Report to all concerned high-ranking leaders and civil society! part 2)

The second block will start with pleasant news for any U.S. citizen 📰 

The editor and its editor-in-chief personally, taking advantage of the great intimacy and easy access to the bodies of the world's stars of the show business, Hollywood and other star ballet, asks my favorite in some places star bodies to betray the personal greeting of the Editorial To all CNN TV journalists and the company as a whole, unconditionally wise leadership of this media empire. Dear my star bodies, you have no idea what honor the journalists of this tv company have achieved. In January 2020, the famous former currency prostitute of Russia, and a little later or immediately, we did not notice this difference in the transition of status from a prostitute - the mistress of the loving head of the state bank VTB of the Russian Federation Andrei Kostin, this charm Andrei cute calls this famous chump colleague. Bravo CNN 👍 👏 👏 👏 

"With a colleague with CNN, Richard Kvest, without exaggeration, a legend of international and business journalism. Sites like Davos, among other things, provide an opportunity to observe the work of colleagues, learn from them something, well, and just discuss with interesting people the latest news."

https://t.me/nailyaaskerzade/1530

Once again 🛢

To raise funds worth $14.14 billion. ODA funding in 2019-2023.

The editors are not responsible for the very frequent inappropriate antics of our editor-in-chief. And now he made me write, the poor and defenseless vulnerable soul of a girl, threatening insidious violence another vulgarity looking at these two charming deities. He said in a direct text: "Fuck someone such terrible fucking and gets a kick out of it 😝😆

In January 2017, together with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he conducted a second simulation for CEOs of large companies at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos. In July 2017, a similar simulation was carried out in collaboration with German Chancellor Angela Merkel for health ministers at the G-20 government meeting, which traditionally focuses on finance and the economy. Finally, in October 2017, a fourth script was played out, described by Lena San in an article, "World Leaders Are Preparing for a Pandemic That Will Come "Earlier Than We Expected", published October 24, 2017 in The Washington Post. >https://d.docs.live.net/d0ed8f6b3c3aa440/%D0%A0%D0..." >https://d.docs.live.net/d0ed8f6b3c3aa440/%D0%A0%D0... It was the following. Ministers are facing a new outbreak of the infectious disease. The mysterious virus caused nausea and killed people at an alarming rate. Some patients had to turn on their lungs to breathe. The new virus seemed resistant to antiviral drugs. During the week, the authorities closed a major hospital and schools and quarantined thousands of people. Fear and panic quickly spread as people in neighbouring countries were infected and dying. This scenario was part of an imitation of a pandemic held during the World Bank's annual meeting in Washington this month. This scenario was presented by then-U.S. Vice President D. Biden's chief of staff, Ron Klein, former head of Silicon Valley's Silicon Valley investment technology company, and coordinator of Ebola control in the United States. As a result of the simulation, Klein came to the conclusion that the world is frankly not ready even for a mid-scale pandemic, although the probability of its occurrence was estimated at 100%. At the same time, he reminded that next year will be the centenary of the great influenza pandemic of 1918-1919, which killed at least 50 million people around the world. In the summer of 2017, in preparation for the fight against the pandemic, the World Bank, together with reinsurance companies, established a special Pandemic Financing Facility-PEF," as stated, "to save millions of people." The new issue was that the Fund issued so-called pandemic bonds worth $245 million. to fight six viruses in developing countries: new influenza viruses, coronaviruses, phyloviruses, Lassa haemorrhagic fever, Rift Valley fever virus and the Congo-Crimean haemorrhagic fever virus. Bonds are purchased by large investors, pension funds, managers who earn government-guaranteed interest (up to 11%). if one of the six designated viruses reaches a predetermined infection rate and the number of deaths; a certain rate and rate of spread and in the case of crossing international borders (e.g., there is this point: "The disease must cross the border into two neighbouring countries and within a certain period of time In a short period of time, at least 20 victims are estimated to be affected. when WB bonds were used for financial efforts to combat infectious diseases and when the risk of a pandemic in low-income countries was transferred to financial markets.

