Category: Vaccines

Posted on

Meet Ryan Imgrund: HS Science Teacher Whose Predictions Drive Donations For Other Interests

Ryan Imgrund is a high school science teacher, and has also been a “consultant” calling for more restrictions in Ontario. However, things aren’t quite what they seem to be. Like so many “experts” in the media, no real due diligence is done before bringing them on.

About
I am a biostatistician and corporate consultant working with a several Fortune 500 companies, Ontario public health units, and a private Ontario lab. My specialty is discovering, analyzing and interpreting scientific, mathematical, economic and retail trends.

This man has been a consultant since March 2020. Interesting time to start such a business, especially as he’s supposed to be a full time educator. Unfortunately, this is far from an isolated case.

Michael Warner is head of the Canadian Division of askthedoctor.com. Kumar Murty of OST is the Chief Technology Officer of a tech company called PerfectCloudIO, which stands to profit from lockdowns. Kwame McKenzie of OST led the research into the 2017 UBI project in Ontario. And on a related note: Trillium Health Partners got a $5 million gift from a company that makes face masks. Abdu Sharkawy makes a small fortune on the speaking circuit. Robert Steiner of OST, an LPC operative, claims to be the brains of PHAC, founded in 2004.

Even with that in mind, Imgrund is strange for a number of reasons. Let’s go through some of them.

Imgrund’s LinkedIn profile states that he has an undergraduate degree in science, and a bachelor’s degree in education. This essentially qualifies him to be a science teacher, which is how he makes his primary living. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn’t show that he has any sort of expertise. (see archive here).

It’s unclear why PHAC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, would hire him in 2000, especially since he was at university, starting his junior year at that time. Presumably, he would have been preoccupied with a heavy course load.

Even if there was a typo in the start date, it’s unclear what special skills he would have brought. A superstar student would have gone higher with his career, not be teaching high school science. His profile indicates he was hired as a teacher immediately out of university.

But there is someone else here that is worth attention. Look again at those dates.

Imgrund claims to have been with the Public Health Agency of Canada back in 2000. Problem is, it didn’t exist until 2004. It was created that year due to the instigation of the World Health Organization, to be an outpost for global health measures. It was covered in detail in this earlier piece.

Perhaps he should have talked with Robert Steiner, who claims to have advised Paul Martin on its creation, before putting it on his resume.

It takes a legend (or a moron) to be working at an institution a full 4 years before it was founded. Did none of Imgrund’s other clients check him out ahead of time?

Imgrund admits that modelling is heavily based on assumptions and predictions. However, he leaves out how grossly inaccurate it has been so far. Should algorithms and formulas determine how society is run? Imgrund’s skills are what exactly?

Imgrund was also involved with the Sick Kids Hospital recommendations report, on how to “safely” reopen Ontario schools for the Fall of 2020.

One of Sick Kids Hospital’s major donors is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but that’s no reason for concern. Nor is the pattern of this, or Walied Soliman being a Director, and Chief of Staff to Erin O’Toole.

Supposedly, after Southlake Regional Health Centre saw some of his modelling, they asked him to be a consultant for them. That being said, Southlake is always asking for money from the public, so Imgrund’s work is likely to generate many more donors.

Quite simply, crisis predictions are good for business. After all, no one wants to be seen as refusing much needed funding to a hospital in the middle of a “pandemic”. It would be nice if his other clients were listed, but searching them is proving tricky.

Imgrund himself seems to love his new celebrity status. He’s frequently on the media circuit drumming up fear and paranoia about Ontarians just going about their lives.

Additionally, is Imgrund getting paid or compensated in any way for his numerous media appearances? Keep in mind, he has only been a “corporate consultant” since March 2020, so it’s not like he has a long history of doing this.

He never addresses serious questions like the virus not being isolated, PCR tests being unsuitable, the high recovery rate, or the health problems from long term mask use. Nor will he cover the documented proof of premeditation in all this. Either he is oblivious, or chooses to ignore it.

While his Twitter feed is filled with “pandemic” postings, he also never mentions potential testing and safety issues with vaccines. He seems very partial and selective about what needs covered.

And it raises the possibility of a serious conflict of interest. Working in the education system, he is supposed to put the needs of students first. However, as a “consultant” and “expert”, he and his clients financially and professionally can profit from having longer and more severe restrictions. There’s no money to be made in a crisis if that crisis goes away.

Does this man work in the best interests of the public?

(1) https://twitter.com/imgrund
(2) https://www.linkedin.com/in/ryan-imgrund-aa944b85/
(3) https://archive.ph/OkkFr
(4) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/corporate/mandate/about-agency/history.html
(5) https://www.raptorsrepublic.com/2020/10/06/the-interview-ryan-imgrund-biostatistician-imgrund/
(6) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/statistician-worried-back-to-school-plan-risky-1.5671012
(7) https://www.sickkids.ca/siteassets/about/about-sickkids/sickkids-annual-report-2019-2020.pdf
(8) Sick Kids Hospital Major Donors
(9) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-29-the-financial-ties-between-sick-kids-hospital-and-the-gates-foundation/
(10) https://www.newmarkettoday.ca/coronavirus-covid-19-local-news/how-a-newmarket-biostatistician-is-using-rt-to-track-the-impact-of-reopening-2515509 for them.
(11) https://southlake.ca/foundation/about/your-investment-in-southlake/

Posted on

Meet Dr. Abdu Sharkawy: Paid, Professional Commentator For Vaccines And Lockdowns

Abdu Sharkawy frequently appears on CTV News as an “infectious diseases expert”. Strange thing however, it’s not disclosed that he’s actually a professional speaker, who makes money on the circuit. He is part of the NSB, or National Speakers Bureau. This is an agency that connects speakers with organizations searching for someone on a particular topic. It’s a sort of referral agency.

