10 COVID related suggestions from a Concerned Citizen (emailed to gov reps May 2 2021) + quick links to select old posts

Cleaning out old files - POSSIBLY readers NEW to evidence-based COVID-19 science might be interested in knowing how long certain key facts were ALREADY KNOWN!

Oct 14, 2024

Welcome aboard to all the people who have come aboard as new subscribers recently! There seems to have been a push to get this Substack in front of more eyeballs of late. Keep on sharing as NOW, before the next big “declared pandemic” the information in this substack could help new arrivals who are new to the “other side of the story” on all things COVID science related.

I will quickly point you new readers to a few highlights of this Substack… (Longtime readers can skip down to below the image.)

Ten months ago, I created a little directory of ‘printables’ in THIS POST. This was in the hope that people would find them useful. Some could use updating, but others seem to be just as relevant now as ever. The bonus is that most of these are SHORT!

In THIS POST I summarize some of the findings around SARS-CoV-2 and mRNA injections that were being posted early in the declared pandemic. Often for those of us following the research from the start, certain truths are now so well known outside of the ‘mainstream media bubble’ that we do not cite the sources each time we mention them. This is super frustrating for people only recently becoming aware of FOUR years worth of research findings. So in this post I start back at the bottom of the ladder - referencing key findings that were NEVER reported inside the ‘mainstream media bubble’ OR simply declared as ‘mis/dis information’.

Here I wrote about the ‘mainstream media bubble’ and encouraged people to look beyond it. To assist them navigate in the immense universe of ‘independent/ censorship-free’ media I prepared THIS POST.

Here in THIS POST I have a bit of advice for readers under the heading “Knowledge is Power”

In THIS POST I explain what I had been working on for the two years prior to starting this Substack (a compilation of research evidence from the start of the declared pandemic up to the fall of 2021.) What I share below was written in Spring of 2021. The attached Appendices were later reformatted and expanded upon.

And finally, for those who want a bit of a bio on me as a writer - I am the teacher cited in THIS POST & in THIS POST as part of the CanadianShareableNews project, I provide further background. I can also be followed on LinkedIN and on X/Twitter.

***************

(Image Source)

I have a new dilemma: my email program just started telling me I am nearing 90% capacity!! So I am going to have to pay for more storage or start deleting messages. I reluctantly prefer the latter.

So I went back to 2021 and found my attempts at getting news out to friends, journalists, politicians, school board administrators and others via EMAIL with PDF attachments - a combo that people found overwhelming and about stuff they didn’t want to hear. So as not to lose hours of effort, and to enter the information into a (hopefully) more permanent record of WHAT was known WHEN already and WHAT was emailed TO WHOM WHEN - I will copy some of these ‘content packages’ into this Substack.

Readers who didn’t know about the various findings until much later, can now be asking the media:

a) What exactly prevented you from reporting on this in the past?

b) When did you become aware of this information and did you publish it then?

c) If you only found out about this information because I forwarded the information to you, what steps will you take to verify this information and how soon can I expect you to publish it?

d) Are you aware of legal cases in Germany re: state funded media outlets NOT following their constitutional obligations to report on a DIVERSITY OF VIEWPOINTS? (The same ethical requirements are outlined in various broadcaster codes of ethics in Canada too.) Given that you are now being alerted about much of this information, when will you follow your ethical requirements and make information along these lines public?

================

LETTER

Edmonton, May 2, 2021

This email with its attachments is being addressed to

Hon. Patty Hajdu, Minister of Health; Patty.Hajdu@parl.gc.ca

Cc to NDP Health Critic don.davies@parl.gc.ca

& Conservative Health Critic Michelle.Rempel@parl.gc.ca

Cc also to Dr. Eve Dubé, member of National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI)

To the Honorable Minister of Health, MP Patty Hajdu

Undoubtedly, one of the most crucial position holders in the country, I realize you are extremely pressed for time. Before reading on, please note the first URGENT attachment - You may not be aware that as of today (May 2) there is NO 2021 DATA available at all on the adverse effects of vaccine reaction on the Adverse Effects Database for anything since the END of 2020. Please see the first attached document, a copy of an email sent to https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medeffect-canada/adverse-reaction-database.html. I am not sure if they are waiting for action from your office for example before proceeding.

