Health – Page 21 of 27

April 16, 2021November 17, 2023

Public Health Agency Of Canada Created As Branch Of WHO; Bill C-12 PHAC Act

This will sound controversial, but PHAC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, is essentially a branch of the World Health Organization. It’s therefore logical that Theresa Tam (or whoever that person is), would actually hold dual roles.

From 2004 to 2006, there were a few significant developments in Canadian politics. The effects of which would finally be felt in 2020, with this fake “pandemic”.

(1) Creation of Public Health Agency of Canada by Order In Council
(2) International Health Regulations, 3rd Edition, Take Effect
(3) Passing of Quarantine Act, based on WHO-IHR
(4) Passing of PHAC Act, giving the Agency real teeth

These events are connected. The 2005 Quarantine Act is domestic implementation of the International Health Regulations. The Provincial Health Acts are derivatives of that. PHAC is a branch of WHO that masquerades as part of the Canadian Government. It was created to fulfill obligations under WHO-IHR.

Far from being a rogue administration, this was advanced by successive Liberal and Conservative Governments. Maybe one of the reasons the Canadian media spent so much time on the Paul Martin/Stephen Harper drama was to divert attention from what was really going on. It may also explain why Erin O’Toole is so blase about martial law being imposed these days.

1. Timeline: PHAC Act/Quarantine Act/IHR 3rd Ed

Jan 23, 2004 – WHO decides to update IHR
2004 to 2005 – WHO begins process of creating IHR 3rd Edition
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1068, amend Financial Administration Act
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1070, amend PS Staff Relations Act
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1071, amend Public Service Employment Act
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1072/1073, amend Privacy Act
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1074/1075, amend Access To Info Act
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1076, amend CSIS Act
Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1076, amend Auditor General Act
Oct 8, 2004 – 1st Reading of Quarantine Act
Oct 26, 2004 – 2nd Reading of Quarantine Act
Oct 28, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Nov 4 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Nov 18, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Nov 23, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Nov 25, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Dec 7, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Dec 7, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Dec 8, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act
Feb 10, 2005 – 3rd Reading of Quarantine Act
Feb 10, 2005 – 1st Reading of Quarantine Act (Senate)
Mar 9, 2005 – 2nd Reading of Quarantine Act (Senate)
Apr 14, 2005 – 3rd Reading of Quarantine Act (Senate)
May 13, 2005 – Royal Assent of Quarantine Act
May 8, 2006 – 2nd Reading of PHAC Act Passed in HoC
May 11, 2006 – Parliamentary Hearing on PHAC Act
May 16, 2006 – Parliamentary Hearing on PHAC Act
June 20, 2006 – 3rd Reading of PHAC Act Passed in HoC
June 20, 2006 – 1st Reading of PHAC Act (Senate)
June 28, 2006 – 2nd Reading of PHAC Act (Senate)
Nov 3, 2006 – 3rd Reading of PHAC Act (Senate)
Dec 12, 2006 – Royal Assent of PHAC Act
Dec 15, 2006 – OIC 2006-1587, PHAC Act Active

2. PHAC Is Canada’s “Focal Point” For IHR

Article 4 Responsible authorities
1. Each State Party shall designate or establish a National IHR Focal Point and the authorities responsible within its respective jurisdiction for the implementation of health measures under these Regulations.
.
2. National IHR Focal Points shall be accessible at all times for communications with the WHO IHR Contact Points provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article. The functions of National IHR Focal Points shall include:
(a) sending to WHO IHR Contact Points, on behalf of the State Party concerned, urgent communications concerning the implementation of these Regulations, in particular under Articles 6 to 12; and
(b) disseminating information to, and consolidating input from, relevant sectors of the administration of the State Party concerned, including those responsible for surveillance and reporting, points of entry, public health services, clinics and hospitals and other government departments.
.
3. WHO shall designate IHR Contact Points, which shall be accessible at all times for communications with National IHR Focal Points. WHO IHR Contact Points shall send urgent communications concerning the implementation of these Regulations, in particular under Articles 6 to 12, to the National IHR Focal Point of the States Parties concerned. WHO IHR Contact Points may be designated by WHO at the headquarters or at the regional level of the Organization.
.
4. States Parties shall provide WHO with contact details of their National IHR Focal Point and WHO shall provide States Parties with contact details of WHO IHR Contact Points. These contact details shall be continuously updated and annually confirmed. WHO shall make available to all States Parties the contact details of National IHR Focal Points it receives pursuant to this Article.

IHR 3rd Edition Full Text 2005 (See highlighted version)

The 2005 Edition of the International Health Regulations specifies that each State Party (which is each country) shall establish a “focal point”. These points shall be responsible for implementing the Regulations, and answer to WHO.

And who is that focal point? The Public Health Agency of Canada. It was created specifically for the purpose of implementing WHO’s directives on global public health.

Who better to head PHAC than Theresa Tam? This person acted in a 2010 film supporting martial law, and already works for WHO anyway.

3. Timeline Of PHAC/IHR Implemented

January 19 to 23, 2004, at the 113th Session of the Executive Board of the World Health Organization, it was decided that the International Health Regulations were to receive an updated edition. See here, here and the archive.

Mr AISTON (Canada) said that the International Health Regulations were a key component of Canada’s approach to the management and containment of communicable diseases, and also central to the role and function of WHO. The approach proposed was good: while a case could be made for accelerating the process, revision required careful consideration and the timetable put forward was therefore probably realistic. Having been a participant in the negotiations on the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, he suggested that the process should be concluded in one or two negotiating sessions at most. Canada was preparing a domestic approach to the revision of the International Health Regulations and would keep WHO informed of developments.

