The WHO is not really "powerful" like a nation is, as they do not have a military or enforcement arm, and they do not pass laws.

All they can do is decide how their funds get spent. They are granted all these "powers" to spend their funds by the participating states. Furthermore, they are restricted to spending it on things that promote world health. The worst they can do is squander the money, which isn't even all that much.

Compare this to people like Jeff Bezos who have vastly more money, 100% centralized, and effectively no restrictions on how they spend it. Whether you should be concerned about that is up for argument, but by contrast, any concerns about the WHO are pretty absurd.

> The WHO is not really "powerful" like a nation is, as they do not have a military or enforcement arm, and they do not pass laws.

True, but a majority of policy makers and talking heads (that influence and approve laws) carry out their deeds under the guise of "Well, the WHO says so". Consider how frequently the "appeal to authority" tactic was used during the pandemic.

This isn't entirely without consequence.

But still consider the relativity here. The risk of a malicious WHO is insignificant next to the risk of rich industrialists like Jeff Bezos. Very wealthy and powerful entities like Jeff Bezos do lobby and influence governments and media on a totally different scale then international organizations such as WHO. And more often then not these industrialists do succeed in bending policy to their favor at the cost of everyone else.

Maybe this isn’t without consequence, but relatively speaking the risk of negative consequences are next to nothing.

Is it intended to remove politics from science?

By replacing it with unilateral power?

Yeah, what could go wrong with that?

1984 but instead of televisions with pee-bottles and blood-tests ;))