CANImmunize: Working With Big Pharma On National Vaccination Certification, Medical Research

In Nova Scotia, as well as other areas, you can use CANImmunize to book your vaccine appointment. Do you think you need to? Well, perhaps reading through this information of their partners will be enlightening.

This company openly admits that your health data may be sold or used for research purposes. Now, identifying details will likely be removed, but it’s still pretty underhanded. Not only is it receiving Government (or taxpayer) funding, but your data is likely worth money. In other words, the public financing its own invasion of privacy. More on that later.

CANImmunize is also part of the Vaccine Safety Network, which was established by the World Health Organization. It’s a mixture of various Government agencies and pro-vaccine NGOs pushing the big pharma agenda. You will find an awful lot of overlapping names here.

CANImmunize describes itself as “Ottawa-based technology company specializing in immunization software. It developed the CANImmunize app, a pan-Canadian digital immunization tracking system that helps Canadians keep track of their vaccinations with a mobile app and web portal”. In short, it’s laying the ground work for a vaccine passport, despite how harmless this sounds. Interestingly, this was set up in 2012, long before this so-called “pandemic”.

Incidently, PHAC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, isn’t a Canadian entity. It was created by an Order In Council in 2004 to serve various World Health Organization functions.

For a walk down memory lane, the Vaccine Credential Initiative has been hard at work trying to get a global vaccine passport. The Government of Ontario is a partner organization. There’s reason to fear that this is going to be the new ID required to move around.

It’s also recognized by the European Centre for Prevention and Disease Control, their equivalent of the CDC. That’s just lovely. Now who else is responsible for advancing, funding, and promoting CANImmuize?

1. Pfizer A Major Sponsor/Endorser Of CANImmunize

Pfizer is a prominent sponsor and endorses of CANImmunize. This is a significant conflict of interest, considering that it’s likely the biggest financial benefactor of the mass vaccination agenda. That said, this is only the tip of the iceberg.

2. Sanofi Pasteur Also Interested In This Venture

It’s worth mentioning that Sanofi also provides indirect funding to CANImmunize, by financing and supporting their other partners. Perhaps this is a way to make it more difficult to see just how much money is coming in.

3. I-Boost-Immunity Endorser Of CANImmunize

IBoostImmunity has ties to UNICEF and the BC Public Health Association. It’s sponsored by: London Drugs, Sanofi Pasteur, and Merck. London Drugs is a large chain in the West, and has immunization clinics in virtually every location.

4. Kids Boost Immunity Funded By Big Pharma

Kids Boost Immunity is partnered with UNESCO and the U.N. It also is sponsored by companies by GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer and Sanofi Pasteur. Are we seeing the common thread here?

5. Immunize Canada Funded By Pharmaceutical Companies

Immunize Canada is financed by the usual suspects. And taking a quick through its “member organization”, many of them also receive money from those same groups.

6. Vaccines411 Anonymous Referral Service For Vaccination

Who We Are is an online vaccination clinic locator which also includes reliable immunization resources for Canadians to easily find the vaccination resources they need. The website was officially launched in May 2011. This free online service was created in order to facilitate the process of vaccination for the many Canadians who do not know where to turn to for this kind of information.

Vaccines411® is managed by a dedicated team of professionals, which includes writers, researchers, translators, and developers. The content and resources provided on Vaccines411 is selected and reviewed by our team based on clarity, objectivity, and the credibility of its sources (i.e. government sourcing, medical reviews etc). However, please note that we are not healthcare professionals and that the information provided on is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between a patient and his/her healthcare professionals.

This is supposed to an online referral service, for people looking to get their shots. Although the names seem to be kept hidden, it’s not difficult to imagine where the money comes from.

7. Society Of Obstetricians And Gynaecologists: Pregnant Women

This was covered in an earlier article. The Society Of Obstetricians And Gynaecologists is supposed to be concerned with promoting the health and well being of women and children. Instead, its Pfizer money has likely contributed to the absurd recommendations with pregnant women.

8. Canada Immunization Research Network

CIRN, the Canadian Immunization Research Network, is another group that has been previously covered on this site. Like the others, it supports CANImmunize too. This organization takes money from the public, and is supposed to be neutrally investigating and researching how safe and effective vaccines are. However, given the cash they also get from drug companies makes that suspicious.

9. Federation of Medical Women Of Canada, Funded By Pharma

The Federation of Medical Women of Canada (FMWC) is funded by by drug companies. That’s pretty twisted, considering that pushing harmful medications on women will lead to far fewer of them alive.

10. Meningitis Foundation Canada, Funded By Pfizer

Now, this group, Meningitis Foundation Canada, probably has many donors. However, Pfizer has presumably contributed enough that it merits displaying it prominently across that main page. But don’t worry, that won’t impact whether or not certain therapeutics are recommended, or how often.

Enough about the donors and sponsors. The available information about the technology itself and the company is pretty chilling.

Kumanan Wilson, the CANImmunize Chief Executive Officer, say in his biography:

An internal medicine physician, scientist and expert in digital health, Dr. Wilson is an internationally, widely published expert in public health and immunization and the founder of the CANImmunize project. Currently funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Health Organization Dr. Wilson’s vision is to use technology to solve public health problems

In other words, his project is at least partially funded by WHO and the Gates Foundation. It’s not like they have an agenda or anything.

If all of this isn’t creepy enough, CANImmunize provides plenty of promotional material promotion their App, and vaccines in general. Some of this seems clearly targeted to children.

As for its privacy policies:

CANImmunize will use your information to send you communications about vaccinations and other healthy behaviours, including information from integration partners such as local health authorities, updates about outbreaks near you if you choose to use location services, and periodic updates about CANImmunize Inc and its platforms. You will be offered the ability to opt out or unsubscribe from these communications. If you have consented to sharing your information with one or more integration partners, CANImmunize will share it with them.