The NSB will connect people with a speaker on a variety of different subjects. These include: current events, education, finance, health, leadership, media, motivational speaking, and much more. This group claims not to charge a fee, which implies that it will be getting a piece of whatever contract is signed with the speaker in question.

While there is nothing inherently wrong with making money, these types of arrangements show that a person is interested in doing this for the long haul. This isn’t just a one time event, or a special occasion. Sharkawy, like the others, see this as just a way of doing business.

It can also create serious conflicts of interest, depending on who the audience is, and in what context. It’s even worse when these payments are not disclosed, as seems to be the case here.

Having a handler arrange for people to appear in the media as an “expert” brings back memories of Tom Quiggin and One Godless Woman.

Sharkawy is hardly the only person who moonlights with a conflicting job. Michael Warner is head of the Canadian Division of askthedoctor.com. Kumar Murty of OST runs a technology company called PerfectCloudIO, which stands to profit from lockdowns. Kwame McKenzie of OST led the research into the 2017 UBI project in Ontario. And on a related note: Trillium Health Partners got a $5 million gift from a company that makes face masks.

Speaker Biography
.
Dr. Abdu Sharkawy is a world-renowned internal medicine and infectious diseases specialist who is based in Toronto, Canada.
.
From the outset of the Covid-19 Pandemic, Dr. Sharkawy was one of the key authorities speaking on and educating the public about the Covid-19 pandemic on a global stage.
.
Dr. Sharkawy has provided extensive knowledge about the Covid-19 pandemic to many audiences on a global stage. He has spoken about the pandemic on well-known media platforms, such as Dr. Phil, ABC News, Al-Jazeera and BBC News, and he is the leading source of COVID-19 information for the biggest news network in Canada, CTV News. Millions of Canadians rely upon Dr. Sharkawy’s medical expertise, as a part of their daily routines.
.
Working on the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic, in one of the largest hospital networks in Canada, has undoubtedly allowed Dr. Sharkawy to have a unique perspective on the pandemic. Dr. Sharkawy has spoken on several key areas of the pandemic, including but not limited to, the vaccines, the trajectory of the virus, and the best/worst case scenarios for the future.

That is from Sharkawy’s professional profile with NSB. He has spoken not just in Canada, but internationally on this subject. Millions of Canadians rely on his medical expertise.

All of that said, it doesn’t appear that his arrangement his NSB (or any other agency), or his fees, have ever been publicly discussed. He is referred to as a doctor, and an infectious diseases expert, but not as a paid actor. This is pretty important information to leave out.

Yes, he does appear quite regularly on CTV, spreading fear-porn each time. However, this arrangement as a professional speaker is not disclosed. Here are a few examples of what he has been saying.

If they were going to use him at all, CTV should have disclosed Sharkawy’s side job as a professional speaker. It should be done at least once each appearance. Being working for CTV, he does have other clients.

On March 19, 2021, Sharkawy spoke with the B.C. Pharmacists Association on the subject of vaccine rollouts. May 6, 2021, he talked about these mysterious variants that were overwhelming Canada.

  • Abbott
  • Amgen
  • AstraZeneca
  • Janssen (owned by Johnson & Johnson)
  • London Drugs
  • Merck
  • Pfizer
  • PriceSmart Food Pharmacies
  • Sandoz (part of Novartis)
  • Save On Foods Pharmacy
  • Urban Fare Pharmacy
  • Westland Insurance

It gets even worse, as the B.C. Pharmacists Association has is funded by big pharma. However, this isn’t surprising. If you view companies like Pfizer and Merck as the manufacturers or wholesalers, pharmacies are just the retail end of it.

Sharkawy promotes vaccines for one of his clients that is funded by big pharma. Is there anything wrong with this?

Shawkawy has also been promoting the group ThisIsOurShot. It’s been targeting minority populations for vaccination, while downplaying the actual risk. The group is also selling T-shirts, which is going to help Kids Help Phone. This is morbid, considering that child mental health has deteriorated in large part due to the lockdowns that Sharkawy supports.

Go on his Twitter account. He spends a lot of time posting and retweeting about vaccination and more restrictions.

Sharkawy is also an Assistant Professor at the University of Toronto, which has endless connections to the Ontario Science Table, promoting lockdowns in that Province. The OST also has numerous conflicts of interest, which has been outlined on this site.

With all of the side work that Sharkawy does, when does he find the time to actually practice as a doctor? This isn’t even sarcasm.

Now, a few points must be addressed about CTV itself.

This is a summary of CTV News policies and is not meant to be comprehensive. CTV News is committed to producing journalism that is accurate, fair and complete. Our journalists act with honesty, transparency, and independence, including from conflicts of interest.

CTV claims that it has a strong ethics code, which specifically includes conflicts of interest. Fine, but what about the experts they bring on? This wasn’t difficult to find. Was no due diligence done before giving Abdu Sharkawy the microphone? Or have they known about these other interests, but just kept silent? Was he recruited using the NSB group?

CTV is also part of the Trust Project, which sounds Orwellian.

UPDATE TO ARTICLE

The National Speakers Bureau did respond to an inquiry on Sharkawy. His fee for a virtual event would be $12,000. An in person event would presumably cost much more. Now, who would pay this kind of money, unless they had a financial interest in what he had to say?

