Another Toronto Court Challenge, But Will This One Actually Go Anywhere?

There was an online announcement of a Notice of Application filed in the Toronto Branch of Ontario Superior Court, Civil Division. Predictably, it caused a buzz in the alternative media. Several commented that it was disappointing the mainstream outlets chose not to cover it.

While that is a valid point, there is another one to raise: how come other complaints have dropped off of people’s radars? There was one filed in October 2019 that is collecting dust 18 months later. There is also a high profile suit filed July 2020 with no defenses submitted almost a year later. True, there was a temporary moratorium on filing deadlines, but that lapsed September 14, 2020. There doesn’t appear to have been any attempt to either force that case ahead, or seek default judgement.

The average person may not know this, but it’s quite easy to search for a case in Ontario and see what progress, if any, has been made. If Parties aren’t even represented, that can also be found out.

Despite there being no movement in those cases, a defamation lawsuit was filed in December 2020. Interesting how actual human rights violations are worth only $11 million, but mean words on Twitter is worth $12.75 million. Perhaps there is some deeper insight that isn’t obvious.

Now, what people choose to do in their private lives is their business. That being said, when asking for donations from the public to finance a lawsuit, it’s worthwhile to ensure the money is going where it’s supposed to be.

One example last year was Action4Canada/Liberty Talk raising money for the promise of a lawsuit in B.C., against Bonnie Henry. Now, the fundraising started in September 2020 (if not earlier), so that has been 8 months now. The promised lawsuit has not materialized. Odessa Orlewicz has spoken about pocketing 25% of it.

It sounds great (on the surface) that another challenge was launched. However, it must be asked: will anything become of it? Or will it fade away, like its predecessors?

On the topic of covering court cases: it’s worth pointing out that various Libel & Slander Acts provide a number of defenses for people reporting on them. These include truth, opinion, public interest, and acting in good faith. Also, there are anti-SLAPP laws (strategic lawsuits against public participation), that ensure reporters and journalists will have a wide breadth to cover important events. For anyone wanting to publish information on court cases, this is important to know.

Spencer Fernando Promotes Fake Parties As Beneficial For Canadian Representation

On April 27, Spencer Fernando published a piece titled “Canada Would Benefit From Having Maverick & PPC MPs In Parliament”. This would be hilarious, if not for the fact that people take this man seriously.

Does the author of this article support nuking the CPC in order to bring a real alternative to Canadians? No. He supports having fake parties take a few seats as a way to send a message.

As for the title above, both the PPC (People’s Party of Canada), and Maverick (formerly WExit), are fake parties. Neither have constitutions, governing documents, or elect their leaders. As such, they immune from being overtaken by people serious for real change.

Considering how long Fernando has been writing about politics for, it’s hard to believe he doesn’t know this.

Has he not found it strange that in almost 3 years, Maxime Bernier hasn’t bothered with adding even a rudimentary structure to his party? Not strange that EDAs keep getting shut down?

Fernando claims to be offering an “independent” perspective in his publications. That’s downright laughable, considering that his organization, the National Citizens Coalition, used to be run by Stephen Harper. The blantant anti-Trudeau bias is evident.

That said, there are times when the NCC takes potshots at “conservative” politicians. This has the effect of making it less obvious of their agenda. And this is one of those times.

In fairness, there are many in the Conservative Inc. media who engage in this sort of behaviour. Included are:

  • Rebel Media – This outlet calls itself activist, and doesn’t even pretend to be neutral. Recently, they were sending out petitions calling for the return of Stephen Harper.
  • True North Canada – This is a fake charity that used to be the Independent Immigrant Aid Association. It’s run by Candice Malcolm and Kasra Nejatian, who used to be staffers for Jason Kenney while he was Multiculturalism Minister.
  • The Post Millennial – This is run by Jeff Ballingall, who helped get Erin O’Toole and Doug Ford into their current positions. It’s owned by Matthew Azrieli, grandson of a late media billionaire, David Azrieli.
  • Western Standard – This is currently run by ex-Alberta MLA turned fake populist Derek Fildebrant. Admittedly, it does provide some decent coverage on Western issues, but never comes clean on PPC or Maverick.

There are others of course, but those are the big names. None of them address the issue of fake parties in the election landscape.