All this evidence for investigators that not medics were preparing for viruses and outbreaks. Criminal actors of the financial world were preparing for this. Prepared seriously and thoroughly, prepared for outbreaks of diseases caused by viruses it was money 💰 not doctors 🥼. The system was tested during an Ebola outbreak in Congo in 2018 that killed more than 2,000 people. It was one of the most serious outbreaks in history, but the victims were paid a small portion of the money ($61 million) because only 3 deaths were detected in Uganda, a neighbouring country, according to WHO. In addition, this amount was paid only three months after the outbreak of the pandemic and could no longer help prevent the spread of the disease at an early stage. According to a study conducted in the aftermath of the Ebola epidemic, more money was spent on paying interest to financial investors than in countries affected by the Ebola virus.

Other interested players in this area are hedge funds, i.e. financial companies, which are now allowed to act as banks, but which are not subject to restrictions. More and more banks are setting up their own hedge funds and thus carry out exactly those transactions that were previously banned by them. Thanks to their constant hunt for quick profits and huge profit opportunities in the pharmaceutical industry, which has become the most profitable industry in the world, they also own shares in numerous pharmaceutical companies and through them can influence WHO. After the global financial crisis of 2007/2008, central banks maintained the global financial system for 11 years, pouring more money and lowering interest rates, but this strategy is no longer working from 2019. That is why today hedge funds are trying to compensate for their losses by seeking assistance from governments and central banks, and in these circumstances, creating a mass hysteria of unprecedented proportions that could be organized with THE help of WHO is extremely beneficial for these structures. WHO's credentials and capabilities. Before describing WHO's actions during the coronavirus outbreak, it is important to recall its powers. WHO operates in accordance with the Charter. According to his article 21, The WHO Health Assembly has the power to establish rights relating to sanitary and quarantine requirements, disease nomenclature, standards of diagnostic research methods, etc. Thus, THE rules set by WHO are not automatically binding or binding, and their acceptance or rejection depends on the consent of member States themselves. The Executive Committee implements the Assembly's decisions, which can, in accordance with Article 28 (i) "within the terms of reference and financial capacity, take extraordinary action in cases requiring immediate action. In particular, it can authorize the Director-General to take the necessary measures to combat epidemics, One of WHO's basic regulations document is the new International Health Regulations (IHR) adopted on 23 May 2005 for 58 WHO sessions and came into force in 2007. Its aim is to prevent the international spread of disease through preventive and anti-epidemic measures. They aim to strengthen the collective protection of public health from the many and varied risks in today's globalized world that can spread rapidly globally as a result of increasing volumes of international travel and trade. The treaty has become a key tool in global health security. 

The fact is that the old rules considered only three diseases (cholera, plague, yellow fever), but now they have spread to new diseases, including acute pathological conditions caused by non-infectious disease-causing agents. With the new legal framework, the IHR provide a rapid collection of information, a common understanding of what public health emergencies of international concern (PHEIC) can represent, and the ability to provide international assistance to countries. The new reporting procedure for such events aims to accelerate the flow of timely and accurate information to WHO about potential PHEICs. WHO, which is formally a neutral body, has the necessary technical knowledge and resources, as well as a wide network of communications and can assess information accordingly, recommend specific actions, and, when necessary, facilitate or assist the coordination of technical assistance, taking into account the changing situations. These rules prescribe the following. Notification. The 2005 IHR requires States to notify WHO of all events that may constitute a PHEIC and respond to requests for confirmation of information related to such events. Availability of a national IHR focal point and WHO IHR contact points through which notifications and communications from States Parties are to be communicated. This requirement was an important innovation in the new treaty. (As for Russia, here the functions of the national coordinator for MMPS are performed by Rospotrebnadzor. However, the question of the powers of this body as a coordinator remains open. The fact is that, in order to clarify them, on February 20, 2019, a draft resolution of the Russian government was published in the Russian Federation " On amendments to the Regulation on the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare ", but it was never adopted. The draft concerns clause 5.16. The Regulation, according to which Rospotrebnadzor" interacts in accordance with the established procedure with public authorities of foreign states and international organizations in the established field of activity. "This procedure has not been determined, and there is only an explanatory note to the specified project" Rospotrebnadzor as a national coordinator for the implementation of International Health Regulations ", which states the following [16]. powers of Rospotrebnadzor for interaction in the established in an established manner with public authorities of foreign states and international organizations in the established field of activity regarding the implementation and implementation of the IHR 2005. It is stated here that the IHR 2005 is an international legal mechanism binding on all WHO Member States, and a universal legal a binding tool for responding to crisis situations in public health, including a sanitary and epidemiological nature. Rospotrebnadzor implements the functions of the National Coordinator in the Russian Federation for the implementation of the provisions of the IHR, which is available at any time for communication with the WHO contact points for the IHR. It also states: “Acting as the National Coordinator for the IHR in the Russian Federation, Rospotrebnadzor promptly and regularly notifies WHO and other participating States of events identified by the national sanitary and epidemiological surveillance system that have the potential for cross-border spread of pathogens of dangerous infectious diseases. In addition, the functions assigned to Rospotrebnadzor in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation ensure the implementation of most of the provisions of the IHR, in particular, within the framework of the organization and implementation of federal state sanitary and epidemiological surveillance, sanitary and quarantine control at checkpoints across the state border of the Russian Federation, as well as development and the approval of state sanitary and epidemiological rules and hygienic standards providing for the criteria of safety and harmlessness to humans of environmental factors of an infectious and non-infectious nature, including taking into account the calculation and assessment of risk to human health. Rospotrebnadzor, as the National Coordinator of the Russian Federation for the implementation of the IHR, on the eve of the World Health Assembly, in accordance with Article 54 of the IHR, provides an annual report on the progress of the implementation of the IHR, including reflecting the capabilities of the Russian Federation in the field of prevention, detection, assessment, notification and response to threats the spread of infectious diseases. Thus, all functions for the implementation of the IHR, including interaction with WHO, including the WHO Emergency Program and interaction with the relevant department of the WHO Secretariat (Country Health Emergency Preparedness and IHR / Preparedness for health emergencies at the country and IHR level) , attributed to the competence and mainly provided by Rospotrebnadzor, in connection with which the draft resolution clarifies the corresponding powers of Rospotrebnadzor. A regulatory impact assessment for the draft regulation, given its subject matter, is not required. The adoption and implementation of this draft resolution will not require cancellation or amendments to other regulatory legal acts. The implementation of the powers stipulated by the draft resolution will be carried out by Rospotrebnadzor within the limits established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the number of employees in the central office and territorial bodies of the Service, as well as budgetary allocations provided for by Rospotrebnadzor in the federal budget for leadership and management in the sphere of established functions. The draft resolution complies with the provisions of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union of May 29, 2014, as well as the provisions of other international treaties of the Russian Federation "). Requirements for basic surveillance and response capabilities. A radical innovation in the IHR 2005 is the requirement that each country develop, strengthen and maintain the core public health resources needed for adequate surveillance and response, using existing national resources, such as national improvement plans, for this purpose. flu pandemic preparedness. Key sanitary and health services and infrastructure should also be developed at international airports, ports and ground transport hubs designated for this purpose by the participating States. 

Recommended measures.

