The World Health Organisation (WHO): a life-threatening money-printing machine?
Source: PD Dr Michael Nehls, 16 August 2024
At the beginning of August 2024, I had a conversation with the legal scholar Dr Silvia Behrendt. What I learnt from her is shocking and not only explains the disastrous health policy of recent years (which does not deserve that name), but also allows reliable conclusions to be drawn about what awaits us in the coming years – at least if we as a society do not learn from experience and allow a further escalation of this takeover by the WHO and its allies.
About my interviewer: Dr Behrendt studied law at the University of St. Gallen and obtained her doctorate in law in 2009 with a thesis on the significance and impact of the International Health Regulations. In 2009, she was legal advisor to the WHO and is therefore a recognised expert. In 2021, she founded the non-governmental organisation (NGO) “Global Health Responsibility Agency” in order to better monitor its activities and intervene legally if necessary.)
Some background information: The International Health Regulations (IHR) are binding regulations of the WHO under international law for the prevention and control of the cross-border spread of diseases. They were signed in Boston on 25 July 1969 and came into force on 1 January 1971 and date back to the International Sanitary Convention (Venice, 1892). On 23 May 2005, they were amended in Geneva by the 58th World Health Assembly in view of the increasing globalisation and international spread of infectious diseases such as SARS (caused by SARS-CoV-1, the precursor virus of SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen that triggers COVID-19).
On 1 June 2024, more than 190 countries participating in the IHR agreed on far-reaching changes to the IHR in Geneva, thereby further strengthening the WHO’s global influence. For example, “the amendment package contains provisions on possible WHO recommendations on the availability and distribution of relevant health products, the maintenance of essential supply chains and travel options for health workers, and numerous other changes, including the possibility of using digital certificates in health emergencies”.
Let’s take a look at why this interview is so explosive. Here is a written summary of the most important content from the interview, plus relevant background information:
1) The WHO is more than 80 per cent funded by earmarked donations, i.e. money from pharmaceutical companies in developed countries or philanthropic foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and does not have to disclose this funding in detail! Important: These funds are tied to the purpose specified by the donor. This means that it is not the WHO but the investor who determines which measures for global health are prioritised. For example, if he wants to bring certain vaccines onto the market, he can direct the WHO accordingly.
2) Why do rich people donate to the WHO? In addition to misguided philanthropy, there is another obvious motivation for donating large sums to the private organisation given the circumstances. The WHO itself refers to this reason: “According to a new analysis published here, the quantifiable return on investment in the WHO is very high!” Specifically, the WHO promises a return on investment of a factor of 35 as the most conservative estimate of an expected minimum (“in the most conservative estimation possible“), as can be seen in an official WHO document entitled “A Healthy Return” from 2022: “The new analysis presented here shows that an investment in the WHO yields a return of 35 US dollars for every US dollar invested.” (“According to the new analysis presented here, investing in WHO provides a return of US$ 35 for every US$ 1 invested.“)
How does the high ROI come about?
In A healthy return you can read (translation): “According to a new analysis included here, the quantifiable return on investment in WHO is very high. The cost of the WHO over the next ten-year period (2022-2031) is US$33 billion, and the public value created by this investment is expected to be between US$1.155 and US$1.46 trillion at the most conservative estimate. The resulting return on investment is at least USD 35 for every USD invested in the WHO.” This could be interpreted as follows: In principle, as a WHO investor you become an insider or even a string-puller through earmarked donations. Insider trading is made possible by the fact that you know earlier than others which pharmaceutical company will generate the highest turnover in the future.
To put this into perspective: If you put money into your bank account, you might get a return of around 1 per cent. This corresponds to a return on investment of 1.01 or a factor of 1.01. Ambitious investment managers sometimes promise 10, 20 or even 50 per cent, i.e. a factor of 1.1, 1.2 or even 1.5, whereby the higher the returns, the greater the risk that you will lose everything. Incidentally, depending on the market situation, you now even have to give up something for the deposit, which is then called negative interest.
