Institute For Strategic Dialogue (ISD): Government Sponsored Group Combatting “Misinformation”

Ever get the impression that Governments are colluding with social media and NGOs in a program of counter-intelligence? Ever think that there may be a coordinated effort to keep the general public oblivious to what’s really going on in the world? Turns out, there may be something to that.

Credit where it’s due: Stormhaven Media previously addressed the ISD, and some of its nefarious connections. Go check that out for more context.

The Canadian Government briefly mentions the work done by ISD in their group: Rapid Response Mechanism Canada (RRM Canada). This was related to foreign interference during and leading up to the 2019 European Union Parliamentary Elections. ISD is specifically listed in footnote #3.

On that page, there was also concern that anti-abortion sentiments were rising as a result of the language used. In short, calling things what they were amounted to resistance to the pro-death agenga. Also, Ottawa seemed to realize that people were getting wise to globalism and to the prospects of a Muslim takeover. Having a narrative shift makes it harder to sell Government policies.

A program run by Public Service Canada involved implementing the agenda of preventing violent extremism into Canadian schools. Parents, did you know about this?

Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD)
This project builds on a long-standing international program, first launched in 2015 through support from Public Safety Canada, designed to give young people the resources to challenge violent extremism in all its forms. Extreme Dialogue is a free resource designed to be delivered by teachers, youth practitioners, external facilitators (including social services and police), or young people themselves, by using films and supporting curriculum materials to learn about the true stories of those affected by violent extremism.
.
This new investment will support bringing the program to approximately 2,000 students between the ages of 14-20 in eight different francophone high schools and CEGEP/colleges in Quebec, and will deliver new and adapted education material and workshops for students, delivered by teachers and practitioners. Teachers and practitioners will be equipped through training delivered by the Centre for the Prevention of Radicalization Leading to Violence (CPRLV).
.
Ultimately, this project aims to build resilience to radicalization leading to violence in youth by providing them with the knowledge, skills and values needed not only to openly discuss, but to also challenge extremism in schools and other settings within their community.

Did parents know that the Federal Government was implementing into their schools the same kind of training that is given to those “peaceful groups” to ensure they don’t commit mass murder? Maybe not letting such people into Canada in the first place would have been a better idea. Perhaps this is done to subconsciously shift the public opinion that this sort of thing should be considered normal. But then, objecting to the forced integration of vastly different groups is probably racist, or something.

Canada also has a Cross-Cultural Roundtable on Security, or CCRS, It’s chaired by Amarnath Amarasingam, a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue

In 2013, Public Safety Canada gave ISD $24,372.98 in a sole-sourced contract to “counter violent extremism”. However, the details of this contract were extremely sparse, so we are left to guess about what it actually involved.

Last year, Canadian taxpayers forked over nearly $400,000 to this “independent” group. Seems like an unproductive use of money. But then, it’s hardly the only time we’ve financed our own brainwashing. See the links at the bottom for worse examples of this.

It’s a registered tax-exempt organization in the United States, so more information about its finances is available from the Internal Revenue Service.

Of course, it’s hardly just the Canadian Government (or rather, taxpayers) who are financing this organization. Looking through their website, it’s easy to find the full list of donors and partners. And wow, what a list of organizations this is.

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue US (ISD US) is a non-political, not-for-profit corporation registered in the District of Columbia with 501(c)(3) status. It was formed with Articles of Incorporation on 19 August 2009. Whilst the two entities are legally separate, a majority of Board members sit on both boards so that decisions can be taken collectively. You can search for ISD US using tax identification number 27-1282489.

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue gGmbH (ISD Germany) is registered with the companies’ registrar in Berlin, registration AG Berlin-Charlottenburg HRB 207 328B. It was formed on 19 February 2019 with a Deed and Articles of Association and began operations in 2020. The Managing Directors are Huberta von Voss and Sarah Kennedy.

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue France (ISD France) is a legal entity under the status of Association de loi 1901, a status granted to not-for-profit organisations across a range of sectors.

