It's time to end the WHO's secret grip on American health care



It’s common sense: Local challenges should be confronted and solved locally whenever possible. Protecting Americans’ health is no exception.

Yet few realize that the World Health Organization still exerts influence over American health care, even as the United States has taken steps to separate from it. Earlier this year, a presidential executive order initiated the process of withdrawing the U.S. from the WHO, citing concerns that the organization prioritizes politics over science and public accountability.

The future of all health care should be patient-centered, not controlled by slow-moving, politically driven bureaucracies.

There is no question that leaving the WHO was and still is an important step forward for American patients, but there is much more work to be done before the organization’s foreign influence is extracted from our health care landscape and families can fully access the treatments that are best for them.

The next critical step? Detach the U.S. medical insurance coding system from the WHO’s model to ensure that it gives patients access to all medical procedures, from lifesaving precision oncology options to restorative, cutting-edge reproductive health therapies.

Unfortunately for patients, U.S. diagnostic codes are modeled after the WHO’s bulky and inherently limited insurance coding protocol. These codes play a pivotal role in determining patients’ access to care, provider reimbursement, and clinical outcome reporting. In the 1990s, the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics began to establish ICD-10-CM codes, which conform to the WHO’s framework governing how health care providers bill diagnoses. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services likewise developed ICD-10-PCS codes — which mirror WHO coding protocol — for use in inpatient hospital settings.

Just one of the many problems with each of these coding systems is that they are slow to adapt to medical advancements. Restorative reproductive medicine, for example, is a comprehensive approach to solving underlying fertility complications at the core. RRM seeks to heal human reproduction systems metabolically, hormonally, and otherwise. Already, it has helped thousands of couples struggling with infertility to have children.

The CDC and CMS bureaucracies have historically failed to recognize and cover evidence-based reproductive treatments like RRM that address the root causes of infertility, leaving families seeking such treatments — such as natural family planning/fertility awareness-based methods — to cover the costs themselves or resort to in-vitro fertilization to achieve pregnancy.

At its core, inadequate diagnostic coding for RRM discourages many providers from relying on RRM to heal patients at all because they know that code limitations will prevent them from being reimbursed through insurance.

Unfortunately, the ICD-10 codes doctors are forced to use do not accurately represent the nuanced hormonal, structural, and immune-related causes of infertility such as polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, and luteal phase defects that so often prevent pregnancy.

Even Current Procedural Terminology codes developed by the American Medical Association do not reflect modern fertility-preserving surgical interventions such as laparoscopic restoration of fallopian tubes, excision of endometriosis, or varicocele repair.

Instead, doctors who wish to deliver comprehensive treatments such as these are tied into relying on non-specific or “unlisted” codes, leading to denials of coverage and limited patient access to restorative procedures, which, if covered, would be far more cost-effective than artificial reproductive technologies like IVF.

Perhaps even worse for American patients and doctors alike is the fact that unclear coding undermines transparency and accurate reporting in these vital areas of medicine. Failing to differentiate between RRM's and IVF’s distinct clinical approaches, ethical frameworks, and long-term health implications limits transparency in outcome reporting while obscuring the true effectiveness and cost-efficiency of restorative treatments.

Each of these coding challenges points to a dire need for an evidenced-based, patient-centered, common coding lexicon nationwide.

The good news is that we have ample evidence that these coding changes are possible and effective. My organization, which facilitates common-sense, cost-saving therapies for our members, already allows providers to bill for effective treatments so often inaccessible through traditional insurance companies.

The federal government would be wise to do the same. The future of all health care should be patient-centered, not controlled by slow-moving, politically driven bureaucracies that rely on outdated, foreign billing and coding restrictions.

‘Disease X’ coming? WHO’s ‘replicon’ plan looks like doom



On Monday, May 5, President Trump signed an executive order banning “dangerous gain-of-function biological research in the United States and around the world.” This directive added muscle to his previous decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization. However, the United States remains vulnerable to international control.

Let’s review the history.