I am writing jointly to you and your two Health Critics from across the aisle and I am asking you all to set aside your partisan affiliations for the moment. I am also including Dr. Dubé as I am making use of her graphics and I am learning from her how NACI is trying to get at the question of vaccine hesitation. Within my social circles, while people were supportive of all mitigation measures early on, as more and more information is coming out, and research studies are published, censored, etc., there is a distinct parting of ways in terms of how the population I come into contact with sees the very matters that you as Minister of Health are directing.

Please see the second attached document for 10 suggestions and supporting documentation, for actions you and others can take to bring adherents of two very different viewpoints closer together in this country and move us forward in these pandemic times.

Specifically, these are:

1. To convene an Independent Bi-Lateral Investigative Panel consisting of key scientists representing both the “mainstream” and the “alternate” interpretation of science around COVID in order to get clarity on the differing “facts vs myths” that are circulating in the population.

2. To ensure that the directives of the WHO regarding PCR testing are applied nation-wide to ensure that case count numbers are reliable and consistent. Currently there is the perception by some that they are not.

3. To fast track the dissemination of information about successful early outpatient treatment protocols for COVID-19.

4. To better contextualize the data presented at the level of government for which you are responsible.

5. To determine which level of government/which agency is best placed to develop an information campaign about Immunity, using the information compiled as part of #1.

6. Various URGENT actions to undertake re: the vaccine rollouts

7-9 Support various recommendations being addressed to other federal departments that are meant to rebuild the trust of various concerned sectors of the population (i.e. around conflict of interest).

10. Ensure that those living with chronic illnesses (with incurable disabling symptoms that lead to similar suffering or isolation as severe COVID does) receive the same high degree of focus and attention as is currently devoted to COVID.

Thank you

Hannah-Luise

Concerned citizen (lay person)

========

1st Attachment:

From: me

Date: Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:46 PM

Subject: urgent need to update Covid adverse effects on your database

To: hc.mhpd-dpsc.sc@canada.ca

Hello MHPD_DPSC

re: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medeffect-

canada/adverse-reaction-database.html

I note with dismay that the Adverse Reactions Database comes with this explanatory line:

This database includes data from 1965 to 2020-12-31.

Given that we are now FOUR months into 2021 and that the COVID-19 vaccine rollout

is swiftly advancing throughout this country, and doctors are already spending time

(unpaid hours) documenting adverse both IMMEDIATE AND LATE ONSET systemic

side effects in good faith that the information will be made available, it is

incomprehensible that this information is not yet posted online.

Currently showing are 2 reports (both submitted before the Dec. 30 cut off date).

When will the reports submitted since January 1 by physicians be posted? What is the

process? Is there a step in between where physicians reports are scrutinized to decide

which can be made public and which not (I would hope not but cannot explain the

delay to myself.)

Also please note that physicians are reporting that the reporting tool does not allow for

the wide range of effects being noted with COVID vaccines. Given that data is only as

good as the mechanism used to report it, someone needs to rectify the situation asap.

Keep in mind please that a WIDE range of effects are currently being reported in

Europe including deaths.

Meanwhile your database remains silent...

Please explain.

thank you

hannah-luise

Concered Citizen

https://eudravigilance.ema.europa.eu/Decommissioned/Decommissioned.html

As of April 24, 2021 it is reported to show a total of 8430 deaths and 354,177 injuries

post-vaccination with all four current COVID-19 vaccines.

Here is the summary data through April 24, 2021.

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA

vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 4,524

deaths and 151,306 injuries to 24/04/2021

 11,191 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 40 deaths

 7,372 Cardiac disorders incl. 522 deaths

 50 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 3 deaths

 4,183 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 3 deaths

 112 Endocrine disorders

 4,629 Eye disorders incl. 6 deaths

 33,33 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 227 deaths

 103,813 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1459 deaths

 214 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 16 deaths

 3,338 Immune system disorders incl. 20 deaths

 10,160 Infections and infestations incl. 527 deaths

 3,950 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 89 deaths

 7,595 Investigations incl. 168 deaths

 2,564 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 91 deaths

 53,714 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 47 deaths

 150 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and

polyps) incl. 7 deaths

 65,745 Nervous system disorders incl. 425 deaths

 192 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 7 deaths

 80 Product issues

 6,008 Psychiatric disorders incl. 63 deaths

 938 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 66 deaths

 994 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 1 death

 13,954 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 523 deaths

 16,171 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 35 deaths

 438 Social circumstances incl. 6 deaths

 124 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 8 deaths

 8,220 Vascular disorders incl. 165 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-

024414) from Moderna: 2,283 deaths and 17,625 injuries to 24/04/2021

 839 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 16 deaths

 1,278 Cardiac disorders incl. 231 deaths

 7 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 2 deaths

 378 Ear and labyrinth disorders

 23 Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death

 570 Eye disorders incl. 3 deaths

 3,857 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 80 deaths

 12,513 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1012 deaths

 77 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 3 deaths

 476 Immune system disorders incl. 3 deaths

 1,449 Infections and infestations incl. 118 deaths

 803 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 44 deaths

 1,087 Investigations incl. 60 deaths

 515 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 47 deaths

 5,669 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 47 deaths

 48 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and

polyps) incl. 8 deaths

 7,489 Nervous system disorders incl. 244 deaths

 50 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions

 8 Product issues

 862 Psychiatric disorders incl. 31 deaths

 299 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 23 deaths

 106 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 1 death

 2,198 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 197 deaths

 2,163 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 19 deaths

 162 Social circumstances incl. 6 deaths

 109 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 13 deaths

 1,166 Vascular disorders incl. 74 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222 (CHADOX1 NCOV-

19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca: 1,579 deaths and 184,833 injuries to 24/04/2021

 5,319 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 64 deaths

 7,374 Cardiac disorders incl. 199 deaths

 76 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 2 deaths

 5,011 Ear and labyrinth disorders

 155 Endocrine disorders incl. 2 deaths

 7,922 Eye disorders incl. 5 deaths

 56,473 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 62 deaths

 141,042 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 495 deaths

 248 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 13 deaths

 1,837 Immune system disorders incl. 7 deaths

 10,631 Infections and infestations incl. 99 deaths

 4,341 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 18 deaths

 9,798 Investigations incl. 21 deaths

 6,977 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 18 deaths

 82,522 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 16 deaths

 144 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and

polyps) incl. 4 deaths

 111,873Nervous system disorders incl. 244 deaths

 108 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions

 52 Product issues

 9,514 Psychiatric disorders incl. 12 deaths

 1,745 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 11 deaths

 2,076 Reproductive system and breast disorders

 15,824 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 171 deaths

 23,168 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 10 deaths

 364 Social circumstances incl. 3 deaths

 383 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 12 deaths

 8,706 Vascular disorders incl. 91 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN

(AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 44 deaths and 413 injuries to 24/04/2021

 11 Blood and lymphatic system disorders

 45 Cardiac disorders incl. 10 deaths

 1 Congenital, familial and genetic disorder

 20 Ear and labyrinth disorders

 1 Endocrine disorder

 20 Eye disorders

 109 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 1 death

 235 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 14 deaths

 3 Hepatobiliary disorders

 18 Immune system disorders

 44 Infections and infestations incl. 2 deaths

 34 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 1 death

 61 Investigations

 19 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 1 death

 95 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 1 death

 232 Nervous system disorders incl. 3 deaths

 3 Product issues

 45 Psychiatric disorders

 11 Renal and urinary disorders

 5 Reproductive system and breast disorders

 80 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 3 deaths

 50 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders

 5 Social circumstances

 3 Surgical and medical procedures

 96 Vascular disorders incl. 8 deaths

This is public information funded by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and

anyone can use the EudraVigilance system and verify this data.

Denmark and Norway have completely suspended use of the AstraZeneca experimental

COVID-19 shots.

A statement issued by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health stated that the

AstraZeneca COVID “vaccine” is more dangerous than COVID itself, especially for

young people.

The EMA continues to recommend it. They did, however, add a safety warning to the

J&J shots, due to fatal blood clots. (Source.)

2nd Attachment:

The full document can be downloaded here:

To The Health Minister

1.32MB ∙ PDF file

Download

It contains numerous appendices with charts, tables and other special formatting that would take FAR TOO LONG to redo as a Substack post.

Here I will simply copy in the content MINUS appendices.

May 1, 2021

Greetings all...

“To vaccinate or not to vaccinate?” That is the question that is now pitting colleagues, friends, family, team, community and faith group members against each other in ways that threaten to permanently damage relationships.

We know that the population no longer shares the sentiment felt a year ago at this time, that of “all being in this together.” Our frontline workers no longer feel buoyed by the gratitude shown them by the population, as health care and other heroes. At this time in 2020, there was widespread support for the pandemic measures that locked down our society as an emergency strategy to contain spread and to give the experts a few weeks or months to “get this thing figured out.” At that time, medical researchers were cheered at every corner, yet a number of months into the pandemic, it was becoming clear that issues around the same biological phenomenon (the virus) were being interpreted in vastly different ways depending on who you listened to. When talk started about getting out of the pandemic via vaccination, our global ball of wool started getting all knotted up, reflecting the inner tensions we all feel across our entire society.

