Hello John and Doves,

 

Bad reports keep coming out about the Covid-19 "vaccine" and the Covid-19 response. 

 

This report was generated by a Covid-19 vaccine Task Force for Alberta, Canada.  They looked at and critiqued Alberta, Canada's Covid-19 Pandemic Response.  They found massive screwups and made many recommendations for future pandemics - pointing out where things went wrong and who did what.  They wrote extensively about Alberta's own pandemic response protocols that were pushed aside when Covid-19 hit.  They don't know why this decision was made nor do they know why various decisions were made, like social mandates, when the science just didn't back it up.  They noted the lack of transparency and that major decisions were made "behind closed doors".  They hit the Covid-19 vaccine hard with the shoddy testing and deceptive results reporting.  

 

Their conclusion:  Halt the use of the Covid-19 vaccines.  Especially for children.  Figure out a better response for the next pandemic as this response was a disaster.  And they said that people should be able to opt out of treatments - like vaccines when there is a pandemic.  The public should be allowed to judge their own risk of behaviors.

 

They noted problems with the PCR testing - too many false positives.  And the other testing was questionable also.  They noted the lack of informed consent for the "vaccines" and other treatments.  And how physicians were narrowly controlled in their treatments of Covid-19.  No one could present any ideas or information.  And the doctor-patient relationship was broken.  Physicians were accused of spreading 'misinformation'.

 

While reading this report, I thought that if some group in the U.S. did such an analysis, their results would be very similar.  People were deceived about the virus and the extent of the pandemic; they were deceived about the Covid-19 mRNA 'vaccines' and not allowed informed consent; they were deceived about the good treatments, like ivermetin and hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin treatments, that were banned from use even though studies in 2020 showed very good outcomes.  Also, doctors in Alberta were 'disciplined' and 'threatened' if they didn't stick to the narrative, and support mask mandates and push the "vaccine".  Crazy mandates/quarantines were put in place that had no scientific justification for doing - like the 6 foot rule and mandated masks, restricting business hours, shutting down grade schools/masking children.  Just like here in the U.S. 

 

And there was ample evidence that these draconian measures did little to stop the spread or prevent Covid infections. Yet, the measures continued and got worse.  And they noted that even with the "vaccine" the Covid cases continued to climb.

 

This Task Force reported on the horrendous results of the 3 month post-authorization Pfizer vaccine safety date.  That weren't initially made available to physicians and the public. 1,223 deaths attributed to the vaccine. 40,086 people injured within 4 days of vaccination.  Also, 1,236 different diseases were caused by the vaccine.  And an 87.5% fetal/neonatal mortality for the thirty-two pregnancies.  And the nanoparticles in the vaccines have significant side effects - especially with repeat injections.

 

They reported on the damage caused by the mandates and that the risk-benefit of the "vaccine" just didn't pan out.  They also noted that they were greatly hindered in their getting information and date for this report.  They noted a concerted effort to keep decisions, choices, etc hidden.  They noted what appeared to them as 'federal government' involvement.

 

It's amazing to me that Canada did the exact same thing the U.S. did - almost like 'someone' or some organization (like WHO? or Fauci?) was orchestrating the entire Covid pandemic response.  They asked a LOT of questions, like why weren't other health care experts included in the decision making and they couldn't figure out why some things were done the way they were; and why was Alberta's very capable response to an outbreak kicked to the side. 

 

IMO, this wasn't incompetence or stupidity; there was an ulterior motive/nefarious plan.. this was an attack on the public.  This was a concerted effort to do harm - cause morbidity and mortality.  Set up control and significantly damage the economy and people's livelihoods.  To me, this was a crime against humanity.  I see this as a nefarious biological/bioweapon (virus and "vaccine") attack on humanity.

 

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem!

 

Maranatha!

 

Chance

 

The Report:

 

In this report the authors noted "the relatively few deaths that did occur in otherwise health people."  This is a HUGE statement.  "Covid-19 deaths (83%) occurred among residents of long-term care facilities, potentially due to a withdrawal of care." 

 

They noted that "there were concerns about transparency and timeliness of decision-making.  The abandonment of the existing pandemic response plan and the lack of engagement with available evidence raised questions about the rationale behind decisions."