(1) https://www.nsb.com/
(2) https://www.nsb.com/speakers/abdu-sharkawy/#/!
(3) https://www.nsb.com/topics/
(4) https://archive.is/CCpOf
(5) Abdu Sharkawy On How Schools Should Become
(6) Abdu Sharkawy Pushing Vaccines On Canadians
(7) Abdu Sharkawy On The Terrifying “Second Wave”
(8) https://www.bcpharmacy.ca/conference/agenda-speakers
(9) https://archive.is/o1l6q
(10) https://www.bcpharmacy.ca/conference/sponsors
(11) https://www.bcpharmacy.ca/news/bcpha-2021-conference-highlights-dr-abdu-sharkawy
(12) https://archive.is/o27zw
(13) https://twitter.com/SharkawyMD/status/
(14) https://twitter.com/SharkawyMD/status/1391100381766189065
(15) https://facdir.deptmedicine.utoronto.ca/Detail.aspx?id=1640&fromone=1
(16) https://canucklaw.ca/health-care-reviews/
(17) https://www.ctvnews.ca/editorial-standards-and-policies
(18) https://thetrustproject.org/

Posted on

CV #24(D): Heidi Larson; LSHTM; VCP; Vaxxing Pregnant Women; Financed By Big Pharma

Heidi Larson is a bit of a superstar for the pharmaceutical industry, and its allies. It’s well known that GAVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, is heavily funded by the Gates Foundation, and big pharama. GAVI has also been lobbying the Canadian Parliament for years, and getting hundreds of millions of dollars in grants.

A bit of background information here. The VCP, Vaccine Confidence Program, is part of the LSHTM, or London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Both receive extensive funding from pharmaceutical companies, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, and Governments.

Who else is worth noting?

  • Board member, Carlos Alban (AbbVie)
  • Board member, Bill Anderson (Roche)
  • Board Member, Gabriel Baertschi (Grünenthal)
  • Board member, Anders Blanck (LIF)
  • Board Member, Olivier Charmeil (Sanofi)
  • Board Member, Alberto Chiesi (Chiesi)
  • Board member, Frank Clyburn (MSD)
  • Board Member, Eric Cornut (Menarini)
  • Board member, Richard Daniell (Teva Pharmaceutical Europe)
  • Board member, Johanna Friedl-Naderer (Biogen)
  • Board Member, Murdo Gordon (Amgen)
  • Board member, Peter Guenter (Merck)
  • Board member, Angela Hwang (Pfizer)
  • Board member, Enrica Giorgetti (Farmindustria)
  • Board member, Dirk Kosche (Astellas)
  • Board member, Jean-Luc Lowinski (Pierre Fabre)
  • Board member, Catherine Mazzacco (LEO Pharma)
  • Board member, Johanna Mercier (Gilead)
  • Board member, Luke Miels (GSK)
  • Board member, Gianfranco Nazzi (Almirall)
  • Board member, Oliver O’Connor (IPHA)
  • Board Member, Stefan Oelrich (Bayer)
  • Board member, Giles Platford (Takeda)
  • Board member, Antonio Portela (Bial)
  • Board member, Iskra Reic (AstraZeneca)
  • Board Member, Susanne Schaffert (Novartis)
  • Board member, Stefan Schulze (VIFOR PHARMA)
  • Board Member, Kris Sterkens (Johnson & Johnson)
  • Board member, Han Steutel (vfa)
  • Board member, Alfonso Zulueta (Eli Lilly)

One of the major donors of the Vaccine Confidence Project is the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). It’s Board is made of up members representing major big pharma companies.

Another donor of VCP is the Innovative Medicine Institute. Salah-Dine Chibout is on the Governing Board of IMI, and also is the Global Head of Discovery and Investigational Safety at Novartis. Additionally, Paul Stoffels is the Chief Scientific Officer at Johnson & Johnson, Worldwide Chairman of Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson.

The VCP also works closely with the World Health Organization, and is supportive of its mass vaccination agenda. The role with WHO is simply to market the programs to make them more effective.

The Gates Foundation has financial connections to WHO, GAVI, the CDC, and countless pharmaceutical companies. It is also connected to agencies that are involved in computer modelling, such as:
(a) Imperial College London, Neil Ferguson
(b) London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
(c) Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium

While all of this is nefarious and creepy, where does Heidi Larson fit into this? What role does she play in the system?

Larson works for both VCP and LSHTM. Her job is mostly one of research and consulting into “increasing vaccine confidence”. In layman’s terms, she is looking into ways to convince segments of the population to get vaccines at higher rates. This doesn’t involve research into CREATING safer and more effective products. Instead, it’s done to CONVINCE people that they already are. Her financial connections to companies like GSK and Merck likely influence her work.

Larson and her cronies apparently see nothing wrong with targeting pregnant women, who are the focus of the following article. Yes, damn the consequences, let’s vaxx the preggers. This, and the following information should horrify and enrage normal people.

5. Conclusion
This literature review has shown that both pregnant women and HCW cite safety concerns as a main barrier to obtaining/providing influenza and pertussis vaccines during pregnancy. However responses differed depending on geographical area: inlow-income countries for example, pregnant women were more likely to cite access issues as a barrier to vaccination. There are alsowide gaps in knowledge regarding the attitudes of HCW to vaccination in pregnancy, which is significant considering the impact they have on a woman’s decision to vaccinate.
.
From the supply side, regulatory agencies still do not have a licensing pathway for many vaccines for pregnant women, manufacturers remain concerned about liability and providers perceive that pregnant women are unwilling to accept vaccines [95].
.
As the MDG era comes to an end, the development agenda beyond 2015 is widening to include other important health issues such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). However, neither still-births nor neonatal deaths are mentioned in post-2015 documents [96] risking that the current momentum for new-born health may be lost.
.
Barriers to vaccination in pregnancy are complex and can differ from barriers and concerns affecting uptake of routine childhood vaccinations. Maternal vaccination is administered at a time when the patient is cautious about various behaviours, including taking medications and vaccinations, and feels responsible for not just her own life but of that foetus. Depending on the cultural context, different norms are also established around the time of pregnancy. Barriers also vary depending on context and target population.
.
Taking these points into account, ‘quick-fix’ interventions which aim to increase vaccination uptake, such as health communication messages and training physicians in communication strategies [97], without understanding addressing the root cause of vaccine hesitancy in specific contexts, are likely to have little effect on patients’ decisions to vaccinate or on the provider’s own confidence in communicating with parents about vaccines.
.
It is important to understand how cultural and gender dynamics in different settings can influence a woman’s decision to vaccinate. This can be done through in-depth local ethnographies, taking the views of all community members and influencers into account, complemented by in-depth individual interviews and focus groups. Research could also examine some of the complex socio-political reasons for under-vaccination in certain communities must to inform vaccination policies and delivery strategies. With more understanding of the perspectives of pregnant women, their providers and communities, maternal vaccine strategies will be more likely to reach and protect pregnant women and their newborns from preventable disease.

