Information Warfare:
Curating the Covid Narrative

The World Council for Health is a global organization of medical professionals that is critical of and proposes alternatives to the World Health Organization’s policies — and chances are that you’ve never heard of it.

2,118 words

The World Council for Health [is] a faux-medical body dedicated to promoting vaccine hesitancy and Ivermectin as a COVID treatment. — VICE magazine

The World Council for Health is a pseudo-medical organization dedicated to spreading misinformation about Covid vaccines and promoting fake Covid treatments. — Wikipedia

How many organizations are there? It feels as though we will soon have one for each of us — our own personal advisory body or lobby group among the forest of acronyms, logos, and mission statements. There is nothing wrong with being an organization per se, even if hyper-organization is one of the many viruses to which the West is playing host. But how do you make sense of this endless arcade of mostly single-issue bodies? One performance indicator is to watch the media reaction to any given organization.

Catching up with the little platoon of English YouTubers from whom I get my sketches of the old country as it exists today, one of them mentioned something called the World Council for Health (WCH) — and in approving tones. YouTuber Katie Hopkins is so hated by the Left that a play was performed in Wales in 2018 entitled The Assassination of Katie Hopkins. “The most provocative thing about this show,” bleated the Left-wing Vatican the Guardian, “is the title.” The review goes on to say that the play is “an intelligent, thoughtful, and often wryly enjoyable look at the polarization of public debate in the age of social media, and what happens when it ceases to be a discourse and becomes a mere echo-chamber.”

The Guardian is not a newspaper known for the self-awareness of its writers. In an age in which people think a cogent argument can be made in 140 characters, the title is everything. And, given the animosity Hopkins excites on the Left, if she mentions an organization of which I have never heard, I will at least look it up.

The WCH website can be found here. It’s a colorful, splashy site, and you expect the anodyne when you read a description of their “Better Way Charter,” as it sounds bland enough to take its pew in the choir-stalls:

7 Principles of a Better Way.

The Better Way Principles is [sic] a reference point for the World Council of Health, our partners, communities, and individuals everywhere to continue the exciting and important work of co-creating a Better Way, one step at a time.

It reads just like standard globalist jargon, but perhaps the mention of “individuals” might alert us — and others — to developments further down the page.

The WCH is an umbrella organization, claiming some 200 partners worldwide. I have heard of none of them, but it is not my area and, as noted, one thing the world is not short of is organizations. The most illustrious partner I can find is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The WCH go on to describe themselves as “an active group of professionals seeking to empower people to take control of their health and wellbeing and to develop autonomy and agency.” This is enough to get the sniffer dogs of the media alerted, surely. By the time they give a precis of their policy brief on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recent “power grab” — their words — they have shown their true colors to the medico-media complex:

[A]mendments to the International Health Regulations (2005, downloadable here) . . . [illustrate] why the undue concentration of power in the field of global public health and the provision of a legal framework for such using the WHO constitute a threat to health, sovereignty and democratic governance that requires a swift, effective and robust response.

Put your hands where can see ‘em, WCH. Not only have you criticized the WHO, you got sovereignty in there as well.

The WHO may not alarm Europeans as much as it does Americans. Europeans — and the United Kingdom — are used to living under the governance of an almost entirely unelected political congress (MEPs, or Members of the European Parliament, aside). The fact that the WHO has just proposed amendments to its core pandemic document that would allow it to override sovereign nations and impose emergency conditions when it sees fit is just another outrageous European scheme to curtail liberty. Big deal, put it with the rest.

But surely the globalists’ praetorian guard in the media will have smeared the WCH for their impertinence in the face of “the science.” Not at all. They have exercised the other media strategy towards ideological pariahs, and ignored them completely. I can’t find a mention of the WCH anywhere in the mainstream media. Even a piece on one of the WCH’s steering committee, Dr. Mark Trozzi, who was barred by The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario from granting Covid-19 exemptions from testing, mask-wearing, and vaccination, contained no mention of his affiliation with the WCH, which you would expect in a hit piece. The first mention I came across was three tech pieces by someone called Anna Merlan, and published last year in VICE magazine. Well, VICE should be a good litmus of how the Left feel about the WCH. Ms. Merlan is in no doubt that she is in the presence of heresy:

[T]he WCH is an umbrella group for purveyors of COVID misinformation. Its dozens of large and small “coalition partners” . . . share one thing: a devotion to casting doubt on COVID vaccines and promoting discredited treatments for the disease . . . Since the beginning of the pandemic, a growing number of organizations, new and old, have devoted themselves to creating the perception that there are legitimate medical bodies that question the basic science of mask-wearing, social distancing, and vaccination. [italics added]

Eighteen months is a long time in a pandemic, and the much-trumpeted trio Ms. Merlan calls “basic science” have all been either discredited or linked with unexpected deaths. Now that Covid is many moons — and news cycles — ago, governments are slowly releasing the more problematic statistics and outcomes and fudging the rest with reports and enquiries. It is not the business of the legacy media to broadcast, but merely to cover up. There isn’t much on the BBC about excess deaths in England and Wales post-Covid vaccination, even though mortality rates in England and Wales for April were 12.9% higher than the five-year average. The Covid status of the deceased was given statistically; not so vaccination status.