 

"The Task Force identified biases in the process, source and weight of evidence used in decision-making."

 

"Cabinet decisions were made behind closed doors...Lockdown interventions were implemented based on the precautionary principle, with limited scientific data supporting such measures during the initial wave."

 

"Given the data and information available, the Task Force is unclear as to why Alberta continued to implement containment measures through policy and mandates when the information at the time did not justify such aggressive actions.  Additionally, it is not clear why Alberta's researchers and decision-makers overlooked crucial data when forming their recommendations and policies."

 

Alberta had a pandemic response plan already in place before Covid-19 hit.  But it was 'deviated' from so much during the pandemic that the Task Force reported:  "This shift suggests a strong and persuasive federal government influence on Alberta's Covid-19 response."

"The Task Force has not found evidence in support of the rationale behind the decision to deviate from Alberta's established pandemic response planning."  "Why did the AHS and Alberta Health abandon this plan and adopt an ad hoc and reactive approach instead?"

 

"...is remains unclear why there was such a significant level of disconnect, confusion and uncertain decision-making in response to the pandemic?   Specifically, why did Alberta not leverage previous emergency plans rooted in past emergency response experiences?  Why did the policy responses implemented lack thorough engagement with existing literature and best practices?"

 

"The Task Force's search for answers to these questions was hindered by informational barriers, including reluctance of key stakeholders to acknowledge and engage with out mandate."  "There appears to be a fundamental lack of transparency and willingness to reveal information and discuss decisions and actions taken by AHS during the pandemic."

 

"Canada's decision to sign on to the WHO's 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR)..paved the way for federal government's protagonism in pandemic response...

 

The Task Force noted that The Minister of Health authorized clinical pharmacists, dental hygienists, dental assistants and dieticians to perform the nasal swabs for PCR testing.  "The loosening of the restrictions...allowed for a significant expansion in the ability to perform PCR testing via nasopharyngeal swab sampling.  The expansion of testing in itself...is dependent on testing being applied to appropriate populations.  For example, indiscriminate testing, particularly among asymptomatic individuals, may lead to a high incidence of false positives, thereby complicating the accuracy and effectiveness of the public health response."  

 

The Task Force questioned competent performance for the swabbing, incorrect swabbing, improper handling of the samples, lack of discernment in who needed testing.  "...potentially leading to an overestimation of case numbers due to false positives."

 

Physicians were not allowed to "express concerns that emerging evidence supported certain off-label medications that had an extremely low risk of harm or that certain non-pharmaceutical interventions were contributing to various short- and long-term harms and were doing so without policy-grad evidence of benefit."

 

There was a perpetuation of definitive "inappropriately narrow range of health care delivery options to combat the pandemic."  The CPSA (the College of Physicians and Surgeons Alberta) and the Alberta College of Pharmacy on March 31, 2021, called the "the immediate cessation of prescribing hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, remdesivir, azithromycin, among others, as treatments for Covid-19, as these medications had not been approved for use."  Along with a statement from CPSA and ACP to stop prescribing and dispensing ivermectin.

 

The Task Force found that "the rigidity imposed by these mandates not only stifled the flexibility and professional discretion that healthcare practitioners needed during an unprecedented crisis but also obscured potential harms caused by such restrictive measures."

 

They also noted that "Patients must be free of compulsion, duress or coercion when consenting to or refusing treatment."  Explicit consent is necessary "e.g. when injecting vaccines or other drugs."  The failure to do this due to coercive measures "employed to ensure the uptake of novel pharmaceuticals, including vaccines...undermined the principles of voluntary and explicit consent.  Physicians were pressured to conform with mandates that did not allow for individualized patient assessments or the honoring of patient autonomy in medical decision-making.  This coercion directly contravenes the ethnical requirement that consent be free of undue influence, duress, or coercion, as stipulated in the CPSA standards and the Canadian Medical Protection Agency's guidelines."  "The Colleges placed physicians in a position where they were unable to fully inform patients of the risks, benefits and alternatives to novel medical interventions, thus compromising the integrity of informed consent."