CANImmunize may transfer your personal information, excluding health information (except in cases where you send us unsolicited health information – which we delete – outside of the platform such as through support channels), to domestic or international third parties including, for example, IT services, for processing that furthers the purposes for which you consented to provide the personal information. These transferees will be required to maintain privacy and data security standards similar to our own. This sort of transfer is considered a use not a disclosure under Federal privacy legislation. For more information, see here:

By creating an account and storing your immunization information in the app, you are also consenting to allow CANImmunize to use it in de-identified and/or aggregate form for research purposes in the health sector. De-identified information is information about you, but it has been stripped of identifiers such as your name or date of birth and cannot be associated with you as an identifiable individual. Aggregate information is data combined from several measurements; when data is aggregated, groups of observations are replaced with summary statistics such that the data cannot be linked back to an identifiable individual. This will happen only where the research has been approved by, and is protected by, the policies of a Research Ethics Board.

CANImmunize will also use aggregate information to inform its understanding of trends in vaccination, opportunities to improve immunization rates or to generate other insights and may share this aggregate information with third parties.

Before CANImmunize uses or discloses your personal information for any other purpose, we will always ask for your consent.

Whether you want it or not, your medical information is available to be sold to 3rd parties for the purposes of research. Sure, your name and contact details may be purged, but you are part of future data compilation. It seems that this may be one of the biggest data harvests in history in Canada.

Again, by taking part and using the app, you are presumed to have consented. Now, if this limited assurance isn’t enough for you, try out the terms of service:

Use of CANImmunize is governed by these Terms of Use. We may amend or modify these Terms of Use at any time, without notice. The current version of these Terms of Use will be available each time you access the website. By using CANImmunize, you agree to be bound by these Terms of Use and are responsible for reviewing these Terms of Use as well as the CANImmunize Privacy Policy. You also agree that you will comply with all applicable laws and regulations when using CANImmunize and are prohibited from attempting to violate the security of the website. You should not use CANImmunize if you do not agree to these Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy, understand what they mean, or do not consent for your data to be used.

In other words, CANImmunize can change their terms at any time, without notice. On the other hand, the people using this app are expected to read and understand what’s going on. Feels great, doesn’t it?

(4) Vaccine Safety Net _ Vaccine Safety Net
(8) Partners _ CANImmunize
(10) Sponsors _ I Boost Immunity
(12) Our Partners _ Kids Boost Immunity
(14) Member Organizations _ immunizecanada
(18) Sponsors & Partners _
(20) Our Supporters
(22) Promotion _ CANImmunize
(25) Privacy Policy _ CANImmunize

The Myocarditis Foundation, And Donations From Financially Interested Parties

It’s a narrative seen all too often lately: heart problems and death among young and healthy people is common. There’s nothing too alarming. Well, is that really the case? Are things this straightforward, or is something obvious not being discussed?

On the surface, there’s nothing wrong with an organization whose purpose is to bring public awareness to common health problems. There are certainly many of them. The Myocarditis Foundation is just one of these groups.

Upon digging a little deeper, there are questions about this group, and what its interests really are. In particular, it’s curious where their financing comes from, and what they leave out of the conversation. But first, a bit of backstory:

Regeneron was one of the companies in 2020 who was vying to get a cure onto the market for this so-called “Covid-19”. They ultimately got Regen-CoV (casirivimab and imdevimab) emergency use authorization with the FDA. This obviously wasn’t full approval, but allowed the products to be distributed. Regen-CoV has some interesting side effects, to put it mildly.

The story gets more interesting. Regeneron has many products either in testing, or already on the market. One such case is a partnership with Sanofi on a cancer drug. Another drug was something called Arcalyst, which was to be repurposed by a company called Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals. This essentially amounts to taking a commerical drug, and finding an entirely new purpose for it.

In its information for investors, Kiniksa explains how this happened to come about. They are quite open that this is someone else’s creation.

Rilonacept was discovered and developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Regeneron) and is approved by the FDA under the brand name ARCALYST® for the treatment of CAPS. Kiniksa licensed rilonacept from Regeneron in 2017 for evaluation in diseases believed to be mediated by both IL-1α and IL-1β, including recurrent pericarditis. The FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to rilonacept for recurrent pericarditis in 2019. Based on the Phase 3 RHAPSODY data announced today, the Biologic License Application (BLA) for CAPS will transfer to Kiniksa, and the company plans to submit an sBLA with the FDA in recurrent pericarditis later this year. Upon receipt of FDA approval for rilonacept in recurrent pericarditis, Kiniksa would assume the sales and distribution of rilonacept for the approved indications in the United States and will evenly split profits on sales with Regeneron.

Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals was founded in 2015 in Bermuda. Despite being a “new” company, there were able to raise $80 million relatively quickly. Over the next year, they would obtain the exclusive rights to rilonacept. 2018, they were able to raise $170.7 million with their IPO, or initial public offering. 2019, the FDA conferred “Breakthrough Therapy” designation on them and they went into Stage 2 testing. All of this is pretty impressive for a company that seemingly came out of nowhere.

June 29, 2020 Kiniksa announced the Phase 3 testing for its drug to combat recurring pericarditis. What a coincidence that they would soon have such a growing market for their product.

March 18, 2021, Kiniksa received FDA approval for its product. Proprietary name is Arcalyst, and the established name is Rilonacept. “Treatment of recurrent pericarditis (RP) and reduction in risk of recurrence in adults and children 12 years and older.” Interesting how this product came along just in time for the wave of heart problems that would ensue.

[1] Regeneron is involved in conducting research into various cures for Covid-19. Of course, so are many others.
[2] Kiniksa takes an existing product from Regeneron. It’s used as a cure for pericarditis, the scale of which is likely made much worse by Covid-19 vaccines.