What strikes me is that we are all rational, compassionate and caring individuals at a loss for how best to move forward in this current time. Normally, as practical people, we are used to taking some sort of action. What is dividing us is which information we have access to, as “the medium is the message.” That famous phrase by communications guru Marshall McLuhan is especially relevant in this current “infodemic” in which we currently find ourselves. Those of us getting our news from “mainstream” sources including the Health Canada website will see the pandemic, the virus, the lockdown, the vaccination etc. from one lens and end up on the right side of the drawing below. Those of us getting our news from the “alternate” sources can end up at the “end the lockdown” end of the spectrum (shown here on the left). And then there are those in the middle somewhere.

Eve Dubé - Infodemic in Canada and Quebec, posted December 2020.

Adherents on both sides point to examples of “misinformation” that the other side is repeatedly spewing and we are all getting more and more irritated with others who “just don’t seem to ‘get’ what is plainly obvious to us....”

Eve Dubé - Infodemic in Canada and Quebec, posted December 2020.

Here is the entanglement within which we find ourselves:

The people of the province look to the provincial leaders for guidance and direction out of this pandemic. → The provincial leaders look to the Chief Medical Officer in the Office of Public Health, who, in turn, relies on the experts on the various provincial and national panels such as the National Advisory Committee on Immunization. → These panel members, when furthering their understanding on, for example recent reports of low blood platelet counts and blood clotting inside blood vessels in patients who have recently received COVID-19 vaccines, turn to the Brighton Collaboration, a program of the Taskforce for Global Health (which has done excellent work over the years on the eradication of polio, leprosy, etc.) → Its funding comes from The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) which was launched by the World Economic Forum in 2017, to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics.The vaccine companies themselves seek investment to do their business of developing vaccines. The major investment groups of all the major gene-based vaccine companies (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZenica, J&J) overlap greatly with the investment groups of the major American private hospital chains, health insurance companies, food production, media, sports and entertainment companies, publishing houses, supply chain firms, tech companies, banks, investment and financial services companies. Only three of the biggest investment groups (Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street) jointly command controlling interests in investment equivalent to 75% of the GDP of the US economy.

And instead of being some big ogres, the top investors in these investment groups are predominately the very tech companies that we the people use every day...Microsoft, Apple, Google (Alphabet), Facebook, etc. which brings us right back full circle to us,

as it is our time online that feeds their profit margins.

These same dominant investment groups also retain controlling interests in the major for-profit news agencies or wire services who in turn churn out news stories for public consumption that are often re-writes of press releases provided by the vaccination companies. → Health Canada requires pharmaceutical companies to provide medical safety information and so now, the info posted on its website echoes info given by the vaccine companies. Serious side effects, being reported on all sides (in the “alternate” more than in the “mainstream” media) are oddly absent from the official Health Canada information. → The same tech companies, publication companies, vaccine companies, etc. themselves are key members of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the launchpad of the aforementioned CEPI. The WEF is an unelected body that has no formal lines of accountability to us as citizens, but that is shaping the direction for every line of human endeavor from sport, media and entertainment, to technology, health, finances, governance and more.

Meanwhile independent investigative journalists (some of whom have worked for mainstream, corporate owned press before being let go for being “too investigative”) as well as medical research-practitioners, doctors, heads of hospitals, university professors, etc. have been attempting to make their observations and findings public. Those who are in a position to do so, have their work published in peer reviewed medical journals (discoverable on PubMED). Others use their own websites, social media platforms etc. to publish their findings. These platforms (owned by the aforementioned investment groups) have begun censoring information deemed to contradict what has now coalesced into the one solution for this pandemic—that of gene based vaccination. (Last spring, there were still other options being considered as gene-based ones were seen as being too problematic.) Among the censored voices are those with an actual TREATMENT for COVID delivered at home before the patients end up in hospital and that is effective in 85% of cases. For these major investment groups information that steers 85% of potential clients away from the market (i.e. keeps them out of the hospital where high patient counts feed profits) would just be seen as a “barrier to profitability,” something that needs a strategic solution. We know we are in a situation of “vulture capitalism” when cost of life isn’t really a factor under consideration.

