Dr. Chan, China and the Enemies of the Internet
Well, today my hopes for the WHO have turned to ashes. The worst possible person for the job has been chosen, Dr. Margaret Chan.
As you may recall, Dr. Chan is one of the individuals responsible for the disastrous response to the SARS epidemic in Hong Kong. Her handling of the H5N1 pre-pandemic situation has been quite poor. She has repeatedly praised China for their transparency in handling H5N1 even as others at the UN and the WHO criticised China for withholding information.
Just a few days ago, Dr. Julie Hall of the WHO had this to say about cooperation from China's Ministry of Agriculture:
"There's a stark contrast between what we're hearing from the researchers and what the ministry of agriculture says," said Dr Hall. "Unless the ministry tell us what's going on and shares viruses on a regular basis, we will be doing diagnostics on strains that are old."
She said the MOA has not shared any bird-flu samples with the WHO since 2004 and this has hindered the organisation's ability to monitor and track possible mutations in the virus. Keeping track of the virus is vital in developing vaccines and suitable control measures.
From:
And who has been the individual in charge of getting this information from China during this time? Margaret Chan. She came to the WHO in 2003 and became the Representative of the Director-General for Pandemic Influenza in June 2005. As you can see, she's done a great job getting China to co-operate [sarcasm].
But now that she's got the job of WHO Director-General, she will crack down on the Chinese government, right? If you believe that, I've got some extra-special water bottled in Harbin to sell you. China used all of its considerable economic and political power to get her the job. She owes them, literally. The conflict of interest should be obvious.
Does it really matter who the Director-General of the WHO is? Yes, it does. Only the Director-General can move the pandemic alert phase to 4. Many country and state pandemic plans do not initiate serious preparations until phase 4 is declared. But declaring phase 4 would result in travel restrictions to affected countries which would include large areas of China. This would decimate China's economy. Does anyone really think Margaret Chan would damage the economy of China to save us?
Although some of the MSM has mentioned that Dr. Chan's failure in Hong Kong during SARS, most of the coverage has been upbeat and positive. The US government strongly supported her candidacy. So who is left to watch the WHO and China? Well, just a few alarmists on the internet. But not in China. China has some of the most repressive restrictions on the internet in the world:
Along with effective spying and censorship technology, the regime is also very good at intimidating users and forcing them to censor their own material. China is the world’s biggest prison for cyber-dissidents, with 62 in prison for what they posted online.
Nothing like that could happen in the North America, could it?
Well, could it?
Wednesday, November 8, 2006