Page 41 starts to address proposed changes to the IHR, and states that it was widely supported by Member States. There seems to be no concern with just how much sovereignty is given up.

In fact, discussions for what changes to make to the International Health Regulations continued throughout 2004, and into 2005. That’s when things started to happen in Canada, although this was not discussed publicly.

In September 2004, a series of Orders In Council were signed to retroactively include the Public Health Agency of Canada into existing legislation. PHAC was also a recent creation that had not yet received any sort of legislative legitimacy. That would later change.

This is not some conspiracy theory. In fact, PHAC itself writes “was created in 2004 in response to growing concerns about the capacity of Canada’s public health system to anticipate and respond effectively to public health threats”. This is posted on its own website. It’s under the section titled WHY WAS THE AGENCY CREATED?

PHAC’s creation was in part of the larger Federal Strategy. Part of that (Pillar 3) promoted the idea of a Pan-Canadian Public Health Network. “Pan-Canadian” seems to be a euphemism for global.

October 8, 2004, just 2 weeks later, Bill C-12 was introduced into the House of Commons. This was the Quarantine Act, and was to be based on the World Health Organization’s regulations. By the end of October, it had passed Second Reading and was before the HESA Committee.

The November 4 hearing, the second hearing, is quite an interesting one. Below are quotes from the transcript of that session.

The Quarantine Act is passed in 2005, and the 3rd Edition of IHR took effect that year. In 2006, “Conservative” Prime Minister Stephen Harper brings in the PHAC Act, to give some legislative legitimacy to PHAC.

4. Bill C-12, Quarantine Act, IHR Implementation

[Page 5]
Mr. Colin Carrie: I have a question about Canada’s quarantine laws. Are we in touch with the World Health Organization and other international organizations? If there’s an outbreak, can we have any influence on quarantining people in other areas, or vice versa, the sharing of information in that way?
.
Dr. Paul Gully: During an outbreak we certainly would communicate with the countries involved. During SARS we had close collaboration with the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, for example, as required, to share intelligence. In terms of utilization of their legislation, such as quarantine acts, we feel that our relationship with WHO, which is closer, and also clarification of WHO’s powers under the international health regulations will, I think, further ensure there is consistency in terms of response from individual member states as a result of that. Does that answer your question?
.
Mr. Colin Carrie: Yes.
Are you aware of international standards for quarantine?
.
Dr. Paul Gully: The international health regulations would be the regulations that individual states would then use to design their quarantine acts. I don’t know of any other standards out there or best practices to look at quarantine acts, but the IHRs really have been used over the years as the starting point. Now, with the improvement of the international health regulations, maybe, as is the case in Canada, changes will occur to quarantine acts in other countries in order to better comply with the international health regulations.

[Page 6]
The Chair: Madam Demers.
[Translation]
Ms. Nicole Demers (Laval, BQ): Madam Chair, my colleague made a reference earlier to international agreements. This is also one of my concerns. You will recall that the fundamental principle established at the First International Sanitary Conference in 1951 was to ensure maximum protection combined with a minimum number of restrictions. This principle still holds sway today. I’m certainly concerned about our future course of action.

[Page 8]
Mrs. Carol Skelton: Why did Health Canada proceed with a separate Quarantine Act at this time?
.
Dr. Paul Gully: Those of us who administered the Quarantine Act over the years always knew there were deficiencies in the old act, and because it was rarely used there wasn’t the inclination to update it. As a result of SARS and utilization of the act, which certainly put it under close scrutiny, and the requirement for the Government of
Canada to respond to the various reports on SARS, it was felt that updating the act sooner rather than later was appropriate. In addition, during discussions about the international health regulations of the World Health Organization, it was felt that it was appropriate to do it and to spend time and energy, which it obviously does require, to do it now, before other parts of legislative renewal, of which Mr. Simard is well aware, were further implemented or further discussion was carried out.

[Page 8]
Mrs. Carol Skelton: I would appreciate that, please. We talked at a previous committee meeting about the newly
created Public Health Agency of Canada. Bill C-12 gives authority to the Minister of Health, with no mention at all of the Chief Public Health Officer. Is there any connection between Bill C-12 and the Public Health Agency headed by our Chief Public Health Officer?
.
Dr. Paul Gully: The minister has the powers and can delegate those powers. The responsibility for the Quarantine Act is a responsibility of the Public Health Agency, which is headed by the Chief Public Health Officer. In effect, the Chief Public Health Officer has responsibility for the act under the minister, because there are certain powers, obviously, that the minister will delegate to the Chief Public Health Officer.

[Page 9]
Ms. Ruby Dhalla: I have one question. In terms of the Quarantine Act for our country, where are we at in terms of best practices models when we look at the international spectrum?
.
Dr. Paul Gully: I don’t know the acts in other countries, but because we are updating our act right now and we’re taking into account the probable revisions to the international health regulations, I believe we would be well in the forefront in terms of having modern legislation.

From the November 4, 2004 Parliamentary Hearings. Bill C-12, the 2005 Quarantine Act, was written as to accommodate anticipated changes in the International Health Regulations. As is spelled out, compliance is mandatory.

It also becomes clear that the newly created Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), will be responsible for carrying out actions in accordance with the Quarantine Act. Keep in mind, in 2004, PHAC had been created by Order In Council. There was no legislative basis for it yet.

