First Global Pandemic Treaty Agreed - Without the US (nature.com) 139
For the first time -- and despite fears that it might never happen -- nations have agreed a series of measures to prevent, prepare for and respond to pandemics. Nature: The terms of the first global pandemic accord were still being hashed out at the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, up until the early hours of 16 April. "This is a definitive moment in the history of global health," says Lawrence Gostin, a specialist in health law and policy at Georgetown University in Washington DC, who followed the negotiations closely. The accord "sets out some very important norms to keep the world safe," he says.
The accord was agreed without the United States, which withdrew from the pandemic treaty the day that President Trump was inaugurated. This reduces its power, says Gostin, but is also a source of strength. "Instead of collapsing in the face of President Trump's assault on global health, the world came together." The treaty is not perfect but represents a major achievement, says Michelle Childs, policy advocacy director at the non-profit organization Drugs for Neglected Diseases Initiative in Geneva. "People didn't think that they'd get to this stage of agreeing at all."
The accord was agreed without the United States, which withdrew from the pandemic treaty the day that President Trump was inaugurated. This reduces its power, says Gostin, but is also a source of strength. "Instead of collapsing in the face of President Trump's assault on global health, the world came together." The treaty is not perfect but represents a major achievement, says Michelle Childs, policy advocacy director at the non-profit organization Drugs for Neglected Diseases Initiative in Geneva. "People didn't think that they'd get to this stage of agreeing at all."
I cannot wait (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What does the US get out of these treaties?
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
Re: (Score:2)
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
"Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country did to you"
Re: I cannot wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That's modern Republicanism. Always be the victim, never accept fault for anything and instead double down to show strength*. Also, don't be afraid to abandon every principle and moral you once believed in - those only get in the way of grasping at power, and accumulation of power is the goal.
They aren't conservative. They're Conservative(tm). It's now a brand with absolutely no meaning anchored in reality, and no longer a philosophy.
* in this context, "strength" is indistinguishable from "stupidity"
Re: (Score:2)
So all you have is "no u"
Why bother posting anything at all?
Re:I cannot wait (Score:5, Insightful)
While the US population does indeed get screwed a lot, almost all of that is its own doing.
Re: (Score:2)
"Huckleberry Finn's Father" syndrome
Re: I cannot wait (Score:2)
Re:I cannot wait (Score:5, Insightful)
All too often, the US gets screwed.
Trump's persecution complex penetrating into the ongoing persecution complex of the Christian Right and combining with the weird American Exceptionalism doctrine that too many of us in country believe has really fucked up the perspective of a lot of our population. We were *the* world power after World War II, and we used that power to help other countries, creating strong allies and relationships, cementing our power and influence. How anyone thinks throwing this global hissy fit, talking about how our strongest allies are fucking us over by trying to continue the trade agreements and overall cooperation we've lived with for most of that time, then using that fake premise as an excuse to take a baseball bat to any and all partners then wondering why they aren't thanking us for it is... baffling to those of us that actually have a few brain cells left tickling around our noggins despite our government's best attempts to keep us stupid and compliant.
Re:I cannot wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if you can't guess just by reading the title, when 193 countries from all sort of political and cultural background agree on a treaty, there are very good chances that something about it is useful.
Re:I cannot wait (Score:4, Insightful)
The leaders of those countries gave intelligence above room temperature and can recognize a common enemy of all of humanity. Funny how the US administration (and a rather large part of the US population) does not manage that feat...
I guess the US will have to beg for data and access and vaccines when the next pandemic hits. And it will. We have been exceptionally lucky the last few decades.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
If you read the article (at least the first few pages that are free) the treaty is, so far, mostly BS.
the best summary:
The details of how exactly the system will work have yet to be hashed out. But the accord states that there must be provisions for “rapid and timely” sharing of information and that manufacturers participating in the agreement must make at least 20% of vaccines, drugs and diagnostics that they produce available to the WHO during a pandemic.
And it further goes on that it's mostly about poor countries extorting rich countries for money and drugs and promising some sort of access to pathogen samples...