A section from the article reads:

And that can happen through the election of some Maverick & PPC candidates in the upcoming election.
.
In the West – particularly in ridings where the Liberals have no chance – a win for the Maverick Party would result in electing someone who is conservative, yet not beholden to Erin O’Toole. They certainly wouldn’t go along with a Liberal agenda, and would be a voice for fiscal conservatism and policies that support the energy sector.
.
On the PPC side of things, Maxime Bernier has been one of the few politicians in Canada who has spoken out against government’s increasingly infringing on our civil liberties – a concern of many Conservatives but one which the CPC itself (with a few notable exceptions like Michelle Rempel Garner & David Sweet – and more subtly Pierre Poilievre), has been reluctant to speak out against.
.
Bernier has certainly been much more consistently ‘conservative’ than the CPC.
.
For that, it would be good if he got his seat back in Beauce, getting back into Parliament and putting pressure on the Conservatives to actually live up to their ideals.
.
In short, a combination of some Maverick MPs and PPC MPs in Parliament would make it clear to the CPC that they no longer have a monopoly on Conservative voters, that Conservative Canadians have leverage, and they must actually offer something of substance to those they expect support from.
.
Now, notice that I’m not calling for the wholesale defeat of the CPC, as that would be completely counterproductive.
.
The CPC still has many MPs – like Poilievre and Rempel Garner – who have a strong future in Canadian politics and effectively represent major threads of Canadian Conservative thought.
.
On balance, it is still better to elect a CPC MP than a Liberal MP.

First point to note: the author doesn’t call for the destruction of the CPC. That is hardly surprising considering that he works for them. He just wants a few MPs elected to “teach them a lesson”.

Considering that Conservatives are silent while Trudeau imposes martial law, and “conservative” Premiers do it Provincially, it’s bewildering why not call for the removal of all of them. The author engages in mental gymnastics to not condemn them outright.

Nothing screams seriousness quite like pandering about resisting tyranny abroad, even as you support it locally. If it’s not worthwhile burning the establishment to the ground over this lot, then what exactly will it take?

Second, Rempel has been little more than a shill for vaccines and martial law in Canada. She whines about minor details of implementation, but overall supports the agenda. On a related note: Poilievre is great with the one liners, and is entertaining, but he outside of being comic relief, offers nothing of substance.

Third, there is a a rewriting of history in terms of Bernier. While in Cabinet, he was pro-UN, pro-China, pro-globalized trade, and supported mass economic immigration. He handed out hundreds of millions in corporate welfare, which he now claims to oppose. He voted in 2007 and 2014 for equalization changes that screwed over the West in favour of Quebec. He reinvented himself as a populist only after losing in the CPC leadership race in 2017.

Fourth, Maverick used to be WExit, which openly called for Western separation. Having gained attention, the goalposts shifted, and its new purpose is just to pretend to pander for the interests of those Provinces.

Fifth, considering that Jay Hill is a former MP from Harper’s Government, how different would be? He didn’t seem to have any issues while in office.

And again, the author completely ignores the fact that both “parties” exist mostly just on paper, and have no structure to keep them alive.

While talking about debts, Fernando NEVER mentions the international banking cartel, which the Conservatives fought in Federal Court to keep intact.

He also addresses the carbon tax, but never gets into the underlying fraud and corruption behind it. Nor does he address the fact that the “challenges” to them were designed to fail.

In terms of nationalism, it is not limited to statues and history, as implied in the article. Canadians don’t want the wholescale population replacement that is going on — something conservative politicians fully embrace.

In 2020, Bernier decided to call for a moratorium, at least until there is economic recovery. Then full speed ahead. He spent over a year calling people who wanted real immigration reforms “racists”.

Conservative politicians of all stripes endorse the free-trade or outsourcing agenda, which leads to industries being sent overseas in the name of cutting costs.

In the name of unity, it’s ignored how incompatible different elements are. Nationalists and social conservatives could theoretically work together. But they have little in common with open borders libertarians and milquetoast cons. They want fundamentally different things.

It’s unclear what specific policies the author actually would see from this, other than (perhaps) no carbon tax. Much like Bernier, he remains extremely vague on what real conservatism is. Perhaps it’s because he doesn’t oppose O’Toole ideologically, just in style.

UPDATE TO ARTICLE
Of course, what does Spencer Fernando know about being a “conservative” anyway? Until a few years ago, he was a Chief of Staff for the Manitoba Liberal Leader. Interesting career trajectory, going from Liberal staffer to Conservative writer. But rhetoric aside, they are basically the same parties.