5. Bill C-5: Public Health Agency Of Canada Act

WHEREAS the Government of Canada wishes to take public health measures, including measures relating to health protection and promotion, population health assessment, health surveillance, disease and injury prevention, and public health emergency preparedness and response;
WHEREAS the Government of Canada wishes to foster collaboration within the field of public health and to coordinate federal policies and programs in the area of public health;
WHEREAS the Government of Canada wishes to promote cooperation and consultation in the field of public health with provincial and territorial governments;
WHEREAS the Government of Canada also wishes to foster cooperation in that field with foreign governments and international organizations, as well as other interested persons or organizations;
AND WHEREAS the Government of Canada considers that the creation of a public health agency for Canada and the appointment of a Chief Public Health Officer will contribute to federal efforts to identify and reduce public health risk factors and to support national readiness for public health threats;

PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA
Establishment
3. The Public Health Agency of Canada is established for the purpose of assisting the Minister in exercising or performing the Minister’s powers, duties and functions in relation to public health.

Qualifications required
(2) The Chief Public Health Officer shall be a health professional who has qualifications in the field of public health.
Lead health professional
7. (1) The Chief Public Health Officer is the lead health professional of the Government of Canada in relation to public health.
Communication with governments, public health authorities and organizations
(2) The Chief Public Health Officer may, with respect to public health issues, communicate with governments, public health author-ities or organizations in the public health field, within Canada or internationally.
Communication with the public, voluntary organizations and the private sector
(3) The Chief Public Health Officer may communicate with the public, voluntary organizations in the public health field or the private sector for the purpose of providing information, or seeking their views, about public health issues.

PHAC was created for the purpose of promoting public health, and it serves as a required “focal point” for Canada to fulfill its obligations under the International Health Regulations and the Quarantine Act.

Having Theresa Tam as both the Public Health Officer of Canada and working for the World Health Organization actually makes sense. PHAC effectively acts as a branch of WHO.

PHAC exists to serve a UN function.

6. Government Openly Admits PHAC Is WHO Outpost

How Canada meets its obligations under the IHR
As a signatory to the IHR, Canada is committed to help strengthen global health security. We build capacities to detect, assess, report and respond to public health events here at home and abroad.

Canada has confirmed its ability to meet these public health core capacity requirements under the IHR through the following activities: (a) monitoring and evaluation (such as the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) process)
real-life events; (b) emergency preparedness and response exercises; and (c) Collaboration efforts between federal departments and with provincial and territorial partners improve and strengthen our country’s public health preparedness and response system.

Canada has also established a National IHR Focal Point (NFP), which is required under IHR Article 4 (Responsible authorities). The NFP supports IHR-related communications between Canadian public health authorities, WHO, its regional office in the Americas (care of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)) and other countries.

Implementing the IHR in Canada
In Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is the lead organization for implementing the IHR. PHAC is also Canada’s designated National IHR Focal Point (NFP). As the NFP, PHAC coordinates the implementation of the IHR on behalf of the Government of Canada.

IHR activities are a shared responsibility. This means that Canada’s Health Portfolio, other federal departments and provincial/territorial governments support IHR implementation.

Canada implements the IHR under existing legislation, regulations, policies and agreements in place at both the federal and provincial/territorial levels.

The success of IHR implementation in Canada relies on ongoing collaboration by all partners to carry out surveillance, reporting, notification, verification, response and collaboration activities: (a) across the country and (b) at international points of entry (airports, ports and ground crossings)

Because legislation differs among federal and provincial/territorial governments, Canada has mechanisms, agreements and plans in place that enable national coordination. This is particularly important during public health emergencies that require federal involvement.

It’s hardly a conspiracy theory when Ottawa openly admits that PHAC serves as the “focal point” for WHO, and to implement the International Health Regulations.

PREVIOUS CANUCK LAW POSTS
(1) WHO International Health Regulations Legally Binding
(2) A Look At International Health Regulation Statements
(3) Quarantine Act Actually Written By WHO, IHR Changes
(4) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR
(5) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part II
(6) World Health Treaty Proposed, Based On WHO-IHR

WHO/INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS
(1) 113th Session Of World Health Org Executive, January 2004
(2) 113th Session World Health Organization Jaunary 2004
(3) https://apps.who.int/gb/ghs/pdf/A_IHR_IGWG_1-en.pdf
(4) WHO September 2 2004 IHR Meeting
(5) https://apps.who.int/gb/ghs/e/e-igwg.html
(6) https://archive.is/kexzW
(7) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/corporate/mandate/about-agency/history.html
(8) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/corporate/mandate/about-agency/federal-strategy.html
(9) WHO 113th Session Revise The IHR
(10) WHO IHR 3rd Edition Full Text 2005 MARKED

PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA ACT (BILL C-5)
(1) https://orders-in-council.canada.ca/
(2) https://openparliament.ca/bills/39-1/C-5/?page=2
(3) https://www.parl.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&billId=2162144&View=5
(4) https://parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/39-1/bill/C-5/first-reading
(5) HESA Committee Study On Bill C-5
(6) May 11 2006 HESA Transcript PHAC Act
(7) May 16 2006 HESA Transcript PHAC Act

April 14, 2021December 28, 2021

The University Of Toronto, Ontario Science Table Monopoly On “Public Health” In Ontario

Ever get the impression that there is way too much group think in “public health” in Ontario? That could be because so many of them have ties to one institution: the University of Toronto.

About the Science Table
The Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table is a group of scientific experts and health system leaders who evaluate and report on emerging evidence relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform Ontario’s response.
.
The Science Table’s mandate is to provide weekly summaries of relevant scientific evidence for the COVID-19 Health Coordination Table of the Province of Ontario, integrating information from existing scientific tables, Ontario’s universities and agencies, and the best global evidence. The Science Table summarizes its findings for the Health Coordination Table and for the public in Science Briefs.
.
The Science Table is an independent group, hosted by the Dalla Lana School of Public Health. There is no compensation for serving on the Science Table. However, the Scientific Director and the Secretariat are funded by the Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Public Health Ontario.