It's not bad, but it's mostly already how things already worked. Will this prevent China (or other non-western players who tend to do these thinsg) from hiding stuff next time if it's convenient or face saving? i highly doubt it.
Re: (Score:2)
it's mostly already how things already worked
Then this is very good. If the current practice isn't bad, then just put it on paper so we make sure we stick to it. Actually documenting current practice and making sure it is applied by all is a fundamental step when setting up quality management in any organization.
Re: (Score:3)
It's mostly about sharing information, and about distributing vaccines based on medical need rather than who can lean on pharma companies he most. The pharma boys agreed that at least 20% of what they produce will go to the WHO, to be distributed based on where the greatest need is, and where they will be most effective. They also agreed to share technology, so hopefully production will be faster and in greater volume.
Re:I cannot wait (Score:4, Informative)
The UN provides a platform for countries to negotiate terms which they themselves agree to abide by. Then the WHO provides a platform for information exchange and consultancy about the information. I don't know what else you were thinking as a power the WHO needs to be les useless. Did you think/expect WHO inspectors would show up in the streets and tell you to wear a face mask?
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between power through legal mandates and power through influence. The UN has more power over the world than the USA ever could have.
Re: (Score:2)
The desire to have unfettered biological control over their populations? I don't want to live in a country that has to follow the edicts of unelected, international bureaucrats in forcing genetic modification onto the populace. We won't know the damage from by the last round of wildcat genetweaking for two generations.
Note, Pfizer described their mRNA technology as genetic therapy in their SEC filings, not as a vaccine or other prophylactic.
Citation please.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a day when /.ers didn't need to be spoonfed everything.
Can't sell it one way? Change the definition and force it down their throats.
"To our knowledge, there is no current precedent for an mRNA-based immunotherapy such as the type we are developing being approved for sale by the FDA, European Commission or any other regulatory agency elsewhere in the world. Although we expect to submit BLAs for our mRNA-based product candidates in the United States, and in the European Union, mRNA therapies have be
Re: (Score:2)
edicts of unelected, international bureaucrats
The people who are discussing and approving each point are not bureaucrats, they are the envoys of each country, typically an Ambassador who reports to a President / Prime minister.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this a serious question? Are you really this extremely dumb?
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing, because they keep ignoring them and then complain when things don't go their way, while countries that are actively working together achieve overall better outcomes.
When you look at any treaty in isolation you can only see something negative. When you look at them holistically they present huge opportunities. It's like the USAID discussion. All the Trump admins see is money going away, while the people who set it up saw it for what it was: bought influence over the 3rd world. Now where are we? The
Re:I cannot wait (Score:5, Informative)
'Treaty' has a particular meaning in the US Constitution. It requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate to have effect. Without that it has no legal status, it's just big words drifting on the breeze and probably violating a noise ordinance.
"The Treaty Clause of the United States Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) establishes the procedure for ratifying international agreements. It empowers the President as the primary negotiator of agreements between the United States and other countries, and holds that the advice and consent of a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate renders a treaty binding with the force of federal law."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
For historical reasons going way back Congress is not too keen on surrendering its authority to make the law.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
For historical reasons going way back Congress is not too keen on surrendering its authority to make the law.
Except THIS congress, over half of which is just waiting in line to suck the golden dick and wave their MAGA hats at their reelection rallies. After watching the fiasco with tariffs, firing federal employees for no cause, creating fictitious DOGE department, defying court orders, threatening to send citizens to foreign prisons for convenience, etc., you really think the Cheeto in Charge gives a shit about the law?
Re: (Score:2)
That's interesting but does anyone except Congress care?
People dying because the US didn't join the pandemic prevention/response treaty probably don't.
Other countries certainly don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Being ruled by morons 2000 miles away is bad enough. Being ruled by morons 6000 miles away would be even worse.
(I'm in the western US.)
Besides, if the WHO recommendations make sense we can follow them.
