![]() This is part of AP’s effort to address widely shared misinformation, including work with outside companies and organizations to add factual context to misleading content that is circulating online. “As with all international instruments, any new accord, if and when agreed by Member States, would be determined by governments themselves, who would take any action while considering their own national laws and regulations,” the page states.Įpstein said discussions surrounding the accord are expected to resume in June, after countries involved were allowed to submit written proposals in recent months. That page says that among the “guiding principles and rights” for the new accord is the importance of national sovereignty. Senate powers, but in an email pointed to a “ frequently asked questions ” page the agency has developed about the pandemic accord. “The WHO has no such enforcement mechanisms.”ĭaniel Epstein, a spokesperson with the WHO, didn’t directly address the claims of bypassing U.S. Department of Health and Human Services wrote in a statement in February. health policy or national health emergency response actions,” the U.S. “It is false to claim that the World Health Organization has now, or will have by virtue of these activities, any authority to direct U.S. However, as experts and officials told The Associated Press at the time, the proposal would not overrule any nations’ individual health or domestic policies. “This would help the US and the world to do better next time with more sharing of scientific information, more transparency, and more equity.” “We have just been through a pandemic and lost over a million lives,” Gostin wrote. In February, an initial “zero draft” of the proposal was released, laying out a vision for more effective pandemic prevention, preparedness and response through international cooperation.Īmong other things, the draft called for developing ways to better allocate vaccines, tests and other pandemic essentials, committing to reporting research findings quickly and transparently and sharing information on emerging health threats. ![]() “If it is adopted as a convention or treaty, it would almost certainly require Senate ratification.” “There is no truth in this statement,” Gostin wrote in an email. Constitution, conventions and treaties made with other nations must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate and have the full force of federal legislation. Senate approval, according to Lawrence Gostin, a global health law professor at Georgetown University who has been involved in the discussions. The WHO’s 194-member nations agreed last year to develop a pandemic accord as a legally binding convention or treaty, meaning it would require U.S. They also claim it would somehow alter the American way of life.Ĭhanges to Connecticut’s anti-discrimination laws won’t make pedophiles a protected class Recent posts suggest a plan being discussed under the auspices of the WHO would circumvent the constitutionally-required approval of the U.S. THE FACTS: Social media users are casting doubt over ongoing talks to improve the world’s response to pandemics, mischaracterizing it as a thinly veiled threat to U.S. It is meant to encourage international coordination so countries are better prepared to weather future pandemics. Regardless, the proposal also doesn’t seek to take away sovereign rights. Senate, according to an expert involved in the process. Discussions about the proposed agreement are in their early stages but all indications are that it would take the form of an official convention or treaty, which would require approval by the U.S. Senate and “reshape America.”ĪP’S ASSESSMENT: False. ![]() CLAIM: The World Health Organization is working on an agreement among nations regarding future pandemics that would “bypass” the U.S.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |