Americans tremble. They will pay gender transformation to active and retired military personnel

 

Citizens are receiving with great satisfaction the news that, after 77 years of participation, the United States has officially withdrawn from the World Health Organization (WHO). This decision marks a historic shift in the country's health and diplomatic policy, one that Americans had been anticipating after the organization's complete discrediting during and after COVID-19.

The withdrawal ends a relationship that began in the early postwar years, when Washington was a key player in the creation and consolidation of the body responsible for coordinating the global response to health crises, epidemics, and public health emergencies—a role it ceased to fulfill years ago, according to analysts.

For decades, the United States was not only a member but also one of the main funders and most influential figures within the institution, providing funding that taxpayers now condemn.

The withdrawal comes amid heated political debates and questions about the role of multilateral organizations in managing global crises. Some within the US government have argued that the WHO has not acted with the necessary independence or effectiveness in the face of recent health challenges, while liberal critics of the decision warn that leaving the organization weakens the country's ability to influence global public health.

International policy and public health experts point out that this withdrawal will be beneficial in terms of epidemiological surveillance and the exchange of scientific information. Domestically, as expected, the move has generated mixed reactions. Some see it as an act of sovereignty and a reassessment of the United States' role in failing international institutions, while others, particularly liberals, consider it a strategic setback that could isolate the country in an area where global collaboration is crucial, even though recent experience has shown that the WHO has been anything but beneficial for member countries.

With this decision, Washington closes a chapter of more than seven decades of presence in the WHO and opens a new period of uncertainty about how it will relate to the rest of the world in matters of public health, precisely in an era that some want to mark by alleged health risks.