Why is that so scandalous? A paragraph from my book “The Indoctrinated Brain” provides the basis for understanding it:
In 1860, Thomas Joseph Dunning (1799-1873), secretary of the London Association of Bookbinders, wrote a pamphlet on the philosophy of the trade union movement of the time, in which he described an extreme characteristic of economic power and greed for profit: ‘Capital has a horror of the absence of profit, as nature has of emptiness. With sufficient profit, capital becomes very courageous. A percentage of 10 per cent secures it employment anywhere; 20 per cent produces much zeal; 50 per cent enormous audacity; 100 per cent makes it ready to trample all human laws under foot; 300 per cent, and there is no crime it will not shrink from and no risk it will not run, even to the danger of its owner being hanged. If turbulence and unrest bring profit, it will readily promote them.”
[1]
In other words, according to Dunning, people are prepared to do almost anything for a 300 per cent return on investment or a return of a factor of 3, whether it is eliminating competitors, starting wars or – in today’s world – spreading viruses, i.e. sacrificing countless people.
However, the WHO promises its wealthy investors not just a return on investment of a factor of 3, but a factor of at least 35, which is quite simply alarming! How far are you prepared to go for such an absurd profit margin? Where are the limits?
3) To achieve its goals, the WHO relies on its global power position in health issues: “Investment in the World Health Organisation is catalytic by nature, i.e. the resources invested in the WHO are used to support Member States in implementing health policies. This is done through the WHO’s three key functions: leadership, technical product development and country support.”
The WHO derives this power and the ability to extract almost infinite sums of money from the entire world population from its concept of “Disease X”, i.e. the threat of a previously non-existent infectious disease, as John Hopkins University explains. According to the university, the concept of Disease X has been around since at least 2018. Shortly afterwards, COVID-19 became the first highly lucrative and power-generating “Disease X”, with many more to follow:
“It’s not new. This concept has already led to several successes. BioNTech and Moderna had a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate at hand within hours or days when they responded to the MERS epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula and figured out how to stabilise the spike protein to produce the right kind of antibodies, for example. [FYI: The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was discovered in April 2012]. Although we did not know that SARS-CoV-2 would be a pandemic pathogen [a perfidious misstatement, see below], we began to believe that the coronavirus family was an important virus family to deal with because of its ability to cause severe respiratory illness. All of this greatly accelerated the development of the vaccine. The sooner a vaccine, antiviral drugs, monoclonal antibodies and diagnostic tests are available, the more lives can be saved in the event of an emergency caused by an infectious disease.“
The statement “Although we did not know that SARS-CoV-2 would be a pandemic pathogen” contradicts the fact that SARS-CoV-2 was genetically engineered precisely for its pandemic properties as part of gain-of-function research in Wuhan. “Gain-of-function” is the common term in bioweapons research and describes the insertion of new human-dangerous properties into a pathogen, such as the introduction of the furin cleavage site patented by Moderna into the spike genome of a corona virus from which SARS-CoV-2 emerged. Here is a passage from “The indoctrinated brain“:
“SARS-CoV-2 is thus the only coronavirus whose genome carries 12 unique strands [more precisely: nucleotides in a unique combination] [encoding a furin cleavage site], enabling the spike protein to be activated by the enzyme furin, allowing it to spread easily between human cells,” writes ChinaDaily [see here]. Piquantly, these 12 strands are embedded in an equally unique sequence of 19 strands, otherwise only found in a patent granted to spike vaccine maker Moderna in 2017, two years before the first COVID-19 cases. [“The genetic sequence was discovered in the furin cleavage site (FCS) of SARS-CoV-2 (the coronavirus), the part that makes it very efficient in infecting humans and that distinguishes it from other coronaviruses,” explains the international team of researchers who made this astonishing discovery, adding: “Conventional biostatistical analyses show that the probability of this sequence being present by chance in a 30,000-nucleotide viral genome is 3.21 ×10-11.”] In other words, a probability of one in three trillion (1,000 billion) makes it virtually inconceivable that this unique sequence could have entered SARS-CoV-2 by chance or by natural means. It is worth recalling this information against the backdrop of the official narrative: The exceptionally high infectivity that Event 201 [see here] presupposed for a conceivable and imminent next pandemic, which was to originate in China, was therefore only achieved by SARS-CoV-2 because it had this extremely unlikely, supposedly natural mutation in the genome that produces a furin cleavage site – whose exact nucleotide coding in the genome, against all plausible probability, was patented against SARS-CoV-2 by a vaccine manufacturer [Moderna in 2016] that hardly anyone had heard of before 2020.