PARTNERS
INSTITUTIONAL PARTNERS

  • Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
  • ARENA @ Johns Hopkins University
  • Cardiff University
  • Centre for the Analysis of Social Media (CASM)
  • Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
  • Deakin University
  • Demos
  • Fair Fight Action
  • Geneva Center for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
  • German Marshall Fund Alliance for Securing Democracy
  • Global Center on Cooperative Security
  • Global Counterterrorism Forum (GCTF)
  • Global Disinformation Index
  • Hans-Bredow Institute
  • Harvard Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society
  • Institut Montaigne
  • Institute for Economics and Peace
  • McCain Institute
  • MIT Media Cloud
  • Ontario Tech University
  • Sussex University Computer Science Department
  • United Nations Counter Terrorism Executive Directorate (UNCTED)
  • Victoria University
  • West Asia-North Africa (WANA) Institute

FUNDERS (2018-PRESENT)

  • Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  • British Council
  • Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)
  • Europäisches Forum Alpbach
  • Gemeinnützige Hertie Stiftung
  • Gen Next Foundation
  • Hirondelle Foundation
  • International Republican Institute (IRI)
  • Mercator Stiftung Germany
  • Mercator Stiftung Switzerland
  • National Democratic Institute
  • Omidyar Group
  • Open Society Foundations
  • Robert Bosch Stiftung
  • United States Institute for Peace

Governments & Multilateral Organisations

  • Australia Department of Foreign Affairs and trade (DFAT)
  • Australian Department for Home Affairs
  • Centre for Research and Evidence on Security Threats (CREST)
  • Council of Europe
  • Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  • Danish Ministry of Immigration and Integration
  • Department of Premier & Cabinet, Victoria, Australia
  • Dutch Ministry for Foreign Affairs
  • Dutch Ministry of the Interior
  • European Commission
  • Finnish Interior Ministry
  • German Federal Agency for Civic Engagement
  • German Federal Foreign Office (Auswaertiges-Amt)
  • German Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV)
  • Global Affairs Canada
  • Global Coalition to Defeat Daesh/ISIS
  • International Organization for Migration (IOM)
  • London Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC)
  • Ministry of Justice and Security, The Netherlands
  • New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs (DIA)
  • Norwegian Ministry of Children & Families (MCF)
  • Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  • Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security
  • Public Safety Canada
  • Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB)
  • Swedish Ministry of Integration
  • Swedish Ministry of Justice
  • Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA)
  • UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO)
  • UK Home Office
  • UN Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT)
  • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
  • US Department for Homeland Security (DHS)
  • US State Department

Private Sector

  • Audible
  • Facebook
  • GIFCT
  • Google
  • Google.org
  • Jigsaw
  • Microsoft
  • YouTube

Now, just because the Institute for Strategic Dialogue is financed by numerous Western Governments, social media companies, think tanks, and NGOs like the Open Society and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, there’s no reason to be concerned. It’s not like there is any ideology that prevents truth and objective analysis from being published.

It’s hardly surprising that the International Organization for Migration (IOM), and the Open Society are claiming that racism and hate are on the rise. When NGOs are pushing open borders policies, it tends to provoke considerable backlash.

ISD lists conditions it imposes for any donations that are offered. While they sound fine on the surface, it needs to be said that it will only take money from groups who are on board with its ideology.

(1) The funder demonstrates respect for and adherence to universal human rights, freedom of speech, democracy and the rule of law, and does not support or condone extremism or terrorism
(2) The funder does not conduct activities or implement policies that promote violence, hatred or prejudice on the basis of gender, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, age or disability, and does not seek to deflect criticism from their involvement in any of the above by funding ISD
(3) The funding will help to challenge extremism, polarisation and disinformation and will support ISD in its pursuit of its charitable objectives
(4) The funder does not attempt to influence ISD’s objectives, policies or decisions, and the funding does not pose a risk to ISD’s independence, either explicitly or implicitly
(5) The funding does not pose a risk of harm to ISD’s reputation, staff, partners or beneficiaries

If one questions of the replacement agenda is real (getting rid of whites in the West), the climate change narrative, the pandemic fear-porn, or censorship in general, ISD will not take money. Rather than foster any true debate or research, it seems that all this group wants is an echo chamber.

Never forget, the Canadian Government has openly talked about passing laws to combat what they call “pandemic misinformation”. While that may be a hard sell, this may be the next best thing, from their perspective.