The WCH continue to poke the bear: “We believe in a healthy world, which enjoys information transparency, access to proven medicines, and real action in the face of disease . . .”

You can buy Christopher Pankhurst’s essay collection Numinous Machines here.

This is the exact opposite of what the WHO, Western governments, and their retail allies in Big Pharma believe in. And with videos titled “Gender Ideology: Indoctrination, Contagion and Medicalisation,” and “Protecting Young Minds,” the WCH are also trespassing on more ideologically private property in criticizing transgender coercion.

The WHO have effectively made a power grab which no government has tried to prevent. America, a country famous for amendments, wishes to amend those of the WHO, particularly the statement that the WHO can declare a world health emergency at any time, with all the state-mandated precautions that entails. But America — just — can still stand up to bodies such as the WHO. How many of the other 193 countries who have signed up to the WHO will have that leverage?

But the WHO’s easing into world governance is less sinister than another aspect of the pandemic which is only just struggling to surface: control of the narrative. To ensure no public conversation could be had during Covid concerning masks, social distancing, and vaccines, the British government adopted what is becoming standard operational procedure. Breitbart reports;

Officials within the UK Government reported worked clandestinely with social media companies . . . as well as AI firms to monitor critics of the lockdown regime, as well as to identify and ultimately criticize speech criticizing the draconian government policy.

There was also a “Counter Disinformation Unit” (CDU) under the direction of the Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care, Neil O’Brien. Even the army got involved, although they are usually reserved for emergencies in the physical world rather than the virtual. The secretive and so-called “77th Brigade,” whose brief is to deploy “non-lethal engagement and legitimate non-military levers as a means to adapt behaviors of adversaries.” Non-lethal behavior adaptation of adversaries: that would be us. It’s good to see the army is busy protecting the nation.

The government is thus an imperial guard for the pharmaceutical companies, running defense for this dominant industry composed of people who are quite happy to mass inject whole populations with an untested, experimental vaccine, leading to results we are now beginning to see. And there is a win bonus, as the British government got to road-test its program of controlling the whereabouts and status of its citizens. The WHO will soon reinforce this with a Digital Health Passport (DHP). In addition, the WHO also point out that morale in the medical workforce is a serious issue, claiming that nine out of ten nurses wish to leave the profession. European Union Social Rights Commissioner Nicolas Schmit talks of the importance of “internal migration of healthcare people,” which will doubtless ensure that the flow of migration to richer Western countries will be boosted.

And, of course, the citizens are paying for their own surveillance. From The Daily Telegraph:

[AI firm] Logically has been paid more than £1.2 million of taxpayers’ money to analyze what the government terms “disinformation” — false information deliberately seeded online — and “misinformation,” which is false information which has been spread inadvertently.

The danger of AI, of which we are constantly reminded in the language and format of a graphic novel, is not the rise of the robots but the question of how governments will use AI against their own people. The question these people must answer, both in themselves and in their voting behavior, is: How far is my government prepared to go to punish me for expressing forbidden opinions?

There so many similar and conjoined schemes being piloted in Europe that are designed to be detrimental to the public, sometimes you almost miss one, as here in France: “A bill handing French authorities the right to spy on certain individuals using cameras and microphones embedded in private devices has passed its first reading.”

Every time there is a new play by whoever it is that is ultimately pulling the global strings — every new pandemic or climate scare or war or rumors of war — two things will become routine for Western people outside the political class and their administration. Firstly, liberties will be directly infringed. Secondly, there will be full-scale, covert surveillance of anyone questioning the state line.

The CDU was not briefed simply to monitor popular journalists such as Peter Hitchens and talk-show host Julia Hartley-Brewer, but also Member of Parliament Sir David Davies, academics, and scientists. And, of course, the little people. Put simply, any voice on social media and elsewhere who spoke out against the governmental, WHO-endorsed Covid policy was treated in the same way as he would be in China, Turkey, or Iran — and we must watch to see how much further they attempt to replicate those models with incarceration for Wrongthink.

The interconnection between the provisional arms of government is apparent. The CDU is linked to the “Trusted News Initiative” trumpeted by the BBC and Reuters. Reuters just happens to have a former chairman of Pfizer on its board, and accepts funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This staged curation of the truth — or at the very least valid discussion of the truth — looks as though more care and application was expended on it during the pandemic than there was on attempting to improve the lot of the voter.

Along with the DHP, governments have been road-testing the CBDC, or Central Bank Digital Currency. This would enable government direct access to bank accounts, and is a step closer to a Chinese-style social credit system whereby your purchases could be monitored and controlled for either social reasons, punitive ones, or both.

In a stable world, the World Health Council would be featured, interviewed, and reported on in the mainstream to the same extent as the WHO’s diktats. This lack of presence in the public’s attention span means that far fewer people know of their existence than if they had had equal media coverage.

But at least they know someone — apart from me — has read their website from beginning to end, and probably taken an interest in the WCH’s 200 coalition partners. Unfortunately, that assiduous reader will have been working for the British government.

Visit Mark Gullick’s blog: Mad, Bad, and Dangerous to Know.

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.

• First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
• Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
• Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments. 
• Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:

Paywall Gift Subscriptions

If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:

• your payment
• the recipient’s name
• the recipient’s email address
• your name
• your email address

To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.