Well, whaddya know … the World Health Organization finally got something right!
No, I’m not referring to their initial claim that COVID-19 wasn’t spread through the air or originating in a Wuhan wet market rather than a lab.
Instead, WHO has published a recent report correctly warning about another feverish pandemic … paranoic mental-health impacts of climate change based upon terrifying projections its political United Nations ally, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
As explained: “WHO has developed a policy brief describing the interconnections between climate change and mental health and providing five key recommendations on potential approaches to address the mental health impacts of the climate crisis [italics added].”
Hey, the report’s scary graphics alone should make any climate crisis Armageddon believer even a little bit more looney … a little child running toward his mother’s comforting arms for safety from a burning tree as smokestacks and a nuclear plant billow dark smoke in the background.
Incidentally, nuclear plants don’t emit smoke…only water vapor.
The accompanying text warns that we are “witnessing changes and damage to landscape and ecosystems,” and that “awareness of climate change and extreme weather events and their impacts” could lead to all sorts of really bad psychological outcomes which sound an awful lot like results of WHO’s COVID shutdowns.
The 16-page WHO report says many young people are particularly distressed over alarming news about climate change, including such symptoms as “solastalgia, eco-anxiety, environmental distress, ecological grief.”
Climate change neurosis, it seems, can lead to strained social relationships, anxiety, depression, intimate partner violence, helplessness, suicidal behavior and alcohol and substance abuse, among other things (which are probably worse.)
And they’re very right about that.
A recent study in The Lancet reported that 45% of young people surveyed in 10 mostly higher and upper-middle income countries said their feelings about climate change hurt their daily functioning.
As discussed in a recent New York Times article, “eco-anxiety, a concept introduced by young activists, has entered a mainstream vocabulary. And professional organizations are hurrying to catch up, exploring approaches to treating anxiety that is both existential and, many would argue, rational.”
Although the narrative states that there is “little empirical data on effective treatments,” the rapidly expanding field has reportedly spawned more than 50 groups with professional certification programs in climate psychology.
A working mom identified only as Ms. Black described her climate phobia as a “luxury problem,” whereby plastic toys in the bathtub made her anxious, and she began to worry about a relationship between using disposable diapers and wildfires.
One psychotherapist noted by the Times applies aspects of “logotherapy,” or “existential therapy,” described as “a field founded by Viktor E. Frankl, who survived German concentration camps and then wrote ‘Man’s Search for Meaning,’ which described how prisoners in Auschwitz were able to live fulfilling lives.”
A December 2021 10-country Lancet survey of 10,000 people aged 16 to 25 found that 40% of respondents said worry about climate negatively affected their daily life, three-quarters said they believed “the future is frightening,” and 56% said that “humanity is doomed.”
A particularly tragic eco-paranoia case I wrote about in my first book on this topic, “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax” (2011) involved an Argentine family.
In March 2010, Francisco Lotero and Miriam Coletti shot two of their children before killing themselves after making an apparent suicide pact over fears about effects of global warming. Although their 2-year-old son, Francisco died instantly, their unnamed 7-month-old infant daughter remarkably survived.
In another shamelessly irresistible plug for my 2015 book titled “Scared Witless: Prophets and Profits of Climate Doom,” I will also note again providently foreseeing those most psychiatrically disturbed populations being of liberal ideological persuasion.
Nevertheless, if the U.N. and its ultimately authoritative IPCC believe the world is on fire because of our evil smokestacks and SUVs, who can doubt they have the real scientific scoop on the matter?
Except maybe for a candid admission from former IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer, who advised in 2010 that “… one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.”
Fast forward then to true agendas of another climate and environment “expert” and Democratic “Green New Deal” architect, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY.
As AOC’s former chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti told then-Washington state’s climate director Sam Ricketts during a May 2019 meeting, "The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all."
Chakrabarti then asked, "Do you guys think of it as a climate thing? Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing."
While conceding that “There are gaps in understanding the impact of climate change on mental health and psychosocial well-being,” the WHO report nevertheless concludes “but current knowledge is sufficient to act!”
In other words, WHO has also now assumed the scientific mantel as climate health authority.
Wall Street Journal editors advise that WHO is now exploiting a mental illness surge in the wake of COVID lockdowns it supported as an extended financial opportunity.
WHO, the Journal points out, already “lost credibility after being late to raise alarms about COVID and then helping China whitewash an investigation into its origins. … Like many bureaucracies, it wants to expand its authority despite failing in its core responsibilities.”
In feeding unwarranted climate fear and guilt suggesting that the world is doomed — and we are responsible — WHO is seeding an existing pandemic of apocalyptic predictions in the interest of persuading wealthy countries to give it more money and political power.
When science becomes political, it can no longer be dignified nor trusted as science.
As H.L. Mencken observed in his 1918 essay In Defense of Women, “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture and the graduate space architecture program. His latest of 11 books, "Beyond Flagpoles and Footprints: Pioneering the Space Frontier" co-authored with Buzz Aldrin (2021), is available on Amazon along with all others. Read Larry Bell's Reports — More Here.
© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.