Until President Trump severs all remaining ties between the United States and the WHO, the public health of all Americans remains under threat of global government control.

On January 30, 2020, Tedros Ghebreyesus, director general of the World Health Organization, announced a “public health emergency of international concern.” With these magic words, Tedros put into force the WHO's International Health Regulations that supercharged the WHO into a one-world government health agency with the legal authority to declare pandemic sovereignty over all member nations, including the United States.

Tedros (as he is known) was born in Ethiopia and is not a medical doctor. Still, he is a Marxist and member of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, a group the Ethiopian government has classified as a terrorist organization. So Tedros, by extension, is not only a Marxist, but he’s also a terrorist. Tedros handled the COVID-19 response by running cover for the Chinese Communist Party, denying resolutely that the virus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and setting the stage for medical martial law and planet depopulation.

On January 20, 2025, President Trump finally withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization. Under terms of the WHO constitution, however, America’s involvement will not end officially until January 23, 2026.

Enter the Pentagon’s Defense Health Agency. The DHA monitors vaccine creation and “communicable” diseases and determines disease origination. The DHA uses the CDC for guidance, and its Influenza Division “provides ... leadership for the detection ... and control of influenza in the United States and around the world.” More importantly, the DHA still maintains “a vital partnership” with the WHO in a collaboration that includes "expanding military biodefense vaccine manufacturing."

This could become especially alarming if the world faces “Disease X.”

“Disease X” is the generic term the WHO uses to refer to an anticipated but unspecified future pandemic. That future may be now. Our research suggests that “Disease X” has already been weaponized and released in the form of a gain-of-function-enhanced version of COVID-19 that is more contagious and possibly more lethal than its predecessor.

A new “vaccine” to combat the next pandemic includes a “replicon” that continues to reproduce the active ingredient of the virus spike protein throughout a patient's body, even after the patient is dead. Replicon is a self-amplifying mRNA technology that copies itself and crosses between species. There is no known antidote that can stop the replicon from propagating the pathogenic COVID-19 spike protein.

RELATED: WHO director is upset ‘conspiracy theories’ may derail his global pandemic treaty

 Photo by FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images

A more contagious and fast-acting version of COVID-19 propelled through the body by a replicon vaccine could well become a highly lethal nightmare pandemic concoction. In 2024, scientists in Japan developed the world’s first replicon vaccine, brand-named “Kostaive.”

Knowing that the United States remains tied to the WHO until next January and that the DHA maintains a “partnership” with the organization, what assurance do we have that our military would not bow to the WHO if the WHO defied the U.S. commander in chief by declaring a “Disease X global health emergency” that required forced replicon vaccination?

Until President Trump issues an executive order severing all remaining ties between the NIH, the CDC, and the DHA and the World Health Organization, the public health of all Americans remains under threat of global government control.

Ghebreyesus is, in our view, the most powerful and potentially dangerous person on the planet. With his connections and self-professed infallibility, what possibly could go wrong?

Editor’s note: This article has been adapted from “Disease X and Medical Martial Law: Defeating the Globalist Plan to Depopulate the World and Enslave the Remnant” (Post Hill Press).

DOJ Can Dig Up Even More Evidence U.S. Taxpayers Funded Lab Creation Of Covid-19

The closest point of access that we have to the Wuhan lab is Dr. Peter Daszak. DOJ needs to start asking him questions.

Neoliberalism implodes in a crisis of truth and trust



Since the Enlightenment, liberalism has aimed to remove politics from the political. Given that human history is largely defined by clashing worldviews and violent conflict, the impulse to tame this dynamic is understandable. Liberalism, grounded in secular neutrality and rule of law, sought to suppress the passions that drive men to war. Its answer was to distribute power widely enough so that no single leader’s rage or charisma could lead a nation into chaos.

This project has reached its apex in today’s managerial neoliberal regime, where secular humanism serves as the ruling creed and experts, housed in supposedly impartial institutions, are tasked with determining truth. But the cracks in this foundation began forming long ago.