Re: (Score:2)
For historical reasons going way back Congress is not too keen on surrendering its authority to make the law.
I'd like you to have a look around for the last 90 days or so. Congress has been surrendering its authority on a great many subjects, including it's authority to make the law, and it's authority to keep a rogue administration in check, and it's authority to control where and when money is spent.
Yet another embarrassment (Score:4, Interesting)
I hope the US survives this thrashing and can rejoin the global community some day.
Re: (Score:1)
https://www.reddit.com/r/World... [reddit.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That would be nice. Even a basically second-world country like the US is better to have as a partner than as a country of isolationist freaks.
Re: (Score:1)
i don't support much of the H1 2025 upheaval / rhetoric, and hope things will chill out reasonably soon, but for all our problems and to some degree BECAUSE we're already kind of uncomfortable the US is still the force to recon with.
If i had to pick between the US or the EU in any sort of serious crisis: war, pandemic, etc. ... i think i'd go US as to who would come out ahead.
Final Verdict: Model or Warning?
Europe presents a complex picture. On one hand, it offers a social model that prioritizes well-being, equity, and sustainability. On the other hand, it faces significant challenges in competitiveness, innovation, and demographic stability. For America, the European experience is both a model and a warning—a reminder that while social safety nets and progressive values are essential, they must be balanced with economic dynamism and innovation to ensure long-term prosperity.
https://worldecomag.com/europe... [worldecomag.com]
Re: (Score:2)
i don't support much of the H1 2025 upheaval / rhetoric, and hope things will chill out reasonably soon, but for all our problems and to some degree BECAUSE we're already kind of uncomfortable the US is still the force to recon with.
If i had to pick between the US or the EU in any sort of serious crisis: war, pandemic, etc. ... i think i'd go US as to who would come out ahead.
Final Verdict: Model or Warning?
Europe presents a complex picture. On one hand, it offers a social model that prioritizes well-being, equity, and sustainability. On the other hand, it faces significant challenges in competitiveness, innovation, and demographic stability. For America, the European experience is both a model and a warning—a reminder that while social safety nets and progressive values are essential, they must be balanced with economic dynamism and innovation to ensure long-term prosperity.
https://worldecomag.com/europe... [worldecomag.com]
Please don't do this.That site is obviously all AI generated content. I do live in the EU and I find no joy in this self-harm.
Re: (Score:2)
ok. how about The Guardian instead:
The EU should fear for its self-preservation as it faces a “slow and agonising decline”, according to a hard-hitting report by the former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi that calls for an €800bn-a-year spending boost to end years of stagnation. ...
EU growth had been persistently slower than that of the US in the past two decades, he said while China had subsidised many industries to a level where they could out-compete EU firms.
The report highlighted how 30% of EU startup businesses that had grown to be valued at more than €1bn – known as unicorns – had moved abroad, and mostly to list on stock markets in the US.
“There are too many barriers to scaling up,” he said. “We are also hindering growth in our traditional sectors. We want coordination to be a source of growth.”
https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You crack me up.
You're either in China, Russia, or you're our bitch. Deal with it.
Re: (Score:2)
This viewpoint of "the world has superpower states and vassal states, and everyone outside China/Russia is a vassal" is... interesting. Sure can make a lot of friends by calling 75% of the world "our bitch". But that's right, you don't need friends, you have vassals. Give it a few years. If there's a WW3, I'm not sure the US will find itself in the "allies" group.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're welcome for mRNA vaccines, btw.
BioNTech doesn't like to advertise that they licensed the tech from the NIH and UPenn, just like Moderna did, but they did nonetheless.
Re:Maybe we just don't need ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Thanks for the mRNA vaccines, good work last time, but do you think vaccine skeptic Mr Brain worm is going to allow easy public access to vaccines next time? Will BioNTech still have enough scientists in the USA, or will they have moved to countries that think scientific research is a good thing.
Next time BioNTech will be better off licensing to other countries and leave the body bag companies to ramp up production in the USA.