Healthcare Of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) Owns Stock In Vaccines & Masks Being Pushed

The Ontario Science Table lists groups in the health care sector as its partners. Whether or not the individual members support this, and to what extent, the pensions of a lot of people are tied up in promoting their agenda.

HOOPP, the Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan has some interesting medical holdings. This is at least according the SEC, or U.S. Securities and Exchanges Commission. While there is nothing inherently bad in investing in your own field, it will be driven by the way you want it to go.

The fund claims to have over $100 billion in net assets, or equity. Fair enough, let’s take a look at where some of that money is.

COMPANY AMOUNT
1Life Healthcare $540,000
3M Co. $462,000
Alexion Pharmaceuticals $34,891,000
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals $213,000
Alpha Healthcare Acquisition Corp $2,232,000
Amplitude Health Care Acquisition $930,000
Bausch Health Cos $2,366,000
Biogen Inc. $235,000
CVS Health Corp $32,871
Cytomx Therapeutics Inc. $835,000
Deerfield Healthcare Technology Acquisition $2,696,000
DFP Healthcare Acquisition $3,633,000
Gilead Sciences $6,420,000
HCA Healthcare $142,000
Healthcare Merger Corp. $1,019,000
Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC $3,538,000
Johnson & Johnson $34,401,000
Livongo Health Inc. $6,169,000
Merck & Co. $6,221,000
Pfizer $38,467,000
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals $1,052,000

The individual companies weren’t named in the HOOPP paperwork, so a visit to the SEC was needed for that. For reference, Gilead is the manufacturer of Veklury, also known as Remdesivir, a drug (not a vaccine) to counter Covid-19. It was given interim authorization to be used in Canada. Janssen (which is owned by Johnson & Johnson) also has an authorized “vaccine” in Canada. So does Pfizer, which is partnered with BioNTech. Yes, these are the same companies.

As for the next group, this is on the list of things that will make you go “hmmm”. If health care workers in Ontario were expecting, or wanting, a shutdown of society, these would be the companies to invest in.

A serious question: does it come across as a conflict of interest when health care workers are pushing pharmaceuticals which their pension plans own stock in? And it gets stranger.

COMPANY AMOUNT
Alibaba Group Holdings $730,000,000
Alphabet Inc. $4,799,000
Amazon $18,848
Beyond Meat Inc. $151,000
Blackline Software $16,000
Blackrock $85,000
Blackstone Group $625,000
Broadcom Inc. $181,000
Coca Cola Co. $58,552,000
Dish Network Corporation $89,000
E-Bay $101,000
Facebook $24,022,000
Goldman Sachs $15,978,000
Grid Dynamics Inc. $4,676,000
Mastercard $427,644,000
Microsoft Corp. $298,081
Netflix $335,000
Nike $2,354
PayPal Holdings $378,000
Salesforce $2,746,000
Shaw Communications $6,386,000
Shopify $50,537,000
Starbucks $11,065,000
Visa $1,802,000
Walmart $13,148,000
Zoom Communications $216,000

HOOPP seems to be investing in everything that we need in order to have a cashless society, working from home, and an abundance of pharmaceuticals. But that’s probably just a coincidence.

While most of the profiles of the HOOPP leadership were privatized, a few were in the open. Some interesting details revealed in them.

Tanya Pereira is the Senior Director of Operations at HOOPP. She is also a Strategic Advisor at Andone Pharmaceuticals, during that same time period.

John Watson is the Director of Operations Support at HOOPP. He has also been charge of other pension plans. Early in his career, he was a records supervisor at Sick Kids Hospital Toronto, which gets significant funding from the Gates Foundation.

HOOPP claims to be pushing the ESG/green agenda pretty hard. So expect that they’ll only be investing in such companies that “appear” to be green, regardless of whether or not they actually are green. They sing the praises about sustainability and climate change. Most people have heard it all before.

As for the HOOPP owning stock in these vaccines and masks, and their members pushing them on the public, that is downright shady, to say the least. True, it’s the doctors and nurses themselves who market it to the lay person, but how does this look?

Is this ancient? According to the SEC, it covers the period up to December 31, 2020, and was filed on March 1, 2021. Now, it’s possible that these shares have since been sold, but the first interim authorizations were coming out before then. Again, how does it look?