Problem. Reaction. Solution.

Now, what does all of this have to do with the Myocarditis Foundation? It turns out that Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals is one of their major donors. In their Spring 2021 newsletter, the Foundation celebrates the revelation of Kiniksa’s approval for recurring pericarditis with the FDA.

It’s curious that the other corporate donors are insurance companies. Just a thought, but perhaps there is some larger effort to limit liability of businesses everywhere.

A cynic may wonder if the Myocarditis Foundation’s focus on heart damage from Covid-19 is a way to boost business for Kiniksa, and to deflect attention from the long term effects of these vaccines. With so much money at stake, it’s hard to write off any possibility.

Looking through the tweets and publications of the Myocarditis Foundation, they never seem to address the elephant in the room: how many recent cases of heart problems are caused by these vaccines?

(3) Regeneron’s COVID-19 Response Efforts
(9) Kiniksa Announces Positive Data from Phase 3 Trial of Rilonacept in Recurrent
(11) Corrected 20210930_ ANNUAL_Breakthrough_Approvals
(15) Corporate Charitable Giving – Myocarditis Foundation
(19) Myocarditis Foundation Spring-21-Newsletter

(A) Canadian Pharmaceutical Sciences Foundation Funded By Big Pharma
(B) Canadian Pharmacists Association: Subsidies While They Lobby Against You
(C) CDN Immunization Research Network Funded By Pfizer, GSK, Sanofi
(D) B.C. Pharmacy Association Funded By Drug Companies
(E) U.S. Council On Patient Safety: Women’s Health
(F) Emergent BioSolutions Lobbying All Federal Parties
(G) British Fertility Society Funded By Pharmaceutical Companies
(H) American College Health Foundation Is Funded By Big Pharma-and-insurance/

Elizabeth Smith-McCrossin: Hero Of Nova Scotia, Or Another Fake Populist?

Elizabeth Smith-McCrossin, the Cumberland North MLA, supported an interprovincial blockade in June 2021. She ultimately became something of a folk hero in her riding.

CTV News posted a short clip of Elizabeth Smith-McCrossin’s blockade support, and her ultimate removal from the Progressive Conservative Party of Nova Scotia. Smith McCrossin seems to portray herself as a hero of the people. But is she really what she appears to be?

On the surface, she appears to say the right things. However, upon looking deeper, she could just be a means of “managing” the opposition to medical tyranny out in the Atlantic. In fact, there are signs that her blockade was a publicly stunt, and not some deeply held belief.

A cynic may wonder if her blockade stunt was a calculated effort to secure reelection. After all, there was no guarantee she would have won.

For example, she opposed blockades only the year before, when done under the guise of Indigenous rights. Now, she’s okay with doing it as a way to protest “pandemic measures”.

Nothing wrong with wishing someone a happy birthday. After all, Robert Batherson was Smith-McCrossin’s Campaign Manager when she ran to be the Leader of the NSPC Party. She ended up losing to Tim Houston, who recently became Premier after defeating Iain Ranking.

From April 2008 until March 2009, Batherson was registered in Nova Scotia as a lobbyist for Pfizer Canada. Some will argue this is ancient and irrelevant, and they can hold that view. As a reminder, Pfizer also has ties to Erin O’Toole and Doug Ford. Batherson has also been a lobbyist for McCain Foods Limited, Sobey’s Pharmacy Group and Pharmasave Atlantic.

Batherson is currently the President of the Conservative Party of Canada, and also heads his own lobbying firm: Harbourview Public Affairs. The CPC National Council Secretary is Amber Ruddy, who’s a drug lobbyist, and also pushed for easier access for big pharma to your medical data. In fact, the CPC Caucus in general is anti-freedom. Anyone truly committed to liberty and bodily autonomy should stay the heck away from these people.

Smith-McCrossin received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Nursing from Dalhousie University. Her husband is a doctor in Nova Scotia who got his M.D. at Dalhousie. Is there a concern over his license if he speaks up? However, she’s strangely silent on her Alma Mater’s decision to begin experimenting on children as young as 6 months old. This is disturbing on many levels, but yet this “rebel” apparently has nothing to say on this issue.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons for the Province has made it clear that they don’t want doctors handing out exemptions to the vaccine orders. Never mind that it’s still experimental, with indemnified manufacturers and no long term testing. Smith-McCrossin never speaks out about this.

Side note: but the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation recently offered Dalhousie research grants for “smart farming solutions“. One was for $250,000, and the other for $1.5 million. Also, the “Global Grand Challenges” appear to still be open.

Here, Smith-McCrossin shows her true colours. She doesn’t have any ideological issue with pushing the mass vaccination agenda. She just views coercion as an ineffective way of getting things done. It’s a minor disagreement over methods, not the results. Scrolling though her Twitter feed, she’s very much pro-vaxx, and there’s a total lack of criticism of the public health dictatorship in the Province, and in Canada overall.

This tacit support of tyranny doesn’t appear to be a partisan issue. She was silent when Iain Ranking (Liberal) was doing it, and she’s still silent when Tim Houston does the same thing. This blockade stunt in the Spring appears to be a one-off, and not what she actually believes in.

Oddly, there are more comments from her about increasing women’s representation in politics than on the oppression that Nova Scotians face under the twin evils of Rankin and Houston. Not once does she unequivocally condemn what these monsters are doing. She’s basically just another Rempel.

Ultimately, people must come to their own conclusions. However, this “independent” doesn’t seem to be the freedom fighter that the public has been led to believe.


Dalhousie Experimenting On 6 Month Old Infants; Lisa Barrett; More “Vaccine Hesitancy” Grants

Unfortunately, the conspiracy theorists have been proven right again. In this specific example, Dalhousie University will be doing drug trials on infants and toddlers between the ages of 6 months and 5 years old. That’s right, INFANTS and TODDLERS. Sadly, there are still many parents who would knowingly sign their children up to be experimented on.

