No, Patrick King’s Case Didn’t Mean All Measures Ended For Alberta

The case of Patrick King v. Alberta Health Services has been all over the alternative media lately. People are now thinking this is some landmark decision against the Kenney Government. That isn’t really the case though. People are getting excited over a misunderstanding of the results. The measures remain in effect, though (update) it’s not entirely clear from the video the result of his case. He does admit later that he lost. See 53:44.

King claims that he won a court case in Alberta, and that all restrictions in the Province have been removed. On the surface, this looks fine, or at least possible.

Problem is, that isn’t what happened at all. King’s trial began on May 4, 2021. He got an adjournment so that he could subpoena Deena Hinshaw, the Chief Medical Officer of Alberta. Later, it was discovered that, although a Justice of the Peace did sign one, it required the signature of a Judge. This was a procedural error, which would make it defective in the eyes of the Court. The Crown brought an application on July 16 to quash the subpoena, with a hearing date of July 19.

King, in the May 4th trial, had tried to challenge the constitutionality of the measures themselves, but never filed a Notice of Constitutional Question. He says he didn’t know it had to be done in advance, which is quite plausible.

The Crown also claimed in their July Application that Hinshaw had no material evidence to offer, which is being taken to mean that there was no evidence at all. The Crown asserted that Hinshaw had nothing meaningful to say in this case. The Application to quash was successful.

King implies that his own $1,200 ticket was thrown out, but interestingly, the ruling isn’t posted. He later admits that he lost and had to pay, but it’s not obvious.

In fairness, King is right that the whole “pandemic” is a scam. However, the admission doesn’t mean quite what he thinks it does.

King also has a point that the Judge was supposed to help out self represented litigants, at least to a degree. The 2017 case of Pintea v. Johns made that mandatory.

Now, there’s no justification whatsoever to the assertion that King’s win had any effect on the measures in Alberta being lifted. In fact, many of them were on July 1, previous to this appearance. However, King has been making the rounds claiming that freedom has been won for Albertans by this. Stew Peters interviewed him, but did little to no due diligence first.

Also, there is still no ruling posted on CanLII, and there doesn’t seem to be a copy anywhere. Pretty strange if the Judge ended everything, but never bothered to write anything up.

King had asked for a transcript of his August hearing, to get in writing the admissions he wants. That’s fair. But the transcripts floating around are from his May 4th appearance. These are not the same things. The transcript was attached as an Exhibit in Alberta’s Application to quash.

While King claims to be self representing, it appears that he’s had some coaching from someone. And it’s interesting, King is friends with Kelly Ann Wolfe. Also, the woman at the bottom looks very familiar. Where have we seen her before?

Oh right, this is WholeHearted Media, earlier talking with her co-host, Galati. This previous video by Awake Canada speaks of non-existent Court rulings ending all measures in Canada. That hoax was only a few weeks back. Of course, when a person is asked to provide an actual ruling, there’s nothing to say.

Though unrelated to this matter, there was this floating around the other day: an obviously fake transcript of Calgary Mayor Nenshi. The King case may have been just a misunderstanding, but there’s no doubt that this one is intentional deception.

It would have been nice to see a ticket thrown out (for whatever reason), but it wasn’t. And these silly claims that all illegal measures have ended don’t help. It makes it harder to take such things seriously.

Correction: it was wrongly thought the ticket was dismissed. That has been corrected

(1) https://www.redvoicemedia.com/video/2021/08/freedom-fighter-court-victory-ends-masking-shots-quarantine-in-alberta/
(2) https://www.instagram.com/p/CSH4pTNJ3zp/
(3) https://awakening.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/05122457/transcriptofcourtcase.pdf
(4) Patrick King Application Service Of Documents
(5) Patrick King Application To Quash Subpoena
(6) https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZeOQnjHAXYmn/
(7) https://twitter.com/1777Roots/status/1423337680004206592
(8) http://www.lauralynn.tv/2021/08/dr-patrick-phillips-pat-king.html

The Climate Change Money Pit: Where Is It Really Going?

