WHO's Incompetence

Last October I posted on an unforgivable mismanagement of the AIDS epidemic in Africa by the World Health Organization (WHO). The problem was the use of counterfeit anti-AIDS drugs that only accomplished increasing the HIV resistance rate. Who formed WHO, you ask? The U.N. of course.

Well now the WHO has a new target of interest to keep the poverty and death rate going strong. AIDS is running rampant and up to 40% of children are dying from an out-of-control (but very preventable) Malarial epidemic, but the U.N. is now focusing its energy on evil baby formula.

With AIDS, the WHO got a black eye for placing 18 Indian-made rip-off medicines on its list of approved drugs. Those medicines turned out to be uncertified copies of the patented HIV drugs from which they were copied.

With malaria, the WHO has refused to encourage the use of DDT and other proven insecticides and has engaged in what a group of scientists, writing in The Lancet, called “medical malpractice” in its use of a poor regime of anti-malarial drugs.

A U.N. agency that was set up in 1948, the WHO, more and more, has come under the influence of radical health and environmental activists who push a bitterly anti-enterprise ideology.

Congress should insist that the WHO stick to the basics. Instead, having botched campaigns against the two worst epidemics in the world, the WHO, incredibly, is focusing its attention on the bottle-feeding of infants.

<..snip..>

In January, the WHO recommended the adoption of an extreme anti-bottle-feeding resolution at the 57th World Health Assembly — the WHO’s annual meeting, set for mid-May in Geneva. The immediate objective of the resolution is to force infant-formula packages to carry warning labels akin to those on cigarettes or liquor. The ultimate goal is to scare mothers into abandoning bottle-feeding.

There’s a deep irony here. The WHO wants to discourage the use of baby formula, whose efficacy and safety have been established over many decades — while at the same time, the WHO has been approving untested anti-AIDS drugs.

<..snip..>

There’s a correlation between high rates of infant-formula use and low rates of infant mortality. The reason is not that infant formula is better than breast milk, but that, as a country develops, infant health and nutrition improve, and the use of formula, at the same time, increases.

Nestle sells more infant formula in a healthy nation like Belgium than it does in all of Africa, which has 60 times Belgium’s population. The best way to boost good health in Africa is to boost African economies. And time-saving technologies like infant formula can help.

This means that Africans should be able to choose, and not to be scared or shamed into breast-feeding. Radicals and their supporters at the WHO, however, want to keep African women, in effect, barefoot, denying them the choice, as they modernize, of a healthy, convenient product.

After the UN runs all the baby formula out of Africe, just who exactly is suppose to breast-feed all of the orphans? Does this make sense to anyone? This is beyond insane.

Read here to find out how radical activists have kept the safe, lifesaving insecticide, DDT, out of use that is paramount to mass murder...Oh, I'm sorry - that's 'population control'. Go read it yourself...I'm not kidding.

Population control advocates blamed DDT for increasing third world population. In the 1960s, World Health Organization authorities believed there was no alternative to the overpopulation problem but to assure than up to 40 percent of the children in poor nations would die of malaria. As an official of the Agency for International Development stated, "Rather dead than alive and riotously reproducing."

[Desowitz, RS. 1992. Malaria Capers, W.W. Norton & Company]

Your United Nations at work ladies and gentlemen. Those poor souls in Africa have not a chance in hell.