News
Featured Image
Dr. Leana WenTwitter / screenshot

(LifeSiteNews) – Former Planned Parenthood president Leana Wen is continuing to dissent from COVID-19 orthodoxy despite bitter condemnation from her former left-wing allies, publishing Tuesday a Washington Post article explaining why she will not mask her children when sending them to school.

Wen, a former Baltimore health commissioner whom Planned Parenthood fired in 2019 after less than a year leading the abortion giant, has advocated various restrictive measures in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, including vaccine mandates and passports. But recently she has begun to soften on some of those measures, prompting outrage from fellow leftists.

As detailed recently by Dr. Robert Malone, more than 600 left-wing health practitioners, academics, and students have signed a petition demanding that Wen be disinvited from speaking at the 2022 American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting, based in large part on her latest COVID opinions, and replaced “with someone whose work is consistent with anti-racist, anti-eugenicist public health practices and community health.”

Wen is so far standing by her calls for a less restrictive COVID regime. In the Post, she argues that the Omicron variant of the virus is “is so contagious — with its derivative strains such as BA.5 even more so — that preventing covid-19 became nearly impossible,” which necessitated “dramatically” rethinking the “benefit-risk calculus of mitigation measures.”

“I was willing to limit my children’s activities for a year or two but not for their entire childhood,” wrote Wen, who vaccinated her children for COVID (despite the shots being unnecessary and potentially harmful, especially to young people).

“It helped, too, that omicron is milder than previous variants,” she noted. “”The likelihood of severe outcomes, including the feared multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, is much lower now than it was during the delta or alpha surges. The odds of developing long covid are also lower with omicron compared with previous strains. Vaccination, while less protective against symptomatic disease due to omicron, continues to provide excellent protection against severe illness” (the notion that this protection outweighs the risks remains questionable).

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Stop Tedros' WHO Pandemic Treaty
  Show Petition Text
101107 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

The WHO Pandemic Treaty looks set to be one of the biggest power-grabs in living memory, with unelected globalists seeking the power to declare pandemics, and then control your country's response. 

But it's not too late to do something about it. 

SIGN and SHARE this special petition telling Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that the WHO will never usurp your nation's sovereignty.

The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level. 

194 member states representing 99% of the world's population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.

This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations. 

SIGN this petition against the WHO's Pandemic Treaty, before it's too late.

Ludicrously, 20 world leaders calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to "dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation - namely peace, prosperity, health and security."

Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.

The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO. 

Biden's representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.

These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28 and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed. 

SIGN and SHARE the petition telling the WHO that you won't accept any pandemic treaty

The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations "on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response," a U.S. statement read. 

"This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive. 

"We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multisectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic. 

"We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems," the U.S. statement added.

SIGN the petition today to show the WHO that you won't accept this attack on national sovereignty.

These are precarious times in which freedom and self-determination must be defended from those who would ride rough-shod over your civil rights. 

We do not want to go back to global lockdowns, vaccine mandates and propoganda.

Sign the petition - speak up now!

For More Information:

Biden hands over American sovereignty with proposed WHO treaty - LifeSiteNews

Pandemic Treaty is a backdoor to global governance - LifeSiteNews

Dr. Robert Malone on the WHO's power-grab - LifeSiteNews

**Photo: YouTube Screenshot**

  Hide Petition Text

“I accept the risk that my kids will probably contract covid-19 this school year, just as they could contract the flu, respiratory syncytial virus and other contagious diseases,” Wen wrote. “As for most Americans, covid in our family will almost certainly be mild; and, like most Americans, we’ve made the decision that following precautions strict enough to prevent the highly contagious BA.5 will be very challenging. Masking has harmed our son’s language development, and limiting both kids’ extracurriculars and social interactions would negatively affect their childhood and hinder my and my husband’s ability to work.”

Despite her continued support for the controversial COVID shots, Wen’s rejection of masking and extreme COVID restrictions reflects increasing public awareness and consensus of how the public health establishment’s favored policies actually performed.

Evidence indicates that masks, for instance, were not only ineffective at containing the virus but actually resulted in a variety of harms, especially for children.

“The potential educational harms of mandatory-masking policies are much more firmly established, at least at this point, than their possible benefits in stopping the spread of COVID-19 in schools,” University of California-San Francisco epidemiologist professor Vinay Prasad wrote in September 2021. “Early childhood is a crucial period when humans develop cultural, language, and social skills, including the ability to detect emotion on other people’s faces. Social interactions with friends, parents, and caregivers are integral to fostering children’s growth and well-being.”

Last year, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) came under fire for removing from its website an acknowledgment of this consensus after coming out in favor of forced masking of children as young as two.

“By the time babies are 6 to 8 weeks old, they may smile back when they see a face,” read the since-deleted Face Time and Emotional Health brochure. “These ‘social smiles’ are both fun and important. Make time for ‘face time’! That means taking time to smile at your baby’s face and to return a smile whenever your baby smiles.”

“If your child learns early in life that he can easily get your attention by smiling or cooing or being happy, he will keep it up,” it added. “But if you do not make time for face time, he may give up on smiling and try more fussing, crying and screaming to get the attention he needs.”

Similarly, reviews found that the lockdowns favored by more liberal states were either ineffective at saving lives, or what benefit they offered was outweighed by associated harms.

Last March, the left-wing Associated Press admitted that “California and Florida have experienced almost identical outcomes in COVID-19 case rates,” despite the former imposing some of the most draconian lockdown measures in the country and the latter remaining mostly open, and that the mortality gulf between Connecticut and South Dakota was similarly small despite the wide gulf in their responses to the virus.

In April 2021, Simon Fraser University economics professor Douglas Allen published a study concluding that while lockdowns saved 22,333 years’ worth of lost life worldwide, they also caused 6.3 million years of lost life, making the policies’ net long-term harm 282 times worse than their benefits, thanks to the combined toll of canceled or delayed care for other medical issues, and the psychological harm of lost jobs and social isolation, among other factors.

In February 2022, a meta-analysis published in Johns Hopkins University’s Studies in Applied Economics found that “lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality,” but have “imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted.”

In April, the fiscally-conservative Committee to Unleash Prosperity (CUP) ranked all 50 states on the equally-weighted metrics of health, economic, and educational outcomes. They gave 18 states an A or B grade. Of those, 16 were led by Republican governors, including the top six performers: Utah, Nebraska, Vermont, Montana, South Dakota, and Florida. By contrast, the six states and jurisdictions to receive an F grade are all led by Democrats: Illinois, California, New Mexico, New York, the District of Columbia, and New Jersey.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

7 Comments

    Loading...