WHO's response to PHEIC will include provision of interim advice on appropriate public health measures and may include recommended actions to be taken by the affected Member State, as well as other States and international carriers. These interim recommendations are being developed by WHO on a time-limited and risk-adjusted basis, in the spirit of the PHEIC response. External expert advice on the IHR. The IHR (2005) include procedures for obtaining independent technical advice related to the implementation of the IHR. For example, this could be the process of establishing an emergency committee (!) That will assist the Director-General of WHO in determining whether a particular event is a public health emergency of international concern, as well as advise on any appropriate interim guidelines. For a PHEIC, this could be any unusual public health event that could pose a public health risk to other nations as a result of the international spread of the disease and potentially require coordinated international action. That is, we see that everything here is vague and vague, which opens the way to an arbitrary solution to the issue of emergency situations. Regarding the legal status of the IHR, in accordance with the WHO Constitution, they automatically become binding on all WHO Member States if they do not actively and within a limited period of time declare their disagreement with the IHR. However, not a single WHO Member State has completely withdrawn from these Regulations, and only two countries have made certain reservations to them. The rules entered into force for states that made a reservation, subject to this reservation. Russia does not belong to such countries - it fully agrees with WHO, although it is in the functionality of Rospotrebnadzor, in accordance with paragraph 5.16 of its Regulation, that it "interacts in the prescribed manner with public authorities of foreign states and international organizations in the established field of activity." But, recall, the draft Resolution on the introduction of clarifications to this point was never adopted. It is very important to point out the following. The IHR does not include any mechanism to monitor their mandatory implementation, but a state that does not comply with them may be subject to collective action by WHO Member States. The strongest incentives for compliance with the Rules appear to be pressure from other Member States and public awareness. In the modern world with its huge variety of electronic media, no secret can exist for very long. States do not want to be isolated. Potential consequences of non-compliance with the Regulations include: tarnished reputation, higher morbidity and mortality in affected populations, unilateral travel and trade restrictions, economic and social upheaval, public outrage. Conversely, working with each other and with WHO to monitor any event that poses a threat to public health, and communicating accurately what measures are being taken to address the problem, help states protect themselves from undue measures that might be taken against them. other states unilaterally. Responsibility for implementing the IHR (2005) rests with all States covered by the IHR and WHO. The state, including all its sectors, ministries, levels, officials and personnel, is responsible for implementing the Rules at the national level. WHO will work with States and support them in implementing the Regulations. By agreeing to adhere to the IHR (2005), states have the opportunity to: enjoy the reputation and advantages of a respected partner in international efforts to maintain global health security; receive advice from WHO in building and scaling up the key resources needed to rapidly detect, notify, assess and respond to public health emergencies and public health risks, including those of national and international concern; receive offers of technical support and receive assistance in efforts to mobilize possible financial support to meet these new commitments; receive advice from WHO as they assess and respond to the nature and extent of the outbreak; have access to specific information collected by WHO on public health risks around the world, which is a prerequisite for ensuring the protection of their own citizens; receive advice and logistical support from WHO (upon request) to help them respond appropriately to outbreaks of disease and other events that pose a threat to public health; have access to the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN), which is a platform of global resources that can be used to address public health risks and emergencies of international concern (PHEIC). However, States Parties to the IHR (2005) are required to: appoint a national IHR focal point (see question 4 above); assess events occurring on their territory and notify WHO of all events that may constitute a PHEIC, using the decision tree in Annex 2 of the Regulations for this purpose (see question 5 above); respond to requests for verification of information regarding events that may constitute a PHEIC; take action to address public health risks that could spread internationally; develop, strengthen and maintain the key resources needed to detect, notify and respond to any events that pose a threat to public health; ensure and constantly maintain material and technical conditions and services, as well as the conduct of inspections and control activities at designated international airports, ports and ground transport hubs in order to prevent the international spread of diseases; send to WHO any evidence of public health risks identified outside their territory that may cause international spread of the disease and that have resulted from the export or import of human cases, vectors or non-infectious disease agents, and contaminated goods; make every effort to implement the measures recommended by WHO; collaborate with other States Parties and WHO to implement the IHR (2005). The IHR (2005) gave WHO new roles and responsibilities. WHO should: designate WHO IHR contact points at headquarters or at the regional level (see question 4 above); 