Interesting, the Ontario Science Table claims to be “independent”, yet it also has a mandate to provide health information for the Province of Ontario. How independent can they really be? And even if there isn’t direct compensation, are they expecting favours later? Political favours?

https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/about/
https://www.ontariosunshinelist.com/positions/twbpm

Adalsteinn Brown, Co-Chair, Dean, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto Senior Fellow, Massey College
Brian Schwartz, Co-Chair, Vice-President, Public Health Ontario, Associate Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
Peter Jüni, Scientific Director, Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology, Department of Medicine and Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Director, Applied Health Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital
Upton Allen, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Toronto
Vanessa Allen, Assistant Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Chief, Microbiology and Laboratory Science, Public Health Ontario, Medical Director, Provincial COVID-19 Diagnostic Network, Ontario Health, Clinical Consultant, Infectious Diseases, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre
Laura Desveaux, Scientific Lead, Institute for Better Health; Learning Health System Program Lead, Trillium Health Partners; Innovation Fellow, Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, Women’s College Hospital; Assistant Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto; Executive Director, Women Who Lead
David Fisman, Professor of Epidemiology, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
Jennifer Gibson, Director, Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Sun Life Financial Chair in Bioethics, Associate Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health University of Toronto
Anna Greenberg, Vice President, Health System Performance, Health Quality Ontario Adjunct Lecturer, Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Michael Hillmer, Assistant Deputy Minister, Capacity Planning and Analytics Division, Ministries of Health and Long-Term Care, Assistant Professor, Institute for Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Jessica Hopkins, Deputy Chief, Health Protection, Public Health Ontario, Assistant Professor (part-time), Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Adjunct Lecturer, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
Audrey Laporte, Professor and Director, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Director, Canadian Centre for Health Economics
Linda Mah, Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Associate Member, Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto
Allison McGeer, Microbiologist and Infectious Disease Consultant, Mount Sinai Hospital, Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
David McKeown, Associate Chief Medical Officer of Health, Ontario Ministry of Health, Adjunct Professor, Clinical Public Health Division, University of Toronto
Andrew Morris, Professor, Infectious Diseases, University of Toronto; Director, Antimicrobial Stewardship Program, Sinai Health and University Health Network
Laveena Munshi, Assistant Professor, Clinician Investigator, Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, Sinai Health System/University Health Network, University of Toronto
Kumar Murty, Director, Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences, Professor of Mathematics, University of Toronto
Samir Patel, Deputy Chief, Microbiology, Public Health Ontario, Clinical Microbiologist, Public Health Ontario
Associate Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto
Fahad Razak, Internist and Assistant Professor, St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Assistant Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Research Scientist, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Provincial Lead, Quality Improvement in General Internal Medicine, Ontario Health
Robert Reid, Chief Scientist, Trillium Health Partners, Professor (status), Institute for Health Policy, Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Professor (part-time), Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Affiliate Associate Professor, Health Services, University of Washington
Paula Rochon, Senior Scientist and Geriatrician Women’s College Hospital; Professor, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto; RTOERO Chair in Geriatric Medicine, University of Toronto.
Beate Sander, Canada Research Chair in Economics of Infectious Diseases, Scientist and Director, Population Health Economics Research, University Health Network, Director, Health Modeling and Health Economics, Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment collaborative, Associate Professor and Faculty Co-Lead Health Technology Assessment program, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Michael Schull, CEO and Senior Core Scientist, ICES Professor and Clinician-Scientist, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Senior Scientist, Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Arjumand Siddiqi, Associate Professor and Division Head of Epidemiology, University of Toronto Canada Research Chair in Population Health Equity
Arthur Slutsky, Scientist, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Professor of Medicine, Surgery and Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto
Janet Smylie, Professor, Dalla Lana School of Public Health and Department of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto
Tania Watts, Professor of Immunology, University of Toronto
Nathan Stall, Eliot Phillipson Clinician-Scientist Training Program and the Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto
Robert Steiner, Management and Evaluation Director, Dalla Lana Fellowship in Global Journalism, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
Antonina Maltsev, MPH Epidemiology Student, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
Karen Born, Senior Research Associate, Assistant Professor, University of Toronto
Gerald Lebovic, Assistant Professor, Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Justin Morgenstern, Senior Research Associate, Assistant Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto
Ayodele Odutayo, Senior Research Associate, Resident Physician, University of Toronto
Pavlos Bobos, Pavlos Bobos is a professionally trained clinician (physiotherapy) and a clinical epidemiologist.
His graduate studies were conducted at the Bone and Joint Institute at Western University and the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at University of Toronto.
Yoojin Choi, Research Associate, PhD Candidate, Department of Immunology, University of Toronto Course Instructor, Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto
Roisin McElroy, Research Associate, Emergency Medicine Physician, St. Joseph’s Health Centre, Unity Health Toronto, Lecturer, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto
Ashini Weerasinghe, an epidemiologist within the Health Promotion, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Program at Public Health Ontario. She holds a master’s degree in epidemiology from the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto
Diana Yan, Research Associate, HBSc Data Science & Pharmacology Student, University of Toronto

That is the “Science Table” Covid-19 Advisory For Ontario. The above list isn’t everyone, but a lot of them. They all have ties to the same institution. But what about these “medical experts” demanding lockdowns? Surely, they have some more variety to them.

