Thursday, September 9, 2021

The World Health Organization's Digital Vaccination Documentation - Where Are We Headed?

The World Health Organization recently released its proposal for a vaccine passport in its 'Digital Documentation of COVID-19 Certificates: Vaccination Status" (DDCC:VS) report as shown here:



In this highly technical document, we find the WHO's plan for a digital vaccination certificate (DDCC:VS) which documents a persons' current vaccination status to protect against COVID-19. 


The document opens with this definition of a DDCC:VS:


"The DDCC:VS is a digitally signed representation of data content that describes a vaccination event. DDCC:VS data content respects the specified core data set and follows the Health Level Seven (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard detailed in the FHIR Implementation Guide."


Pretty technical, isn't it?


Here is a further explanation of a vaccination certificate according to the WHO:


"A vaccination certificate is a health document that records a vaccination service received by an individual, traditionally as a paper card noting key details about the vaccinated individual, vaccine administered, date administered, and other data in the core data set. Digital vaccination certificates are immunization records in an electronic format that are accessible by both the vaccinated person and authorized health workers, and which can be used in the same way as the paper card: to ensure continuity of care or provide proof of vaccination. These are the two scenarios considered in this document.


A vaccination certificate can be purely digital (e.g. stored in a smartphone application or on a cloud- based server) and replace the need for a paper card, or it can be a digital representation of the traditional paper-based record. A digital certificate should never require individuals to have a smartphone or computer. The link between the paper record and the digital record can be established using a one-dimensional (1D) or two-dimensional (2D) barcode, for example, printed on or affixed to the paper vaccination card. References to the “paper” record in this document mean a physical document (printed on paper, plastic card, cardboard, etc.)." 


Here is a key descriptor which pretty clearly outlines the limitations of a DDCC:VS or any other vaccine/immunity passport:


"The guidance in this document is for a digital record that only shows that a vaccination has occurred. The digital record is not intended to serve as an immunity passport or provide a judgement or decision on what that vaccination means or permits."


The document goes on to show different formats of a DDCC:VS:



It also provides us with some possible uses for a DDCC:VS:



Note, in particular, the use of the DDCC:VS for "work, university education and international travel". 

Obviously, there are going to be concerns about data privacy attached to these digital certificates.  Of course, the WHO addresses that here:


"The potential benefits, risks and costs of implementing a DDCC:VS solution should be assessed before introducing a DDCC:VS system and its associated infrastructure. This includes an impact assessment of the ethical and privacy implications and potential risks that may arise with the implementation of a DDCC:VS.


Member States must establish the appropriate policies for appropriate use, data protection and governance of the DDCC:VS to reduce the potential harms, while achieving the public health benefits involved in deploying such a solution."


....and here:


"Respecting the data protection principles (see section 2.2), Members States will adhere to data protection and privacy laws and regulations established under national law or adopted through bilateral or multilateral agreements."


Nonetheless, they do note that there could be some backlash to the idea of a digital certificate:


"The creation of a DDCC:VS following vaccination for each individual may incentivize more people to receive a vaccine to access the benefits of a DDCC:VS. However, it may also increase vaccine hesitancy because of privacy and other concerns that the vaccination record could be linked to personal data and be used for functions other than those originally intended (e.g. surveillance of individual health status), or be used by unintended third parties (e.g. immigration, commercial entities, researchers).


And we all know that governments would never, ever surveil us, don't we?  Of course, we have good reason to be skeptical.  Many governments are now using COVID-19 vaccination status as a means of denying certain services and employment opportunities to the unwashed, unvaccinated individuals and some are leaving those threats open-ended.


If we go back to the Executive Summary of the report we find this:



And, there we have it.  The certificate can be used as proof of vaccination status "for purposes other than health care".  When you think about this, you realize that these certificates could be used to deny (or allow if you are well-behaved) all manner of government and private sector services to individuals outside of health care.  As well, given that the world is headed towards central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), it isn't much of a stretch to think that these certificates could also ultimately be used to deny an individual to their digital savings or that they could be used to deny an individual the ability to borrow money.  Once governments have us conditioned to the idea of a universal digital identity, there is no turning back.


Lest you think that this is a stretch, let's look at who was behind the WHO's move toward DDCC:VS as found on page vi:


I'm not surprised, are you?


Given that Bill Gates still owns 1.36 percent of Microsoft's outstanding shares and that Microsoft is involved in the development of a COVID-19 Digital Passport as shown here:


...and here: looks like Bill Gates has once again successfully dictated the World Health Organization's response to the pandemic (and beyond) and looking to increase his already obscene wealth now that he's had to "donate" some of it to his ex-wife.  With the population being "softened up" through the use of extensive fear porn over the past year, people are far more likely to accept the issuance of invasive digital identity documentation than they ever have in the past.


Let's close with this "it's mine, all mine" photo:



Hint - It was never about a virus.

No comments:

Post a Comment