Re: (Score:1)
No, I'm not confusing them. I'm making the point that the USA may well be fucked if there is a pandemic because the response will likely not be by "US Science", it will be by "the weird fucking politics".
I doubt it. Mr. Brain Worm is a puppet.
US Science carries on, just with a much more difficult relationship with Federal grants.
It's not like our Universities don't have many billions in endowments, though.
Thanks for the mRNA vaccines, good work last time, but do you think vaccine skeptic Mr Brain worm is going to allow easy public access to vaccines next time? Will BioNTech still have enough scientists in the USA, or will they have moved to countries that think scientific research is a good thing.
Fuck Brain Worm Guy. He won't have a choice.
Even in COVID-19, while Trump was pontificating to the morons who elected him, he still made the right calls policy-wise.
I'm not arguing that he isn't bad, or some shit. That he isn't a fucking moron. He is both of those things. But remember- COVID-19 happene
Re: (Score:3)
he still made the right calls policy-wise.
Now explain how he'll get there without any of the expertise he had access to during his first administration, who have all been fired or defunded by the DOGEbags?
All the informed people have left the building. All that's left are "loyal" yes-men who can't rubber stamp shit fast enough. And we're now seeing what happens under those conditions.
Re: (Score:2)
Now explain how he'll get there without any of the expertise he had access to during his first administration, who have all been fired or defunded by the DOGEbags?
I'll definitely grant you that the hollowing out of Federal agencies isn't helpful at all, in this particular case, but there are still adults in the room.
All the informed people have left the building. All that's left are "loyal" yes-men who can't rubber stamp shit fast enough. And we're now seeing what happens under those conditions.
Na, it's not quite that bad.
You paint a pretty stark picture of US Doom. I think it's because you're invested in that outcome to show everyone that you were right about big bad Trump.
That moron will pass, like the morons before him.
The US will be just fine.
When we start breaking historical benchmarks, then I'll start panicking- but for now, you coul
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you mean all the politicians that are vaccinated, despite all their bullshit?
Here's the only thing you need to know about the so-called anti-vaxx movement: RFK Jr. had his children vaccinated against measles. If it was so risky, why would he do that?
Re:Maybe we just don't need ... (Score:5, Interesting)
To make and test a vaccine, you will need samples of the pathogen and information about it (DNA sequence, etc.) The treaty promotes sharing such info, "in exchange for more equitable distribution of drugs and vaccines" (per TFA.)
The USA is a signatory to many international treaties. All of them entail a selective relaxation of part of a country's sovereignty in exchange for a mutual benefit. The USA exercised such a benefit in the NATO agreement after 9/11. If you want to shun treaties and "go it alone" then fine, but consider the consequences.
Re:Maybe we just don't need ... (Score:5, Informative)
"The USA is a signatory to many international treaties."
Like several other countries with authoritarian governments, this statement is entirely meaningless under the current administration in the USA. It's clear that any prior treaties or other agreements between the USA and other nations can be broken, dismissed or ignored at the whim of the current USA executive branch. And the USA is powerless to reverse the damage inflicted by the current "leadership".
Since the USA has shown that they CAN elect a president who is willing to burn down the international order, NONE of the allies will ever be able to trust the USA again.The USA has utterly erased the trust of ALL its allies, everywhere. The goodwill for the USA based on the post-WWII "rules based order" as built by the USA is all gone. The USA now has NO allies, just countries that think the USA "might" help them if they are attacked, and only if it is in the interest of the USA to help.
These countries no longer want to buy arms from the USA because they can't trust the arms. Is there a kill switch in the F-35? Who knows? They can't trust USA assurances! There is no way to rebuild that trust: The post-war international order is ENDED. The USA-centric economy and international order is finished and it's not coming back. The use of the US Dollar as a reserve currency is probably going to end within a few years.