oversee public health and assess significant public health events at the global level, and disseminate health information to Member States, as appropriate; offer States technical assistance in their efforts to cope with public health risks and emergencies of international concern (PHEIC); support States in their efforts to assess existing national public health structures and resources, and to develop and strengthen the key resources needed for both surveillance and response to emerging threats and ongoing epidemiological work at designated points of entry; determine whether a particular event, which, according to the Rules, was notified by the state, is the PHEIC, using, if necessary, the assistance of external experts; develop critical public health measures in the event of a PHEIC and recommend that participating States take these measures (in consultation with external experts); monitor the implementation of the IHR (2005) and update the guidelines to ensure they remain scientifically accurate and in line with changing requirements. One of the most important objectives of the IHR (2005) is to improve communication between WHO and states. The designation of National IHR Focal Points gives WHO direct access to those government officials who have the authority to alert and notify WHO of events falling under its responsibilities. In fact, this legalizes the status of "WHO agent of influence". According to the IHR (2005), States are required to notify the WHO IHR Contact Point at headquarters or at regional level of any such event that takes place on their territory. WHO will also be able to ask States to verify the accuracy of communications received from sources other than government agencies. The State, acting through the National IHR Focal Point, is obliged to cooperate in the verification process of the message received. New notification requirements, coupled with WHO's requirement to verify unofficial reports of events with international implications, respect for confidentiality in the processing of information received, and the ability to receive rapid assessment assistance from the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN) the event and the response, all of which create good conditions and incentives for greater openness. Once WHO has determined that a particular event is a PHEIC under the IHR (2005) and upon request, WHO must respond immediately. Given the specific nature of each emergency, the WHO Director-General will recommend measures to be taken by the affected state, as well as by other states. These recommendations, which are limited in time, are communicated to States and subsequently to the public. In the light of new evidence, the recommended measures may subsequently be modified or withdrawn. The Emergency Committee will advise the Director-General of WHO on the nature of these recommendations. For travelers, states may require that they provide information about their health status and documentation of vaccinations, as well as a requirement to undergo a basic medical examination. According to the IHR (2005), WHO should be required to report all cases of the following four diseases: smallpox, poliomyelitis due to wild poliovirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and human influenza due to a new subtype of the virus. In May 2016, to strengthen WHO's mandate, Member States agreed to one of the most profound transformations in the organization's history, establishing a new Health Emergencies Program [17]. In addition to the organization's traditional technical and regulatory functions, it adds operational capabilities to provide rapid and comprehensive support to countries and local communities preparing for emergencies caused by any threat to human health. As such, since 1 August 2016, WHO has been acting in accordance with the new disaster management processes to assess risk, determine the level of disaster and resolve incidents. As pointed out by Program Executive Director Peter Salama, it aims to create a unified program with a unified workforce, a unified budget, a unified set of rules and processes, and a direct line of authority. According to him, it creates the basic capabilities for the implementation of the IPM and ensures the creation of global public health. It is also important to note that flexible funding is key to its advancement, which must be secured by commitments from the UK, US and Japan. WHO and the coronavirus. Timeline of major WHO actions. On December 31, 2019, the WHO Country Office in the PRC takes note of the media statement on cases of "viral pneumonia" in Wuhan. The WHO Open Source Epidemiological Data Initiative platform is also filing a media report on the same cluster of cases of "pneumonia of unknown etymology" in Wuhan, and on January 1, WHO is requesting information from the Chinese authorities. On January 9, WHO reports that the outbreak is caused by a new coronavirus, according to the findings of the Chinese authorities, and is organizing the first teleconference with global networks of experts. On January 17, WHO convenes the first meeting of the working group on the modeling and analysis of the new coronavirus. On January 20-21, WHO organizes the first trip to Wuhan and meets with health officials. On January 21, WHO reports that there is clear evidence of "at least moderate person-to-person transmission," and the US reports the first confirmed case of coronavirus infection (the first in America). On January 22, the WHO Director General convenes a conference call for the IHR Emergency Committee on the outbreak of the novel coronavirus, composed of 15 independent experts from around the world, who are tasked with providing the Director General with an opinion on whether the outbreak is a health emergency of international concern ( ChSZMZ). On behalf of Russia, it was attended by the head of the department of the Stavropol anti-plague research institute of Rospotrebnadzor, doctor of biological sciences and the head of the WHO on plague, Vladimir Dubyansky. Since, due to the limited information available, the Committee was unable to reach an unambiguous conclusion, discussion continued on 23 January. Members of the Committee again disagree on whether this event meets the criteria of the CHSMZ, since there was not sufficient information for this, and the range of possible solutions is limited to only two options (CHSMZ or not CHSMZ, since there is no intermediate threat level). Given the differences of opinion, the Committee refrained from concluding that the event constituted a ChSZMZ. On January 29, WHO publishes guidelines for community use of masks in home care and health care settings. On January 30, the WHO Director-General is re-convening a meeting of the IHR Emergency Committee, which has concluded that the outbreak meets the criteria for a CHEIC at this stage. The CEO agrees and announces that the outbreak of the new coronavirus infection is the ChSZMZ [23]. At this point, 98 cases were reported outside China in 18 countries without a single death, in 4 cases (Germany, Japan, the United States and Vietnam) there was evidence of person-to-person transmission. The committee formulates recommendations for the PRC, all countries and the world community, which are accepted by the CEO and issued in the form of recommendations in accordance with the IHR. The general director makes a corresponding statement, which explains the grounds for making a decision to declare ChSZMZ. It is significant that the next day, January 31, in the Russian Federation, Resolution No. 66 of the Government is adopted "On Amending the List of Diseases that Pose a Danger to Others", in accordance with which this list is supplemented with paragraph 16 - coronavirus infection (2019-nCoV). WHO is finalizing a Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan on 3 February, which describes how to build operational collaboration and scale up preparedness and response activities. Then the WHO Secretary General appeals to the UN Secretary General with a request to transfer the work of the UN Crisis Management Group to an active mode. On February 11, WHO announced that the disease caused by the new coronavirus will be named COVID-19. On March 9, the Global Preparedness Monitoring Council, an independent high-level body established by WHO and the World Bank to monitor PHEIC preparedness, calls for an immediate $ 8 billion in funding to coordinate efforts to provide priority support to the most vulnerable countries; development of new diagnostic tools, drugs and vaccines; strengthening surveillance and coordination capacities at the regional level; and providing health workers with adequate protective equipment [26].

