USA Rejects WHO Pandemic Response Measures

In a bold move, the United States has formally rejected the World Health Organization’s (WHO) revised International Health Regulations (IHR) amendments, adopted in 2024 by the WHO’s 194 member states.

The decision, announced by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, underscores the Trump administration’s commitment to safeguarding American sovereignty and civil liberties.

The rejection also marks a significant pushback against the WHO’s overreach into national authority, aligning with President Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda.
Background on the IHR

The International Health Regulations, first established in 1969 and updated in 2005, serve as a legally binding framework for WHO member states to coordinate responses to global public health emergencies.

The 2024 amendments were promoted by the WHO as essential tools to enhance global preparedness for future health crises, such as pandemics. However, the revised rules have sparked controversy due to several provisions which encroach on national sovereignty, including potential mandates for lockdowns, travel restrictions, and global health surveillance systems.

U.S. Rejects WHO’s Authority

In a joint statement, Kennedy and Rubio outlined the U.S. decision to reject the amendments, citing concerns over the erosion of national autonomy and individual freedoms.

In a video address, Kennedy warned that the amendments “open the door to narrative management, propaganda, and censorship,” drawing parallels to measures implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. He emphasized that the U.S. can cooperate internationally without compromising its Constitution or ceding sovereignty to an unelected global body.

A key point of contention is a provision requiring nations to establish “risk communication systems” which Kennedy argues could institutionalize mechanisms for controlling narratives, potentially stifling free speech and enabling censorship. Another concern is the inclusion of language supporting “global systems of health IDs and vaccine passports,” which could lead to dystopian levels of medical surveillance under WHO oversight.

Broader Implications and Biden-Era Policies

The rejection also serves as a rebuke of policies pushed by the Biden administration, which sought to strengthen the WHO’s authority through the IHR amendments and a proposed Pandemic Treaty.

These initiatives would have allowed the WHO to monitor and influence national pandemic preparedness strategies, potentially pressuring countries to adopt controversial agendas, such as promoting abortion as a “human right” during health emergencies.

During the COVID era, the WHO explicitly included abortion and contraception in its response frameworks, often under the guise of “sexual and reproductive health.” This issue stands as precedent for the WHO to potentially use health crises in the future to advance politically charged issues.

The Trump administration’s rejection is reflective, however, of a broader effort to dismantle what it views as globalist overreach.

In January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order initiating the U.S. withdrawal from the WHO, a process that takes one year to complete. This follows a similar attempt during his first term, which was reversed by President Biden in 2021. The administration has also cut funding to other UN-affiliated agencies, including UNICEF, UNRWA, and UNESCO, signaling a broader shift away from multilateral institutions which are misaligned with U.S. interests.

A New Global Health Framework

In tandem with the WHO withdrawal, the U.S. and Argentina announced plans to develop an “alternative international health system” focused on respecting national sovereignty whilst fostering cooperation. This initiative aims to disrupt the WHO’s dominance in global health governance and to encourage other nations to reconsider their alignment with the organization.

Why It Matters

The U.S. rejection of the IHR amendments isn’t just a domestic policy decision but a signal to the international community. As a founding member and the WHO’s largest financial contributor since 1948, the U.S. carries significant influence.
By taking a stand, the Trump administration is challenging other nations to scrutinize the WHO’s expanding authority and its track record of controversial policies.

Looking Ahead

As the U.S. moves toward full withdrawal from the WHO by January 2026, be prepared for the global health landscape to look very different. The creation of an alternative health system could reshape international cooperation, whilst the rejection of the IHR amendments may inspire other nations, like Italy, to prioritize their sovereignty.

For now, the Trump administration’s actions reaffirm its “America First” doctrine, positioning the U.S. as a counterweight to globalist agendas and a defender of self-determination in health policy.

Thank you for your support.

If you appreciate the work we do to spread the good news of Jesus Christ, please consider giving a gift to help us continue this work. Maranatha!