[A few quotes from the notice]

What is the purpose of the KidCOVE Study?

The purpose of the KidCOVE Study is to test a vaccine that may protect children from getting sick if they come into contact with SARS-CoV-2 (also called coronavirus), which causes COVID-19.

What is the KidCOVE Study?

The KidCOVE Study is a clinical trial that is testing a study vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19. Researchers will measure your child’s immune response to the vaccine by collecting blood samples. These samples will be tested for natural proteins that are called antibodies. Checking your child’s antibody level helps researchers know how well the study vaccine is working. The study doctor and study team will monitor your child’s health throughout the study.

To be eligible, your child must:

  • Be between six months old and less than six years old and in good health
  • Not have a positive COVID-19 test within two weeks prior to receiving the first vaccination
  • Be free from exposure to someone with SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 within two weeks prior to receiving the first vaccination
  • Not have received an investigational vaccine or treatment for COVID-19
  • Be willing and able to comply with all study requirements

What will my child have to do?

  • Your child will have two injection visits, which will be 28 days apart. If your child is enrolled in the first part of the study, you will know that they are receiving the study vaccine. If your child is enrolled in the second part of the study, they will be chosen at random to receive either the study vaccine or the placebo.
  • There is a 75% chance your child will receive the study vaccine and a 25% chance they will receive the placebo. Your family will not know which option your child has been assigned if enrolled in the second part of the study.
  • You and your child will be asked to return to the study site three to four more times, depending on their enrollment assignment. These visits will occur 15 days, one month, six months, and 12 months after the second injection.
  • Your child will have two telemedicine visits – about one week after each injection. During these calls, the study team will check how your child is feeling. After that, the study team will call you once a month during the months your child does not have a study site visit.
  • You will be asked to complete electronic diary (eDiary) entries for the duration of the study to report any COVID-19 symptoms your child experiences.
  • Your child will be closely monitored by the study team if any symptoms of COVID-19 are reported at any time throughout their participation.

To be eligible, the children must be under the age of 6 years old. This is alarming on many different levels. Over 13,000 children are expected to be enrolled in this.

This study appears to be a collaboration between Dalhousie University and the Canadian Center for Vaccinology. It gets even creepier, as the Center for Vaccinology already prepared their list of “talking points” (their label) for children who are understandably worried. And what do you know? It’s Moderna who’s behind the study.

The CCfV collaborates with 3 partner organizations:
(a) CAIRE (Canadian Association for Immunization Research and Evaluation)
(b) CIRN (Canadian Immunization Research Network)
(c) IMPACT (Immunization Monitoring Program, ACTive)

CIRN has actually been covered by Canuck Law before. The organization has extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry. CAIRE is currently studying the effects of vaccines on pregnant women, and has ties to the usual suspects. IMPACT is run by the Canadian Paediatric Society, and tries to push vaccines on children.

Does these people really have your interests, and the interests of your children at heart? Or is this simply a lucrative business opportunity?

One of the members of the CCfV is Lisa Barrett, who is a “Clinician Investigator” at Dalhousie. She has quite the interesting background, and is more than just a doctor.

It turns out that Barrett is another media darling, making the rounds on the Canadian news. She’s just one more “expert” pushing the mass vaccination agenda, and is often on outlets like CTV News.

According to both her LinkedIn and Dalhousie profiles, Barrett spent time at the NIAID, or National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. This is the organization headed by Anthony Fauci. She also completed a residency at the University of Toronto, which is where the Ontario Science Table is based.

Dalhousie received a $50,000 grant from NSERC (or rather, taxpayers) over the Summer of 2021. This was to promote the pro-vaccine agenda. It was one of just many handed out to Canadian universities. See the links at the bottom for much more on these subsidies.

For another batch of taxpayer grants used to “fight vaccine hesitancy“, consider the list below. A lot of money is being used to promote and push these shots. Now, if there was were a raging pandemic, would all of this be necessary?

African Arts & Culture Community Contributor Society Black communities in British Columbia $450,000
Alberta International Medical Graduates Association Newcomers to Canada $500,000
Alliance for Healthier Communities Vulnerable populations across Ontario,
Community health providers and workers
BGC Canada Youth, Parents and guardians $500,000
British Columbia Association of Community Health Centres (BCACHC) Vulnerable populations across British Columbia, Community health providers and workers $323,871
British Columbia Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC) Public health and immunization stakeholders, General public $2,732,965
British Columbia Fraser Health Authority Hard-to-reach families, Indigenous populations, Newcomers to Canada, Low-income families $709,175
Canada Safety Council Teachers, Students in primary, junior, and intermediate grades, Parents and guardians $220,000
Canadian Association of Community Health Centres (CACHC) Vulnerable populations across Canada, Community health providers and workers $598,915
Dr. Peter Centre Marginalized populations living with HIV and other health issues $537,301
The Canadian Association of Science Centres (CASC) General public $1,749,578
Canadian Public Health Association Vaccinators, Health care providers $1,847,303
Eastern Ontario Health Unit (EOHU) Primary care patient populations less likely to have received the vaccine based on factors like reason for vaccine hesitancy, age, language, education level, rurality, gender, and ethnicity. $450,000
Indigenous Primary Health Care Council Health care providers, Indigenous Peoples $500,000
Institute national de santé publique du Québec (INSPQ) Parents and guardians, Youth, Teachers/educators $723,804
Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre Inc. Urban Indigenous populations in Winnipeg, Manitoba $470,000
Mainline, a program of the Mi’Kmaw Native Friendship Centre People who use drugs and urban Indigenous Peoples in Halifax, Nova Scotia $123,000
Manitoba Association of Community Health (MACH) Vulnerable populations across Manitoba, Community health providers and workers $350,625
Nova Scotia Association of Community Health Centres (NSACHC) Vulnerable populations across Nova Scotia, Community health providers and workers $292,800
Nova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness People of African Descent in Nova Scotia $430,000
Public Health Association of British Columbia Youth $1,139,916
Refugee 613 Newcomers to Canada and racialized populations $500,000
Regina Treaty / Status Indian Services Inc. (RT/SIS) Indigenous Peoples in Regina and surrounding communities, Saskatchewan $100,000
Regroupement des centres d’amitié autochtones du Québec (RCAAQ) Indigenous Peoples in La Tuque, Trois-Rivières, and Joliette, Québec $475,000
Saskatchewan Health Authority Community health workers, Parents and guardians, High-risk populations $650,642
University Health Network Personal support workers $325,000
University of British Columbia Public health, Primary and community care leaders, Local organizations, Indigenous and/or cultural leaders, Municipal leadership, and other Policy makers $419,000
University of Toronto Vaccinators, General public $499,792
Vancouver Infectious Diseases Centre Underhoused and homeless individuals in New Westminster and Vancouver, British Columbia $460,000
Women’s College Hospital Non-physician health care practitioners and other essential workers in long-term care facilities and homecare settings $500,000
Women’s Health in Women’s Hands Community Health Centre Racialized women, Ethno cultural and faith-based organizations $450,000
Yukon Health and Social Services Yukon residents $599,999