Barbara Yaffe – Ontario Deputy Medical Officer
Eileen De Villa – Toronto Chief Medical Officer
Vinita Dubey – Toronto Associate Medical Officer of Health
Lisa Berger – Toronto Associate Medical Officer of Health
Christine Navarro – Toronto Associate Medical Officer of Health
Avis Lynn Noseworthy – Medical Officer of Health for the Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge
Vera Etches – Ottawa Deputy Medical Officer of Health
Brent Moloughney – Ottawa Associate Medical Officer
Lawrence C. Loh – Peel Medical Officer of Health
Hamidah Meghani – Halton Region Medical Health Officer
Nicola Mercer – Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Medical Officer (UofT Medical School)
Mustafa Hirji – Niagara Acting Medical Officer of Health (U of T graduate)
Elizabeth Richardson – Hamilton Medical Officer of Health (U of T graduate)

Seeing any pattern here? A lot of them have connections to the same place. It can’t all be a giant coincidence. For more background information on Barbara Yaffe, check this earlier piece.

April 11, 2021February 27, 2026

Dr. Michael Warner’s Financial Interests In Prolonging The “Pandemic”

Dr. Michael Warner of Toronto is constantly giving media appearances, demanding more lockdowns and more restrictions. Just a few examples are here and here. Even a year later he still advocates for having basic freedoms stripped in the name of “safety”. Now, is this just his professional, medical opinion? Or does he have other reasons for supporting such draconian measures?

This will sound petty, but Warner has a creepy demeanor, which comes across as MK Ultra. Beyond that, he has consistently demanded more and more restrictions be imposed on the public. The mainstream “news” outlets haven’t seen fit to really challenge him on anything he says.

Credit where it’s due: Stormhaven recently published a piece exposing the rampant conflicts of interest that Michael Warner has in promoting lockdowns and vaccines. Hopefully, this article can expand on that.

Despite Warner’s frequent visits to the Canadian media circuit, and in spite of his constant alarming tone, his other business interests are not discussed. He is only referred to as a doctor at Michael Garron Hospital. Either the Canadian media does no research, or they are intentionally not disclosing his other business ventures. Not sure which, but both options are bad.

Michael Warner On CBC, March 21, 2020
Michael Warner On CBC, March 23, 2020
Michael Warner, April 3, 2021
Background Information From Stormhaven
https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelwarnermdmba
https://archive.is/WI06K
https://www.linkedin.com/company/ontariohealth/
https://archive.is/17Zmb
https://www.advisorymd.com/
https://www.pwc.com/
https://www.utoronto.ca/news/nine-u-t-researchers-receive-federal-grants-covid-19-projects
https://www.utoronto.ca/news/u-t-researchers-receive-federal-grants-covid-19-modelling-projects
https://healthydebate.ca/2016/07/topic/doctor-apps/
https://archive.is/dmNbb
https://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/03/prweb13287286.htm
https://archive.is/8gTxX
https://www.owler.com/news/askthedoctor
https://twitter.com/askthedr
https://www.askthedoctor.com/
https://www.askthedoctorfoundation.org/ppe
https://theppedrive.com/
https://betakit.com/ask-the-doctor-acquires-sehat-indias-largest-health-platform/
https://vator.tv/news/2012-01-05-askthedoctor-and-nih-partner-for-ai-medical-research

Michael Warner is a practicing intensivist and Medical Director of Critical Care at the Michael Garron Hospital. He is a Lecturer at the University of Toronto and educates residents on the financial aspects of transitioning to practice. In 2018, he won the Excellence in Community-Based Teaching award for the best teacher among all U of T community-based teaching hospitals. More recently, he founded thePPEdrive.com and has become a trusted physician voice in the media helping Canadians navigate the COVID-19 pandemic.
.
A graduate of Queen’s University School of Medicine, Dr. Warner trained in internal medicine and critical care at the University of Toronto. To nurture his interest in business, he completed the full-time MBA program at the Rotman School of Management.
.
As a respected clinician and entrepreneur, Dr. Warner has successfully combined his interests in business and medicine. He served as the Medical Director of Best Doctors Canada and worked domestically and internationally as a healthcare consultant for PwC. He also served as Chief Medical Officer of a virtual care company and has a growing interest in coordinating real estate investment opportunities for physicians.
.
In 2016 Dr. Warner started AdvisoryMD. He provides career coaching and personal finance education to physicians clients. For corporate clients he offers clinically informed business advice to companies ranging from healthcare start-up to private equity firm.

There is nothing inherently wrong with having multiples sources of income. However, the problems start to creep in when interests in one (financial or otherwise), collide with another. While Warner’s patients, and society as a whole would likely benefit from ending this martial law, his other businesses may not.

From April 2014 to October 2016, Warner was a consultant with Pricewaterhouse Coopers. One of the areas this company focuses on is transforming the health care sector by increasing the size and scope of virtual care available. Interesting that their former representative now advocates for the sorts of measures that would ensure their growth.

Warner has also moonlighted as a lecturer at the University of Toronto since 2011. Nothing particularly insidious about that. However, it’s worth noting that 9 researchers from UofT got collectively some $6 million to do coronavirus modelling in March 2020. Even more money was handed out in April 2021, despite the awful job done previously for the modelling.

In both his ABOUT section of his LinkedIn page and advisorymd.com site, Warner states that he served as Chief Medical Officer of a virtual care company, but does not identify the company. He also doesn’t make it clear if he is still with them in any capacity. It’s not AdvisoryMD, since he lists that separately. Strange, considering he seems to have no issue with naming other organizations he’s affiliated with.

Spoiler: It’s https://www.askthedoctor.com

This lack of system support is one reason Ask The Doctor decided not to enter the market of offering live access to doctors. The Toronto-based company has doctors answer patient questions within one hour for a fee, and has answered more than 5 million questions worldwide. Patients can also ask doctors on the site for a second opinion, uploading documents such as CT scans or pathology reports along with their self-reported descriptions of their medical history.

