Thoughts on coronavirus...

Politics, History, & 'Conspiracy'
User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Re: Thoughts on coronavirus...

Postby Masato » Sat Sep 04, 2021 2:18 am

Our family doctor just told her today that they would refuse her an appointment and a referral for my wife if she is not vaxxed.

They are already refusing medical attention here in Ontario.

User avatar
Canuckster
Posts: 6731
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:24 pm
Reputation: 3073

Postby Canuckster » Sat Sep 04, 2021 2:29 am

If they're refusing medical treatment for something you're paying taxes for,...............
People say they all want the truth, but when they are confronted with a truth that disagrees with them, they balk at it as if it were an unwanted zombie apocalypse come to destroy civilization.

User avatar
Canuckster
Posts: 6731
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:24 pm
Reputation: 3073

Postby Canuckster » Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:05 am

Getting crazy
People say they all want the truth, but when they are confronted with a truth that disagrees with them, they balk at it as if it were an unwanted zombie apocalypse come to destroy civilization.

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Postby Masato » Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:43 am

well it was our old family doctor, my wife called them by mistake. We switched them before covid because she was just awful, lol lazy and didn't give a shit about their job. Frightfully bad

Our new family doctor I don't really know yet, whether or not he will follow suit remains to be seen, but yeah its not just the taxes its our fuckin healthcare lol its like the proudest thing Canada boasts of and basic human right

My wife has an appointment for an eye doctor in a couple weeks, but its just a consultation they will have to follow up with a procedure date. will they refuse the procedure if she is not vaxxed? Even if she is healthy?

Madness

I don't care much for protests but I think I might go to Toronto tomorrow, there is supposed to be a big one against the forced vax. Turning point in history imo

User avatar
Megaterio Llamas
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
Reputation: 2533

Postby Megaterio Llamas » Sat Sep 04, 2021 8:57 am

I've had a proof of vaxx card downloaded onto my phone here in BC since April. This whole new vaxx passport ID the BC gov is rolling out in ten days or so is kind of a charade. They already provided people with a way to download their vaccination results onto their phones months ago. All that's new are the restrictions on discretionary stuff the unvaxxed will be excluded from.

And I'm reading Ontario has decided to adopt ID passports as well eh. I though Ford said he wouldn't do that?
el rey del mambo

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Postby Masato » Sat Sep 04, 2021 2:04 pm

Megaterio Llamas wrote:I though Ford said he wouldn't do that?


So did Trudeau, lol

'Just 2 weeks to flatten the curve!'


Boiling frogs. In less than 2 years. :?

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Postby Masato » Thu Sep 09, 2021 7:37 pm

How much more obvious does it have to get before people start understanding what is happening? How far do we have to go before 'conspiracy theories' are admitted to no longer be theories?

Its absurd that people still scoff and turn when we try to explain to them what's going on, even when their TV leaders are coming out and admitting it out in the open.

Here Australia Gov't puppets discuss "...what contact tracing looks like in the New World Order"


User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Postby Masato » Mon Sep 13, 2021 2:16 pm


User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Postby Masato » Tue Sep 14, 2021 12:07 pm

This is great:

https://ocla.ca/a-letter-to-public-health-officers/

Ontario Civil Liberties Association
A Letter to Public Health Officers

[spoiler]
A Letter to Public Health Officers
Posted on September 13, 2021 by admin
Civil liberties are under attack in Canada and worldwide. On the basis of public health acts and infectious disease laws, limitations to constitutional rights are imposed through emergency orders by Canada’s medical officers of health and by unelected bureaucrats elsewhere.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was written specifically to limit government overreach. In a crisis such as this, it is more important than ever to uphold Charter rights. Whether the COVID-19 mandates and restrictions represent reasonable and necessary limitations has yet to be seen.

Members of the newly formed group Canadian Academics for Covid Ethics and other independent scholars address these questions in a letter to our public health officials. The authors summarize the many uncertainties around the severity of the pandemic, reliance on problematic testing procedures and erratic modeling, ineffective non-pharmaceutical interventions, suppression of alternative treatments, disregard for natural immunity, and the destructive focus on vaccines as the only solution.

Open Letter to Public Health Officers

After months of fear, misinformation, lockdowns, mandates, and broken trust, Canadians are starting to wake up in disbelief:

What have you done?!