Has this sort of money EVER been spent on trying to push experimental concoctions on the public? Has there ever been drive kind of a drive to use infants as guinea pigs?

Much of the content for this article came from 2 people who read this site often. Thanks very much for spreading the word on these important issues.

(2) Participants needed for COVID‑19 vaccine study in children – Dal News – Dalhousie University
(4) KidCOVE COVID-19 Study – Canadian Center For Vaccinology –
(6) Moderna_KidCOVE_Study-Talking-Points
(8) CCfV Members and Researchers _ Canadian Center for Vaccinology
(10) Collaborative Networks for Research _ Canadian Center for Vaccinology
(14) Immunization and Vaccines _ Canadian Paediatric Society
(16) Lisa Barrett – Division of Infectious Diseases – Dalhousie University
(18) Infectious disease expert Dr. Lisa Barrett answers viewer questions CTV News
(21) Lisa Barrett _ LinkedIn

(A) Canada’s National Vaccination Strategy
(B) The Vaccine Confidence Project
(C) More Research Into Overcoming “Vaccine Hesitancy”
(D) Psychological Manipulation Over “Vaccine Hesitancy”
(E) World Economic Forum Promoting More Vaccinations
(F) CIHR/NSERC/SSHRC On Grants To Raise Vaccine Uptake
(G) $50,000 Available — Each — For Groups To Target Minorities
(H) Vaccine Community Innovation Challenge
(I) CIHR Using Public Money To Push Vaccines On Society
(J) Heidi Larson, VCP, LSHTM All Getting Funding From Big Pharma
(K) NSERC Grants To Push Vaccines On More People

Christine Massey On: FOI Requests; Virus Isolation; Fluoride’s Harmful Effects

The following is from an interview that was supposed to be published in a European health magazine. There were some translation issues which ultimately prevented its release. Permission has been granted for this printing. In any event, go check out the work by Fluoride Free Peel.

A bit odd how most of the heroes who claim to be fighting this medical tyranny rarely (if ever) mention the fact that this “virus” has never been isolated. This is all based on lies.

(1) Massey Interview Isolation Purification

Before we get into the “SARS-COV-2” discussion, would you like to describe the Freedom of Information responses you have collected in regards to fluoride exposure during pregnancy, and what prompted you to begin that project?

A few years ago I submitted a series of 9 freedom of information requests to find out if public health institutions that promote water fluoridation had any primary studies to show that fluoride exposure is safe during pregnancy with respect to IQ and ADHD symptoms in their offspring. Dentists and public health officials in Canada and the U.S. are always telling us that water fluoridation is “safe and effective for everyone” and they call it a “great public health achievement”. But it turned out that they had no studies whatsoever.

I had focused on those particular outcomes because I was aware, thanks to the efforts of the wider community, that a large body of evidence had accumulated suggesting that fluoride is neurotoxic at high enough doses, and some high quality government-funded studies had recently showed that common fluoride exposure levels during pregnancy are associated with lower IQs and increased ADHD symptoms in offspring.

Many people aren’t aware, but there is currently a lawsuit underway against the U.S. EPA over their failure to regulate drinking water fluoride levels in a manner protective of neurological health. And this is only one of many concerns.

It had also come to light that the chemical typically used to fluoridate water here is actually an industrial hazardous waste acid that is contaminated, for example with arsenic and lead, and had never been subjected to long-term toxicology studies. We also knew that, after many decades of the practice, fluoridated water had still never been tested for effectiveness in humans via double-blind randomized controlled experiments. Health Canada’s 2014 FOI response to Ms. Joanne David confirmed those facts.

It is easy to prove using grade-school math that so-called “optimally fluoridated” water delivers contra-indicated doses of fluoride to children every single day (see slides 6 and 10 here). In every 350 ml glass of water a child receives the same amount of fluoride that all of the dental and public health authorities insist should be spit out, not swallowed, when brushing their teeth with the recommended amount of fluoridated toothpaste. Most dentists are completely unaware of this simple truth.

Despite the simplicity of this truth, even Medical Officers of Health sometimes try to dispute it, because they get paid massive salaries to push the government’s health agendas. I presented the simple math multiple times to the municipal council where I used to live. But only 1 sensible Councillor cared, the rest didn’t and they continued with the practice. It was like talking to a brick wall. And I wasn’t the only one trying to reason with them and showing them evidence of harm, many other people were doing the same thing.