This entanglement affects us here in our various provinces as well. Lockdowns are instituted because of rising case counts

 Case counts are measured by a test procedure called PCR testing which involves spinning samples through various cycles at highheat

 The more cycles, the higher the number of positives results, but not everyone hassymptoms. The problem is that some people with positive results show their symptoms 4-5 days later and the question is were they able to pass COVID on during the time between their positive test result and the start of their symptoms? “Mainstream science” says YES, while “alternate science” says NO. This and many other questions are too complex for non-scientists to understand, but here is something we can do....

1. We can ask YOU, our health decision makers to arrange a “meeting of the minds” to

have the science experts in both camps duke this out... to have them use their skills and

tools to see who has got what right and who has got what wrong as there is bound to be

truth in different places. Currently almost every one of the points that government

health departments have identified as myths actually involve lots of debate and counter

science by professional scientists that are having trouble getting the word out. The

Scientific Method involves a constant reappraisal of known and new information.

Currently “we the people” are essentially falling into a crisis of trust with each saying

“I trust my experts more than yours!” The only way to end the division is to urge for

scientific cooperation – to have scientists from both sides speaking within the same

shared space. We refer to this as an Independent Bi-Lateral Investigative Panel

consisting of members all without pecuniary interests. If there is no willingness on the

side of our government for such a “meeting of the minds” our citizenry might consider

moving on something similar to this action in Ohio – legal action seeking transparency

on scientific data. https://737219ae-5006-40ee-a8a8 fa20478a03dd.filesusr.com/ugd/d642c8_20339927b75440cca9b3879efdf551a7.pdf [SORRY, now in 2024, this is now coming up as an invalid URL.]

2. We ask YOU, our health decision makers what the current standard for PCR testing

is...and whether provincial health testing follows the directives of the World Health

Organization for what to do when someone without symptoms tests positive. Just like

one can’t decide if someone has a fever if the measurement for where fever starts is

different from week to week or in different regions of the country, currently many

proponents of the “alternate” narrative discount the rising case count numbers as

unreliable. If the test results are standardized around a lower cycle count and false

positives are factored out, many believe we would result in lower case counts, and that

those counts would be seen as more valid than is currently the case.

3. We ask YOU our health decision makers what the process is for authorizing

medication to use as treatments. It has been 13 months and so far, Health Canada’s

current clinical management guidelines for patients at home with mild or moderate

COVID-19 make no reference to any kind of treatment protocol whatsoever.

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/2019-novel-coronavirus-%20%20infection/clinical-management-covid-19.html [Now in 2024, this is now coming up as ‘no longer available’.]

We would like to point out that if the vaccines could be fast tracked, then so could

treatment protocols that have already been proven to work in other jurisdictions. If

this means showing some defiance on the part of our Health Departments to those

pharmaceutical companies who stand to lose profits if these other treatments are

followed, so be it. Currently, reporters bringing news stories about individuals

hospitalized with COVID and rank and file physicians appear not to be aware of

successful treatment protocols that could have been started

immediately while the patients were still at home. In 85% of cases where these

protocols are available, patients recover at home and no hospitalization is needed. (See

McCullough, Appendix II.) Where treatment protocols are unknown and unavailable,

people SUFFER and often DIE NEEDLESSLY. We ask what it would take to get any

Canadian safety trials underway and to have our media spend airtime on that

information. Information provided by the Public Health Agency of Canada for

distribution via the Assembly of First Nations for example, states that there is no

specific treatment when it is now known that that is not true. https://www.afn.ca/wp-

content/uploads/2020/03/CoronaVirus_Factsheet__NEW_ENG.pdf. [Now in 2024, this page is ‘not found.’] Here, however is screen capture:

(See McCullough, Raoul, Todaro Appendix II.)

When will updated information be distributed? For example, the trials similar to the

one by Dr. Girouard in Moncton could be fast tracked—if current

data from outside of Canada is not considered sufficient to authorize use of treatment

protocols. (Also in Appendix II.)

4. We ask all those managing health data (federally and provincially) to put the numbers

into context, by population, by region, by age and risk group, without the current

degree of fearmongering that is currently being reflected in the way the numbers are

presented. Be sure to differentiate between “death with COVID” and “death by

COVID” as currently not to do so invalidates the data.

5. We would like health officials in the appropriate area to work toward an action

campaign on “Immunity 101” as this is one topic on which most of society could use

some clarification as rumor and truth are increasingly hard to differentiate. (Pending

information coming out of Suggestion 1, the Independent Bi-Lateral Investigative

Panel.)