Ever think that your tax dollars are being wasted on the climate change scam? Well, they are. But at least, one can have a better idea of “where” they are being wasted. Here are some, but not all of the recent amounts in recent years.

Considering how little attention any of this gets in the media, or even in political spheres, it’s fair to ask why. Notice that scandals in Ottawa tend to be over relatively minor things. It’s a great way to divert attention.

Some of the grants contain little to no information, making it impossible to say for certain what’s happening. They could be legitimate, or they could just be slush funds. This list only contains money handed over by Ottawa, not any Provincial or local efforts.

NAME DATE AMOUNT
African Development Bank Group Mar. 31, 2021 $132,900,000
Agence Française de Développement Mar. 18, 2020 $10,000,000
Alliance agricole international UPA-DI, CECI Mar. 19, 2021 $16,589,517
Asian Development Bank Mar. 23, 2017 $10,000,000
Canadian Co-operative Association Apr. 1, 2019 $14,800,000
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Sep. 25, 2018 $19,177,873
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Mar. 10, 2020 $17,502,828
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Mar. 19, 2020 $8,030,063
Canadian Coop Society for Int’l Development Mar. 1, 2021 $9,829,509
Canadian Foundation For Development Tech Aug. 27, 2018 $399,141,615
Canadian Foundation For Development Tech Apr. 1, 2021 $747,762,060
Canadian Inst. for Clean Growth, Climate Change May 14, 2019 $20,000,000
CARE Canada May 8, 2013 $12,000,000
Caribbean Development Bank Mar. 27, 2012 $20,000,000
Centre for International Studies, Cooperation Mar. 27, 2019 $13,000,000
Centre for International Studies, Cooperation Mar. 29, 2019 $17,993,407
City of Richmond Mar. 4, 2020 $13,780,000
City of Saint John Mar. 11, 2020 $11,916,074
Cuso International Apr. 15, 2020 $49,985,745
Federation of Canadian Municipalities Jan. 31, 2017 $75,000,000
Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Fund Mar. 19, 2018 $62,500,000
Government of Northwest Territories Sep. 13, 2019 $30,000,000
Government of Nova Scotia Jul. 22, 2019 $90,000,000
Government of Nova Scotia May 25, 2020 $24,997,500
Government of Yukon Sep. 20, 2019 $118,212,428
Green Climate Fund Mar. 25, 2020 $190,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Mar. 24, 2016 $30,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Jan. 12, 2018 $165,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank May 14, 2018 $20,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Sep. 16, 2019 $20,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Feb. 26, 2020 $16,500,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank May 29, 2020 $28,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank May 29, 2020 $410,000,000
IBRD Trust Funds – World Bank Mar. 31, 2021 $35,000,000
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank Mar. 28, 2018 $16,000,000
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank Mar. 19, 2019 $223,500,000
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank Mar. 31, 2021 $190,000,000
IDRC – International Development Research Centre Mar. 24, 2017 $19,600,000
IFAD – International Fund for Agricultural Development Dec. 19, 2019 $150,000,000
IFAD – International Fund for Agricultural Development Mar. 31, 2021 $190,000,000
Oxfam-Quebec Sep. 5, 2019 $13,000,000
Papyrus S.A. (Haiti) Mar. 15, 2019 $13,000,000
Seedchange May 26, 2015 $17,599,059
St. Francis Xavier University Dec. 18, 2019 $9,797,119
Sustainable Development Technologies Canada Dec. 10, 2014 $23,293,000
United Nations Development Programme Mar. 8, 2018 $10,150,000
United Nations Environment Programme Oct. 16, 2013 $15,500,000
United Nations University Jun. 22, 2020 $10,000,000
UPA Développement international Apr. 7, 2020 $12,015,755
World Food Programme Jan. 27, 2020 $20,000,000
WUSC – World University Service of Canada Jan. 5, 2021 $19,487,814

Keep in mind, this is nowhere near the full list of such payments, but does include many of the larger grants. Now, where is any of this going? While some are spent locally, many are handed out to foreign groups. Let’s look at a few of them.