Finally, here's the real reason why the tariffs have been "postponed". Someone with half a clue finally told Diaper Donny that the foreign ownership of the USA "Treasury Bonds" is an issue. You see, China owns over a trillion dollars of those bonds. Japan owns a lot, Mexico and Canada own a lot and Europe owns a LOT. All these nations need to do is dump these bonds, and the USA is going to see the price of servicing the debt will explode. The USA will not be able to borrow any money anywhere, the bottom will drop out of the USA economy, and the USA will be a third world country with high taxes, no services and barely able to feed the rich, let alone the rest of the population. The USA will be a "failed state". The dollar will be less valuable than the soviet ruble.
That's all. folks.
Re:Maybe we just don't need ... (Score:5, Informative)
Foreign owners of the debt have 24% of it. That's enough to seriously tank the US economy.
See: https://www.reuters.com/market... [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Foreign owners of the debt have 24% of it. That's enough to seriously tank the US economy.
You're correct- they do. And for a day- yes it is.
Fortunately, 32% of the world's entire wealth is in private hands, right here in the good ol' US of A.
Bond sell-offs have already been happening.
For bond sell-offs to fuck the US over, people have to stop wanting to buy them. 32% of the world's wealth is pretty invested in those bonds not turning to junk.
Bonds are not the way to hurt the US. All you do is put more of its debt back into the hands of its public. Stock buy-backs are good for the company.
Re: (Score:2)
So why aren't they buying the bonds already?
lol- if they didn't, the US would have collapsed long before now.
The answer to your question is- that can't be answered, because it's based on a false premise.
They are buying the bonds already, and they will continue to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you too stupid to understand what that shows?
Re: (Score:2)
The bond yields perfectly tracked the market, which is completely normal.
What you are, is a liar. Fabricating a set of alternative facts to support a false narrative.
Frankly, it's fucking lame.
Re: (Score:2)
Or do you laughably think they have piles of cash sitting around waiting to buy bonds.
Wait- do you think nothing in the US has any intrinsic value?
Fascinating.
Re: (Score:2)
American bonds and American dollars partly rely on other countries wanting to buy them. What do you think happens when they don't?
Partly, yes.
In times of uncertainty everyone buys $US and bonds.
This is correct.
Well except as just shown, American bonds, stocks and $US all fell together. That's pretty rare.
Bond yields falling means they were have an easy time selling bonds. Bond yields increasing shows a difficulty in moving bonds.
Bond yields dropped when the market did, which means, as normal, the market reacted by moving their money into US bonds.
What the fuck is wrong with you that you're stalking my every post trying to dumb bullshit misinformation all over it?
When we hit 1981 yields, then we can worry. Seriously, fucking educate yourself, dipshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Bond prices were falling, not yields. Yields were rising.
Wrong, lol.
Bond yields started falling on 4/1. [cnbc.com]
This represents a major flight from he market into bonds.
They started rising again on 4/4.
This part was likely due to a large selloff of foreign bonds.
Trump's announcement on 4/9 of a pause made pretty much no difference in the bond market whatsoever. It's on its own path.
All of this was about 50 basis points from the floor set by the mass capital flight into the bonds, or 20 basis points from the pre-fuckery. Which is fucking nothing. It's not even a
Re: (Score:1)
The US is $37T in debt, which means there are $37T in outstanding bonds
Yes and America is adding to that every year. And paying interest on that every year. When the interest rates go up you pay even more
Interest will rise from $881 billion in FY 2024 to $1 trillion in FY 2026 before climbing further to nearly $1.8 trillion in 2035. Interest on the debt is already larger than spending on Medicare and national defense – it is second only to Social Security.
Note that's before interest rates rise
As is becomes more and more clear America is unable to service it debt, less and less people will want to buy it. Making it worse and worse.
Like most collapses it will happen slowly at first and then suddenly all at once as every rushes to the exits.
Re: (Score:2)
it would collapse the dollar.
Not even close.
60-100 basis points, tops on 10 year yields.
Go look at a yield graph for the last 40 years and come back with a new answer.
Yes and America is adding to that every year. And paying interest on that every year. When the interest rates go up you pay even more
Uh, no shit...