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://hoopp.com/
(2) https://hoopp.com/about-hoopp
(3) https://hoopp.com/investments/pension-plan-performance-and-hoopp-annual-report
(4) https://hoopp.com/about-hoopp/pension-leadership
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/authorization/list-drugs.html
(6) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/veklury/product-details
(7) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/janssen-covid-19-vaccine/product-details
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1535845/000153584520000007/0001535845-20-000007-index.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1535845/000153584520000007/xslForm13F_X01/SEC13F09_2020.xml
https://archive.is/Kqazd

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) OST: Como Foundation Gives Trillium Health Partners $5M
(j) OST: Current PHO Officials Also Sitting On As Partners
(k) OST: Canadian Agency For Drugs & Technologies In Health; pCPA
(l) OST: Centre For Effective Practice Gets Money From Lockdown
(m) OST: Cochrane Canada; WHO; McMaster University
(n) OST: SPOR Evidence Alliance Gets Funding From WHO

SPOR Evidence Alliance (OST Partner), Gets Funding From World Health Organization

This is another look at the Ontario Science Table, and their partners. Now we get to the SPOR Evidence Alliance, which was supported by CIHR, the Canadian Institutes for Health Research. SPOR itself is an acronym for “Strategy for Patient Oriented Research”. Okay, it’s funded by the Canadian Government, but by itself, that isn’t too bad.

Problem is, SPOR is also supported and sponsored by, the World Health Organization, although the distinction isn’t clear. It’s also sponsored by CADTH, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, a WHO Working Group.

How We Manage Conflicts of Interests
.
-We currently DO NOT accept any funding from private industry (e.g., pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers) to support our research activities.
-All our members must declare annual statements of conflicts and competing interests.
We encourage and nurture open communication and respectful relationships, and strive to resolve conflicts and competing interests through diplomacy.

While this sounds fine on paper, it overlooks 2 details. First, Governments, supra-national bodies and academia “can” and often do have conflicts of interest. Second, even if they don’t have conflicts of interests, groups they partner with can.

SPOR has more sponsors. This includes the University of Toronto, which has all kinds of ties to the Ontario Science Table. Furthermore, it’s sponsored by McMaster University, which hosts Cochrane Canada (another WHO partner), and receives money from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

At a Glance
The Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) Evidence Alliance is a pan-Canadian research initiative designed to promote evidence-informed health policy and practice changes. Our 300+ network of researchers, trainees, patient partners, and stakeholders is led by Dr. Andrea Tricco and 11 principal investigators from across Canada.

The SPOR Evidence Alliance was founded in 2017, thanks to a five-year grant awarded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) under Canada’s SPOR Initiative, and the generosity of partners from 41 sponsors from public and not-for-profit sectors in Canada.

From this description, SPOR seems to present itself as a researching and consulting group, one designed to cause systematic change to health care. How many of these groups are there?

And when they take money from institutions like the World Health Organization, how independent can they really be?

Also, CIHR funds initiatives that seem to run counter to independence, like paying groups to act as vaccine salesmen and improve uptake rates. How independent is this group, or any part of the Canadian Government?

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://sporevidencealliance.ca/
(2) https://sporevidencealliance.ca/about/governance-structure/
(3) https://sporevidencealliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SPOREA_Alliance-Infographic.pdf
(4) https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/193.html
(5) https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/41204.html

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) OST: Como Foundation Gives Trillium Health Partners $5M
(j) OST: Current PHO Officials Also Sitting On As Partners
(k) OST: Canadian Agency For Drugs & Technologies In Health; pCPA
(l) OST: Centre For Effective Practice Gets Money From Lockdown
(m) OST: Cochrane Canada; WHO; McMaster University

Cochrane Canada: WHO Partner; OST Partner; McMaster University Affiliate

Cochrane Canada is listed as a partner for the Ontario Science Table. However, there are important things about this organization that are not being publicly discussed. For starters, Cochrane is partnered with the World Health Organization, and receives funding from them. Cochrane (the parent org) also gets funding from various Governments and universities.

What is the end result of this? Cochrane helps to legitimize the actions of the very Governments that it gets funded from. After all, it refuses to accept commercial funding.

It’s a bit like the 2003 Iraq war. U.S. Government Officials leaked their “information” to various journalists. Those journalists were then cited as sources to show there were weapons of mass destruction.

Cochrane is for anyone interested in using high-quality information to make health decisions. Whether you are a doctor or nurse, patient or carer, researcher or funder, Cochrane evidence provides a powerful tool to enhance your healthcare knowledge and decision making.