The Green Climate Fund is essentially a large slush fund that countries pay into, so that the money can be doled out to various climate programs, with little to no accountability. Of course, no one ever voted on allowing unelected bureaucrats to do this, but whatever.

4.3 Catalysing private sector finance at scale
21. Contributing to making financial flows managed by the private sector consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development is key to realizing the scale of resources – in the trillions – needed to implement developing countries’ NDCs, ACs, NAPs, TNAs, TPs , and other climate strategies. The GCF’s 2020-2023 programming will aim to more systematically and fully realize the potential of the GCF to mobilize resources at scale, and support activities to increase the impact of investments, while encouraging a wider alignment of financial flows with countries’ climate plans and strategies.

According to their updated 2020 to 2023 plan, the Green Climate Fund projects that trillions of dollars (with a “T”) will be needed for developing countries to implement their various goals.

The African Development Bank Group is set up to hand out grants to companies that are working to achieve the UNSDA, or the Agenda 2030 goals. This acts as a middleman to write the cheques. Interestingly, in its FAQ section, there isn’t a question about ensuring the accountability of the funds.

The Asian Development Bank, hands out money to finance a variety of projects, with climate change being one of them. It’s interesting, given how nations like China, Japan and South Korea are actually more wealthy than Canada.

The Inter-American Development Bank works in much the same ways as others, acting as a middleman to hand out money for various projects related to the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. This primarily takes effect in South America.

Keep in mind, there is virtually no way to track the money once it’s left the country. This means there is really no way to ensure it goes where it’s supposed to. An astute person will realize how absurd it is for Canada to be borrowing money only to be sending it off overseas, at least the portions sent abroad. We will be charged endless interest for funds that will never benefit Canadians. An even more observant person will take note that the international banking system means private borrowing, and no way to pay it off.

But hey, as long as Canada appears virtuous in the eyes of outsiders, then what else matters?

(1) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(2) https://www.greenclimate.fund/
(3) https://www.greenclimate.fund/document/updated-strategic-plan-green-climate-fund-2020-2023
(4) https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/updated-strategic-plan-green-climate-fund-2020-2023.pdf
(5) Updated Strategic Plan Green Climate Fund 2020-2023
(6) https://www.afdb.org/en/about/mission-strategy
(7) https://www.adb.org/
(8) https://www.iadb.org/

ACOG, Council On Patient Safety In Women’s Health Care, Partnered With Drug Companies

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the ACOG, made quite a stir when they recommended back in December 2020 that it was okay for pregnant women to get these experimental “emergency use authorization” vaccines. Apparently, that is still the case.

Turns out, there is a bigger picture to look at. The ACOG is part of the Council on Patient Safety, a collective of health care groups that work together.

The Membership Of The Council On Patient Safety In Women’s Health Care comprises 19 different spots, and there are currently 2 vacancies. The groups have different goals, but there is a lot of overlap with what they do. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is a member, and so is the American College of Nurse Midwives. By itself, that it nothing remarkable.

  • American Academy of Family Physicians
  • American Association of Nurse Anesthetists
  • American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • American College of Nurse Midwives
  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
  • American College of Osteopathic Obstetricians and Gynecologists
  • American Society for Anesthesiologists
  • American Society for Reproductive Medicine
  • Advancing Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery
  • Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses
  • Nurse Practitioners In Women’s Health
  • Preeclampsia Foundation
  • Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics & Gynecology
  • Society of Gynecologic Surgeons
  • Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology
  • Society of OB/Gyn Hospitals
  • Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility

The problems start to set in once you realize that the Council on Patient Safety also has an “industry” branch, including pharmaceutical companies. Needless to say, whatever policies the Council pushes can greatly increase the market for these products

The Forum on Patient Safety in Women’s Health Care, created in January 2013, is a collaboration between the Council and industry partners committed to advancing patient safety in women’s health care. The Forum is designed to facilitate open and ongoing dialogue in order to identify and maximize common interests in women’s health and to develop collaborative initiatives.