On 10 March, WHO, UNICEF and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) release guidelines outlining essential principles and practices for safe school and helpful advice for parents and caregivers, as well as children and , in particular, schoolchildren. And finally, on March 11, expressing concern about the spread of infection and the severity of its consequences and the unacceptable scale of disasters, the head of WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said that the situation with coronavirus infection "can be characterized as a pandemic." At the same time, he cautioned that the use of the word "pandemic" should not override measures taken by countries to prevent the spread of the virus, although he admitted that if misused, it could "cause unwarranted fear and unjustified recognition that the fight is over." And further: “We have never seen a coronavirus pandemic. This is the first pandemic caused by the coronavirus. We have also never seen a pandemic that can be brought under control at the same time ... As I stated on Monday, the number of cases and countries affected by the virus does not tell the whole story ... Provided that detection, diagnosis, treatment and isolation are ensured patients, monitoring all contact persons and mobilizing all forces to carry out anti-epidemic measures, countries in which a small number of cases of the disease are registered will be able to prevent the emergence of epidemiological clusters, which in turn can lead to the circulation of the virus among the population. " “The current crisis is not only a health crisis, it will affect every sector, so every sector and every person must be involved in the fight against the pandemic. From the very beginning, I talk about the need for countries to implement an approach based on the involvement of all sectors of government and society as a whole, and built around a comprehensive strategy aimed at preventing the spread of infection, saving lives and reducing the negative consequences of the disease. In short, this can be summarized as four main objectives. First, the adoption of preparedness measures. Secondly, identifying patients, providing them with assistance and treatment. Third, prevention of further spread of infection. Fourth, finding innovative solutions and learning from experience. I remind all countries that we urge to activate and expand the scope of emergency response mechanisms. ” However, it is important to note here again that there are no clear criteria by which WHO could be guided when declaring a pandemic. On the WHO website, its definition is given (2010): "A pandemic is the spread of a new disease on a global scale." But this definition fits many diseases (for example, seasonal flu). Prior to this, the WHO, as we wrote, dealt only with influenza pandemics, and in accordance with its position, the pandemic is determined not by the potential severity of the disease, but by the fact that it was a new virus that was actively spreading even in summer. "An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus emerges and spreads around the world, and most people are not immune." However, this approach is highly controversial. As shown by the 2010 scientific discussion in The Journal of Infectious Diseases, different authors give different definitions of a pandemic, although common features can be found. The overwhelming majority of experts note that a pandemic is a widespread disease throughout the world, that is, the key criterion is geographic. But there are other signs that many experts agree with. This is 1) a new causative agent (for example, this very sign is important for the WHO European Office: “An influenza pandemic is a global epidemic caused by a new influenza virus, against which there is no initial immunity in the human population or it is very low”); 2) a well-forgotten old pathogen (for example, cholera); 3) infectiousness and spreading around the world from one point to another; 4) overt symptoms and noticeable transmission rate; 5) the minimum number of people are immune to the pathogen. But the severity of the disease is considered an important