In the liberal order, the collapse of institutional credibility marks a crisis of truth. And so far, the only answer from the ruling class has been to scream, 'Shut up!'

Our ruling class members have willingly torched the credibility of the very institutions they rely on for legitimacy — all in pursuit of temporary political advantage. That destruction has accelerated a collapse that now feels inevitable. Liberalism faced an epistemological crisis and failed to meet the challenge. Like every tradition that cannot defend its intellectual ground, it is watching its authority erode into dust.

Neutral governance comes with clear benefits. It claims to free society from bitter conflicts over religion and identity. It promises a greater scale of cooperation by stripping away regional particularities — traditions, customs, prejudices — that make governing diverse populations difficult.

Even technical differences tied to nationhood, like currency, units of measurement, or contract law, obstruct trade. But by creating institutions that claim neutrality in matters of faith, culture, and commerce, liberalism increased the scale of possible coordination. It built what amounts to a “minimum viable morality,” a lowest common denominator that allowed incompatible systems to function together.

The problem? That same minimum morality now appears insufficient to hold anything together.

Instead of serving specific peoples with particular needs, modern institutions — staffed by credentialed experts — aim to impose rational, universal standards on everyone. The promise is simple: equal treatment under a neutral system. The administrators of this system are chosen not for their biases, but for their supposed objectivity.

These institutions soon become more than arbiters — they become the final authority on truth. In the liberal order, they are the only legitimate source of knowledge. If it isn’t institutional, it isn’t real.

The economic benefits of this arrangement are obvious. Large-scale cooperation yields immense material gains. Yes, traditions and religious customs may erode in the process, but who can argue with abundance? Prosperity silences most dissent.

As long as the ruling class preserves the credibility of the institutions, the system works. Managerial liberalism turned experts into a new priestly caste — with one crucial difference: This priesthood could actually make it rain. As long as the economy grew and the promises were kept, no one questioned the myth of neutral expertise. All the boats were rising. Why complain?

Unfortunately for the liberal order, human beings are predictably flawed. The institutions were never truly neutral, and the experts were never infallible. Over time, the ruling class got greedy. They stretched their credibility to justify wars and push social engineering — even when it clearly wasn’t in the public interest.

As their grip on power tightened, they grew bolder. Those who ran the system began treating institutional trust as a political currency to be spent. They traded legitimacy for short-term advantage, eroding the very foundation that kept their authority intact.

This trend hit its apex during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Across the board — from the World Health Organization to local physicians — experts promoted obvious falsehoods to maintain power. The betrayal was staggering.

After watching that coordinated institutional collapse, the public started asking uncomfortable questions. If medical professionals — the most trusted experts in life-and-death matters — could lie, what else has the system lied about? Elections? Wars? Economics? History? Suddenly, everything is up for re-examination.

This moment terrifies the ruling class. Its members' entire strategy relied on institutional consensus to shape truth and steer public opinion. This is why disillusioned liberal voices like Sam Harris or Douglas Murray, once celebrated for challenging orthodoxy, now beg the public to get back in the box and stop asking questions.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with how we know what we know. Under managerial neoliberalism, experts — and the institutions they populate — became the foundation of knowledge itself. Truth was whatever the expert consensus declared it to be.

Philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre (no relation) argued that the survival of any tradition depends on its ability to confront and resolve an epistemological crisis. In the liberal order, the collapse of institutional credibility marks just such a crisis. And so far, the only answer from the ruling class has been to scream, “Shut up!”

MacIntyre also insisted that resolving a crisis requires more than adopting a new framework. It demands understanding why the old one failed. But the current elite show no capacity for that kind of reflection. Instead of humility, we get hysteria — mockery, censorship, and cancellation from experts who should be asking how they got it so wrong.

The global neoliberal order has hit an epistemological wall, and its expert class members lack the wisdom or self-awareness to break through it. They will continue screeching and lashing out in defense of a collapsing worldview. But the truth is unavoidable: The era of rule by experts is ending.