There is a scrolling banner of those industry partners, and it was capped for illustrative purposes. Anyone find it odd that drug companies are partnering with health groups this closely?

Some familiar names, including Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson. Is it any wonder that vaccines are still recommended for pregnant women? I don’t suppose the industry partners had anything to do with that. Interesting, that people online are recently getting upset over these recommendations, yet no one takes that time to do even a basic search.

The U.S. Center for Disease Control Foundation (the fundraising arm), receives considerable donations annually, including from drug companies. This isn’t really a secret these days. And what a shocker, Johnson & Johnson, and Pfizer, are both on the donors list.

Now, the USCDC recommends mass vaccinations, including for pregnant women. The Council on Patient Safety recommends them too. And both have ties to companies that will benefit from these decisions. Do you get it now?

(Update): This problem isn’t limited to the United States, which isn’t surprising. The Society for Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada has some interesting donors. The largest is MD Financial Management, a company that provides money management services to doctors. The next largest are Bayer, Merck and Pfizer. Related health care groups probably are funded by big pharma as well.

Now, SOGC refers to this as “providing resources”. Is that a euphemism for drug companies providing money? Or discounting their products? Wish it was a little more specific.

(1) https://cwcnova.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/ACIPURGINGEUA.pdf
(2) ACOG Recommends Vaccinating Pregnant Women
(3) https://www.phillytrib.com/news/health/ob-gyn-associations-recommend-all-pregnant-people-get-vaccinated-against-covid-19/article_74130a85-fb9d-5ed6-a4f2-002b4746f238.html
(4) https://safehealthcareforeverywoman.org/
(5) https://safehealthcareforeverywoman.org/council/about-us/council-members/
(6) https://safehealthcareforeverywoman.org/council/about-us/industry-form/
(7) https://www.cdcfoundation.org/partner-list/corporationshttps://archive.is/cYdV4
(8) https://www.sogc.org
(9) https://www.sogc.org/en/-COVID-19/COVID-19/COVID-19-Champions/en/content/COVID-19/covid-champions.aspx?hkey=1d24c3f0-be85-48f3-bc0a-a006c53b98a2
(10) https://archive.is/lGQpy

Alberta Activist Collective: Selling Merchandise At PRO-Lockdown Protests

Over the last 18 months or so, protest in Canada have typically been over restrictions to civil liberties. People quite reasonably were angry over arbitrary and heavy handed crackdowns on basic freedoms. However, something new has arrived, standing that idea on its head.

There are protests in Alberta demanding that Jason Kenney, Deena Hinshaw and Tyler Shandro MAINTAIN restrictions on people’s rights. This isn’t trolling or satire. These people are quite serious, and they want your freedoms eroded on an indefinite basis.

That being said, there are things about these protests that seem off, things that the paid off media in Canada will never address. Things just aren’t quite right with these people.

There is a new group around, called the Alberta Activist Collective. It states that it’s here to support non-violent activism and engagement. Well, who could disagree with that? Of course, the Commie fist in the logo is an odd choice.

It would be nice to know if these same people showed such outrage when places like Nova Scotia banned public gatherings. Did they speak up then rights to free (peaceful) assembly were trampled on all across the country? Have they protested about the incoming vaccine passports and mandatory shots that are creeping in?

By new, it’s very new. In fact, its Twitter account was set up earlier this month. Strange that they are only now considered with the freedom to assemble and protest. They claim to be a non-profit organization, although that seems unlikely. Given their lack of any presence or infrastructure, it seems doubtful they’ve taken to filing the appropriate paperwork.