criterion by a minority of specialists. So the fact that WHO has declared a pandemic does not mean that the new coronavirus infection is a serious disease that threatens many people with death. As the economist and geopolitical analyst Peter Koenig, a researcher at the Center for the Study of Globalization who previously worked at the World Bank, wrote on this occasion, “WHO has declared the COVID-19 coronavirus a pandemic, despite the fact that there is not the slightest trace of a pandemic. In a pandemic, the mortality rate reaches more than 12% ... Most likely, WHO received orders from the `` top '' - from those who also rule Trump and the `` leaders '' of the European Union and its member countries, from those who seek to rule the world with the help of A single world order ”. There is one more key point to be highlighted here. In March, WHO not only announced a pandemic, but demanded that COVID-19 be codified as an emergency based on tests only, regardless of the condition of the patients. But it is known that tests give a large proportion (experts say about 30%) false positive values, which became the basis for a fraud on a truly international scale. WHO has made urgent changes to the international classification of diseases of the 10th and 11th revisions (ICD-10 and ICD-11), adding the codes necessary to record patients with COVID-19 diseases. We are talking about the following changes. 1. In the class "Some infectious and parasitic diseases (A00-B99)" subclass "Other viral diseases (B25-B34)" section "Viral infection of unspecified localization (B34)" added a clarification that for the nosology "Coronavirus infection of unspecified localization" ( code B34.2) the following values ​​are excluded: "COVID-19, virus identified (U07.1)" and "COVID-19, no virus identified (U07.2)" 2. In the class "Codes for special purposes (U00-U85 ) "Subclass" Temporary designation of new diagnoses of unclear etiology or for use in emergency situations (U00-U49) "the following changes have been made: a. In the section "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) (U04)", a clarification has been added that for the nosology "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, unspecified" (code U04.9) the following values ​​are excluded: "COVID-19, virus identified (U07.1)" and “COVID-19, no virus identified (U07.2)”. b. New values ​​have been added to the Use in Emergency Situations (U07) section: i. "COVID-19, virus identified" (code U07.1). Explanation: Use this code when COVID-19 has been confirmed by laboratory tests, regardless of the severity of the clinical signs or symptoms. If necessary, indicate pneumonia or other manifestations of infection, use the additional code. Excludes: coronavirus infection, unspecified (B34.2), coronavirus as the cause of diseases classified elsewhere (B97.2), severe acute respiratory syndrome (ARVI), unspecified (U04.9). ii. "COVID-19, no virus identified" (code U07.2). Explanation: Use this code if COVID-19 is diagnosed clinically or epidemiologically, but laboratory tests are inconclusive or not available. If necessary, indicate pneumonia or other manifestations of infection, use the additional code. Excludes: coronavirus infection, unspecified (B34.2), COVID-19: laboratory confirmed (U07.1), special screening examination (Z11.5), suspected but excluded by laboratory negative (Z03.8) [36]. WHO has also further clarified that codes U00-U49 should only be used to temporally code new diseases of undetermined etiology. To encode COVID-19, the updated specification of the U07 category must be applied. Electronic system designers need to ensure that this category and subcategories are available so that they can be used immediately as directed by WHO. These changes, we recall, were introduced by WHO in March, and on April 8, 2020, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, by its letter No. 13-2 / I / 2-4335 signed by E.G. Kamkin, brought this information to the regional health authorities (OUZ ), federal healthcare institutions, FMBA, Federal Tax Service and Rosstat.

Continuation follows...

24-ዘዐሀዩ ጠልፘልጓፗበይ 📓 'ናልናዘዓሀልዩ'

⏳ƬɼiᎴʋlɛ א 🔬Ꮥɑγʂ 🎙