What is your academic background?

I have a master’s degree in biostatistics from Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto. I used to work as a statistician with cancer researchers.

Some might claim that because you are not an expert on fluoride toxicity, or a virologist, your input is of no value on either topic. How would you respond to that?

No one needs a special background to grasp the grade-school math mentioned above, or the lack of randomized controlled studies to prove the alleged effectiveness of fluoridated water, or the lack of toxicology studies on the chemical, or to notice the blatant double-standard that is applied by the public health community and dentists.

If you show them a study that suggests ineffectiveness or harm to humans, they will dismiss it because it’s not a controlled experiment and they will go through it with a fine-tooth comb to point out weaknesses. What they won’t tell you is that they have zero controlled human experiments to prove effectiveness or safety, and that they rely solely on observational studies of equal or lesser quality when insisting the practice is safe and effective.

While they claim it would be unethical to carry out a controlled experiment on humans who give voluntary, informed consent to investigate potential harm, they insist it’s a “great public health achievement” to force an uncontrolled experiment without voluntary or informed consent onto entire communities.

Anyone can see the contradiction, and it applies to other health practices as well – for example not testing a drug on pregnant, consenting volunteers, but then marketing and administering that same drug to pregnant women, insisting that It’s safe and effective.

With regards to the isolation/purification of the theoretical “COVID-19 virus”, it’s as simple as recognizing the difference between mixing things together and separating things apart, and realizing that no one on the planet has a purified sample of the alleged virus. It’s not rocket science – anyone willing to invest a little time can understand it.

We have every right to question and dispute the so-called experts, and it’s important that we do, especially when it comes to things that directly impact our lives. Experts often don’t agree among themselves and have been wrong on many things throughout history. And some so-called experts (i.e. public health officials) are in fact not expert on a given public health topic. So it’s very dangerous for people to think that they should not investigate and should not feel free to question anything that does not make sense to them, and to demand answers if need be.

Right now our world is being turned upside down over claims that are quite easy to disprove. The truth is that no one has a purified sample of the alleged virus, and thus there are zero validated tests and zero “confirmed cases”.

How did you become aware of the “virus” isolation/purification issue?

Nothing about the “COVID-19” story made sense from the beginning, starting with the blind acceptance by media and governments that a deadly new virus was responsible for respiratory disease in heavily polluted Wuhan.

Also the numbers didn’t make sense here in Ontario when they put us into lockdown for the first time. And I simply could not take seriously the notion that the same governments in Canada and the U.S. that unlawfully mass medicate and experiment on the public with fluoride were suddenly taking extraordinary steps to protect us. They kept saying that they were doing it “out of an abundance of caution”. But they had demonstrated zero caution or credibility when it came to fluoridation, so it was completely contradictory to their usual behaviour.

Then I heard that they were using PCR tests to diagnose people, and I recalled hearing about those same tests from the great investigative journalist Jon Rappoport over the years. He had reported that they were highly problematic for diagnosing other alleged viral diseases.

So I started looking for more detailed information about the PCR tests, and in doing so came across the brilliant work of Canada’s David Crowe, and later the equally brilliant Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Thomas Cowan and Dr. Stefan Lanka, and eventually others as well. They were all pointing out flaws in the story of the alleged virus itself. So I studied their work, and started looking at the “isolation” studies for myself, which confirmed what these gentlemen were describing.

And what gave you the idea of requesting freedom of information responses from governments and institutions?

I had found the FOIs a very simple and effective tool for exposing the absence of safety studies at institutions that promote fluoridated water during pregnancy, and realized FOIs could be useful again to investigate whether the alleged virus had in fact been isolated/purified.

Please describe your initial steps, the wording of your requests, and the first response or 2 that you received.

My first request was submitted on May 14, 2020 to Health Canada. (Some people have claimed that Health Canada is not an appropriate institution to have submitted this request to, but I disagree because Health Canada is the Canadian institution that has approved all of the “COVID-19” test kits, clinical trials, injections and other drugs and devices.)

I was very careful with the wording because I wanted to weed out the fraudulent “isolation” studies where nothing is actually isolated/purified, but not make it so restrictive that it also weeded out any potential legitimate studies.

The request was for: “all records describing the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus, directly from a sample taken from a diseased patient, where the patient sample was not first combined with any other source of genetic material”.

I stressed that I meant “isolation” in the “every-day sense of the word: the act of separating a thing(s) from everything else” and that I was “not requesting records where “isolation of SARS-COV-2” refers instead to the culturing of something, or the performance of an amplification test (i.e. a PCR test), or the sequencing of something”.

And I clarified that my request was to include any such record that had been downloaded to a computer, or printed in hard copy, etc. In other words, any record authored by anyone, anywhere, that was held by Health Canada. And I requested citations for any such record that might already be available to the public elsewhere, since publicly available records are not covered by the FOI legislation.

On June 11th, 2020 an Access to Information analyst advised me that Health Canada would not typically evaluate the type of information I had requested and that “Information on virus isolation would be best obtained from the Public Health Agency of Canada or the National Research Council.”

On June 23rd, 2020 the same analyst advised that Health Canada’s role is only to review evidence provided by sponsors in order to make regulatory decisions to approve products and authorize clinical trials, and that I might wish to contact the sponsors of clinical trials and/or companies in order to get the information I was seeking.

Health Canada’s final response came on June 24, 2020 and it stated: “Having completed a thorough search, we regret to inform you that we were unable to locate any records responsive to your request.” So I posted the response on my website, shared it on social media and sent it to my municipal Council.

On July 14, 2020, the National Research Council of Canada provided their stating that “a thorough search of NRC’s records has now been completed, and we regret to inform you that no records responsive to your request were identified”.