Currently, there is a Go Fund Me page active to raise money for the AAC. There is also merchandise (shirts, coffee mugs….) being sold, with the proceeds going to that Go Fund Me account.

Vladislav Sobolev, the founder of Hugs Over Masks, seemed to be shameless when he used the freedom movement to open up his own fashion line in 2020. AAC outdoes him, using calls for tyranny to sell their products. Just 2 sides of the same grifting coin.

It’s hard to tell what the AAC actually does, since their website isn’t operational. However, it promises to be ready in the next 8 or 9 days, or so. Seriously, this group claims to be a non-profit, even though its site doesn’t work, and its social media is all very new.

The merchandise lists 2 people as promoting it. One is Albert Nobbs, the head of AAC. The other is Darrin Thompson, who founded the Gamechangers Canada Online Network. The site is pretty bare, so it’s unclear that exactly it’s supposed to be doing.

It’s interesting that both men have Palestinian flags in their Twitter bios. They also promote the same Black Lives Matter and gay rights talking points. Strange how people can virtue signal about the non-existent oppression of minority groups in Canada, yet support the overall erosion of basic rights. But this is what the Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism, and similar institutions, have led to.

These protests included people like Muna Saleh, a “curriculum studies and Muslim motherhood researcher, social studies teacher educator.” She identifies as Palestinian, suggesting a lack of attachment to this country. She demands that the Kenney Government maintain such violations in the name of safety. Interestingly, if she were still in Palestine, she wouldn’t enjoy anywhere near the freedoms and rights that she enjoys today. Oh, the joys of multiculturalism.

These protests are anything but organic and natural. However, the media that was so quick to vilify other gatherings turns a blind eye to this. It looks like a combination of grifting, injected with other political movements. Sure, there are legitimate doctors, but their movement is already co-opted.

Of course, how much of these funds raised will end up going to the pro-Palestinian groups? The main players all seem to be on their side. Hell, if they hate freedom so much, then go home, or at least to Toronto.

Seriously, this information wasn’t difficult to find.

(1) https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/rally-against-lifting-of-covid-19-restrictions-hosted-outside-alberta-legislature-saturday-1.5530764
(2) https://albertaactivistcollective.ca/progress/
(3) https://twitter.com/ActivistAlberta
(4) https://twitter.com/BallerGearCA/status/1415731518727548928
(5) https://archive.is/pajOZ
(6) https://ballergear.ca/collections/aac
(7) https://archive.is/i035m
(8) https://www.gofundme.com/f/LaunchAAC?utm_campaign=p_cp+share-sheet&utm_medium=copy_link_all&utm_source=customer
(9) https://archive.is/NoJc6
(10) https://www.gamechangerscanada.com/
(11) https://twitter.com/Albert_Nobbs
(12) https://twitter.com/darrinthompson6
(13) https://hugsovermasks.ca/

“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

B.C. Contemplating Vaccine Passports, As Bonnie Henry Glosses Over Old Statements

Apparently, Bonnie Henry is going to be pressuring people to take the experimental “vaccine”, but will get getting private businesses to do the dirty work.

Health Minister, Adrian Dix, didn’t have much to say in a meaningful sense. After all, his education in history and political science didn’t really prepare him for the role.

People in B.C. may be a bit confused. After all, the Protective Measures (COVID-19) Order was repealed on June 28, 2021. Also, the State of Emergency from March 2020 was formally cancelled.

Guess we can forget about a peaceful life in B.C. Will there also be emergency measures reintroduced at some point? After all, there are still plenty of people who see through this act.

From the looks of things, it seems that the B.C. Government won’t mandate it. However, they will encourage businesses to impose such a policy. Now, will they be subsidized to enforce such rules? Will there be extra perks for places that do?

Many people know about the 2015 Ontario Labour Arbitration which the ONA fought against a mandatory VOM “vaccinate-or-mask” policy. What less people know is that Bonnie Henry was an expert witness in that case.