You have convinced and continue to attempt convincing the public that we are in the midst of a major health crisis, and thrust our country into chaos. Meanwhile, all-cause mortality in Canada is in-line with trends from the past several years and indicates no such crisis. You have instilled fear in the general public of COVID-19 by publishing egregious data (such as daily cases and ICU numbers) without putting those numbers into context. How serious are those ‘cases’? How many were asymptomatic? What would similar case numbers be in any past years for other illness such as the flu? How does ICU occupancy compare to previous years? You are misleading the public and priming us for unwarranted future restrictions.

What have you done?!

You have not been transparent about the favourable survival rates from COVID. Instead, you convinced us that a positive test result is a death sentence, when in reality the virus overwhelmingly affects elderly people and those with specific vulnerabilities. COVID remains relatively harmless for the majority of the population.

What have you done?!

You have driven up case numbers by relying on the PCR test, deemed to be inappropriate as a diagnostic tool by its inventor and known to yield too many false positives at the cycle thresholds that have been used. In fact, the WHO recommended, on June 25 of this year, that ‘widespread screening of asymptomatic individuals is not a recommended strategy’. And yet, you insist on driving up the case numbers by mass testing of healthy, asymptomatic individuals. You have made Canadians irrationally fearful of one another, convincing us that asymptomatic transmission is a driver of infections, while multiple studies demonstrate that this is false. Yet, you fail to update the public on the changing science.

What have you done?!

You have coerced an entire population to wear masks, despite the fact that their ability to prevent transmission of COVID-19 has been seriously called into question by recent systematic reviews of the medical literature. This is also readily observed by comparing regions with and without mask mandates. Cloth masks and most mass-produced face masks are not approved medical devices, rather their real purpose appears to be the creation of heightened public anxiety, isolating the wearers, and posturing visual compliance to unfounded public health diktats. This insidious form of psychological control has immeasurable health, social and psychological consequences, especially for children, which you fail to acknowledge.

What have you done?!

You have utilized lockdowns as a sledgehammer to bring down COVID cases, while neglecting the resulting collateral damage from lost livelihoods, stalled cancer and transplant surgeries, and increased rates of depression, drug overdose, and suicide. You have failed to take a holistic approach, and your “cure” is proving far worse than the disease. There are multiple studies demonstrating the ineffectiveness of lockdowns, easily seen by simple comparison of jurisdictions that locked down with those that didn’t. You are failing us by failing to understand the evolution of knowledge. We learn by and through mistakes. The ethical principle is to own up to mistakes. Without that first step, ignorance flourishes.

What have you done?!

You have provided madcap computer model predictions to justify lockdowns, proclaiming the lockdowns as successful, when the predictions did not materialize. This is not proof. This is manipulation. Computer models have provided too many nonsensical predictions and should have been ignored. After decades of model refinement, we still cannot accurately predict the weather, even a day in advance. Yet, you present COVID model results as if they are accurate over the span of months.

What have you done?!

You have not provided any solid scientific evidence that any of the measures you have imposed on the public are either necessary or effective. You have ignored a body of scientific literature that does not support your measures, and you have not engaged with experts who have raised concerns or evaluated the same evidence in a way that does not align with your views. You have not allowed public scientific debate on these issues, choosing rather to ignore, censor or smear those brave enough to bring them to the public.

What have you done?!

You have ignored early treatment protocols for safe, effective, and inexpensive treatments of COVID 19 with multidrug therapies, despite the massive evidence both from front-line doctors and meta-analysis of the medical literature, with published studies showing their efficacy around the world. Instead, you have convinced citizens that COVID-19 is a death sentence and that only vaccination, indeed vaccine mandates, will save us. You have withheld important information from the public and from frontline doctors, and more shockingly, you have intimidated, demonized, and threatened with loss of license doctors who have had the courage to prescribe lifesaving treatment to their patients. What a waste of lives!

What have you done?!

You are now relentlessly pushing experimental vaccines on the general population as ‘safe’. Nothing could be further from the truth, as shown by almost 14,000 deaths reported in the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Since December of 2020, the number of reported covid vaccine-related deaths are already more than one-and-a-half times the number of deaths reported in conjunction with all other vaccines combined since the implementation of the system in 1990. Furthermore, there is a lack of long-term safety data. These genetic-based therapies only received emergency interim authorization, and have not undergone the same type of review as fully approved products. You are not providing the public with the information they need to be able to give informed consent.

