — this time to tackle a climate emergency."²⁵

We also have the statements of Bill Gates²⁶ and the Red Cross,²⁷ both of which in 2020 claimed that climate change poses a greater threat to mankind than COVID, and must be confronted with the same urgency and resolve. The World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations and the WHO have also published articles stating their intent to "fight climate change" by shutting down society.²⁸

Notably, in "How to Fight the Next Threat to Our World: Air Pollution," published by the WEF²⁹ and co-written by the director of WHO's Environment and Health Department, it's suggested that health and climate issues be combined into one. As noted in that article:

"We can confront these crises more effectively and fairly if we address them as one — and foster support across all sectors of the economy … COVID-19 has proven humanity's inbuilt ability to rise up and act to protect the health of our most vulnerable people. We need to do the same with air pollution."

Recall, as I mentioned above, if the WHO has sole power over global health, combining health and climate issues will automatically give the WHO the de facto power to issue climate lockdowns. Some claim climate lockdowns have already begun,³⁰ with the random shutting off of people's power even though there's no actual outage — sort of slow-walking people into accepting that the lights won't always turn on.

That the WHO will jump at the opportunity to implement climate lockdowns can also be seen in the WHO Manifesto for a Healthy Recovery From COVID-19, which states:³¹

"The 'lockdown' measures that have been necessary to control the spread of COVID-19 have slowed economic activity, and disrupted lives — but have also given some glimpses of a possible brighter future.

In some places, pollution levels have dropped to such an extent that people have breathed clean air, or have seen blue skies and clear waters, or have been able to walk and cycle safely with their children — for the first times in their lives.

The use of digital technology has accelerated new ways of working and connecting with each other, from reducing time spent commuting, to more flexible ways of studying, to carrying out medical consultations remotely, to spending more time with our families.

Opinion polls from around the world show that people want to protect the environment, and preserve the positives that have emerged from the crisis, as we recover …

Decisions made in the coming months can either "lock in" economic development patterns that will do permanent and escalating damage to the ecological systems that sustain all human health and livelihoods, or, if wisely taken, can promote a healthier, fairer, and greener world."

This manifesto also lays out many other aspects of The Great Reset agenda, including smart cities, travel restrictions, new food systems, a complete transition to green energy and more. But again, the thing that will really facilitate all of these changes is to have a centralized powerbase, and that is the WHO.

What Can You Do?

Stopping the WHO pandemic treaty will be difficult, as the World Health Assembly may or may not even accept public comment before making a decision. Your best bet right now is to sign up for the World Council for Health's (WCH) newsletter.

The last time the World Health Assembly met to discuss the treaty, the WCH issued links and instructions on how to submit your comment. You can subscribe at the bottom of this page, or on the WCH's home page. I and the CHD will also share details if they become available, so subscribing to our newsletters can give you a heads-up as well.

In the absence of instructions, you could reach out to your respective delegation and request that they oppose the treaty. A list of U.S. delegates can be found in James Roguski's Substack article, "Speaking Truth to Power."

For contact information for other nations' delegates, I would suggest contacting the regional office and ask for a list (see "Regions" in the blue section at the bottom of the World Health Assembly's webpage).