This crisis brings danger, yes — but also opportunity. A new paradigm is emerging. And whatever comes next, it will not be governed by the priests of consensus.

World Health Organization reports adverse effects following US withdrawal



On his first day back in office, President Donald Trump resumed America's withdrawal from the scandal-plagued World Health Organization — a departure Trump initiated in his first term that was delayed for four years by the Biden administration. Days later, the administration ordered U.S. public health officials to stop working with the WHO.

Since American taxpayers will no longer be on the hook for funding over 15% of the organization's annual budget, the WHO is scrambling to adapt, laying off workers, closing clinics, and killing programs.

According to an internal WHO memo seen by Reuters, the organization — facing an income gap of $600 million in 2026 when the withdrawal takes effect — is looking to slash its budget for 2026-27 by 21%, from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion.

"The United States' announcement, combined with recent reductions in official development assistance by some countries to fund increased defence spending, has made our situation much more acute," said the memo, which was signed by WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

"Despite our best efforts, we are now at the point where we have no choice but to reduce the scale of our work and workforce," added the memo.

'WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States.'

In his Jan. 21 executive order, Trump recalled his initial reasons for leaving the organization, namely "the organization's mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states."

Trump noted further that the "WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries' assessed payments. China, with a population of 1.4 billion, has 300 percent of the population of the United States, yet contributes nearly 90 percent less to the WHO."

In early February, Ghebreyesus begged the Trump administration to reconsider, stating he would welcome the opportunity "to preserve and strengthen the historic relationship between WHO and the US."

Ghebreyesus suggested that contrary to Trump's characterization, the WHO was a reformed organization whose heavy financial reliance on the U.S. was short-term. The director-general also suggested that the WHO was not politically compromised by China and had not mishandled the COVID-19 pandemic.

'Drastic cuts to development aid by the U.S. and other countries represent a huge disruption.'

Growing increasingly desperate, Ghebreyesus pleaded again for a reversal of fortunes on Feb. 11, stating, "We regret the announcement by the United States, of its intention to withdraw, and it was also sad to see them participating less this week. I think we all felt their absence."

"We very much hope they would reconsider, and we would welcome the opportunity to engage in constructive dialogue," added Ghebreyesus.

It appears the WHO — which Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently called a "very nefarious organization" — has since accepted the fact that the U.S. and its money are not making a return.

According to the Brussels Times, the WHO is executing a hiring freeze, a ban on nonessential travel, and renegotiations of supply contracts.

Ghebreyesus noted in the internal memo, "Drastic cuts to development aid by the U.S. and other countries represent a huge disruption for countries, NGOs, and U.N. organisations, including the WHO."

The organization's executive board, composed of 34 member states, recently recommended a 20% member fee hike to cover half of the WHO's budget by 2030, reported Agence France-Presse.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FACT CHECK: Kenya Has Not Withdrawn From The WHO

A post shared on Facebook claims Kenya withdrew from the World Health Organization (WHO). Verdict: False There is no evidence for this claim. Kenya has called for more funding for the WHO. Fact Check: The United States withdrew from the WHO on Jan. 20, with the WHO director asking the country to reconsider its decision, according to […]

Trump announces America's withdrawal from World Health Organization



President Donald Trump announced America's withdrawal from the scandal-plagued World Health Organization late in his first term, citing the organization's poor response to COVID-19, its apparent willingness to help the communist Chinese regime cover up the spread of the virus, and its refusal to adopt urgently needed reforms.

The withdrawal was set to go into effect on July 6, 2021, but former President Joe Biden swooped in to keep America's membership in the globalist outfit up to date.

Biden is gone, and Trump's withdrawal plan is back.

In his Monday executive order to sever all ties with the WHO, Trump reiterated his previous issues with the organization, then noted that the "WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries' assessed payments. China, with a population of 1.4 billion, has 300 percent of the population of the United States, yet contributes nearly 90 percent less to the WHO."