What have you done?!

You forced family and emergency doctors to abandon their Hippocratic oaths to “first do no harm.” You have destroyed the science surrounding COVID and replaced it with baseless behavioural prescriptions. You have divided citizen from citizen, parent from child, brother from sister. Overall, you have participated in destroying a country that was once prosperous, strong and free.

What should you do?

Publicly admit that your recommendations and orders are both harmful and baseless. Retract all of your recommendations and orders immediately. Stop vaccine mandates. Apologize to Canadians and resign.

Anton de Ruiter, PhD
Jan Vrbik, PhD
John Zwaagstra, PhD
Claudia Chaufan, MD, PhD
Maximilian Forte, PhD
Denis Rancourt, PhD
Angela Durante, PhD
Valentina Capurri, PhD
Alexander Andree, PhD
Janice Fiamengo, PhD
Laurent Leduc, PhD
Jens Zimmermann, PhD

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 8226

Postby Masato » Tue Sep 14, 2021 12:09 pm

This too:

Professors Write Open Letter Regarding University Vaccination and Testing Mandates
Posted on September 2, 2021 by admin

https://ocla.ca/professors-write-open-l ... -mandates/

[spoiler]
Posted on September 2, 2021 by admin
Four professors from the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier University sent an open letter to their university presidents on Sept. 1 stating their deep concerns with the universities’ COVID-19 vaccination and testing policies.

The authors argue, with many references, that the universities’ policies violate campus members’ fundamental rights in five ways. These five themes are listed below, along with a short excerpt from each one:

Discrimination:
“The policy explicitly divides the our university communities into two groups, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, and then adds to the latter group a requirement to seek an exemption and to regularly undergo onerous biological testing—this falls squarely within the definition of ‘discrimination’. Furthermore, since certain minority, ethnic and religious groups are less likely be vaccinated, the policy will systemically discriminate against these already disadvantaged groups. Universities should be especially understanding of vaccine hesitancy in some minority groups in light of past unethical medical experiments that have targeted minorities (e.g., the Tuskegee experiments).” […]

Basic rights
“Ontario universities have long supported the notion of “my body, my choice;” is this mantra now to be replaced with “my body, the university administration’s choice?” We hope our universities will continue to be a robust champion of basic human rights and freedoms, even during a pandemic.” […]

Scientific evidence
“The COVID-19 policy fails to take into account and make available all scientific knowledge regarding the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. First, by requiring regular testing of only the unvaccinated, the COVID-19 policy ignores data showing that vaccinated individuals can harbour and transmit SARS-CoV-2. If the university is interested in tracking COVID-19 infections on campus, why are possible ‘breakthrough infections’ in the vaccinated not being monitored by regular testing of the vaccinated?” […]

Coercion
“As currently formulated, the policy coerces students, staff and faculty into taking an invasive experimental medical treatment (i.e., COVID-19 vaccination) that has a largely unknown safety profile and possible life-long and even fatal side-effects …”

Informed consent
“The Nuremburg Code (1947) also stipulates that voluntary consent requires that the individual ‘should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him [or her] to make an understanding and enlightened decision.'” […]

Based on these concerns, the professors ask for the COVID-19 vaccination and testing policies to be immediately repealed and replaced with a policy that gives campus community members choice over vaccination and testing.