On December 7, 2020, the Public Health Agency of Canada (which includes Canada’s only “biosafety level 4” laboratory, the National Microbiology Laboratory) responded and provided me with 1 study and several emails that they claimed were responsive, but none of the records described isolation/purification of the alleged virus from a patient sample or from anything else.

In a revised response to that same request, the Public Health Agency of Canada admitted that they had no responsive records and stated that the gold standard used to determine the presence of intact virus in patient samples is visible cytopathic effects on cells in a cell culture.

Further, the Agency said that in the case of SARS-COV-2 “isolation” kidney cells extracted from an African green monkey (“Vero cells”) “combined with minimal essential medium (MEM) were used because they are essential to support viral replication and cell growth”, and that “PCR further confirms that intact virus is present”. But of course culturing has nothing to do with isolating/purifying anything, and PCR tests do not even attempt detect alleged viruses or even alleged genomes.

What did you make of these responses?

It was clear that the top health institutions in Canada had no evidence that the alleged virus had ever been isolated/purified, and thus no proof that “it” even exists. I realized that this was important evidence that could help to open people’s eyes and possibly be used in court, so yes, I kept submitting requests to more and more institutions in Canada, including at the provincial and municipal levels.

As of today (November 1, 2021), your website lists responses from 127 institutions in over 25 countries. How did you amass such an enormous collection from around the world?

Eventually a gentleman from New Zealand contacted me and asked if I would mind him using the same wording in requests in his country. Of course I welcomed this, and this gentleman ended up submitting and receiving responses to many requests in New Zealand, Australia, the U.S. So I posted his responses on my website as well, to help publicize them and make it easier for people to find all of the isolation/purification FOI responses. (He went on to do many other initiatives on this issue as well, including a 59 second video that explains the irrational, unscientific version of “isolation” used in virology.)

Gradually more and more people got in touch with me, sending in the FOI responses they had received, and in some cases court documents, and all of them were added to the collection. I’m aware of responses from additional institutions that I don’t have copies of yet, as well.

To this day, no institution has provided or cited even 1 record of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” (or any other alleged virus, that I’m aware of) having been isolated/purified from even 1 patient sample on the planet.

There is an FOI Request Template on my website where I encourage people to submit requests to the institutions where they live.

What are the implications of the fact that no one has any record of the alleged virus having been purified from patient samples?

Politicians who have engaged in fear-mongering, terrorized, manipulated and coerced the public, misused public resources, sabotaged businesses and economies, passed fraud-based “laws” and regulations, gave so-called “emergency” powers to lying public health officials, and issued threats, “mandates”, and all manner of financial and psychological abuse are all responsible for their actions.

Purification is just 1 essential (but not sufficient) step in proving the existence of an alleged virus. And it needs to have been carried out on many patient samples, not just 1 or a few. And the steps of purifying and following up with the other necessary steps with the purified sample (characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments) should have been carried out by multiple research teams in order to replicate and verify the results. Instead, to this day, no one on the planet has performed even the purification step, from even 1 patient sample.

So it is 100% clear that these politicians all failed to demand proof that the alleged virus even exists, let alone proof of a pandemic. And on top of that they failed to respect God-given rights and freedoms and to uphold higher laws, and they have caused vast amounts of needless suffering and misery. They have participated in a global fraud and crimes against humanity, and they are responsible along with all the other complicit parties (virologists, public health officials, etc).

Despite all of the evidence to the contrary, institutions around the world still insist that the alleged “SARS-CoV-2” has been isolated. What do you say to that?

The FOI collection includes responses from numerous intuitions that had claimed to have “isolated the virus”, for example:

  • University of Toronto (Canada)
  • McMaster University (Canada)
  • Mount Sinai Hospital (Canada)
  • Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Canada)
  • Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization – International Vaccine Centre (Canada)
  • U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • University of Otago (New Zealand)
  • Peter Doherty Institute (Australia)
  • Indian Council of Medical Research
  • National Institute of Infectious Diseases “Lazzaro Spallanzani” (Italy)

The Methods sections of the so-called “virus isolation” studies, and FOI responses from many institutions, make it clear that “SARS-COV-2 isolation” to a virologist means “culturing” a patient sample in monkey kidney cells (aka “Vero” cells), fetal bovine serum and toxic drugs, reducing the nutrition to the cells, and then irrationally and unscientifically blaming the alleged “virus” for whatever harm (“cytopathic effects”) they observe in the monkey cells. It’s all wild speculation and outlandish assumptions.

They usually don’t bother with any sort of controls, and in the studies where they do refer to “control” cells, they fail to describe exactly what they did to those cells.

A colleague of mine had an email conversation with a Chinese virologist involved in one of these papers, and this virologist admitted that they gave the experimental cells double the amount of toxic drugs that they gave their so-called “controls”. This was only 1 of the many problems with their paper.

And, we know there could not have been full control in any of the allegedly “controlled” experiments because full control would require everything to be the same in both the experimental and control groups except for the 1 factor that is being investigated – in this case the alleged virus. Since no one has a purified sample of the alleged virus, no experiment could have been fully controlled.

What myself and many other people have come to realize during the last 1.5 years is that virology is simply not a science. The faulty “virus isolation” methods applied during this virus-less “pandemic” are not even unique to “COVID-19”, they are typical.

Others, such as Germany’s Dr. Stefan Lanka, had already known of these problems for years or even decades. Now it is time for the entire world to come to this knowledge, so that we are never duped or coerced again into another faux “vaccine” or any other sort of “virus” manipulation.

Some Thoughts On Why Flair Airlines Supports The Mandatory Vaccination Policy

It seems a bit counter-intuitive that a discount airline would be so enthusiastic about the policy of mandatory vaccines for travelers. Flair Airlines is one such company. Then again, looking a bit deeper, there may be other reasons for doing this.