Now, let’s see the ISD findings in action. Let’s see some fairly mainstream coverage which references the work ISD does. Surely, it will be fully transparent in all of this.

Irish far-right groups have been exploiting online loopholes and using encrypted and largely unmoderated social media sites and messaging apps to mobilise and spread messages of hate throughout the Covid-19 pandemic.
.
That’s according to research carried out by the Institute of Strategic Dialogue (ISD), an independent global organisation dedicated to powering solutions to extremism, hate, and disinformation.
.
The study showed that the number of channels and messages created and sent by Irish users of the encrypted messaging app Telegram has increased rapidly, with just 800 messages sent in 2019 compared with over 60,000 this past January.

As just one example of propaganda, the Irish Examiner refers to the ISD as an “independent” organization. Any due diligence would have found out who really funds this group. Pretty hard to be independent when Governments and interested parties are paying the bills.

It’s entirely possible this omission was due to sloppy writing. However, it appears far more likely that this author simply chose to ignore the truth about the ISD, in an attempt to mislead and deceive readers. Looking at his LinkedIn profile suggests willful omissions, as he has a Masters in journalism. He probably should have stuck with being an English teacher.

Don’t worry, the Government is isn’t involved in gaslighting, brainwashing, or otherwise dumbing down the population in order for them to be more compliant. Politicians don’t really get their hands dirty like this. They just pay other people to do it.

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://www.isdglobal.org/
(2) https://www.international.gc.ca/gac-amc/publications/rrm-mrr/european-elections-europeennes.aspx?lang=eng
(3) Open data analysis – European Parliamentary Elections_ Comprehensive Report
(4) https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/bt/cc/fpd-en.aspx
(5) https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/ntnl-scrt/crss-cltrl-rndtbl/mbrs-en.aspx
(6) Members of the Cross-Cultural Roundtable on Security
(7) ISD Funding Project Descriptions
(8) https://www.securitepublique.gc.ca/cnt/trnsprnc/cntrcts/dtls-en.aspx?id=3462
(9) ISD Disclosure of Contracts Over $10,000
(10) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(11) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/?sort=score%20desc&page=1&search_text=institute%20for%20strategic%20dialogue
(12) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/allSearch
(13) https://www.isdglobal.org/partnerships-and-funders/
(14) Partnerships and Funders – Institute For Strategic Dialogue
(15) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-misinformation-disinformation-law-1.5532325
(16) https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40745154.html
(17) Irish far right groups flocking to encrypted and unmoderated social media sites
(18) https://www.linkedin.com/in/steven-heaney-28bbb9114/
(19) Steven Heaney _ LinkedIn

RESOURCES FOR MEDIA ACTING AS COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/media-subsidies-to-counter-online-misinformation-groups-led-by-political-operatives/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/taxpayer-grants-to-fight-misinformation-in-media-including-more-pandemic-bucks/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/counter-intelligence-firms-to-influence-elections-canada-and-abroad-registered-as-charities/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/more-pandemic-bucks-for-disinformation-prevention-locally-and-abroad-civix/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/disinfowatch-ties-to-atlas-network-connected-to-lpc-political-operatives/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/phac-supporting-science-up-first-online-counter-misinformation-group/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/rockefeller-spends-13-5-million-to-combat-misinformation-in-u-s-elsewhere/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/poynter-self-claimed-factchecking-group-funded-by-media-giants/
(I) https://canucklaw.ca/journalism-trust-initiative-trusted-news-initiative-project-origin-the-trust-project/
(J) https://canucklaw.ca/coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity-c2pa-project-origin-content-authenticity-initiative/
(K) https://canucklaw.ca/public-media-alliance-brussels-declaration-protecting-journalists-media-freedom/