6. A→ We ask YOU as the powers that be to get more information on the risks and

benefits of vaccines into the hands of those considering vaccination. This includes info

on the risks of not getting vaccinated up against the risks of doing so. (This is very

closely tied to Recommendation #1 as once there is consensus, there will be more

clarity on the two choices.) Please read the concerns sent to the European Medical

Association by doctors and researchers here: https://doctors4covidethics.medium.com/urgent-open-letter-from-doctors-and-scientists-to-the-european-medicines-agency-regarding-covid-19-f6e17c311595 [Now in 2024 ‘This account is under investigation or was found in violation of the Medium Rules.’ but letters from doctors4covidethics are found here: https://doctors4covidethics.org/letters/doctorsforcovidethics-letters/]

and consider how you would respond. Individuals within your

Department may have access to data for example on the European system for the

reporting of suspected adverse reactions to medicines authorized for use in Europe,

known as Eudravigilance.

https://eudravigilance.ema.europa.eu/Decommissioned/Decommissioned.html

As of April 24, 2021 it is reported to show a total of 8430 deaths and 354,177 injuries

post-vaccination with all four current COVID-19 vaccines in Europe.

B→We would like to point out that, as of May 1, 2021, there are NO records of adverse

effects from COVID vaccines showing on the Canadian Adverse Reaction Database

past December 31, 2020. This means that currently Canadians have no official means of

understanding the risks and benefits of getting their COVID vaccination as ZERO

reports of adverse reactions related to the last FOUR months of vaccine rollouts are

made public on the Database despite doctors already filing reports of short term and

late onset systemic side effects. We ask what will be done to immediately rectify the situation.

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medeffect-canada/adverse-reaction-database.html [Now in 2024 the comment here is ‘We couldn’t find that webpage.]

C→Also, we ask Health Canada to update the reporting form for “Adverse Effects”

related to vaccination as we are told by doctors that there currently are no spots on the

form for neurological and other lasting aftereffects. Include a section for women to

report major irregularities of the menstrual cycle post vaccination—including in the

case of women 5+ years into menopause who start bleeding in the days after receiving

their “jab.” (See the reference to Dr. Clancy in Appendix II for context.) Be sure there

are no disciplinary actions against medical professionals who abide by the Hippocratic

Oath and express their concerns about vaccinations for specific patients. Find a way

that the time spent on reporting adverse effects is streamlined or compensated, as lack

of paid time in which to file reports is leading to unreported cases.

D→ Also, be sure that any media reporting that is done based only upon statements

from a party that stands to gain financially (i.e., the vaccine companies) where the

claims are not independently verifiable, include the phrase “allegedly” or “apparently”

in their reports. Likewise, ensure the parameters of any terms are included. For

example, instead of reporting that X vaccine is 95% effective, the broadcast would also

explain how efficacy was measured. We would like to ask also about the implications of

Health Canada’s Guidance Document on labelling of pharmaceutical drugs, letting

people take note of the statement outlining that there can be no coercion or threat of

social embarrassment/social exclusion as a rationale for taking the vaccine. Excluding

the “non-vaccinated” from aspects of social interaction appears NOT be allowed under

this documentation. So, under the terms of this Guidance Document, does Health

Canada need to ensure that there is no official messaging like “take this vaccine so you

can keep your job, or take the bus” etc.?

F→STOP the roll out of Stage 2 vaccination until such time as the Independent Bi-

Lateral Investigative Panel has done its work (Suggestion 1). There is an urgent need to

apply all of the recommendations in this letter QUICKLY before the second dose is

delivered, as the cumulative effects of a second dosage greatly increase the chance of

harm. (See Bhakdi, Appendix II.) Given that there are KNOWN harms and our current

health bureaucracy is not providing patients with full processes of “informed consent”

and given that under the Nuremburg Code “following orders” is not a defense, there is

the huge potential for liability down to the level of those providing the vaccines to

individuals without their full and informed consent. Full and transparent information

re: COVID vaccination needs to be shared on the same wide scope. For more

information on principles and practices of informed consent, please review

information provided by the Alliance for Human Research Protection

https://ahrp.org/category/s12-medical-ethics-compliance/ and contact Dr. Meryl Nass

in particular. (See Appendix II.) In 2019 she addressed the New Brunswick Legislature

on the topic of vaccine mandates. The text of her address can be seen here

https://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2019/09/why-are-legislatures-imposing-vaccine.html

G→ In an effort to address racism in health service delivery and to “protect the most

vulnerable first,” two very laudable goals, this rush to roll out incompletely tested and

essentially experimental vaccines is unfortunately for the most part affecting

Indigenous Canadians first. All of the reports of adverse side effects coming out of

Lytton BC for example affected Indigenous Canadians. (See Hoffe, Appendix II.) We

see here how the Assembly of First Nations is informing its membership of vaccine

news (i.e. a budget to support vaccination when available)

https://www.afn.ca/assembly-of-first-nations-bulletin-april-20-2021/.