The company was almost ready to get into the business of providing virtual and home doctors visits before deciding at the last minute to pull out. “We leased two Teslas, we had decals on them, we created our Android app, we had hired the physicians and we had 100 companies signed up,” says Michael Warner, chief medical officer of Ask The Doctor and a physician at Toronto’s Michael Garron Hospital.

But they decided not to move forward because they felt that the market had already become dominated by some major US players such as Doctor on Demand, and because e-consultations weren’t covered by many provinces. Instead, they’re sticking with their specialty, health advice without the ability to formally diagnose problems, write prescriptions or order tests. “We know that one-quarter to one-third of visits to doctors are for doctors to talk to patients about their medical problems, to explain something, review something,” Warner says. “Helping people understand what’s going on in their body is an important part of primary care.”

One would think that Warner’s other role would be more obvious, given his high profile nature over the last year. But this took some digging.

In a now deleted article, Michael Warner was set to become the head the virtual health company “Ask The Doctor” as Chief Medical Officer of Canadian Operations. There is also a mention in the March 21, 2016 entry on Owler. Of course, as lockdowns and free movement continue to be restricted, the value in virtual health care will grow. As such, it would be AGAINST Warner’s business interests to advocate for a full reopening.

Ask The Doctor does have a Twitter account going back to 2009. However, all but 1 tweet prior to March 2020 has been removed.

Warner states he worked (or works) for a virtual care company, but does not name it. The website does not list him anywhere, despite his high profile, and the above articles are some of the very few that mention him. Does he not want people knowing his ties with the Ask The Doctor Foundation?

Warner’s hospital, the Michael Garron Hospital (formerly Toronto East General) started the PPE drive in the Spring of 2020, asking for donations of surplus equipment. Ask The Doctor Foundation started one around the same time. Whose idea was it?

Ask The Doctor also uses the World War III rhetoric on its website, wording Warner has employed several times. Odd they are both so hyperbolic if there is no connection.

For the curious minded, copies of some of ATD Health Network’s corporate filings are available to read. However, they aren’t all that exciting.

In October 2015, Ask The Doctor acquired Sehat, the largest health platform in India. In November, they bought Patients Connected Ltd. as well. (Stormhaven erred in stating these were recent). In 2012, ATD partnered with the National Institute of Health to advance AI medical research.Without going too deep into it, Ask The Doctor is huge.

Warner lists his professional interests — except Ask The Doctor — which is bizarre. Also, has he cut ties with them, or is he still affiliated? Is he still their Chief Medical Officer?

With all of this in mind, there are 2 questions that need to be asked:
(a) Why does Michael Warner REALLY support continuous lockdowns?
(b) How come he is never challenged by the mainstream media?

March 30, 2021March 2, 2026

International — Or Global — Treaty For Pandemic Preparedness And Response Proposed

About 2 dozen world leaders have agreed, at least in principle, of setting up an international treaty to “deal with future pandemics”. Presumably, this would ultimately result in a World Government of sorts that could act in sweeping ways. But of course, it would all be done in the name of public health.

1. Important Links

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/op-ed—covid-19-shows-why-united-action-is-needed-for-more-robust-international-health-architecture
https://archive.is/pMWzw

(62.1) WHO International Health Regulations Legally Binding
(62.2) A Look At International Health Regulation Statements
(62.3) Quarantine Act Actually Written By WHO, IHR Changes
(62.4) Prov. Health Acts, Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR
(62.5) Prov. Health Acts, Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part II

2. Text Of Letter Agreed By National Leaders

The COVID-19 pandemic is the biggest challenge to the global community since the 1940s. At that time, following the devastation of two world wars, political leaders came together to forge the multilateral system. The aims were clear: to bring countries together, to dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and cooperation, namely peace, prosperity, health and security.

Today, we hold the same hope that as we fight to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic together, we can build a more robust international health architecture that will protect future generations. There will be other pandemics and other major health emergencies. No single government or multilateral agency can address this threat alone. The question is not if, but when. Together, we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly coordinated fashion. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a stark and painful reminder that nobody is safe until everyone is safe.

We are, therefore, committed to ensuring universal and equitable access to safe, efficacious and affordable vaccines, medicines and diagnostics for this and future pandemics. Immunization is a global public good and we will need to be able to develop, manufacture and deploy vaccines as quickly as possible.

This is why the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A) was set up in order to promote equal access to tests, treatments and vaccines and support health systems across the globe. ACT-A has delivered on many aspects but equitable access is not achieved yet. There is more we can do to promote global access.

To that end, we believe that nations should work together towards a new international treaty for pandemic preparedness and response.

Such a renewed collective commitment would be a milestone in stepping up pandemic preparedness at the highest political level. It would be rooted in the constitution of the World Health Organization, drawing in other relevant organizations key to this endeavour, in support of the principle of health for all. Existing global health instruments, especially the International Health Regulations, would underpin such a treaty, ensuring a firm and tested foundation on which we can build and improve.

The main goal of this treaty would be to foster an all-of-government and all-of-society approach, strengthening national, regional and global capacities and resilience to future pandemics. This includes greatly enhancing international cooperation to improve, for example, alert systems, data-sharing, research, and local, regional and global production and distribution of medical and public health counter measures, such as vaccines, medicines, diagnostics and personal protective equipment.

It would also include recognition of a “One Health” approach that connects the health of humans, animals and our planet. And such a treaty should lead to more mutual accountability and shared responsibility, transparency and cooperation within the international system and with its rules and norms.

To achieve this, we will work with Heads of State and governments globally and all stakeholders, including civil society and the private sector. We are convinced that it is our responsibility, as leaders of nations and international institutions, to ensure that the world learns the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic.