EVEN MORE MEDIA SUBSIDIES
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/media-1-unifor-denies-crawling-into-bed-with-government/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/media-in-canada-obedient-to-govt-covid-narrative-largely-because-of-subsidies/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-subsidies-connections-may-explain-lack-of-interest-in-real-journalism/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-gets-next-round-of-pandemic-bucks-from-taxpayers-in-2021/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/nordstar-capital-torstar-corp-metroland-media-group-more-subsidies-pandemic-bucks/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/aberdeen-publishing-sells-out-takes-those-pandemic-bucks-to-push-narrative/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/many-other-periodicals-receiving-the-pandemic-bucks-in-order-to-push-the-narrative/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-37i-tri-city-news-pulls-article-where-bonnie-henry-admits-false-positives-could-overwhelm-system/

B.C. Health Care (Consent) And Care Facility (Admissions) Act Of 1996

With the looming vaccine passports in B.C. (and elsewhere), a good piece of legislation to know is the B.C. Health Care (Consent) And Care Facility (Admissions) Act Of 1996. It doesn’t really require much commentary, as the quoted passages are pretty self explanatory.

Part 2 — Consent to Health Care
.
Consent rights
4 Every adult who is capable of giving or refusing consent to health care has
(a) the right to give consent or to refuse consent on any grounds, including moral or religious grounds, even if the refusal will result in death,
(b) the right to select a particular form of available health care on any grounds, including moral or religious grounds,
(c) the right to revoke consent,
(d) the right to expect that a decision to give, refuse or revoke consent will be respected, and
(e) the right to be involved to the greatest degree possible in all case planning and decision making.

General rule — consent needed
5 (1) A health care provider must not provide any health care to an adult without the adult’s consent except under sections 11 to 15.
.
(2) A health care provider must not seek a decision about whether to give or refuse substitute consent to health care under section 11, 14 or 15 unless he or she has made every reasonable effort to obtain a decision from the adult.

Elements of consent
.
6 An adult consents to health care if
(a) the consent relates to the proposed health care,
(b) the consent is given voluntarily,
(c) the consent is not obtained by fraud or misrepresentation,
(d) the adult is capable of making a decision about whether to give or refuse consent to the proposed health care,
(e) the health care provider gives the adult the information a reasonable person would require to understand the proposed health care and to make a decision, including information about
(i) the condition for which the health care is proposed,
(ii) the nature of the proposed health care,
(iii) the risks and benefits of the proposed health care that a reasonable person would expect to be told about, and
(iv) alternative courses of health care, and
(f) the adult has an opportunity to ask questions and receive answers about the proposed health care.

How incapability is determined
7 When deciding whether an adult is incapable of giving, refusing or revoking consent to health care, a health care provider must base the decision on whether or not the adult demonstrates that he or she understands
(a) the information given by the health care provider under section 6 (e), and
(b) that the information applies to the situation of the adult for whom the health care is proposed.

No emergency health care contrary to wishes
12.1 A health care provider must not provide health care under section 12 if the health care provider has reasonable grounds to believe that the person, while capable and after attaining 19 years of age, expressed an instruction or wish applicable to the circumstances to refuse consent to the health care.

However, depending on how malicious the higher ups may be, there are sections that could be twisted and perverted to force certain types of health care. That being said, the whole issue of consent seems pretty clear cut.

Threatening someone’s livelihood, finances, or general freedoms in order to obtain consent amounts to coercion. And that is exactly what forced “vaccines” and tests do. And yes, this has been brought up many times, but these aren’t even approved by Health Canada. They have interim authorization. Considering the emergency declaration was cancelled in Ontario and B.C., this should actually be illegal.

Also check out the Ontario Health Care Consent Act of 1996. So-called medical professionals aren’t allowed to do anything to you if you don’t give voluntary and informed consent.

(1) https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96181_01#part2
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/ontario-health-care-consent-act-of-1996-fyi-for-vaccines-or-tests/
(3) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(4) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/janssen-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(5) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-pm-en.pdf
(6) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-pm1-en.pdf
(7) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-27/page-9.html#docCont
(8) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/interim-order-import-sale-advertising-drugs.html#a2.3

“Inside The Ontario Science Table” Now Available Online

Inside The Ontario Science Table: The “Independent” Group Pulling Ford’s Strings, is now available both in paperback, and as an ebook. It builds off of the last one, and as the name implies, there is a heavy focus on that one Province. Of course, Twenty Twenty-One is still there as well, and covers a lot of topics related to this so-called “pandemic”.