So we strongly urge you to contact the leadership of the Assembly of First Nations and

to work with them to ensure that as mentioned in Suggestion 3, they and their

Membership as well as all of the urban indigenous population are provided with

accurate, complete and timely information.

7. With zero air time given to voices outside of the “mainstream” pandemic/vaccination

narrative, we need to start asking if any of our public or private broadcasters have been

so short of cash as to accept donations from any foundations or other bodies who

would stand to gain from pandemic measures, who may have set conditions on the

range of topics that can be reported. If so, demand that the money be returned. We

should urge the broadcasters to “remove any situation in which financial constraints

encourage the acceptance of money which then impedes on its journalistic freedom

and its mandate to “3 (1) (d) (i) serve to safeguard, enrich and strengthen the cultural,

political, social and economic fabric of Canada” (This refers specifically to the CBC

but all media/news/social media outlets should ensure that they too do not have any

outside parties determining their journalistic freedom.)

8. We also want to start asking our federal representatives to look into the terms of

Canada’s Competition Act to see if they currently apply to the question of possible

price fixing, collusion or market dominance in the case of the recent vaccine

purchases. Of note: A market share of less than 35 per cent will generally not give rise

to concerns of market power or dominance; a market share of 35 per cent or more will

generally prompt further examination; and in the case of a group of firms alleged to be

jointly dominant, a combined market share equal to or exceeding 60 per cent will

generally prompt further examination. We ask those with skills in financial analysis to

look into the overlapping and entangled ownership conglomerates, where the main

shareholder groups and investment firms of all 4 main vaccines are the same parties,

whether this crosses the 60% line to trigger investigations under Canada’s

international agreements.

(See Appendices VI and VII.) We need someone to dig a little further to see that as

mentioned earlier, pretty much every sector of the global economy is already

dominated by these same investor groups. We need business reporters to explain how

truly healthy (or not) this situation of market dominance can be for the world’s

economies, as currently, the stock market, the tax system and even how (especially in

the US) government COVID benefits are managed, all these are rigged against the

“ordinary citizens” running local shops along main street. We need our reporters to

actually report that the largest of the investment firms (Blackrock) has been given the

control of both the US Treasury and the distribution of the benefit funds. We ask if it is

little wonder then, how little money has gone to individual hurting un/underemployed

individuals when the lion’s share of the “CARES Act” funds have gone straight to the

corporate bottom line? We wish also to seek information on how rank and file citizens

can pull their investments out of these Potemkin villages (fake façade of a rigged

economy) into real value added local place-based investments that help local economies

to prosper. One could create a bond fund around water treatment initiatives in First

Nation communities for example. We suggest interested parties invite Ellen Brown

https://ellenbrown.com/tag/blackrock/ to share her specialized knowledge in these

areas.

9. Also, we wish to remind all of our public institutions, as well as our government

representatives of this basic directive.

Public servants in the Government of Canada are required to be as concerned with

preventing apparent conflicts of interest as they are with preventing real and

potential conflicts of interest. https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-

secretariat/services/values-ethics/conflict-interest-post-employment/apparent-

conflict-interest.html [Today in 2024, the comment is ‘We couldn’t find that webpage.’]

When our public servants, our government representatives (municipally, provincially,

federally), in all of our government related institutions appear to single mindedly move

toward a single narrative of gene-based vaccines being the ONLY and COMPLETE

solution, without showing an openness to highly credentialled voices bringing other

avenues and other solutions to the fore, honestly, one does have the “appearance of a

conflict of interest.” Citizens less inclined to trust “official” narratives see in that very

act “proof” of being “bought and paid for.” To counteract this kind of response, it is

paramount that if any corporate or foundation funded donations were received that

these be RETURNED IN FULL in order to restore trust. This can include but is not

limited to provincial/federal colleges of physicians, research institutions, government

departments of health, etc. We should all start asking whether it was not a conflict of

interest to appoint the very MPs to Canada’s Cabinet Committee on COVID-19 who

just 3 months earlier were “hobnobbing” with the largest world corporations including

the Vaccine companies as participants of the annual gathering of the World Economic

Forum in Davos. We ask specifically whether it is not an example of conflict of interest

to have as chair of the Cabinet COVID Committee AND as our Finance Minister, a

member of the WEF Board of Trustees. We ask what safeguards are in place to ensure

that our decision makers are not put into positions where they have to choose between

doing the best for their country vs for their corporate connections.

