From time to time one has breakfast with some international news published by journalistic media of all kinds, of those that catch one’s attention. In some cases I usually read them and put them aside, and in others they simply become part of my archive of forgotten papers, a sort of newspaper pages forgotten in boxes, which from time to time pass to a better life. They collect dust, take up space and with the passing of the years they raise some comments among the people around you: …surely if a psychologist saw your work room, he would not hesitate to diagnose you with Diogenes Syndrome, I have even heard that from friends and family. Surely this Diogenes kept so many things that he got out of control. This is not my case.
Of course, from time to time, in my personal search for more space, I attack those boxes, press containers and many of them, after a discreet review, go to occupy the place that history gives them in the paper container. However, on other occasions some already forgotten headline comes back to remind me again why I kept it. In this case the headline to a column in the newspaper El País of August 13, 2014 (10 years ago) The WHO (World Health Organization) admits the use of experimental drugs. Shielding themselves behind the approval of an ethical committee belonging to the same organization (Juan Palomo, yo me lo guiso, yo me lo como – typical Spanish saying, meaning that one does everything without permisions of anybodyelse) they approved at that time the use of experimental treatments on the victims of an Ebola outbreak that was occurring at that time in West Africa, without having proven their efficacy at all. To justify this treatment, the then WHO Deputy Director of Health Systems argued that other previous treatments were not working and that therefore … it is not only ethical, but a moral imperative.
The WHO statement did not refer, according to the clipping itself, to the experimental serum that had been approved for use in human guinea pigs, but that certain ethical criteria should also be taken into account, including transparency about the nature of the drug (What transparency can there be, when the nature of its results is not known? Ah! These doctors). Of course there was also an emphasis on respect for the individual, dignity and community involvement and, I forgot, consent. Although if you live in West Africa, one of the most depressed areas of the world, where you have absolutely nothing to survive on, whatever those in control of the “medical shaman” shack tell you will be fine with them. What is the difference between dying of Ebola, malnutrition or any other disease for which you are not prepared or serving as a lab rat for the big pharmaceutical corporations, including the phony health guard empire misnamed WHO?
Furthermore, in the same clipping it was confirmed that the WHO had given the go-ahead on the use of certain experimental drugs on those humans in Africa, after a spokesman, a week earlier had advised against the use of any product …that has not gone through the normal process of licensing and medical testing.
Of course I am not going to go into this subject in depth here, but go ahead and say that a book could be written on the subject. If you have the time and opportunity I advise you to put the phrase that serves as the headline of this opinion article: WHO allows experimental drugs to be used, whatever your language, and you will see how thousands of entries on this subject will come up. The COVID 19 pandemic itself, which was not a pandemic and did not plunge the world into a terrifying end of times, was undoubtedly one of the last projects of the WHO and some big pharmaceutical companies on how to use experimental drugs on humans, with the difference that on this occasion they were used on those who could pay for them, enriching the industry in a shameful and disgusting way. Governments lied to us, some presidents even spoke openly of non-existent expert committees (as in the case of Spain), they spoke of transparency and ethics, they used us by calling us stupid and pointing the finger at us if we did not agree with their theses. All limits were exceeded. They hijacked democracy and freedom and subjected us to unnecessary stress from which we emerged, to later define us in general as mentally ill.
Someday I imagine that the truth will have to be brought to light or at least continue to publish material where we can read between the lines of how we were swindled, with the connivance of the WHO, which as on previous occasions, a week before declaring the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, declared that absolutely nothing was going to happen.
What can happen in a week for such a radical change of opinion, and even more so in an organization that, supposedly, has the obligation to watch over all of us?
Sometimes the cuts, although full of dust, are often useful to give us back a minimum of the personal integrity that was taken away from us for a couple of years and that still has not been given back to us, when we now know that there were vaccines that have generated serious health problems and some deaths. Yes, for the greater good. I expect, of course, millions of dollars in compensation to those who have been left with lifelong sequelae or to the relatives of those whose lives have been taken.
By the way, I leave the question up in the air: why in 2014 did we not already have a vaccine against Ebola? A presumed vaccine was patented in 2019, rVSV-ZEBOV, in the USA, if we consider that the disease was detected in 1976 in the Democratic Republic of Congo, why did it take 43 years to obtain results?