A lot of work has gone into both of these, so please support independent research. Thank you.

Other coverage on the site continues.

(1) https://www.amazon.ca/B09BCNP48J
(2) https://www.amazon.ca/B095Y515XK

Bit Of History: WHO Wrote Paper On “Implied Consent” For Vaccinations In 2014

Several years ago, the World Health Organization published a paper on various levels of “consent” required for vaccinating children. It also introduces the idea of “implied consent for children”. Apparently, just going to school after a notice has been given will suffice.

Approaches to obtain informed consent:

  • 1. Written consent
  • 2. Verbal consent
  • 3. Implied consent

It’s the third type that is the most nefarious.

3. An implied consent process by which parents are informed of imminent vaccination through social mobilization and communication, sometimes including letters directly addressed to the parents. Subsequently, the physical presence of the child or adolescent, with or without an accompanying parent at the vaccination session, is considered to imply consent. This practice is based on the opt-out principle and parents who do not consent to vaccination are expected implicitly to take steps to ensure that their child or adolescent does not participate in the vaccination session. This may include not letting the child or adolescent attend school on a vaccination day, if vaccine delivery occurs through schools.

Implied consent procedures are common practice in many countries. However, when children present for vaccination unaccompanied by their parents, it is challenging to determine whether parents indeed provided consent. Therefore, countries are encouraged to adopt procedures that ensure that parents have been informed and agreed to the vaccination. Comprehensive data on whether the approach countries use to deal with consent has changed or evolved over the last decades is not available.

Based on concepts of vaccines as a public good, or on public-health goals of disease elimination and outbreak control, some countries identify one or more vaccines as mandatory in law, or in their policies. Vaccination may, for example, be made a condition for entry into preschool or primary school, or to enable access to welfare benefits. Whether consent is needed for mandatory vaccination depends on the legal nature of the regulations. When mandatory vaccination is established in relevant provisions in law, consent may not be required. If the mandatory nature of vaccination is based on policy, or other forms of soft law, informed consent needs to be obtained as for any other vaccines. Some countries allow individuals to express non-consent (opt-out) and obtain an exemption for mandatory vaccines. This may come with certain conditions, like barring unvaccinated children from attending school during disease outbreaks

Have to cringe at how getting informed consent, or having the parents involved, is seen as an inconvenience. Then again, many concerned parents would put a stop to such things.

(1) https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/policies_strategies/consent_note_en.pdf
(2) WHO Schools And Implied Not Direct Consent
(3) https://www.sott.net/article/424625-WHO-now-says-your-childs-presence-in-school-counts-as-informed-consent-for-vaccination-parental-presence-not-required

B.C. Liberals Are Complicit In Propping Up Horgan/Henry Tyranny (Just The Audio)

This is a shorter piece that just focuses on the audio. Readers familiar with the “pandemic” subject will instantly know what is bein talked about. This is MLA Milobar. He doesn’t even pretend to oppose the tyranny imposed by John Horgan, Adrian Dix, Mike Farnworth, or Bonnie Henry.

The expanded version is here. So is earlier coverage of the October 2020 election, and trolling Sadie Hunter afterwards. Notice, no mention in the platform that they object to any of this. Does it look like people in this Province have any legitimate political options? Are there options anywhere?

In fairness, the B.C. Green Party doesn’t get a pass. They signed onto this with the previous NDP-Green Coalition Government.

A serious question to readers: has anyone else gotten this kind of spin, even of you live in another Province? If so, please share your story, and a tape (if you have one).

Centre For Effective Practice, Yet Another OST “Partner” That Stands To Profit From Lockdowns

The Centre for Effective Practice, or CEP, is another “partner” of the Ontario Science Table. The OST apparently does the thinking for Doug Ford and Christine Elliott.

Unsurprisingly, CEP was established as part of the University of Toronto in 2004. They list their services as: research & evaluation, clinical tools and digitization, education programs, and engagement & communication.

CEP also provides a set of key talking points that doctors and other health care providers are to parrot concerning these “vaccines” now available in Canada. The goal isn’t to address legitimate concerns, but rather, to appear to be addressing them.