For a 50 minute documentary that places the international COVID-19 vaccination

campaign into the larger context of the Great Reset as described by Klaus Schwab of

the World Economic Forum, please see https://happen.network/. This documentary

quotes analysts who say that within FIVE years, 50% of our current jobs will become

obsolete and that our citizens will not have enough time or ability to retrain. This has

immense implications for both physical and mental health policies of our government

and for all who are in positions of responsibility. By associating with those who stand

to gain financially if such widespread changes are quickly brought about in the short

term, we posit that there is a very clear “appearance” of conflict of interest among

certain MPs on the COVID Committee and ask you to consider the implications of

their guidance for your department.

10. Finally, despite what is said in the documentary, once/if/when “things return to

normal” and our kids can play and go to school again, our businesses can operate

again, let us remember those whose chronic health conditions won’t go away, who

have been living a COVID-style kind of life in basic obscurity, and who will likely do so

again. Let us pull them into our circle of compassion, do fundraising, and other

creative projects to break down the barriers these people face. And let our

governments and institutions invest heavily in research, treatment, disability

accommodation, etc. In particular I am thinking of those people and their caregivers,

who deal with Autism Spectrum Disorder; Myalgic Encephalomyelitis / Chronic

Fatigue Syndrome / Post COVID; Fibromyalgia & Environmental Sensitivities /

Multiple Chemical Sensitivities and Post Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome. Let us

carry our concerns for them into a post-pandemic future as

their lives are essentially on permanent or semi-permanent lockdowns, often

throughout the greater part of their lives.

So we urge us all to stand side by side instead of in opposition to one another and

recognize that not only do we face the common foe of COVID, and all of its variants

now and in the future, we face the choking weight of global ubercapitalism. But we

also face an infinite array of creativity—many minds coming up with many ideas for

solutions to try – to mitigate and treat the symptoms, to slow the spread, to prevent

and contain infections, to test, to predict, etc., etc. Let us practice “holding the tension

of opposites.” We can cultivate a “both/and consciousness.” We can start this by calling

together that “meeting of the minds” mentioned in Suggestion 1, the Independent Bi-

Lateral Investigative Panel.

Let us put that wide range of creativity to use, let us not let ourselves be stuck into a

“one track” mind, let us remove the blinders, drop the censorship, engage, discuss and

compare science notes with those mentioned in Appendix II, be wary of those voices

in Appendices VI, VII and VIII and move to implement the various suggestions

mentioned here.

Respectfully,

The Concerned Citizen who is hereby sending this your way....

ADDENDUM

To go with Suggestions 1 & 2

Appendix I – Proposal for an Independent Bi-Lateral Investigative Panel aka “Meeting of the Minds”

Appendix II – a suggested list of experts coming at different angles of the “alternative” narrative

To go with Suggestion 3

Appendix III – Background on the use of RT-PCR testing

To go with Suggestion 4

Appendix IV – Proposal for Contextualization when reporting COVID data

To go with Suggestion 6

Appendix V – Health Canada Guidance for Industry: Labelling of Pharmaceutical Drugs for Human Use

To go with Suggestion 8

Appendix VI – Intertwined Ownership Groups Appendix VII – Reuters (an example)
Appendix VIII – World Economic Forum attendees 2020 To go with Suggestion 10

Appendix IX – other illnesses in need of support

[Questions to ask in 2024: Whatever happened to this email? Did it EVER get past the secretarial staff in the various offices to those to whom it was addressed? And if so, what would they have done with it? Obviously there was a lot of reading to do… do MPs and Ministers have research staff who could have been tasked with reading all the attachments? If so would thy have simply pushed the task aside because “obviously this is all misinformation”? What is their conscience telling anyone today who pushed these types of concerns aside back then? Given that this email contained 10 interconnected recommendations, is it better to send them together as I did nor break them into 10 separate emails? If readers find any single suggestions valuable still today, they are invited to copy out the relevant sections of this post and the appendices and try to engage their MPs and Senators (or provincial/territorial officials) around these issues. ]

Followingthecovidscience’s Newsletter

Discussion about this post