Note that's before interest rates rise
Ya- it's a big number.
Of course, tax receipts for FY 2024 were almost $5T, but your argument isn't nearly as scary without perspective, now is it?
As is becomes more and more clear America is unable to service it debt, less and less people will want to buy it. Making it worse and worse.
There's no question that the logical conclusion to current deficit is that eventually, there will be confidence crisis.
The fact is, though, we're nowhere near there.
You throw out absolute numbers ($1.8T by 20
Re: (Score:2)
How much debt there is is just as important as how high the interest rates are.
Wrong. Absolute numbers have no bearing here, whatsoever.
And yet Trump is still adding another trillion and change to the deficit just this year.
Yup. Deficit spending continues unabated... Why are you trying to use a conversation with me to take swings at Trump, lol.
Has that dumbshit really infected your brain so thoroughly?
Massive uncertainty, high inflation, low growth, rising interest rates, growing deficit, stable genius running it all. I'm sure it will be fine...
lol- again, look at a historical graph of those metrics and get back to me.
Just a reminder, all the other interest rates in the economy are based of the bond rates. It's not just the government forced to pay more, all businesses and consumers do too.
Loosely connected to- that's correct. Not based on- not even a little bit.
And yes, when we get to historical interest rates, again, come back and tell me how we're going to collapse and die.
You're making the MAGA argument. Everything will turn out well because Trump knows what he's doing.
Not eve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What happens when the US Treasury goes to sell more bonds to revolve the credit of maturing bonds, and the market is saturated with sellers?
You think that debt auction is going to go well, and not pile on a shitload of interest cost? No, what will happen is the Federal Reserve will have to print a shitload of money to buy the bonds up and hold onto them in another round of "quantitative easing" and we know what that means from the last few times.
And you do know what happens to the value of bonds being held
Re: (Score:2)
What happens when the US Treasury goes to sell more bonds to revolve the credit of maturing bonds, and the market is saturated with sellers?
Yes, we all understand how dumping treasury bonds causes a distinct short-term pain.
You think that debt auction is going to go well, and not pile on a shitload of interest cost? No, what will happen is the Federal Reserve will have to print a shitload of money to buy the bonds up and hold onto them in another round of "quantitative easing" and we know what that means from the last few times.
No- it goes fucking terribly, obviously.
lol- do we?
QE was done as a policy to pump stimulus into the economy, and it was highly effective in that regard.
Is printing money the end-all solution to everything? Of course not. But pretending like the Fed didn't set us apart from basically the rest of the world during the recession is laughable.
And you do know what happens to the value of bonds being held during a market sell-off, yeah? They become less valuable because of supply and demand. So clearly the move will be to buy more that are worth less, right? The same way that people line up to buy other sinking securities being unloaded on the market?
See above.
Bonds are not normal securities. They're backed by the continued ability
Re: (Score:1)
You're acting like a bunch of people selling US bonds on the secondary market is like people dumping TSLA.
It's not. It's like a bunch of people dumping houses.
There are people ready to buy those houses.
There are people ready to buy US bonds.
You're getting closer to understanding...
That's why there was more panic when the bonds fell. Dumping houses is bad...
People buy houses with savings, and loans
Who is buying the bonds, what are they selling to do it?
Houses you have cash and bonds, sell those take out a loan, buy a house.
You think people will take out a loan to buy bonds...LOL
Or have enough cash lying around not already in bonds...LOL
Stock market is falling, are you selling your stocks, crystalizing your losses, making the stock marke
Re: (Score:1)
They're backed by the continued ability of US taxpayers to pay their taxes, and thus the US Government's ability to keep paying those bond coupons.
They are backed by the belief that the government will have enough money to pay them without "too much" printing or new borrowing.
Nobody really knows what too much is.
US government doesn't receive enough money from US taxpayers to balance the budget. That's why the government needs to sell the bonds in the first place.