Rather than reading the entire paper, that’s the conclusion. First, it’s pointed out that vaccine manufacturers are concerned about liability. So they are fully aware of the damage and exposure their products can bring. Second, it’s acknowledged that women feel responsibility for not just themselves, but the baby as well. This can be manipulated and it ties into the third point, that specific messaging needs to be used on this group. Fourth, specific training to “sell” the vaccines will likely be needed. Fifth, it is higher vaccination rates, not overall safety, that is the focus.

The reference list is extensive.
Check out the actual paper.

That is interesting. Not only is Larson working for the LSHTM and Vaccine Confidence Program, but she has also been employed by pharmaceutical companies GlaxoSmithKline and Merck.

Vaccine confidence concerns the belief that vaccination – and by extension the providers and range of private sector and political entities behind it – serves the best health interests of the public and its constituents. The Oxford English Dictionary defines confidence as “the mental attitude of trusting in or relying on a person or thing”. In light of that, we are not examining the well-studied domain of supply and access barriers to vaccination, but rather what is typically called the “demand” side of immunisation. However, our focus on confidence takes the “demand” rubric a step further than the more traditional notion of building demand through increasing knowledge and awareness of vaccines and immunisation to understanding what else drives confidence in vaccines, and the willingness to accept a vaccine, when supply, access and information are available. In other words, understanding vaccine confidence means understanding the more difficult belief-based, emotional, ideological and contextual factors whose influences often live outside an immunisation or even health programme but affect both confidence in and acceptance of vaccines.

The Vaccine Confidence Program believes that vaccines are good for humanity. It’s a part of the LSHTM, which is one of the biggest modelers of CV-19, predicting death waves. It also receives funding from drug companies who have a product to sell. What we have is a situation where the manufacturers, sales agents, and marketers work together under some humanitarianism guise.

October 2020, Larson co-chaired a panel on combatting pandemic misinformation. It was hosted by LSHTM and Center for Strategic and International Studies.

December 2020, Larson tweeted out — but did not condemn or question — a JAMA Network article discussing mandatory vaccinations.

January 2021, LSHTM tweeted (and Larson retweeted) a Telegraph article on combatting misinformation

January 2021, Larson was at the Pulitzer Center for a talk on combatting misinformation around CV vaccination. A look at their donors reveals the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Facebook, Omidyar Network, Planned Parenthood, and the Rockefeller Foundation.

March 2021, Larson wrote a piece for the New York Times, in support of AstraZeneca. The basic premise was that the AZ vaccine was safe, and that only public perception and confidence were keeping it from being distributed. She also called for “training vaccinators” in such a way to boost the image among others. In short, train people to better sell the product.

Now, this may be a coincidence, but some of the same companies that are paying for Larson’s work “increasing vaccine confidence” are also lobbying Ottawa to buy their products.

Side note with GlaxoSmithKline: Larson has disclosed being a consultant for the company. Now, in 2009, Canada gave Interim Authorization (not approval), to 2 vaccines for H1N1, Arepanrix and Monovalent Vaccine. Lawsuits were filed because the injections harmed a lot of people, but:

[19] The federal Minister of Health authorized the sale of the Arepanrix vaccine pursuant to an interim order dated October 13, 2009. Human trials of the vaccine were still underway. The Minister of Health is empowered to make interim orders if immediate action is required because of a danger to health, safety or the environment. In issuing the interim order, Health Canada deemed the risk profile of Arepanrix to be favourable for an interim order. The authorization was based on the risk caused by the current pandemic threat and its danger to human health. As part of the interim order process, Health Canada agreed to indemnify GSK for any claims brought against it in relation to the administration of the Arepanrix vaccine.

That’s one way to have high confidence in your product: make any sale contingent on getting legal immunity in advance. It’s fair to assume this latest batch came with the same conditions.

Larson’s career appears to have taken off in 2000, then she went to work for UNICEF. No surprise, but she was pushing mass vaccination even then. The bulk of her career appears to be acting as a mouthpiece for big pharma.

Canada announced the launch of a vaccine injury compensation program in December 2020, but so far, so follow-ups have been mentioned.

An interesting side note with Larson’s Twitter profile: she claims that she “did this reluctantly”. That is a strange comment. Does she not believe in what she pushes on the global population?

Anyhow, if nothing else is taken away from here, remember this: the “vaccine confidence” movement is funded by big pharma. They want to convince you that their products are safe. Just ignore the testing issues, and the indemnification agreements.