Cochrane’s members and supporters come from more than 130 countries, worldwide. Our volunteers and contributors are researchers, health professionals, patients, carers, and people passionate about improving health outcomes for everyone, everywhere. Our global independent network gathers and summarizes the best evidence from research to help you make informed choices about treatment and we have been doing this for 25 years.

We do not accept commercial or conflicted funding. This is vital for us to generate authoritative and reliable information, working freely, unconstrained by commercial and financial interests.

Cochrane appears to have legitimacy, because it only takes money from Government or academic sources. But then it publishes material that validates the actions and conclusions of those very parties. It’s pay-for-play, but with very serious consequences.

The largest single donor to Cochrane (globally) is the National Institute for Health Research in the UK. But it’s worth pointing out that the World Health Organization is high up on that list.

More than 1 million GBP

  • National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (UK)
  • Danish Health Authorities (Denmark)
  • National Institutes of Health (USA)

500k to 1 million GBP

  • Federal Ministry of Health (Germany)

100k to 500k GBP

  • South African Medical Research Council
  • Anonymous non‐profit organizations (charitable donations or commissioned work)
  • Department for International Development (UK)
  • Cochrane Charity ‐ central funds awarded
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia)
  • Chief Scientist Office (Scotland)
  • World Health Organization
  • McMaster University (Canada)
  • Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norway)
  • Ministry of Health (New Zealand)
  • Ministry of Health, British Columbia (Canada)
  • Lower Austrian Health and Social Fund (Austria)
  • Laura & John Arnold Foundation
  • South African Department of Health
  • Institut national du Cancer (France)

50k to 100k GBP

  • Ministry of Health (Austria)
  • laurence le cleach (France)
  • HSC Research and Development (Northern Ireland)
  • Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad/Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality (Spain)
  • Joint Research Centre (Italy)
  • Vermont Oxford Network
  • Swiss Medical Board
  • Ministry of Health and Welfare (Taiwan)
  • The Gerber Foundation
  • Ciber de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (Spain)
  • Centre for Future Health, University of York / Wellcome (UK)
  • The National Health Research Institutes (Taiwan)
  • Skåne University Hospital (Sweden)

20k to 50k GBP

  • National Research Foundation (South Africa)
  • Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Germany)
  • University of Vermont, Larner College of Medicine (USA)
  • Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (South Africa)
  • Cochrane Oral Health Global Alliance
  • Lund University (Sweden)
  • Federal Ministry of Education (Nigeria)
  • National Institute for Medical Research Development (Iran)
  • European Respiratory Society
  • Farncombe Family gift
  • Canadian Rheumatology Association
  • The Global Fund
  • Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust (
  • UK)

  • Monash University (Australia)
  • University of York (UK)
  • Ministry of Science and Technology (Taiwan)
  • Institut de Recerca de Sant Pau (Spain)
  • Public Health Wales
  • Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS) (Spain)
  • Kazan Federal University Program, Federal Ministry of Education and Science (Russia)
  • Universidad Francisco de Vitoria (Spain)
  • Dr. Peter Tugwell University Account (Canada)
  • Hamilton Health Sciences
  • State of Lower Austria
  • Lazio Region (Italy)
  • Universidad Tecnológica Equinoccial (Ecuador)
  • Niederösterreich Gesundheits und Sozialfonds (NOGUS)/Health and Social Funds, Lower Austria (Austria)
  • Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark
    Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (Canada)
  • Anonymous non‐profit organization (charitable donation)
  • 10k to 20k GBP

    • American College of Gastroenterology (USA)
    • Navarre Health Service (Spain)
    • Foundation IRCCS ‐ Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan (Italy)
    • Federal Ministry of Health (Nigeria)
    • University of Pécs (Hungary)
    • Campbell Collaboration
    • Economic and Social Research Council (UK)
    • Workshop 2018/2019
    • Medical Center – University of Freiburg (Germany)
    • Training (self‐funded)
    • Erasmus University (Netherlands)
    • Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University (South Africa)
    • Ministry of Health and Regione Lombardia (Italy)
    • INSTITUTO DE EVALUACIÓN TECNOLÓGICA EN SALUD ‐ IETS‐ and UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE COLOMBIA (Colombia)
    • PROPUESTA PARA LA ESTRUCTURACION TECNICA Y OPERATIVA DE UN MODELO DE EXCELENCIA PARA LA RUTA INTEGRAL DE