 

"If physicians were to deviate from the imposed guidelines, they were threatened with disciplinary actions, including investigations, suspensions and license removals.....the CPSA's policies during this period represented a clear contradiction to the established professional and ethical standards...If could even be argued that the Colleges interfered in the patient-physician relationships to the point of the College inappropriately influencing patient treatment."

 

There were physicians who exempted patients from the Covid-19 vaccines - they were labeled "defiant" and "complaints against them were prioritizes" with the false assertion that they "are putting patients in harm's way by refusing to get vaccinated or wear protective equipment."

 

There were threatening actions by the CPSA:  "Regulators to get tough with doctors...crack down on anti-vax doctors...doctors will face sanctions....the CPSA has "lost patience with doctors who have actively undermined the province's response...issue a strongly worded warning letter....followed by a formal hearing...the college has to get tough now...."

 

The CPSA issued a communication on their website concerning 'Covid-19 misinformation spread by physicians"....they didn't like physicians "spreading Covid-19 misinformation, inappropriate prescribing and inappropriate issuance of vaccine and mask exemptions by physicians."  Also, physicians prescribing inappropriate interventions, such as ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of Covid-19 and spreading of misinformation related to Covid-19".  "Physicians are not permitted to prescribe ivermectin as a preventive measure against Covid-19"

 

In 2020, Ivermectin was shown to be effective against SARS-CoV-2; despite this information, ivermectin was banned from use for Covid.  Ivermecting was shown "with high confidence for reductions in mortality, ventilation, ICU admission, hospitalization, progression cases and viral clearance.  Physicians who sought to treat patients with alternative methods...were subject to disciplinary review and reputation-damaging criticism from some media outlets."  The FDA recommended against using ivermectin.  Oberservational data in 2020 showed that hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin reduced the risk of patients hospitalized with Covid-19".  The Lancet reported a study on hydroxychloroquine that showed it failed to reduce the mortality risk for hospitalized Covid-19 patients.  "This study was later shown to be fraudulent and retracted."

 

The Task Force noted that a chiropractor in Nova Scotia lost her license to practice and was fined $100,000 for posting on social media about "disproved and unfounded views on vaccination."

 

Social Restrictions:

 

They found that Canada had "more stringent lockdown measures than nine other OECD nations."  Canada's orders on listed social restrictions, closures, and travel measures "changed 90 times between March and December 2020.  Often, once one set of measures had been introduced, others followed within days to weeks."  In their review "lockdowns" did not substantively reduce transmission or off-set the use of healthcare resources and have come at considerable social and economic costs."  They recommended that "even in the face of a pandemic, that every adult have "the individual right to make informed decisions about their risk behavior."  Other studies found that strict policies "around containment and closures had little effect on the spread of the virus and that the economic costs of these policies could be enormous."  These measures have been found to "likely do more harm than good."

 

Masking:

 

"The Task Force review indicated a weak evidence base for the effectiveness of continuous masking in preventing respiratory illnesses, including Covid-19.  Studies have limited or mixed results regarding the effectiveness of masks in community settings.  The Task Force observed potential harms of masking, such as self-contamination, discomfort and a false sense of security."

 

"Despite the limited evidence and potential harms, mask mandates were implemented in various settings in Alberta. The choice to wear a mask should be a personal medical decision, guided by informed consent."

 

The number of Covid-19 infections did not decrease despite the implementation of mask mandates and widespread vaccination."

 

Initially, WHO advised against community masking, citing no evidence for usefulness, then they reversed their advise saying that "cloth face coverings are most effective at reducing the spread of Covid-19"...Canada followed the WHO masking advice.  Masking recommendations soon became mandated.  "Despite these strong recommendations and mandates, the number of Covid-19 infections did not decrease.  Instead, infections continued to rise, even after the Covid-19 vaccine became available."

 

Data did not support the claim that masking 'reduced community transmission among both symptomatic and symptomatic individuals."  JAMA reported in 2020 that "Face masks should not be worn by healthy individuals to protect themselves from acquiring respiratory infection because there is no evidence to suggest that face masks worn by health individuals are effective in preventing people from becoming ill."  "The benefits of masks are more pronounced in healthcare settings..."