(1) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/
(2) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/team
(3) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/partners-funders
(4) https://archive.is/Ah9Pw
(5) https://www.efpia.eu/
(6) https://www.efpia.eu/about-us/who-we-are/
(7) https://www.imi.europa.eu/about-imi/governance/governing-board
(8) https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/communication/network/vaccineconfidenceproject/en/
(9) Vaccination During Pregnancy Propaganda Research
(10) Vaccine Acceptance During Pregnancy Research
(11) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/vcp-mission
(12) https://twitter.com/ProfHeidiLarson
(13) https://www.linkedin.com/in/heidi-larson-07b535119/
(14) https://www.csis.org/analysis/call-action-csis-lshtm-high-level-panel-vaccine-confidence-and-misinformation
(15) https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2774712?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=content-shareicons&utm_content=article_engagement&utm_medium=social&utm_term=122920#.X-uxuv4Z2-I.twitter
(16) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/meet-scientists-tackling-vaccine-misinformation-tiktok/
(17) https://pulitzercenter.org/event/covid-19-vaccines-combating-misinformation
(18) https://pulitzercenter.org/about/donors
(19) https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/opinion/astrazeneca-vaccine-trust.html
(20) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca
(21) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/legislation-guidelines/interim-orders.html
(22) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2019/2019onsc7066/2019onsc7066.html
(23) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Larson
(24) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2020/12/government-of-canada-announces-pan-canadian-vaccine-injury-support-program.html

CANUCK LAW ON “VACCINE HESITANCY”
(A) Canada’s National Vaccination Strategy
(B) The Vaccine Confidence Project
(C) More Research Into Overcoming “Vaccine Hesitancy”
(D) Psychological Manipulation Over “Vaccine Hesitancy”
(E) World Economic Forum Promoting More Vaccinations
(F) CIHR/NSERC/SSHRC On Grants To Raise Vaccine Uptake
(G) $50,000 Available — Each — For Groups To Target Minorities
(H) Canada Vaccine Innovation Community Challenge

Posted on

CV #66(H): Selective Reporting, The Fraud And Deception Behind VAER Systems

In order for the true effects of a vaccine (or any pharmaceutical) to be fully known, it’s important to have all of the side effects documented and compiled. This is so members of the public can give informed consent, or refuse a product if they see it as unsafe. However, we are getting everything but the truth here.

Normally, clear thinking people would be able to see through such nonsense. However, politicians and hack “journalists” do what they can to keep the public uninformed. A quick example:

In order to keep this “pandemic” psy-op going, it’s necessary that the people in charge engage in mental gymnastics. In particular, the dangers must be exaggerated, and the dangers of the agenda minimized. Never mind that Alberta had zero flu deaths, as the variants are overrunning the Province.

This is done with the gene replacement therapies as well. They are not really “vaccines” as. Now, we can’t have the true scale of problems coming out. Broadly speaking, this is concealed in 2 ways:

  1. Intentionally inflating Covid-19 deaths
  2. Deliberate lowballing Of vaccine effects

Both points will be addressed below.

1. Intentionally Inflating Covid-19 Deaths

There is really no way to deny at this point that public officials are flat out lying about virus deaths, and artificially driving up the counts in order to keep the psy-op going. Check out this article for many more examples of this happening. Never mind that the virus has never been isolated, and that the PCR tests are completely useless for this job.

Skeptics may reasonably ask where the emergency if these death waves aren’t materializing. Better to gaslight such people as crazies and not answer. And never mind the fact that the flu and influenza seem to have coincidently disappeared.

2. DEFINITION FOR DEATHS DUE TO COVID-19
.
A death due to COVID-19 is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness, in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID disease (e.g. trauma). There should be no period of complete recovery from COVID-19 between illness and death.
.
A death due to COVID-19 may not be attributed to another disease (e.g. cancer) and should be counted independently of preexisting conditions that are suspected of triggering a severe course of COVID-19.

In fairness, this can’t entirely be blamed on politicians like Doug Ford, Christine Elliott, Jason Kenney, John Horgan, or Patty Hajdu. The guidelines are written up in such a way (intentionally?) that it positively invites death count inflation

2. Deliberate Lowballing Of Vaccine Effects

In November 2003, there was the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharamaceuticals for Human Use. Their report is publicly available. Now there are some worthwhile parts in this. One of them is the attempt to create universal standards for reporting side effects of medications.

So, what exactly is worth reporting during drug trials, or once its already on the market?

4. STANDARDS FOR EXPEDITED REPORTING
4.1 What Should Be Reported?
4.1.1 Serious ADRs
Cases of adverse drug reactions that are both serious and unexpected are subject to expedited reporting. The reporting of serious expected reactions in an expedited manner varies among countries. Non-serious adverse reactions, whether expected or not, would normally not be subject to expedited reporting. For reports from studies and other solicited sources, all cases judged by either the reporting healthcare professional or the MAH as having a possible causal relationship to the medicinal product would qualify as ADRs. For purposes of reporting, spontaneous reports associated with approved drugs imply a suspected causal relationship.

4.1.2 Other Observations
In addition to single case reports, any safety information from other observations that could change the risk-benefit evaluation for the product should be communicated as soon as possible to the regulatory authorities in accordance with local regulation. Examples include any significant unanticipated safety findings from an in vitro, animal, epidemiological, or clinical study that suggest a significant human risk, such as evidence of mutagenicity, teratogenicity, carcinogenicity, or lack of efficacy with a drug used in treating a life-threatening or serious disease.

4.1.2.1 Lack of Efficacy
Evidence of lack of efficacy should not normally be expedited, but should be discussed in the relevant periodic safety update report. However, in certain circumstances and in some regions, individual reports of lack of efficacy are considered subject to expedited reporting. Medicinal products used for the treatment of life-threatening or serious diseases, vaccines, and contraceptives are examples of classes of medicinal products where lack of efficacy should be considered for expedited reporting. Clinical judgment should be used in reporting, with consideration of the local product labeling and disease being treated.