Case: Sault Area Hospital and Ontario Nurses’ Association, 2015 CanLII 55643 (ON LA)

No joke. Less than a decade ago, Bonnie was telling an Ontario Hearing that there was no real evidence that masks or vaccines worked against influenza. Since then, she has changed her tune, and says something quite different. Although the ruling is readily available, there don’t appear to be transcripts.

134. Dr. Henry agreed with this observation by Dr. Skowronski and Dr. Patrick who are her colleagues at the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control:
.
I do agree, as we’ve discussed earlier, influenza is mostly transmitted in the community and we don’t have data on the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare workers and individual transmission events…in healthcare settings.
.
135. Dr. Henry agreed that no VOM policy would influence influenza in the community. Dr. McGeer denied that she had used or recommended the use of community burden in the assessment of development of such a policy.

So there is no data on any differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated health care workers. Yet these people are still arguing for VOM (vaccine or mask).

145. In her Report Dr. Henry also referred to observational studies as supporting the data she said was derived from the RCTs but acknowledged that these studies related to long term care and not acute care settings. She was cross-examined at length concerning the studies referenced in this section of her Report, some that dealt with other closed community settings, and agreed that they were “clearly not referring to a healthcare setting”.
.
146. Witness commentary concerning the observational/experimental studies relied upon in the McGeer/Henry Reports is set out in Appendix A to this Award. I conclude from a review of these studies, and the expert witness commentary, that they do not disclose a consistent position. They address a wide range of issues in a wide range of settings. Some are not supportive of the OHA/SAH experts’ claim. Some provide weak support at best. Some have nothing to do with the issue in question. Some have acknowledged study design limitations.

Evidence introduced by Bonnie Henry was for long term care centers, not health care settings, so this apples and oranges. There is also weak or irrelevant evidence argued.

160. In direct examination Dr. Henry stated that the pre-symptomatic period was “clearly not the most infectious period but we do know that it happens”.[203] She also agreed in cross-examination that transmission required an element of proximity and a sufficient amount of live replicating virus.
.
161. At another point, the following series of questions and answers ensued during Dr. Henry’s cross-examination:
.
Q. With respect to transmission while asymptomatic, and I want to deal with your authorities with respect to that, would you agree with me that there is scant evidence to support that virus shedding of influenza actually leads to effective transmission of the disease before somebody becomes symptomatic?
.
A. I think we talked about that yesterday, that there is some evidence that people shed prior to being symptomatic, and there is some evidence of transmission, that leading to transmission, but I absolutely agree that that is not the highest time when shedding and transmission can occur.
.
Q. So were you—I put it to you that there’s scant evidence, and that was Dr. De Serres’ evidence, so—but that there’s very little evidence about that, do you agree?
.
A. There is—as we talked about yesterday, there is not a lot of evidence around these pieces, I agree.
.
Q. And clearly transmission risk is greatest when you’re symptomatic, when you’re able to cough or sneeze?
.
A. Transmission risk is greatest, as we’ve said, when you’re symptomatic, especially in the first day or two of symptom onset

Not a lot of evidence regarding risks of transmission. Yes, this is 2015, but it coming straight from BCPHO Bonnie Henry.

177. Dr. McGeer and Dr. Henry presented the position of the OHA and the Hospital based upon their understanding of the relevant literature. Neither of them asserted that they had particular expertise with respect to masks or had conducted studies testing masks.

So, no actual expertise of research. Bonnie Henry just read what was available. And this is the Provincial Health Officer of British Columbia.