(I guess also backed by the faith that the government will pay them even if it has the money. Trump has threatened to not pay some of them before. Congress has threatened to not raise the de
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, Well, according to TFA that's literally the main part of what was signed: that rich countries have to give at least 20% of the vaccine to poor countries. (probably for free, but i wasn't clear on that last part)
Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Trump was right. I really AM getting tired of all this winning...
On the plus side RFK Jr says (Score:2)
I'm not saying it was aliens, but it was aliens.
Also to anyone supporting Trump and his shit show what the fuck is wrong with you?
Re: (Score:2)
Also to anyone supporting Trump and his shit show what the fuck is wrong with you?
Probably sunk-cost fallacy in some. The rest is just too dumb to even understand what is happening. They are cheering on the destruction of their own country.
treaties schmeaties! (Score:2)
treaties schmeaties - real men bosh bioweapons for breakfast and can easily bench-press five times their weight in whale carcasses! (strong arm emoji, fist emoji, whale emoji etc)
Re: (Score:2)
You are.
ok bot
Re: (Score:2)
Drinkypoo, when the topic is something other than computers or software, your opinion is usually wrong. Please stick to the two topics in which you have a clue.
I think that's the nicest thing a troll has ever said to me. Careful, you might start to like me.
The anonymous poster here is named Anonymous Coward for good reason.
Mhmmm.... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm sure this document will ensure that ...
The Chinese and other totalitarian governments of the world don't cover up their lab leaks
The ambitious and self-important science administrators jn the global public sector don't back-door fund gain-of-function research in BSL-2 labs
Vaccine manufacturing capacity will just spring into being in the third world, like Athena from Zeus's head, along with cold chains and other logistics required for distribution
Re: (Score:2)
The ambitious and self-important science administrators jn the global public sector don't back-door fund gain-of-function research in BSL-2 labs
i believe the labs were BSL-3.
Vaccine manufacturing capacity will just spring into being in the third world, like Athena from Zeus's head, along with cold chains and other logistics required for distribution
if by "Zeus's head" you mean taxes in the "rich" countries, then yes, that's exactly what the document says.
US will still get benefits (Score:2)
I am certain China will continue to be willing to freely share its pathogens with the United States.
Re: (Score:2)
I am certain China will continue to be willing to freely share its pathogens with the United States.
Yeah, but to actually get them, U.S. labs will have to pay huge import tariffs.
Or did you mean "share with" as in "spread to"?
Sorry US , maybe stock up on bleach? (Score:1)
And syringes
And Guns... can you ever have enough?
Measures to prevent pandemics :o (Score:2)
a. Don't perform gain-of-function experiments on viruses that is illegal in the US.
b. Don't perform such experiments in China and Ukraine.
c. Don't leak such viruses into the environment.
d. If you must experiment then have a patent for a vaccine already filed.
e. Make billions on a mass vaccination campaign.
f. The mass vaccination campaign accelerating the mutation of the virus requiring re
wish there were more concrete solutions in the tre (Score:3)
wish there were more concrete solutions in the "treaty"... once you get past the majority of the articles covering this talking about how the US isn't part of it... instead of a focus on WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE TREATY... which doesn't seem like much... it sounds like a conceptual agreement, with no specifics and no specific solutions to the problems identified - mainly- hoping for more timely vaccine dispersal in poorer nations. And enhanced sharing of data between manufacturers and health orgs.
Don't forget land mines (Score:2)
The usa is also passing on the global land mine treaty.
Like russia and china (133 countries signed) - fine company indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
And Finland and I think Latvia or another Baltic. Suddenly when the wolf is at the door, thinking changes.
Re:Global Treaty (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess if land mass is the measure of the importance of a country then makes Australia of equal importance to the USA give they are both about the same size? More to the point the USA can be expected to be left out of many important agreements in future as it brings to much instability to have credibility when trying to reach a consensus.
Re: Global Treaty (Score:4, Insightful)
Right now the US doesnâ(TM)t want go be part of the world and itâ(TM)s narrow minded leadership would have probably tried vetoing it or something similar.