 

Why were most individuals denied mask exemptions with "the lack of evidence to support the efficacy of masking"?

 

Testing - PCR and RAT (Rapid Antigen Test):

 

The Task Force acknowledged "the significant increase in testing capacity but found the accuracy of the tests (PCR) and potential for false-positive and false-negative results to be concerning.   The Task Force also found the proportionality of PCR-based screening for asymptomatic individuals to be questionable..."  "Our review shows the flaws of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, which involved amplifying samples over and over in the lab to find viral genetic material remnants, with the risk of getting false positive or negatives."  "A person is deemed infectious if they shed virus particles that are intact and able to be transmitted to infection others.  PCR tests only measure levels of a known viral RNA sequence that may or may not be actual replication-competent viral particles, and that a person who who have recovered from Covid-19 may test positive...for up to 90 days."

 

The Covid-19 RAT performance varied, "raising concerns about accuracy as a screening tool."  "We found that rapid antigen tests have low sensitivity, often necessitating repeated testing..."  These rapid tests are used to detect virus proteins.  These tests are usually repeated several times over 360 hours.  This increases the sensitivity of the test.

 

Mandated/Coerced Vaccination:

 

The Task Force recommended "Avoid coerced vaccination of any population, especially when there are high levels of infection-acquired immunity and or low baseline susceptibility to severe disease."  And Public health policies "need to be grounded in sound fundamental principles and to avoid ideological bias geared towards maximizing vaccine coverage."

 

The Task Force "recommends halting the use of the Covid-19 vaccines without full disclosure of their potential risks, ending their use in healthy children and teenagers, conducting further research into their effectiveness, establishing support for vaccine-injured individuals and providing an opt-out mechanism from federal public health policy."

 

Pfizer's Vaccine 3 Month Post-Authorization Safety Data:

 

"Pfizer vaccine safety data from the three-month post-authorization trial was alarming:  1,223 deaths attributed to the vaccine. 40,086 people injured within 4 days of vaccination.  45% of these were between ages 18 - 50.  Also, 1,236 different diseases were caused by the vaccine.  The analysis of the safety data showed that there was "an 87.5% fetal/neonatal mortality for the thirty-two pregnancies they had reported an outcome for in their post authorization follow-up period.  These are devastating results."  The Pfizer vaccine is NOT safe for pregnant women.

 

Lipid nanoparticles have a well described toxicity in scientific literature after multiple injections.  Nanoparticles "can lead to dangerous side effects, especially is a patient has to take repeated doses over months or years."  Pregnant women in the Pfizer randomized controlled trial did not fair well.  Healthy minors were at low risk of serious Covid-19 infection and yet were recommended vaccination despite known and unknown safety risks....  Covid-19 vaccination carries a well-documented risk for developing myocarditis and pericarditis"

 

"For vaccines, the risk-benefit ratio must greatly favor benefits over risks to recommend to an entire healthy population.  It is significant that only 5% of the study participants in the original randomized control trials of the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines were over 75 years old.  Analysis of data shows that "age and comorbidities played the dominant role in severe outcomes."

 

Dr. Katalin Kariko "who recently received the Nobel prize for developing the synthetic modified RNA technology wrote, "I would say that mRNA is better suited for diseases where treatment for short duration is sufficiently curative, so the toxicities caused by delivery materials are less likely to occur."  Another concern of mRNA vaccines is that the modified RNA gets mis-read causing "unanticipated production of unpredicted foreign proteins."

 

"Safe and Effective":

"If the vaccine was effective in preventing serious infection, you would expect very few vaccinated individuals to be hospitalized.  Pfizer's own testing showed that the vaccines prevented no more deaths than the placebo.

 

"There is now considerable evidence that the Covid-19 mRNA-based vaccines are associated with short-term harm."

 

hlth-albertas-covid-19-pandemic-response-2025-01.pdf

 

And two and three year studies following vaccination have shown the Covid-19 "vaccines" are associated with long-term harm.  And a recent study showed that the spike protein production isn't 'shut off' - the body just keeps producing more and more of this toxic protein.