At a time when COVID-19 has exploited our weaknesses and divisions, we must seize this opportunity and come together as a global community for peaceful cooperation that extends beyond this crisis. Building our capacities and systems to do this will take time and require a sustained political, financial and societal commitment over many years.

Our solidarity in ensuring that the world is better prepared will be our legacy that protects our children and grandchildren and minimizes the impact of future pandemics on our economies and our societies.

Pandemic preparedness needs global leadership for a global health system fit for this millennium. To make this commitment a reality, we must be guided by solidarity, fairness, transparency, inclusiveness and equity.

Still think those “International Health Regulations” aren’t legally binding? Wrong, they will be used as the basis for asserting even more control. And it’s already largely done.

From the way things are going, it seems extremely unlikely that there will be any sort of referendum or democratic mandate to legitimize such a thing nationally.

When they say “coming together globally”, what does that really mean? Will there be a supra-national group to decide what sectors of the economy should be shut down? Will there be misinformation laws to punish or charge people for contradicting the narrative? Will they decide on mandatory vaccinations, or masks? What accountability, if any, will be in place?

3. Who Has Approved, At Least In Principle

Edi Rama, Prime Minister of Albania;
Sebastián Piñera, President of Chile;
Carlos Alvarado Quesada, President of Costa Rica;
J. V. Bainimarama, Prime Minister of Fiji;
Emmanuel Macron, President of France;
Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany;
Charles Michel, President of the European Council;
Kyriakos Mitsotakis, Prime Minister of Greece;
Joko Widodo, President of Indonesia;
Uhuru Kenyatta, President of Kenya;
Moon Jae-in, President of the Republic of Korea;
Mark Rutte, Prime Minister of the Netherlands;
Erna Solberg, Prime Miniser of Norway;
António Luís Santos da Costa, Prime Minister of Portugal;
Klaus Iohannis, President of Romania;
Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda;
Macky Sall, President of Senegal;
Aleksandar Vučić, President of Serbia;
Cyril Ramaphosa, President of South Africa;
Pedro Sánchez, Prime Minister of Spain;
Prayut Chan-o-cha, Prime Minister of Thailand;
Keith Rowley, Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago;
Kais Saied, President of Tunisia;
Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine;
Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom;
Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization.

Sure, Canada isn’t on that list — yet. However, there is certainly nothing to indicate that we won’t be forced to go along at some point. The people running this country aren’t exactly huge supporters of free speech.

March 17, 2021March 2, 2026

Call-In Centers Are Wrongly Telling People “Vaccines” Were Approved

Mass vaccination centers have opened across Canada. The goal is to inject largely untested substances into people, under the pretense of a public health emergency. Now, these aren’t really “vaccines”, but are gene-replacement therapy, and 99% of people don’t need them, but that’s another story. This is to get into the misrepresentation that is going on with the call in centers set up.

1. “Vaccines” Not Health Canada Approved

Before going any further, it is time to distinguish between 2 completely different ways medical devices and substances can be advanced.

INTERIM AUTHORIZATION — deemed to be “worth the risk” under the circumstances, doesn’t have to be fully tested. Allowed under Section 30.1 of the Canada Food & Drug Act. Also known as emergency authorization.
APPROVED — Health Canada has fully reviewed all the testing, and steps have been done, with the final determination that it can be used for the general population.

To be approved means that this thing has been rigorously tested, and has passed all safety measures, and that it has rigorously been examined. This is not what happened here.

Instead, these “vaccines” were given interim authorization, because the Government has decided that it’s worth releasing it to the general public, and finishing the testing later. This is allowed under Section 30.1 of the Canada Food & Drug Act, and an Interim Order was signed by Patty Hajdu.

https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/janssen-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-pm-en.pdf
https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-pm1-en.pdf

Think this is an exaggeration? Take a look at the paperwork available from Health Canada. Not once do they refer to them as approved. Instead, they are “authorized under an Interim Order”. These are not the same thing, and cannot be used interchangeably.

2. Recordings From Booking Centers

Fraser Health Booking

Interior Health Booking

Island Health Booking

Northern Health Booking

Vancouver Health Booking

Saskatchewan Booking

Manitoba Booking

Ontario Booking

In each inquiry made, the person on the other end conflated “approved” with an “interim or temporary authorization”. Now, it possible — even likely — that they don’t know the difference and are not attempting to deceive. But the result is the same. Average citizens call in, and won’t know the difference.

Pardon the less than stellar quality. Speaker phones aren’t the best for this sort of thing.

The 5 recordings here are from each of the 5 health zones in BC. But surely, this is going on elsewhere as well. People don’t ask the necessary questions.

3. Calls To Various Government Lines

Health Canada

Public Health Agency of Canada (Their # anyway)

811 Phone Support In BC

Manitoba Health Services

The people booking not seem to know. Not only that, various Government bodies apparently don’t have a clue either. Not very reassuring.

4. Trudeau’s Two-Faced Claims

Here, we get the standard answer of “Health Canada tests and insures the safety of all vaccines that are APPROVED”. While this sounds fine on the surface, these were never approved, they were given interim authorization. The Government hopes you won’t know the difference.

March 6, 2021September 4, 2022

CV #9: A Look At Money Sunk Into Paying For Vaccines, Research

On August 1, 2020, the Canadian Government, or rather taxpayers, handed out over $240,000 to conduct research which included the study of the issues surrounding MANDATORY vaccines. Yes, that was apparently worth paying for a study. Now, let’s see what else the public’s money has been spent on.