Apparently if reactions are serious and unexpected (not just serious), then it’s grounds for reporting in an expedited fashion. Otherwise, then there’s no rush.

It’s also interesting that it says “clinical judgement should be used” in reporting. Are these health care providers to act as a form of gatekeeper to this information getting out? And what is the standard for how that judgement should applied?

The Canadian standard for reporting isn’t much (if any) better.

Should all AEFIs be reported?

No. During their development, vaccines undergo rigorous testing for safety, quality, and efficacy. During these “pre-licensure trials” efforts are made to capture every single adverse event that follows immunization.

By the time a vaccine is authorized for marketing, the safety profile for common adverse events such as vaccination site reactions or mild fever is well known. It is always important to counsel vaccinees or their guardians regarding the possible occurrence of such reactions, but there is no need to report such expected events unless they are more severe or more frequent than expected.

Does this seem bizarre? A drug manufacturer claims that they intend to document and compile all of the data for side effects during clinical trials, but it’s not a big deal once the product is on the market?!

In fairness, the page does immediately contradict itself right after afterwards and say that events should be reported if it can’t be explained otherwise.

The Canadian Government’s own guidelines state that not all AEFI, or adverse effects following immunization, should be reported. The stated reasoning is that (presumably) minor reactions are already to be expected. In other words, these kinds of reactions are EXPECTED to happen, and shouldn’t be reported if minor.

The first problem is that this standard is incredibly subjective, and prone to both human error. Second, the people involved may not want the full truth about the side effects of their products to get out.

The page goes on to say that the preferred way of reporting is to Municipal or Provincial Health Units. The results are then forwarded along. Now, that can create a problem, if the people involved simply don’t view such reactions are worthwhile, or are instructed not to.

According to Public Health Ontario [Page 9] “all deaths temporally associated with receipt of vaccines that have been reported to public health units are thoroughly investigated and reported to PHO.” That’s interesting, since the Ontario Government doesn’t take issue with classifying Covid deaths simply from having the virus. See Christine Elliott above. Remember, WHO’s definition is death from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed case.

The BC Centre for Disease Control advises not to report on side effects if they are “known to occur” from the vaccine. With this standard in mind, how many legitimate complaints would have been turned away, since these were expected? Alberta also allows for “expected” reactions to bypassed being classified as AEFI.

The obvious questions to ask here: how accurate are the various reporting systems in Canada, and elsewhere? If patients are told not to report certain expected side effects, do we really know the true prevalence? If there is discretion by District Health Units on what to report, how wisely is it being used? How honest are the people who end up using the information at the end anyway?

Very common: may affect more than 1 in 10 people
 injection site pain
 tiredness
 headache
 muscle pain
 chills
 joint pain
 fever
 diarrhea

Common: may affect more than 1 in 100 and up to 1 in 10 people
 injection site redness
 injection site swelling
 nausea
 vomiting

Uncommon: may affect up to 1 in 100 people
 enlarged lymph nodes
 feeling unwell
 arm pain

Non-severe allergic reactions (such as rash, itching, hives or swelling of the face) and severe allergic reactions have been reported.

These are not all the possible side effects you may have when taking Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. If you experience any side effects not listed here, tell your healthcare professional.
There is a remote chance that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine could cause a severe allergic
reaction. A severe allergic reaction would usually occur within a few minutes to one hour after
getting a dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. For this reason, your vaccination provider
may ask you to stay at the place where you received your vaccine for monitoring after
vaccination. Should you develop any serious symptoms or symptoms that could be an allergic
reaction, seek medical attention right away. Symptoms of an allergic reaction include:
 hives (bumps on the skin that are often very itchy)
 swelling of the face, tongue or throat
 difficulty breathing
 a fast heartbeat
 dizziness and weakness

For reference, the above list is what is or can be “expected” from the Pfizer vaccine. Once more, this mRNA “vaccine” is not approved by Health Canada, and only has interim authorization. Still feeling like a champ?

And all of this, for a virus that’s never been proven to exist, using testing methods never designed for infection detection.

As a final thought, just remember the people manufacturing these concoctions are indemnified from legal liability. It you are injured or killed, it’s your problem.

(1) https://globalnews.ca/news/7460952/alberta-influenza-zero-cases-hospitalizations/
(2) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-third-wave-pandemic-variants-1.5972869
(3) https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/Guidelines_Cause_of_Death_COVID-19.pdf?ua=1
(4) https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/E2A_Guideline.pdf
(5) Adverse Effect Reporting Guidelines World Health Org
(6) https://vaccine-safety-training.org/tl_files/vs/pdf/report-of-cioms-who-working-group.pdf
(7) WHO Vaccine Safety Training Manual
(8) https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/covid-19-aefi-report.pdf?la=en
(9) Adverse Effect Reporting Guidelines Ontario
(10) https://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/publichealth/oph_standards/docs/aefi_cd.pdf
(11) Adverse Effects Case Definitions Ontario
(12) https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/covid-19-aefi-report.pdf?la=en
(13) http://www.bccdc.ca/health-professionals/clinical-resources/adverse-events-following-immunization
(14) https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/info/Page16187.aspx
(15) Health Canada Reporting Adverse Reactions
(16) https://archive.is/Uz0hx
(17) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/immunization/reporting-adverse-events-following-immunization/user-guide-completion-submission-aefi-reports.html
(18) Health Canada On Vaccine Safety
(19) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/reports-publications/canada-communicable-disease-report-ccdr/monthly-issue/2014-40/ccdr-volume-40-s-3-december-4-2014/ccdr-volume-40-s-3-december-4-2014-2.html
(20) https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/migration/phac-aspc/publicat/ccdr-rmtc/14vol40/dr-rm40s-3/assets/pdf/ccdrv40is3a05-eng.pdf
(21) Vaccine Vigilance Working Group Report
(22) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-26c-exposing-the-lies-of-the-inflated-death-tolls/
(23) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-37h-bccdc-admitted-a-year-ago-pcr-tests-dont-work-as-advertised/
(24) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FOI-Fluroide-Free-Peel-Compilation.pdf

Posted on

Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, And The Interesting Stocks They Own

https://twitter.com/ETFOeducators/status/1371865858046365704

The Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario (ETFO) has publicly called for forcing masks on children, even those in kindergarten. However, not everything is as it appears. For example, the OTPP, the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, owns $83 million in stock in 3M. This is a company that makes masks.