COVID-19 vaccine authorization
Health Canada has authorized a number of COVID-19 vaccines for use in Canada after a thorough and rigorous review of the evidence to ensure the vaccines meet the standards of safety, quality and efficacy for authorization in Canada. Health Canada will continue to monitor the safety of the vaccines after they are available.

Key messages
Lead by example. Get the COVID-19 vaccine yourself as soon as it is offered to you to protect yourself, your patients, and your community.
Advise patients to receive the vaccine. Communication by trusted health professionals about the importance of vaccines is the most effective way to counter vaccine hesitancy. Tell your patients you will get or have already received the vaccine.
-Be an educator. Be prepared to answer patient questions and address concerns about the vaccine.

Vaccine summary
Efficacy against severe disease and hospitalization
-All of the approved vaccines have a high efficacy rate against severe disease. In the clinical trials, efficacy against severe disease was shown to be:

Pfizer: 75-100% (after dose 2)
Moderna: 100% (14 days after dose 2)
AstraZeneca: 100% (after dose 2)
Janssen: 85.4% (28 days after dose)

First, whether by accident, or by design, CEP is blurring the line between “approved” vaccines, and ones given “interim authorization”. To clarify, these are not approved. Section 30.1 of the Canada Food & Drug Act allows the Health Minister to sign an Interim Order, allowing them on the market anyway.

(a) 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
(b) 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. Commonly referred to as an emergency use authorization.

Have a look at the Interim Order, particularly Section 5. Getting authorization isn’t exactly a difficult burden to meet.

Second, an astute person will notice the sleight-of-hand here. These so-called vaccines were “authorized” by Health Canada, however “approved” ones will be rigorously tested. This is an indirect way of saying that these weren’t actually subjected to such testing.

Third, these aren’t really vaccines. Gene replacement therapy would be a more accurate description of the mRNA substances that Pfizer and Moderna produced.

Fourth, it doesn’t say that these gene-replacement “vaccines” will prevent a virus. Instead, it touts efficacy against severe disease and hospitalization. In other words, symptom management.

Fifth, it is explicitly stated that people will rely on your opinion in order to make the decision. While it’s also stated to answer questions, this passage is full of misrepresentations.

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

Instead of taking word of someone on the internet, it’s probably best to read the product inserts for yourself. Above are the documents provided by Health Canada. Notice, that nowhere do they say “approved” in the documentation.

However, CEP doesn’t provide the actual Health Canada documents. They do other an AstraZeneca summary and a comparison paper, but not the original source materials

Now, why why CEP, the Centre for Effective Practice, be such a blatant shill in the name of big pharma? When you look at their donors and collaborators, things start to make a lot of sense.

Some of CEP’s financial contributors, associates are worth a closer look:

  1. Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario
  2. eHealth Centre of Excellence
  3. Healthcare Excellence Canada
  4. OntarioMD

Could it be that CEP, and its partners and donors support continued lockdowns and restrictions in Ontario, (and elsewhere), at least partially because it’s good for business? Let’s take a look into some of these groups.

We Are The Advocate, Network And Resource For Team-Based Primary Care In Ontario
The Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario (AFHTO) works to support the implementation and growth of primary care teams by promoting best practices, sharing lessons learned, and advocating on behalf of all primary care teams. Evidence and experience show that team-based comprehensive primary care is delivering better health and better value to patients.
.
AFHTO is a not-for-profit association representing Ontario’s primary health care teams, which include Family Health Teams (FHTs), Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics (NPLCs) and others who provide interprofessional comprehensive primary care.
.
Working towards a common vision
Our members share the compelling vision that one day, all Ontarians will have timely access to high-quality and comprehensive primary care; care that is:
.
Informed by the social determinants of health – the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age
Delivered by the right mix of health professionals, working in collaborative teams in partnership with patients, caregivers and the community
.
Anchored in an integrated and equitable health system, promoting good health and seamless care for all patients
Sustainable – efficiently delivered and appropriately resourced to achieve expected outcomes

AFHTO works with and on behalf of members to:
.
Provide leadership to promote expansion of high-quality, comprehensive, well-integrated interprofessional primary care for the benefit of all Ontarians, and
Be their advocate, champion, network and resource to support them in improving and delivering optimal interprofessional care

The Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario is essentially a lobbying group, for the unmbrella of health care workers. That’s what this word salad means. AFTHO also is quite partisan in their efforts, and are pushing for the virtual care model of health, a large part of their online content covers that.