1. Grants To Develop CV Vaccines In Canada

NAME	DATE	AMOUNT
Alberta Research Chemicals Inc.	Jul. 1, 2020	$36,000
Archambault, Denis	Jun. 1, 2020	$622,782
Barr, Stephen D	Apr. 1, 2020	$998,840
Bell, John C	Jun. 1, 2020	$1,936,150
Biodextris Inc.	Sep. 24, 2020	$1,307,678
BioVectra Inc.	Sep. 4, 2020	$5,412,045
Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness	Aug. 4, 2020	$40,000,000
Entos Pharmaceuticals Inc.	May 1, 2020	$100,000
Entos Pharmaceuticals Inc.	Sep. 1, 2020	$5,000,000
Falzarano, Darryl	Feb. 1, 2020	$999,793
Falzarano, Darryl	Jun. 1, 2020	$1,459,325
Grant, Michael D	Sep. 1, 2020	$497,175
Halperin, Scott A	Aug. 1, 2020	$240,731
Halperin, Scott A	Sep. 1, 2020	$3,516,000
Houghton, Michael	Apr. 1, 2020	$600,000
Immunovaccine Technologies Inc.	Apr. 1, 2020	$378,239
Immunovaccine Technologies Inc.	Apr. 1, 2020	$636,596
Immunovaccine Technologies Inc.	Sep. 17, 2020	$1,000,000
Kobinger, Gary P	Feb. 1, 2020	$999,356
Leclerc, Denis	Feb. 1, 2020	$717,645
Les biotechnologies Ulysse inc	Jun. 22, 2020	$30,000
Lewis, John D	Jun. 1, 2020	$4,175,000
Liu, Jun	Jun. 1, 2020	$416,483
McGill University (Academia)	Nov. 6, 2020	$160,198
Medicago inc.	Oct. 18, 2020	$173,000,000
Novocol Pharmaceutical of Canada	Sep. 8, 2020	$500,000
PharmAchieve Corporation. Ltd.	Apr. 1, 2020	$49,920
Pharma Glycovax Inc	Aug. 31, 2020	$3,978,832
Precision NanoSystems Inc.	Oct. 9, 2020	$18,203,000
Providence Therapeutics Holdings	Sep. 1, 2020	$4,700,000
Resilience Biotechnologies Inc.	Nov. 1, 2020	$2,103,150
Richardson, Christopher D	Jun. 1, 2020	$138,097
Symvivo Corporation	Sep. 4, 2020	$2,821,081
Watts, Tania H	Jun. 1, 2020	$1,329,250
University of Saskatchewan	Jul. 7, 2020	$23,000,000
Xing, Zhou	Jun. 1, 2020	$1,920,985
Yao, Xiao-Jian	Apr. 1, 2020	$326,578

This came from a quick search of Federal donations, “Vaccine + Covid”. A lot of money was spent already, for many different parties.

2. Other Grants Funding Vaccines/Research

NAME	DATE	AMOUNT
Adventist Development and Relief Agency	Mar. 30, 2020	$3,500,000
Brockman, Mark A	Dec. 1, 2011	$1,419,901
CARE Canada	May 29, 2019	$2,000,000
Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance	Mar. 28, 2014	$20,000,000
Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance	Sep. 17, 2015	$500,000,000
IDRC	Feb. 17, 2015	$3,000,000
Immuno Vaccine Technologies	Sep. 15, 2011	$2,944,000
Immuno Vaccine Technologies	Oct. 6, 2008	$3,000,000
Int’l Development Research Centre	Sep. 29, 2015	$9,000,000
International Rescue Committee	Jun. 12, 2019	$2,600,000
Kobinger, Gary P	Apr. 1, 2017	$3,997,503
Loeb, Mark B	Oct. 1, 2012	$2,864,660
Loeb, Mark B	Jul. 1, 2016	$8,310,463
Medicago inc.	May 13, 2015	$8,000,000
Medicago Inc.	Jan. 1, 2019	$2,515,000
Novartis Animal Health Canada Inc.	Nov. 1, 2006	$1,836,921
Novartis Animal Health Canada Inc.	Nov. 7, 2008	$1,747,458
Ogilvie, Gina S	Apr. 1, 2019	$10,090,731
Ostrowski, Mario A	Dec. 1, 2011	$1,415,432
UNICEF	Sep. 4, 2020	$2,500,000
University of Saskatchewan	Feb. 16, 2018	$3,609,771
University of Saskatchewan	Mar. 23, 2018	$15,609,771
University of Saskatchewan (VIDO)	Oct. 2, 2007	$49,000,000
WHO – World Health Organization	Mar. 31, 2015	$20,000,000
WHO – World Health Organization	Nov. 13, 2019	$2,000,000
Xing, Zhou	Jul. 1, 2017	$2,462,740

This is by no means all of them, but are some of the bigger grants flagged by searching “vaccines” on the Government of Canada website.

3. NSERC/CIHR/SSHRC Research Grants

NSERC, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, has also handed out hundreds of grants over the last year regarding “Covid research”. It’s available for all to see.

CIHR, the Canadian Institutes for Health Research, has also listed the grants they they will be handing out. As of August 8, 2020, it was listed at $111 million.

SSHRC, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, also has a website detailing information about its grants and spending.

4. Who Needs Science-Based Policy Anyway?

This is BC Provincial Health Officer, Bonnie Henry. Despite repeated admissions like this, the local media fawns over her, refusing to ask difficult questions. This is the unelected dictator of the Province, that all parties agreed to abdicate their responsibilities to. And this is what BC promotes as “safety“.

Category: Health

Public Health Agency Of Canada Created As Branch Of WHO; Bill C-12 PHAC Act

1. Timeline: PHAC Act/Quarantine Act/IHR 3rd Ed