Now with the shoe on the other foot, Trump revoked Biden's Jan. 20, 2021, letter to United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, wherein the elder Democrat indicated he was reversing course and remaining a member, as well as Biden's executive order 13987, the supposed purpose of which was to improve federal coordination when responding to the pandemic.

'Everybody rips off the United States.'

Trump directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russell Vought, the prospective director of the Office of Management and Budget, to pause the future transfer of any cash, support, or resources to the WHO at a time when American taxpayers are on the hook for funding over 15% of the organization's annual budget; recall and reassign American personnel or contractors working in any capacity with the the organization; identify American and international partners who could "assume necessary activities previously undertaken by the WHO"; and jettison the Biden administration's 2024 U.S. Global Health Security Strategy as soon as possible.

Although there is once again a great deal of pearl-clutching about breaking it off with what appears to be in some ways a wealth redistribution scheme, the WHO has repeatedly proven itself to be incompetent and in the pocket of America's adversaries.

For instance, the WHO told the nations of the world not to restrict travelers from China or close their borders, even though China had done so domestically at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic; gave Beijing a a veto over the WHO's COVID-19 origins report; endorsed vaccines that proved to be neither safe nor effective, including the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine whose developer admitted can cause deadly blood clots; and attracted criticism over its sexual abuse scandal, wasteful spending, sloppy scientific research, and corruption.

America's withdrawal is all the more timely because of the continued desire by WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and others to foist a global pandemic pact on member nations. Globalists convened at the World Health Assembly last year failed to produce a draft of the pact, which has been identified by American critics as a threat to national sovereignty. However, Ghebreyesus hinted at the likelihood of trying again while clamping down on "anti-vaxxers" in the meantime.

Trump tasked Rubio in his executive order with also ending further negotiations on the pandemic pact as well as amendments to the International Health Regulations.

"World Health ripped us off," Trump reportedly said Monday. "Everybody rips off the United States. It's not going to happen any more.”

America's withdrawal will be complete within a year of the Trump administration's official notification to the U.N. and the WHO.

"The World Health Organization regrets the announcement that the United States of America intends to withdraw from the Organization," the WHO said in a statement Tuesday. "We hope the United States will reconsider, and we look forward to engaging in constructive dialogue to maintain the partnership between the USA and WHO."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Best Way For Trump To Stick It To WHO Is To Stick With It

Trump should mold the WHO into an organization that serves countries and their populations — not profit — and replace it if he can't.

WHO’s New Tobacco Guidelines Prioritize Ideology Over Public Health

By ignoring the benefit of non-combustible nicotine products in helping smokers quit, the WHO is jeopardizing public health.

Globalists’ 3-pronged attack plan to END our sovereignty



Under the direction of the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the European Union, the largest globalist power grab in history is currently underway.

“We have threats on multiple fronts,” Glenn Beck warns, adding, “The stakes couldn’t be any higher. Everything is under attack. Free-speech, private property, faith, liberty, children, our families, everything is at stake.”

And the time has never been more ripe, as over 60 countries are facing elections this year.

“So, what does that mean for the New World Order? Well, they have to win. They have to make their major moves now. The time to seize control or at least to have the building blocks in place is right now,” Glenn says.

Glenn believes that if you reflect on the trends of the past decade, there are “three main events” that the globalists could invoke as a crisis in order to seize the control they want — and need.

“One, a major geopolitical risk. These are things like, oh I don’t know, war with Russia, or an economic disruption. Both of those are very likely to happen,” Glenn says.

“The next one is a health emergency. This one can be several things: a pandemic, the threat of a possible pandemic, guns, the climate, you use your imagination on this, but they already have a plan in place for all of them,” he warns.

“Climate change. This is how a government will seize control of food, energy, and water. They will also force private businesses into partnerships through mechanisms like ESG, and they can pull this trigger for almost anything. Forest fires, hurricanes, tornadoes, high temperatures in the summer.”

After these crises have been set in motion, that’s when the global institutions step in to declare their power by imposing mandates.

“What we saw with COVID,” Glenn recalls, “the World Health Organization takes the leading role. We all remember how that went.”


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.