184. In her pre-hearing Report Dr. Henry responded to a request that she discuss the evidence that masks protect patients from influenza this way:
.
There is good evidence that surgical masks reduce the concentration of influenza virus expelled into the ambient air (a 3.4 fold overall reduction in a recent study) when they are worn by someone shedding influenza virus. There is also evidence that surgical masks reduce exposure to influenza in experimental conditions.
.
Clinical studies have also suggested that masks, in association with hand hygiene, may have some impact on decreasing transmission of influenza infection. These studies are not definitive as they all had limitations. The household studies are limited by the fact that mask wearing did not start until influenza had been diagnosed and the patient/household was enrolled in the study, such that influenza may have been transmitted prior to enrollment. A study in student residences is limited by the fact that participants wore their mask for only approximately 5 hours per day. Two systematic reviews of the cumulative studies conclude that there is evidence to support that wearing of masks or respirators during illness protects others, and a very limited amount of data to support the use of masks or respirators to prevent becoming infected
.
In summary, there is evidence supporting the use of wearing of masks to reduce transmission of influenza from health care workers to patients. It is not conclusive, and not of the quality of evidence that supports influenza vaccination. Based on current evidence, patient safety would be best ensured by requiring healthcare providers to be vaccinated if they provide care during periods of influenza activity. However, if healthcare workers are unvaccinated, wearing masks almost certainly provides some degree of protection to their patients.

Bonnie Henry keeps hedging her answers. Yes, there is protection, but there are issues with the studies, and the evidence isn’t conclusive. She also takes the position that vaccinating everyone in health care settings would be prefereable.

219. Dr. Henry answered the ‘why not mask everyone’ question this way:
.
It is [influenza vaccination] by far, not perfect and it needs to be improved, but it reduces our risk from a hundred percent where we have no protection to somewhat lower. And there’s nothing that I’ve found that shows there’s an incremental benefit of adding a mask to that reduced risk…..there’s no data that shows me that if we do our best to reduce that incremental risk, the risk of influenza, that adding a mask to that will provide any benefit. But if we don’t have any protection then there might be some benefit when we know our risk is greater.
.
When we look at individual strains circulating and what’s happening, I think we need it to be consistent with the fact that there was nothing that gave us support that providing a mask to everybody all the time was going to give us any additional benefit over putting in place the other measures that we have for the policy. It’s a tough one. You know, it varies by season.[320]
.
It is a challenging issue and we’ve wrestled with it. I’m not a huge fan of the masking piece. I think it was felt to be a reasonable alternative where there was a need to do—to feel that we were doing the best we can to try and reduce risk.
.
I tried to be quite clear in my report that the evidence to support masking is not as great and it is certainly not as good a measure

Bonnie Henry admits no strong evidence to support maskings. However, that was 2015, and apparently the science has changed completely since then. Or perhaps just the politics.

In any event, she seems content pushing experimental, unapproved “vaccines” on the public. Of course, the manufacturers are indemnified against liability.

Even within the last year her view on masks changed considerably. It’s a good thing people document and archive these inconsistencies. Kudos to whoever made this compilation. Otherwise, people like Bonnie Henry, Adrian Dix, John Horgan and Mike Farnworth would be more easily able to rewrite history, and conceal their deceptions

Don’t worry! Action4Canada will be filing their lawsuit any day now, and that will save us! They are just one fundraiser away from being almost ready to start. (Yes, this is sarcasm.)

(1) https://bc.ctvnews.ca/not-vaccinated-against-covid-19-b-c-s-health-officials-say-there-will-be-consequences-1.5525139
(2) https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/mo/mo/m0275_2021?fbclid=IwAR309l-HdQCrEdBaF6q2dUMwr5CbevxjJ94CweOLK-VUSBx7bE-weX725KE
(3) https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/public-safety-and-emergency-services/emergency-preparedness-response-recovery/embc/reports/speaker/621140-letter_to_the_speaker-protective_measures-m273.pdf
(4) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2015/2015canlii62106/2015canlii62106.pdf
(5) 2015.ontario.nurses.association.mask.ruling
(6) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2015/2015canlii62106/2015canlii62106.html
(7) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2016/2016canlii76496/2016canlii76496.html
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2018.ontario.college.of_.nurses.mask_.ruling.pdf