Also, an honourbale mention and shoutout to Stormhaven, who has covered this, and taken a different approach. Check that piece out as well, as it has lots of good information.

What else is in the OTPP (which includes both elementary and high school teachers)? Information on the holdings can be obtained for free at the U.S. SEC, the Securities and Exchanges Commission.

COMPANY AMOUNT
3M CO $83,000,000
Abbott Labs $355,000
Biogen Inc. $41,915,000
Eli Lilly & Co $1,110,000
Gilead Sciences $1,406,000
Globeus Med Inc. $513,000
Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC $317,000
Johnson & Johnson $84,386,000
Medpace Holdings Inc. $393,000
Merck & Co. $406,000
Mersana Therapeutics $504,000
Moderna Inc. $970,000
Pfizer $599,000
Procter & Gamble $837,000
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals $736,000
Sarpeta Therapeutics $753,000
TEVA Pharmaceuticals $17,487,000
United Therapeutics Corp. $1,077,000
Vertex Pharmaceuticals $502,000
West Pharmaceutical SVSC $797,000

$83 million in 3M, a company that manufactures facemasks. This is one of those things that makes you go “hmmm….”, doesn’t it?

In addition to owning parts of companies involved in health care and pharmaceuticals, the OTPP has other interests in businesses that will also profit from extended lockdowns, and the “Great Reset”. Here are some of them:

COMPANY AMOUNT
Amazon Group $287,000
Apple $1,104,000
Bank of America Corp $579,000
Black Hills Corp $322,000
Blackstone Group $413,000
Costco Wholesale $943,000
Goldman Sachs $1,714,000
Home Dept $81,854
Kroger Co. $662,000
McDonald’s Corp. $81,651,000
Microsoft $244,167,000
PayPal Holdings $542,000
Pepsico $853,000
Rogers Communications $743,000
Shaw Communications $906,000
Tesla Inc. $561,455,000
Tri Pointe Group Inc. $1,118,000
Twitter Inc. $257,000
Verizon Communications $860,000
Visa Inc. $83,780,000
Zoom Video Communications $392,000

It’s not much of a stretch to see that the OTPP stands to benefit from lockdowns and the “Great Reset”. After all, they are heavily invested in industries and companies that will profit from the current situation.

In addition to owning part of 3M, this Pension Plan also owns considerable stock in Gilead Sciences, Eli Lilly, Merck, Moderna, Pfizer, Teva, and over $84 million in Johnson & Johnson. This could explain their support for the vaccine agenda. Then again, it could all just be a coincidence.

It could also be a coincidence that Jo Taylor, who’s in charge of the OTPP, has ties to the World Economic Forum. Likewise, it may just be happenstance that Mark Wiseman, who runs Blackrock (which owns SNC Lavalin), used to run the CPPIB, and helped set up the OTPP.

Read into it what you will.

(1) https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=937567
(2) https://archive.is/EFPhz
(3) Submissions At End Of December 2020
(4) https://archive.is/PQnkQ
(5) SEC Filings, Total Pension Fund Assets, December 2020
(6) https://archive.is/SKUga
(7) https://www.weforum.org/agenda/authors/jo-taylor
(8) https://www.weforum.org/people/mark-wiseman

(9) Ontario Teachers, World Economic Forum
(10) Healthcare Of Ontario Pension Plan’s Holdings

Posted on

CV #66(G): Patty Hajdu Lies: Rigorous Testing WASN’T Required To Get “Vaccines” Onto Market

Canadians are constantly told that these gene therapy “vaccines” are safe, and have undergone strict testing in order to be allowed on the market. But what exactly are those standards? And is it normal practice to include a clause making authorization mandatory?

People should know that if the product injures or kills them, indemnification agreements prevent the manufacturers from getting sued. A vaccine injury compensation program was announced back in December, but appears to have gone nowhere.

As a reminder, Interim Authorization and Approval are quite different, and cannot be used interchangeably.

(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.

If you read the inserts provided by Health Canada (see below), they will all claim to be “authorized under Section 5 of an Interim Order”. Fine, but what is that Order, and what does it actually say?

Issuance
5 The Minister must issue an authorization in respect of a COVID-19 drug if the following requirements are met:

(a) the applicant has submitted an application to the Minister that meets the requirements set out in subsection 3‍(1) or 4‍(2);
(b) the applicant has provided the Minister with all information or material, including samples, requested under subsection 13‍(1) in the time, form and manner specified under subsection 13‍(2); and
(c) the Minister has sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the benefits associated with the drug outweigh the risks, having regard to the uncertainties relating to the benefits and risks and the necessity of addressing the urgent public health need related to COVID-19.

Several of these “vaccines”, and I use the term loosely, were given Interim Authorization under Section 5 of an Interim Order signed by Health Minister Patty Hajdu on September 16, 2020. The above criteria is all that is required.

Note: Section 5 starts out with “The Minister must” issue and authorization. It’s not that “The Minister should”, or “The Minister may” issue one, but the Minister MUST.