AFHTO is also demanding Ford impose a stay-at-home order. This is a conflict of interest since they are also promoting the “solution”: more access to online health services.

The eHealth Centre of Excellence is another online medical service that offers e-prescribing, referrals, and consults with specialists. As continued lockdowns make physical movement more tricky, this enterprise will surely grow. Also, as the physical and mental health of people wears down, it will artificially generate more business.

Healthcare Excellence Canada acts as a cross between a health care consultant, and an continuing education provided. They also donate to CEP, and their business model is expected to grow. Also, if you wish to take their Executive Training Program, it’s only $2,500 to enroll. What a deal!

OntarioMD offers a variety of services, such as digital health services, which can be bundled together. There’s also eConsulting, which aims to connect patients to specialists quicker. There’s also a Health Medical Upgrade, which is a way of digitizing, storing, and moving records. As physical appearances in health care settings are replaced, the demand for this will grow.

It’s worth pointing out that OntarioMD is not the only party to benefit from this arrangement. Additionally, it means increased business for its vendors, who will also see the rewards. Some of these names should be familiar.

To circle back to the start of the article: what is the real reason that the Centre for Effective Practice, (an Ontario Science Table partner), is so on board with restrictions to liberty? Or, are these connections just coincidental, and completely unrelated?

Don’t worry, CEP has their “talking points” for people who may be concerned about getting experimental shots of who knows what.

CEP_21-015_Provider-Guide_Moderna_r5
CEP AstraZeneca Information Propaganda
CEP Vaccine Comparison Sheet Propaganda

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://cep.health/
(2) https://cep.health/toolkit/covid-19-resource-centre/
(3) https://tools.cep.health/tool/covid-19-vaccines/
(4) https://tools.cep.health/tool/covid-19-vaccine-staging-environment/
(5) https://tools.cep.health/tool/virtual-management-of-chronic-conditions-during-covid-19/
(6) https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/our-partners/
(7) https://twitter.com/Roman_Baber/status/1386788379669508103
(8) Ontario Science Table 01 Behaviour Control Techniques April 22 2021
(9) Ontario Science Table 02 Vaccine Confidence March 5 2021
(10) Ontario Science Table 03 Learning From Israel Feb 1 2021
(11) Ontario Science Table 04 Putting In Harsher Restrictions Oct 15 2021
(12) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-27/page-8.html#h-234517
(13) Patty Hajdu’s September 16 Interim Order
(14) CEP AstraZeneca Information Propaganda
(15) CEP Vaccine Comparison Sheet Propaganda
(16) https://www.afhto.ca/
(17) https://www.afhto.ca/afhtos-role-supporting-team-based-care/about-afhto
(18) https://www.afhto.ca/news-events/news/ontario-needs-stay-home-order
(19) AFHTO Shift To Virtual Health Care
(20) https://ehealthce.ca/Our-Team.htm
(21) https://healthcareexcellence.ca/
(22) Health Care Excellence Executive Training Class
(23) https://www.ontariomd.ca/
(24) https://www.ontariomd.ca/about-us/our-organization/our-partners

EARLIER IN THIS SERIES
(a) Michael Warner Financially Benefits From Prolonged Lockdowns
(b) Who Is Ontario Deputy Medical Officer, Barbara Yaffe?
(c) OST, Monopoly From The University Of Toronto Connected
(d) OST, University Of Toronto, Look At Their Members And Partners
(e) OST’s Robert Steiner Claims To Be Behind PHAC Canada Creation
(f) OST’s Kwame McKenzie Headed 2017 UBI Pilot Project
(g) OST UofT Prelude Actually Set Out In May 2019
(h) OST’s Murty Has Tech Firm That Benefits From Lockdowns
(i) Como Foundation Gives Trillium Health Partners $5M
(j) Current PHO Officials Also Sitting On Ontario Science Table
(k) Canadian Agency For Drugs & Technologies In Health; pCPA