FULL LETTER:
[spoiler]
Wednesday, September 1, 2021
Open Letter Regarding University Vaccination and Testing Mandates
Dear Presidents Goel and MacLatchy,
As faculty members of the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier University, we write to express
our deep concerns with the present COVID-19 vaccination and testing policies at our universities1,2
.
While we share with the policy makers the goal of balancing the safety of our community during a
pandemic with other competing interests (e.g., learning, human rights), we do not believe that the
current policy achieves this goal. We are aware that another group of faculty, staff and students from
the University of Waterloo have, in the last week, also submitted a similar public letter to
administration calling for a repeal of the COVID-19 vaccination and testing mandate3
. Though we
have submitted our documents separately we support each other fully. Echoing and expanding on
previously articulated arguments, our specific concerns are as follows:
1. Discrimination: The current COVID-19 vaccination and testing policy blatantly violates the
our universities’ commitments to equity, inclusivity and diversity4,5
. The policy explicitly
divides the our university communities into two groups, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated,
and then adds to the latter group a requirement to seek an exemption and to regularly undergo
onerous biological testing—this falls squarely within the definition of ‘discrimination’.
Furthermore, since certain minority, ethnic and religious groups are less likely be vaccinated6,7,8
,
the policy will systemically discriminate against these already disadvantaged groups.
Universities should be especially understanding of vaccine hesitancy in some minority groups
in light of past unethical medical experiments that have targeted minorities (e.g., the Tuskegee
experiments9, see also 10). If policy makers at our universities truly believe, teach and practice
principles of equity, inclusivity and diversity these principles should not be allowed to fall by
the wayside during a pandemic. We maintain that those who hold views about vaccination that
differ from the views of the policy makers should not be systematically discriminated against.
2. Basic Rights: The coercive nature of the COVID vaccination and testing policy is
particularly problematic because it can lead to violations of people’s basic “Right to security
of the person” as articulated in Section 7.2.iii of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
11
1 https://uwaterloo.ca/coronavirus/
2 https://www.wlu.ca/coronavirus/assets/r ... t-faq.html 3 https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/~mannr/Open-let ... dates.html 4 https://uwaterloo.ca/human-rights-equit ... s-policies 5 https://www.wlu.ca/about/discover-lauri ... index.html 6 Razai, M. S., Osama, T., McKechnie, D. G. J., & Majeed, A. (2021). Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minority groups. BMJ,
372, n513. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n513 7 https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/ ... rimer.html 8 Mosby, I., and Swidrovich, J. (2021). Medical experimentation and the roots of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Indigenous
Peoples in Canada. CMAJ, 193(11), E381-E383 https://www.cmaj.ca/content/193/11/E381.short 9 https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/histo ... egee-study 10 Mosby I. Administering colonial science: nutrition research and human biomedical experimentation in Aboriginal communities and
residential schools, 1942–1952. Soc Hist 2013; 46:145–72. 11 https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/r ... /art7.html
According to the Charter, “Security of the person includes a person’s right to control his/her
own bodily integrity. It will be engaged where the state interferes with personal autonomy and
a person's ability to control his or her own physical or psychological integrity…” by, for
example, “…imposing unwanted medical treatment.” Because some people have deeply held
personal, religious, and scientific concerns with both vaccination and surrendering bodily
material for testing, the present coercive COVID policy can cause “severe psychological harm
to the individual,” which the Charter is meant to prevent. Along similar lines, the Canadian Bill
of Rights12 states that “It is hereby recognized and declared that in Canada there have existed
and shall continue to exist without discrimination by reason of race, national origin, colour,
religion or sex, the following human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely, (a) the right
of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person…” (italics added). Furthermore, Bill S-201,
the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act13, also “…amends the Canada Labour Code to protect
employees from being required to undergo or to disclose the results of a genetic test, and
provides employees with other protections related to genetic testing and test results. It also
amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the ground of genetic
characteristics.” Do university policy makers really intend to override these basic rights
afforded to all Canadians? Ontario universities have long supported the notion of “my body,
my choice;” is this mantra now to be replaced with “my body, the university administration’s
choice?” We hope our universities will continue to be a robust champion of basic human rights
and freedoms, even during a pandemic.
3. Scientific Evidence: The COVID-19 policy fails to take into account and make available all