When the US wants to become a leader or a relevant player again, then Iâ(TM)m sure we can talk again. Right now itâ(TM)s as much a liability as Russia is.
Re: Global Treaty (Score:5, Insightful)
When the US wants to become a leader or a relevant player again, then Iâ(TM)m sure we can talk again.
When the US wants to become a leader or a relevant player again, they can get back to the rest of us a decade or so thereafter - provided that during that decade they demonstrate a commitment and an ability to be sufficiently stable and responsible.
Even if Trump loses his majority in the mid-terms, provided there ARE mid-terms; and even if he gets turfed out in the next election, provided there IS an election; it's going to take a very long time to re-establish trust in America as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
The literal imprisonment of the traitor-in-chief and his minions, followed by the instatement of a democracy more robust than the one just wrecked, might shave a bit off that time-frame.
Re: (Score:3)
When the US wants to become a leader or a relevant player again, then Iâ(TM)m sure we can talk again.
When the US wants to become a leader or a relevant player again, they can get back to the rest of us a decade or so thereafter - provided that during that decade they demonstrate a commitment and an ability to be sufficiently stable and responsible.
Even if Trump loses his majority in the mid-terms, provided there ARE mid-terms; and even if he gets turfed out in the next election, provided there IS an election; it's going to take a very long time to re-establish trust in America as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
The literal imprisonment of the traitor-in-chief and his minions, followed by the instatement of a democracy more robust than the one just wrecked, might shave a bit off that time-frame.
Yep, the idea of America becoming leader again is pretty ludicrous. To borrow an Americanism, you've screwed that pooch, although most of the damage has been done in the last 2 months, it's really a culmination of the last 25 years of Republican fuck ups slowly diminishing US power and decreasing trust in the US. Americans, especially Republicans believed too much in American Exceptionalism, so much so that they couldn't see the harm in the rest of the world watching it fail and boy, has it failed.
When t
Re: (Score:2)
it's really a culmination of the last 25 years of Republican fuck ups slowly diminishing US power and decreasing trust in the US. Americans, especially Republicans believed too much in American Exceptionalism, so much so that they couldn't see the harm in the rest of the world watching it fail and boy, has it failed.
I agree, except to add that the Democrats are equally culpable, though in a less obvious way.
First, the Dems have their own too-cozy revolving-door relationship with the moneyed elites. Of all the problems that sprang from that, perhaps the worst was that they nominated Hilary instead of bringing Bernie into the fold. The hunger for populism was already so strong you could taste it, yet the Dems were blind and deaf to it; they decided to double down on a candidate with a background of privilege. If they'd
Re: Global Treaty (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Not sure it will take years. The Felon in Chief only been in office less than 100 days and look at the magnitude of what he's managed to fuck up already.
He'll be in office for at most 4 years. Most red idiots are reluctant to admit they fucked up voting for his empty promises, but hopefully in 2028 they will reject such a blatant attempt to wipe his ass with the constitution.
Re: (Score:3)
Itâ(TM)s so funny how you guys are all backtracking that Trump, for 100%, was not going to allow any more elections and heâ(TM)d be ruling forever.
Who are these "you guys" you're talking about? So far the only person who I've seen saying that Trump will 100% not allow elections was ... well you right now. Are you making up persecution again?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is every time the U.S. enters a Treaty or org like this they end up footing 80 to 90% of the bill.
Can you give examples and especially of ones that weren't primarily of a US interest? I'm not saying you are wrong, just that I'd rather have some supporting evidence that I could validate.
Re: (Score:2)
Only a matter of time before the globe kicks the problematic land masses off the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Trump is right to give them the middle finger.
(and I'm not even a Trump fan.)
Then put down the cheeto dick. Even if that piece of shit does the right thing occasionally, it's always in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons, and that's not actually right.
Re: Abolish the murderous WHO. (Score:2)
Re: Measles (Score:2)
Back in the cave days of the 2010s when antivax was a Whole Foods and Waldorf School phenomenon, and RFKjr was a Dem, Fox News covered it a lot.