Also, the above requirements are not very strict. 3(1) or 4(2) must be met, along with 13(1) and 13(2). And all that’s needed is the very subjective standard that the “Minister has sufficient evidence to support the conclusion”. It doesn’t specify what, if any, standard there is. The Minister only needs to see is as “worth the risk” given the uncertainties there are.

It’s worth noting that Health Canada doesn’t do the testing themselves. Instead, they rely heavily on the documentation provided. Quite the trust system.

Application for authorization
3 (1) Subject to section 4, an application for an authorization in respect of a COVID-19 drug must be in a form established by the Minister and contain sufficient information and material to enable the Minister to determine whether to issue the authorization, including
.
(a) the applicant’s name and contact information and, in the case of a foreign applicant, the name and contact information of their representative in Canada;
(b) a description of the drug and a statement of its proper name or its common name if there is no proper name;
(c) a statement of the brand name of the drug or the identifying name or code proposed for the drug;
a list of the ingredients of the drug, stated quantitatively;
(d) the specifications for each of the drug’s ingredients;
(e) a description of the facilities and equipment to be used in the manufacture, preparation and packaging of the drug;
(f) details of the method of manufacture and the controls to be used in the manufacture, preparation and packaging of the drug;
(g) details of the tests to be applied to control the potency, purity, stability and safety of the drug;
(h) the names and qualifications of all the investigators to whom the drug has been sold;
(i) a draft of every label to be used in connection with the drug, including any package insert and any document that (j) is provided on request and that sets out supplementary information on the use of the drug;
(k) a statement of all the representations to be made for the promotion of the drug respecting
(i) the recommended route of administration of the drug,
(ii) the proposed dosage of the drug,
(iii) the drug’s indications, and
(iv) the contra-indications and side effects of the drug;
(l) a description of the dosage form that is proposed for the sale of the drug;
(m) evidence that all test batches of the drug used in any studies conducted in connection with the application were manufactured and controlled in a manner that is representative of market production;
(n) in the case of a drug intended for administration to food-producing animals, the withdrawal period of the drug; and
(o) the known information in relation to the quality, safety and effectiveness of the drug.

About part (n), it says “administration to food-producing animals”. Are we to assume that livestock are going to be vaccinated with these substances at some point? Or are we repurposing drugs that were originally meant for them? That’s a bit unsettling.

Application for authorization – foreign drug
4 (1) An application for an authorization in respect of a COVID-19 drug may be based on a comparison to a foreign drug if the sale of the foreign drug is authorized by a foreign regulatory authority on the basis of information submitted to the authority in relation to the quality, safety and effectiveness of that drug.
.
Content
(2) The application must be in a form established by the Minister and contain the following information and material:
.
(a) the information and material described in paragraphs 3‍(1)‍(a) to (d), (f), (j) to (l) and, if applicable, (n);
(b) an attestation, signed and dated by an individual who has authority to bind the applicant in Canada, certifying that the applicant has access to the information referred to in paragraph 3‍(1)‍(o) that was submitted to the relevant foreign regulatory authority in order for the foreign drug to be authorized to be sold;
(c) information that demonstrates that the drug is identical to, and is manufactured, prepared and packaged in the same manner as, the foreign drug;
(d) information that demonstrates that the sale of the foreign drug is authorized by the foreign regulatory authority referred to in paragraph (b); and
(e) any labels that are approved by the foreign regulatory authority referred to in paragraph (b) for use in connection with the foreign drug.

Request for information or material
13 (1) The Minister may request that a person that has submitted an application for an authorization in respect of a COVID-19 drug or the holder of such an authorization provide any information or material, including samples, that is necessary to enable the Minister to determine whether to issue, amend or suspend the authorization.
.
Time, form and manner
(2) The person or holder, as the case may be, must provide the information, material or samples in the time, form and manner specified by the Minister.

Section 3(1) lists what documentation needs to be submitted to get authorization. Section 4(2) contains a few extra steps for foreign drugs. Sections 13(1) and (2) state that information and samples must be provided if demanded.

The standard for Interim Authorization under Section 5 appears to be a fairly low one. Keep in mind, the Minister doesn’t even need to be certain the drugs work as advertised. It just has to be determined to be worth the risk. Not quite what we are told on the news.

As for the basis in the law, Section 30.1 of the Canada Food & Drug Act allows the Health Minister to sign such Orders, if it’s believed, (or claimed to be believed), it’s in the public interest. There is no requirement that the Minister have any appropriate education background, or know what he/she is talking about.

Circling back to the top of Section 5, the Health Minister “must issue an authorization” if the conditions in Section 5 are met?!?! So this isn’t discretionary? Our graphic designer Minister must sign off on this?

It’s also unsettling that this Order allows for drugs originally intended for livestock to be repurposed and tested on humans.

WHO Paper On MANDATORY Vaccination April 13, 2021 (Original)
WHO Paper On MANDATORY Vaccination April 13, 2021 (Copy)
Section 30.1 Canada Food & Drug Act
September 2020 Interim Order From Patty Hajdu
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2020/12/government-of-canada-announces-pan-canadian-vaccine-injury-support-program.html
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

Testing Product Insert AstraZeneca Interim Authorization
Testing Product Insert Janssen Interim Authorization
Testing Product Insert Moderna Interim Authorization
Testing Product Insert Pfizer Interim Authorization

Vaccines Supported For Pregnant Women, Despite No Testing
Vaccines Given “Interim Authorization”, Not Approval. Very Different
Call Centers Wrongly Telling People “Vaccines” Are Approved
Ontario Adds, Then Removes Protections Against “No Jab, No Job”
WHO April 13 Paper: Discussion On Mandatory “Experimental Vaxx”