SARS-CoV-2 is a bioweapon and the so-called S1 subunit, which is released during the dangerous furin cleavage, is the actual bullet it fires at our organism. I explain in detail in my book “The Indoctrinated Brain” why this cleavage site in the spike genome was not defused (which would have been very easy) when the mRNA was produced and injected worldwide disguised as a vaccine.
In any case, the “Disease X” programme knew exactly which virus to prepare for. This is the only reason why, as we now know from John Hopkins University (see above), the rapidly available mRNA injections against COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 were the result (and the first global field trial) of this “Disease X” programme and initiative. As we also know, the pathogen was created in a laboratory in Wuhan, despite the international ban on bioweapons research. Here is another paragraph from my book “The Indoctrinated Brain” in relation to “Event 201”, where all the actors or profiteers simulated a coronavirus outbreak similar to COVID-19 shortly before:
Just a few weeks later, a new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, was discovered in Wuhan, which “surprisingly” resembled the description of the simulation virus: it is also transmitted to humans by bats and comes from the SARS virus family. It was an impressive prophetic masterstroke by the organisers of Event 201 to select from the countless human pathogenic viruses the one for a pandemic simulation that was actually to have an impressive successor shortly afterwards! However, it can be assumed that the organisers and participants of Event 201 must have recognised the parallels between SARS-CoV-2, as it appeared in the reports, and the SARS virus from the simulation. Since the Event 201 simulation became reality so quickly and so accurately, the Johns Hopkins Centre for Health Security felt compelled to issue a statement on this surprising coincidence as early as January 2020. It states, among other things: “While our tabletop exercise included a fictional novel coronavirus, the inputs we used to model the potential impact of this fictional virus are not comparable to SARS-CoV-2.” The organiser’s justification seems even less credible today than it did at the time of publication, as it has now been clearly proven that SARS-CoV-2 was cloned and (accidentally or even deliberately?) released in Wuhan using molecular genetic methods (more on this later in Chapter 4).
The term “Disease X” refers to a large number of pathogens that are not yet present in humans, but which can lead to illness after genetic modification and thus, according to the JHU report, “have the potential to trigger a pandemic […]”. Basically, there are two dangers or options for their development, one natural and one artificial:
Option 1) It is possible that pathogens already occurring in nature could accidentally change in such a way that they become pathogenic to humans. As most of these potentially dangerous microorganisms have existed for millions of years and have obviously not yet managed to become pathogenic to humans, a sudden threat from this natural process is very unlikely. In addition, this development would involve completely unpredictable variations that could not be covered by pre-produced vaccines. The following option 2 is therefore necessary for a functioning “Disease X” concept.
Option 2: The microorganisms that are not yet pathogenic to humans are specifically or artificially modified. They become infectious and pathogenic for humans through an artificial function-enhancing modification (i.e. “gain-of-function”). This is a human-controlled process of development that actually enables vaccine pre-production. All that is then needed is a laboratory accident or deliberate release, whereby the newly created human pathogenic virus spreads independently, as was the case with SARS-CoV-2.