Specifically, it appears the Flair Airlines LTD. has been getting CEWS, the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy. Of course, they are likely getting other subsidies as well.

After all, this company went from serious financial hurt, to being able to expand its operations across Canada. Such a sudden shift requires a lot of money.

A quick look through the Federal Lobbying Registry shows that Flair has been quite busy getting the attention of public office holders. The middlemen they send are also worthy of a closer look.

1. Saad Baig, StrategyCorp Inc

Saad Baig is a Director in StrategyCorp’s Public Affairs group and brings six years of experience advising senior cabinet ministers in the Government of Ontario.
Most recently, Saad was Senior Policy Advisor to the Minister of Finance where he was a pivotal part of the team that tabled Ontario’s first balanced budget in ten years. He served as the lead advisor to the Minister on matters relating to tax policy, economic policy and municipal finance. Saad led the development of the 2016 Fall Economic Statement and 2017 Ontario Budget in key areas including transportation, infrastructure, economic development and international trade.
Prior to joining the Ministry of Finance, Saad spent over three years as the lead advisor for infrastructure policy to several ministers where he participated in key negotiations on federal-provincial infrastructure matters, designed municipal funding programs, developed infrastructure planning legislation and coordinated policy and issues for two crown agencies.
Saad has been involved in numerous political campaigns at the municipal, provincial and federal levels including the 2014 central campaign for the Ontario Liberal Party.

This lobbyist for the discount airline spent 6 years in the Ontario Government, in a variety of roles, working for Kathleen Wynne and Dalton McGuinty.

2. Garry Keller, StrategyCorp Inc

Garry has served in several key leadership roles in Canadian politics, including as Chief of Staff to Canada’s Foreign Minister, John Baird; Chief of Staff to the Leader of the Opposition Rona Ambrose, and chief Parliamentary advisor to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He also served as a Chief of Staff to the Government House Leader and the Chief Government Whip, Director of Communications to the Minister of the Environment and Director of Parliamentary Affairs to the President of the Treasury Board. He also served as Acting Chief of Staff to the United Conservative Party Caucus in Alberta in 2017.
As the Chief of Staff to the Foreign Minister, Garry was required to deliver strategic, communication and political advice on both international and domestic matters. He has experience in dealing with regulatory and legal matters, national security matters, trade negotiations, as well as the promotion of Canadian interests and Canadian values on the world stage. He is also an experienced practitioner of the Access to Information Act.
Garry regularly provides commentary on domestic and international politics for CTV News Channel, TVO’s The Agenda and a variety of talk radio shows across Canada. His commentary has also appeared in the National Post and the Globe and Mail, and he has appeared on a number of panels for associations and other organizations on Canadian politics.

Keller spent many years as a Conservative Party of Canada operative, and handler for various politicians. He also moved on to Alberta politics.

3. Sébastien Labrecque, StrategyCorp Inc

Before pivoting to government relations, Sébastien worked in the federal government, which led him to develop a thorough understanding of the inner workings of policy and research development in the public service. Thanks to his experience at Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, Sébastien possesses an extensive knowledge of the policy and stakeholder ecosystems in the areas of housing finance and the digital economy.

Labrecque spent over a year and a half working for the Federal Government before he switched over and became a lobbyist.

4. Kristina Martin, Loyalist Public Affairs

Kristina is a seasoned strategic communications and government relations expert with over a decade of experience working in politics, government relations and the non-profit sector. Based in Ottawa, she knows the inner workings of Parliament Hill and is recognized as a connector and go-to advisor for corporate and nonprofit leaders to advance complex policy agendas.
Before joining Loyalist Kristina worked as Director of Communications and Public Affairs at Canada’s largest science and technology outreach organization, Actua. Prior to that she worked at a national government relations and strategic communication firm.
Kristina has also served as a communications and political advisor to federal elected officials.

Kristina Martin spent many years with the Federal Liberals when they were in opposition. Now that they are back in power, she’s in a position to wield some real influence.

5. Conal Slobodin, StrategyCorp Inc

Slobodin has since left StrategyCorp and gone to Walmart. However, he has held roles in the Federal Government, and is a former consultant for the Yukon Liberal Party. Small world.

6. Andrew Steele, StrategyCorp Inc

As a Vice President at StrategyCorp, Andrew emphasizes client service, creative solutions and professionalism. He provides counsel on management consulting projects, communications challenges and government relations files at the federal, provincial and municipal level.
Previously, Andrew served as Senior Advisor to the Premier of Ontario, as well as Chief of Staff in several Ministries. He has held senior campaign roles for the Liberal Party of Canada and the Ontario Liberal Party.
Andrew was the founding CEO of the Pecaut Centre, a non-profit management consulting firm housed at the Boston Consulting Group. More recently, Andrew was essential to implementing the strategic transformation of public broadcaster TVO into the province’s partner for digital learning inside the classroom.
A director of the board of the Michael Garron Hospital, Andrew graduated with distinction from the MBA program at Ivey. He writes regularly on public policy as an opinion columnist for the Globe and Mail and others.

Steele, by his own admission, has held senior campaign roles for both the Ontario Liberals, and the Federal Liberals. The connection to Michael Garron Hospital is an interesting one. That’s where Michael Warner, the pro-lockdown doctor, Michael Warner works. Melissa Lantsman, MP-elect for Thornhill, is also a Director.

As for Kenzie McKeegan, Dan Mader and Chris Froggatt, check out this piece on their recent work as Pfizer lobbyists. Have to wonder what all of these political hacks arranged in order for Flair to get onboard with these passports.

There doesn’t seem to be an obvious mention of a bailout, but it’s the most likely thing to search for. And they are definitely getting CEWS from the taxpayers.