US officially exits World Health Organization, accusing agency of straying from its core mission!
There are many conflicting opinions, what are your thoughts?
Bye…bye..to the bureaucratic useless WHO…
Who funds the WHO?
Who are the major donors to the WHO?
Who are the major voices/influencers at the WHO?
Answer those questions and you know the value of the WHO.
I think we know those answers…
Very Happy we are exiting the WHO.I believe it is a corrupt organization that has actively worked to undermine Americans sovereign interests.
I think it’s a very wise and exciting decision! So many great things happening, that just a short while ago I never thought I’d see, including this and CHD suing the AAP!
Best thing to happen to Americans. The WHO is a corrupt body of Bill Gates supporters on world population reduction. Another words: Genocide which Bill Gates and his father proposed to the world. We need to rid ourselves of NATO as well. Most NATO memebers always vote against the US Policies.
Wonderful news! That blocks the WHO from intruding on and meddling with our medical freedom, and it also greatly mutes its ability to resonate with and embolden the corrupt leaders of our bad-to-the-bone traditional medical establishment that the IMA’s Honest Medicine is struggling to sidetrack and eventually displace.
@AaronAF So agree. Perfect observation.
@bks I never thought we’d see this either. I’m not American but at the moment the US is leading the way in so many great areas of interest. I’m grateful to now be able to enjoy the expectation of a cascade to other parts of the world that need this guidance. I’m hoping like mad that it’s infectious 
A link to read the full statement from the IMA Independent Medical Alliance Responds to Landmark HHS and White House Actions on Fetal Tissue Research and World Health Organization
Hi IMA-GregT, Thanks for the kind words. I have a question at least tangential to medical freedom, and it involves my efforts to demonstrate to possible future medical providers that I have read and understood the alternative protocols that the IMA recommends for various conditions.
For example, for the hypothetical situation that I may be in if I am ever unfortunate enough to be in a hospital, I would want my doctors and nurses to have access to my healthcare proxy and know that it expresses my informed consent regarding the IMA’s recommended protocols for alternative sepsis treatments as well as for COVID-19.
I looked under the IMA’s “Terms and Conditions” and it only describes its disclaimers for its recommendations for COVID protocols. It does not mention any disclaimers for SEPSIS protocols in the section for “Recommended Protocols.”
Why under Terms and Conditions would IMA be so specific about its recommended protocols for COVID and not mention them for other conditions like sepsis? (I guess that specificity reflects that the IMA used to be the FLCCC.) Since sepsis is such a common, as well as such a serious condition, especially for vulnerable patients, for example for the elderly - and because there seems to be a big difference between how hospitals treat sepsis patients and how Dr.Marik’s protocol handles it, I would greatly prefer to make a case for using Dr. Marik’s protocol(s), and have that preference clearly stated in my Healthcare proxy form. For that purpose, I was hoping to find a well stated summary of sepsis protocol recommendations (including disclaimers) under IMA’s Terms and Conditions to which I could refer.
Please advise.
@AaronAF So I don’t know why, but your response makes me tearful. It’s such a great observation, because a couple of days ago Helen and I heard that someone had gone into hospital either with sepsis, or got it in hospital, and we both turned to each other saying, “If only they’d known about Dr. Marik’s protocol.”
But your point is great because you’re looking to embed the use of the protocol, but embed it in a way that ensures you’re cared for as you want to be (if the situation arises), but there’s a gap in our information that needs to be filled before you can effectively embed it.
Please know (to my knowledge) this is an oversight only, with no considered reason why it doesn’t have the same disclaimer etc.
That’s why this forum is so brilliant. We get so many extra eyes and brains adding their wonderful value.
So I’ll raise this observation immediately with my colleagues. That protocol is another life-saver, and it must be able to be used freely if it has legally and informedly been given consent to be used.
Yes @IMA-GregT that would be my sister who was diagnosed with MSSA on Jan 7th from an infected dialysis catheter placed on Dec 26th. I specifically asked the attending physician for Infectious Disease if they were aware of Dr. Marik’s sepsis protocol after I read the clinical notes indicating sepsis. She immediately responded that she was in fact aware of Dr. Marik’s protocol and that Portland Adventist does not believe that his protocol has scientific evidence of efficacy. I was not going to argue the point since I am an uninformed layman and not a medical professional to challenge her care over my sister. As it turns out the sepsis diagnosis was not really a factor since the MSSA treatment was exactly what Grok described as the standard of care. My sister was transferred to OHSU about a week ago to evaluate her heart for a vegetation artifact on one of her valves. She is at high risk for surgery and so the treatment has reverted to a watch and see if further antibiotic treatment for another 4 weeks will eliminate the staph from her valve. They are now recommending lifelong antibiotic in place of valve replacement. So the barrier here was the doctor who jumped all over me for suggesting a different sepsis protocol. I’m wondering if I insisted on following the Marik protocol would have resulted in the hospital refusing care and secondarily if Medicare would have refused to pay for it. It’s kind of a monopoly system where care is take it or leave it. Maybe at 77 I should go back to college and get a medical degree so I won’t be so uninformed.
@AaronAF From Kelly B "we did update to such with name change and will evaluate with our attorney if that should be updated as well. Thanks for sharing, "
Just as you are preparing a watertight set of 'planned up front ‘hospital consent documentation’, if we can help tighten the applicability of the set we will. It’ll mean a review and update, and Kelly has asked me to hand your info off to the team accordingly.
What a horrible, catch 22 situation. Apologies that I didn’t remember it was you. Of course, you would have known about it. I’ll forward this to Kelly too, to emphasize the need for a method that enables the protocol to be considered as not critical of the care being offered, but rather a real ‘equally viable’ option.
There’s a work item now setup for this.