scientific knowledge regarding the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. First, by requiring regular
testing of only the unvaccinated, the COVID-19 policy ignores data showing that vaccinated
individuals can harbour and transmit SARS-CoV-214,15,16. If the university is interested in
tracking COVID-19 infections on campus, why are possible ‘breakthrough infections’ in the
vaccinated not being monitored by regular testing of the vaccinated? Second, the policy
involves regular testing of unvaccinated asymptomatic individuals, yet policy makers have not
provided clear and compelling evidence to support the assumption that asymptomatic
individuals are meaningful drivers of COVID-19 spread17 on campus; nor has there been
evidence presented supporting the assumption that the outcomes of COVID tests
administered to large numbers of asymptomatic individuals are meaningful, valid, and
reliable18. Third, the policy ignores evidence that those previously infected with SARS-CoV-
12 https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-12.3.pdf 13 https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/4 ... sent#enH42 14 Hacisuleyman, E., Hale, C., Saito, Y., Blachere, N. E., Bergh, M., Conlon, E. G., … Darnell, R. B. (2021). Vaccine Breakthrough
Infections with SARS-CoV-2 Variants. New England Journal of Medicine, 384(23), 2212–2218. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa2105000 15 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm
16 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7031e2.htm
17 Cao, S., Gan, Y., Wang, C., Bachmann, M., Wei, S., Gong, J., ... & Lu, Z. (2020). Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid
screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China. Nature communications, 11(1), 1-7. We also note that much of the evidence
for asymptomatic spread remains circumstantial and speculative. As an example, see: Huff, H. V., & Singh, A. (2020). Asymptomatic
transmission during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and implications for public health strategies. Clinical Infectious Diseases,
71(10), 2752-2756. 18 Armstrong, S. (2020). Covid-19: Tests on students are highly inaccurate, early findings show. BMJ, 371, m4941. doi:
10.1136/bmj.m4941
2 appear to have robust immunity against the virus19,20. Fourth, the requirement for vaccinating
university students does not seem to take into account the strikingly low likelihood that
university-aged individuals will experience severe COVID-related illness or death21. Fifth,
policy makers ought to provide and summarize for our university communities all available
data demonstrating the efficacy of relevant COVID-19 vaccines, focusing only on conclusive,
well-powered, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that measure both shortterm and long-term immunity in university-aged samples. Finally, our university communities
should be presented with a clear statement of the methodology that has been implemented to
track negative side-effects of vaccination as well as up-to-date data regarding the prevalence
and nature of such side-effects; of course, long-term negative side-effects of vaccination
remain completely unknown. Indeed, we note that much of the scientific information
pertaining to these issues is partial, circumstantial, and speculative and we are concerned with
the apparent lack of a clearly articulated data-driven foundation for the present COVID-19
vaccination and testing policy at our universities.
4. Coercion: As currently formulated, the policy coerces students, staff and faculty into taking
an invasive experimental medical treatment (i.e., COVID-19 vaccination) that has a largely
unknown safety profile and possible life-long and even fatal side-effects22. The policy is
coercive because if one does not accept the experimental vaccine, one is required to request
an exemption and comply with onerous testing protocols. As the presently available COVID19 vaccinations have not been through standard rigorous testing protocols, the ongoing
vaccination program is effectively a large-scale experiment, one that now does not seem to
have proper scientific controls. Coercion into participating in such an experiment violates The
Nuremburg Code (1947)23 of “Permissible Medical Experiments,” which requires “voluntary
consent” “without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress,
overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion” (italics added). Our universities
have a long history as leaders in setting and upholding the highest standards of ethics, and it
is shocking that this outstanding track record is now being tarnished by the ethical violations
inherent in the current COVID-19 vaccine and testing policy.
5. Informed Consent: Related to the foregoing, the policy also fails to meet the most basic and
fundamental standards of informed consent. The Nuremburg Code (1947) also stipulates that
voluntary consent requires that the individual “should have sufficient knowledge and
comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him [or her] to
make an understanding and enlightened decision.” Unfortunately, people’s ability to make
‘enlightened decisions’ about pandemic-related issues may have been compromised by
19 Cohen, K. W., Linderman, S. L., Moodie, Z., Czartoski, J., Lai, L., Mantus, G., ... & McElrath, M. J. (2021). Longitudinal analysis
shows durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection with persisting antibody responses and memory B and T cells.
Cell Reports Medicine 2, 100354. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100354. 20 Gazit, S., Shlezinger, R., Perez, G., Lotan, R., Peretz, A., … Patalon, T. (2021). Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to
vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections. Preprint at medRxiv 2021.08.24.21262415; doi:
https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415
21 https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid ... -covid-19-
cases.html?stat=num&measure=deaths&maps=pt#a2
22 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... vents.html 23 https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/201 ... g_Code.pdf
governmental use of manipulative behavioral economics techniques,24,25,26,27 suppression and
censorship of scientific views28,29 and media bias.30 More importantly, at present, along with
the COVID vaccine and testing policy, the university has not made easily accessible clear,
unbiased, and complete information about 1) the costs and benefits of taking the COVID-19
vaccine, including particularly the short- and long-term negative side-effects of the vaccine
(e.g., myocarditis,
31,32 abnormal blood clotting, 33,34 potential pathogenic priming35), and 2) the
validity and reliability of the testing protocols, especially since the FDA in the USA has
revoked the Emergency Use Authorization of some previously used COVID-19 tests36,37.
Critically, we note that useful data about possible side-effects of COVID-19 vaccines are
simply not available since they have not been rigorously collected and investigated. In
addition, to further support informed consent, students, staff, and faculty should also be
informed about the Nuremburg Code, their basic right to refuse invasive medical treatments and
tests as is articulated in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights,
and the possible dangers of medical privacy violations since both vaccination status and
biological data are to be collected.
Based on the foregoing concerns, we request that the current Covid-19 vaccination and testing policy
be repealed immediately and that it be replaced with a policy whereby students, staff, and faculty have
freedom of choice regarding vaccination and testing.
During emergencies, institutional decision making can be influenced by various political, legal and
social pressures and policy makers can allow their personal beliefs, biases and fears to inform their
decisions. Concerningly, during emergencies such as the Covid-19 pandemic, there is a tendency for
institutions to adopt more authoritarian policies38. We respectfully ask university policy makers to
24 Wood, S., & Schulman, K. (2021). Beyond politics—promoting Covid-19 vaccination in the United States. New England Journal of
Medicine. 384:e23, DOI: 10.1056/NEJMms2033790 25 https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/science ... e-workers/ 26 Hursh, S. R., Strickland, J. C., Schwartz, L. P., & Reed, D. D. (2020). Quantifying the impact of public perceptions on vaccine
acceptance using behavioral economics. Frontiers in public health, 8, 877. 27 Sanders, J. G., Tosi, A., Obradovic, S., Miligi, I., & Delaney, L. (2021). Lessons From the UK's lockdown: discourse on behavioural
science in times of COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. 28 Abbasi, K. (2020). Covid-19: politicisation,“corruption,” and suppression of science. BMJ 2020;371:m4425
29 Niemiec, E. (2020). COVID-19 and misinformation: Is censorship of social media a remedy to the spread of medical
misinformation?. EMBO reports, 21(11), e51420. 30 Sacerdote, B., Sehgal, R., & Cook, M. (2020). Why Is All COVID-19 News Bad News? (No. w28110). National Bureau of Economic
Research.
31 Verma, A. K., Lavine, K. J., & Lin, C. Y. (2021). Myocarditis after Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination. The New England Journal of Medicine.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2109975
32 https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/c ... ditis.html 33 Tiede, A., Sachs, U. J., Czwalinna, A., Werwitzke, S., Bikker, R., Krauss, J. K., ... & Ganser, A. (2021). Prothrombotic immune
thrombocytopenia after COVID-19 vaccination. Blood, The Journal of the American Society of Hematology, 138(4), 350-353. 34 Ledford, H. (2021). COVID vaccines and blood clots: five key questions. Nature, 592(7855), 495-496. 35 Lyons-Weiler, J. (2020). Pathogenic Priming Likely Contributes to Serious and Critical Illness and Mortality in COVID-19 via
Autoimmunity. Journal of Translational Autoimmunity, 3, 100051. doi: 10.1016/j.jtauto.2020.100051 36 https://www.fda.gov/media/150773/downlo ... SCDC_2146-
DM61769&ACSTrackingLabel=Lab%20Alert%3A%20FDA%20Revokes%20EUA%20for%20Curative%20SARS-CoV2%20Assay&deliveryName=USCDC_2146-DM61769 37 https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/let ... -staff-and 38 Thomson, S., & Ip, E. C. (2020). COVID-19 emergency measures and the impending authoritarian pandemic. Journal of Law and the
Biosciences, 7(1), lsaa064.
resist these compromising influences and impulses and to base policies on conclusive and wellestablished scientific facts about both benefits and costs of such policies, while also upholding longstanding university values and our basic Canadian rights and freedoms.
Sincerely,
Dr. Daniel Smilek, Professor of Psychology, University of Waterloo
Dr. David M. Haskell, Associate Professor of Digit Media and Journalism / Religion and Culture,
Wilfrid Laurier University
Dr. William J. McNally, Professor of Finance, Wilfrid Laurier University
Dr. Nikolai Kovalev, Associate Professor of Criminology, Wilfrid Laurier University, Brantford
Campus


Return to “The Grand Chessboard”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 128 guests