In the interview, Dr Behrendt highlights the consequences of the WHO and its allies (investors and stakeholders) constantly expanding the list of so-called priority pathogens, which has been in place since 2015: “They only conduct research on these predefined dangerous priority pathogens and virus families – and this means that everything is ready, diagnostics and vaccines together. To this end, “CEPI [Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, a global partnership to accelerate the development of vaccines and other innovations] and the WHO have a memorandum of understanding that research will only be conducted globally in accordance with the WHO programme …”.
Consider the implications of what this means: the WHO determines which infectious diseases can be expected in the future, not only in terms of disease policy but also financially (which can guarantee the high return on investment it promises). Here we see a motive to abuse the institutional power of the WHO, we see the means to manipulate the process and all kinds of opportunities to realise criminal intentions – but above all we see that there is also a certain pressure to influence the pandemic, because the investors who are essential to the existence of the WHO have already been promised extreme profit margins!
In this way, the WHO can ensure a world of permapandemics, as the World Economic Forum, another extremely influential participant in this global profit and power game at the expense of the health of the world’s population, calls it in its 2023 annual report on global risks. We have known how dangerous these staged pandemics and especially the lucrative “vaccination programmes” are since COVID-19, when a large-scale study examined data from 29 countries with high vaccination coverage, covering 14.7% (1.19 billion) of the world’s population, and made the following shocking discovery: “According to our model, the average excess mortality caused by COVID vaccination in the period [December] 2020 to [February] 2024 is higher, about 1.7 times higher than that of the COVID pandemic itself. And the current rate is more than three times [exactly 3.4 times] the rate of COVID deaths.” According to a meta-study, the mortality rate from a SARS-CoV-2 infection would theoretically be zero if only sufficient vitamin D was supplemented, which in purely mathematical terms makes the mRNA injections infinitely more dangerous in comparison. However, a global propaganda campaign has been running against a natural prevention strategy from the outset; it is eye-opening to consider that a low mortality rate would ultimately run counter to the WHO’s profit promises. In 2020, the world was taken hostage, from which each individual could only free themselves if they were willing to undergo a genetic experiment. This must never happen again!
CONCLUSION
For many years, but even more so since the amendment of the International Health Regulations in June 2024, the WHO has been a health risk to the world’s population:
- due to its obscene promise of profits for its investors (at least 35-fold return on investment), to which it alone is committed without any external control …
- based on its world power to pre-define future pathogenic viruses and other pathogens (Disease X) …
- to commission the development (gain of function) of the pathogens in the first place (officially in the event that the identified pathogens actually “accidentally” develop naturally in this way) …
- in order to have (highly risky) vaccines prepared on this basis, …
- since it can declare a Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC) under the IHR at the sole discretion of the Director-General and the pandemic definition is absolutely irrelevant for the development of a vaccine (since 2009, there does not have to be a serious risk of disease) …
- as it can approve these substances for use by emergency authorisation (Emergency Use Listing Procedure) even before sufficient safety and efficacy data are available, as well as recommend measures and preparations/diagnostics to be administered (and thus decide which companies can reap the corresponding astronomical profits through global distribution), …
- itself determines who and in what way someone is tested for what exactly in such a case and thus defines who is considered ill and when and who should be classified as potentially infectious (without necessarily actually being so, as happened with the PCR method unsuitable for such a diagnosis in the case of COVID-19),
- in this way attracts even more investors who want to use this mechanism to increase profits.
This makes the WHO a life-threatening organisation for the world’s population and a highly profitable money-printing machine for its investors.
Dr Behrendt has the last word:
“And yes, the Covid vaccine was based on MERS, there was already a lot about it here for example, then only a new sequence was inserted [the furin cleavage site that fires the bullet, i.e. the S1 subunit, from the bioweapon], as it were, then everything was all set – the WHO’s entire R&D [research and development] Blueprint programme is the actual pandemic machine, which should be banned immediately!
In any case, no pandemic or vaccine falls from the sky! Every future pandemic could be a gain of function [i.e. another bioweapon, insert by M. Nehls]…”
Here I have put the whole puzzle together for you as it appears to me:
Bibliography
Note: All other sources can be found as links in the text.