    0.5k to 10k GBP

    • University Hospital Gaetano Martino Messina (Italy)
    • Faculdade de Medicina de Lisboa (Portugal)
    • Region Skåne (Sweden)
    • University of Copenhagen (Denmark)
    • MDS Foundation (Portugal)
    • Mapi Research Trust
    • CHU de Québec ‐ université Laval research center: Population Health and Optimal Health Practices (Canada)
    • Canada research chair critical care neurology and trauma (Canada)
    • Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano (Italy)
    • Jagiellonian University Medical College (Poland)
    • University of the Basque Country (Spain)
    • Cochrane Canada
    • National Insitute for Clincal Excellence (NICE) (UK)
    • University of Split, School of Medicine (Croatia)
    • Cochrane Japan (commissioned work)
    • INSTITUTO SALVADOREÑO DE SEGURO SOCIAL ISSS and INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES CLÍNICAS DE LA UNIVERSIDAD NAC
    • Cochrane Response
    • Ministry of Science and Education (Croatia)
    • Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
    • City of Zagreb (Croatia)
    • Motor Neurone Disease Association (UK)
    • RCSI & UCD Malaysia Campus (formerly Penang Medical College) (Malaysia)
    • John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
    • Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), Lausanne, Switzerland (formerly Institute of Social and Preventive Med
    • German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
    • City of Split (Canada)
    • Split‐Dalmatia County (Croatia)
    • Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts

    Less than 500 GBP

    • Center for Reproductive Medicine (Netherlands)
    • Health Authority, Umbria Region (Italy)

    As for the operation of Cochrane Canada, it is tied to McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. In fact, several people have an interest in that school.

    McMaster is a major donor to Cochrane, as is the British Columbia Ministry of Health.

    In 2016, the Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada Centre formalized a move from the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI) to its original home of McMaster University – widely acknowledged as the home of evidence-based medicine.

    The Centre supports Cochrane initiatives across the country by conducting education activities, functioning as the communications and knowledge brokering lead for Cochrane Canada, and advocating for the use of evidence in decision-making within Canada.

    Link to search IRS charity tax records:
    https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

    Let’s clarify here: there are actually 2 separate entities. The Foundation is the group that distributes money to various organizations and institutions. The Foundation Trust, however, is concerned primarily about asset management.

    BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION
    EIN: 56-2618866
    gates.foundation.taxes.2016
    gates.foundation.taxes.2017
    gates.foundation.taxes.2018

    BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION TRUST
    EIN: 91-1663695
    gates.foundation.trust.taxes.2018

    Above are records from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The records are publicly available with the IRS. The top is from the year 2017, and the bottom 2018.

    McMaster claimed to have isolated the virus that causes Covid-19. That’s very interesting, considering that when Fluoride Free Peel did a freedom of information request for it, there were no records available.

    $21 million from the Gates Foundation since 2015, according to their publications. Is McMaster University an institution we can trust, or has it been corrupted by special interest money and ideology?

    Also, is Cochrane (either Cochrane Canada, or the parent organization) something that we can trust? Or is it just helping conceal the intentions of interested parties?

    IMPORTANT LINKS
    (1) https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/our-partners/
    (2) https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/our-partners/
    (3) https://esnetwork.ca/
    (4) https://www.cochrane.org
    (5) https://www.cochrane.org/about-us/our-funders-and-partners
    (6) https://canada.cochrane.org/about-us/micheal-g-degroote-cochrane-canada-centre
    (7) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
    (8) https://healthsci.mcmaster.ca/home/2020/03/13/mcmaster-researcher-plays-key-role-in-isolating-covid-19-virus-for-use-in-urgent-research
    (9) https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/university-of-toronto-sunnybrook-hsc-have-no-record-of-covid-19-virus-isolation/
    (10) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants/2019/11/inv003448
    (11) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants/2019/11/inv003448
    (12) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants/2015/06/opp1129405
    (13) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=mcmaster%20#jump-nav-anchor0

    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) OST: Como Foundation Gives Trillium Health Partners $5M
    (j) OST: Current PHO Officials Also Sitting On As Partners
    (k) OST: Canadian Agency For Drugs & Technologies In Health; pCPA
    (l) OST: Centre For Effective Practice Gets Money From Lockdown

    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