Continuing from Part 10 |Part 9 | Part 8 | Part 7 | Part 6 | Part 5 | Part 4 | Part 3 | Part 2 | Part 1 and with the analysis of this article by Rosemary Frei which everyone needs to read. Her article also relates the experiences of a resident’s family member who experienced the consequences of these policies first-hand.
I’m going to go through the remaining references from CONDITION SET 2 from the article:
Condition Set 2 continued
(Secondary: This Canadian government document was publicized: “COVID-19 Guidance for High-Risk and Essential Workplaces” and it links to some important information I wanted to note, including:
Pandemic (COVID-19) Tip Sheets: Pandemic guidance for higher-risk and essential occupations and industries).
Primary: On April 17, the Canadian federal government released this document to guide clinicians with healthcare rationing. According to the author there was no press release.
COVID-19 pandemic guidance for the health care sector
1. It emphasizes age-based rationing.
2. It “explicitly discourages transfer of care-home residents to hospitals.”
Long term care (LTC) facilities and home care services will be encouraged to care for COVID-19 patients in place and may be asked to take on additional non-COVID-19 patients/clients to help relieve pressure on hospitals.
. . . LTC facilities may also be asked to provide surge capacity for hospitals through admission of non-COVID-19 hospital patients to non-funded or respite beds. If COVID-19 does develop in LTC facility residents, they should be cared for within the facility if at all possible, to preserve hospital capacity.. ..
I also notice this very strange statement:
Resource allocation decisions should be guided by the pandemic goals, principles, values, and ethical considerations that underpin the pandemic response.
The “pandemic response” is whatever they decided it is, their list of policies, and apparently it has its own “goals,” “principles,” “values.” Concepts are somehow being separated from human considerations which have tended to generate traditional value systems, but since there is a declaration of a “pandemic,” a group of people decided to invent something new.
It has a whole section (2.4) on how they reinvented ethics for COVID.
Ethical issues will inevitably arise during the COVID-19 response. . . .
The purpose of this document is to provide planning guidance for the delivery of health care in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic, which is expected to result in a prolonged period of increased demand on the health care system. . . .
(It says this document was based on Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Planning Guidance for the Health Sector (CPIP). Another document that is probably important they refer to is: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): For health professionals).
This is hypocritical to put it mildly:
Careful planning is also needed for closed settings with a significant number of vulnerable persons, such as LTC facilities and prisons, to minimize risk of exposure and to manage ill residents and staff.
The other parts of the document we just quoted send non-COVID patients into the LTC homes and keep the COVID patients in the LTC homes.
(PT refers to provincial and territorial governments).
Another indication that this is about age:
Providers of palliative care services and hospice care should plan for an increase in demand. If resource allocation becomes necessary, not all patients who might otherwise receive critical care will be able to receive ICU care or ventilator support.
So the main idea:
Decisions over resource allocation in the provision of care – As our health care system is already strained [the policies scared people away from once-busy hospitals as per CTV news], the influx of COVID-19 patients may overwhelm health care resources resulting in scarcities of medicines, equipment, supplies, and HCWs [didn’t happen as per CTV]. This will require resource allocation decisions including prioritization of patient access to scarce resources including acute care, critical care, oxygen support, ventilator support, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. If patients are not eligible for critical care resources, they should be provided with palliative care and/or pain management.
I remember years ago hearing about palliative care and thinking it was a good thing. Now I just wish that doctors would dissent from the system altogether and figure out how to use proper treatments that have been suppressed for decades to make peoples’ lives easier at whatever stage of life they’re at.
Look, doctors, we’ve all been brainwashed to some degree and controlled by money and debt and conditioning. You’re not the only ones. You remember “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq? There are other types of wars going on also. It’s just you have a lot of power and influence over people, so why not get involved in doing the right thing?
(This document also refers to: Infection prevention and control for COVID-19: Interim guidance for long term care homes).
Primary: This news story clearly refers to the policy:
How shoring up hospitals for COVID-19 contributed to Canada’s long-term care crisis |The Globe and Mail | May 21, 2020
They refer to an 86-year old patient who had been discharged from an Ontario hospital, who died afterwards, who
was one of thousands of seniors discharged to nursing and retirement homes as Ontario, Quebec and other provinces rushed to clear beds for a flood of COVID-19 patients that has so far not swamped hospitals, thanks in large part to shutdowns and physical distancing.
So THOUSANDS of seniors were discharged from hospitals.
Notice that the article thanks “shutdowns and physical distancing” for the lack of COVID-19 patients but they just sent their most vulnerable patients out of the hospitals to be crowded together in LTC homes! What happened to quarantine and isolation policies and physical distancing when it came to seniors who became sick??
All of this is the opposite of rational–but I think people should look at these policies as very deliberate in their intent and read Brave New World to see what happens to the elderly in that and stop wishing and assuming that others in power have your values when they don’t. They shut down our economy and they are still hobbling it in a massive way.
. . . , some hospitals, physicians and long-term care facility administrators were discouraging families from sending infected nursing-home residents to the hospital, saying little could be done to effectively treat COVID-19 in patients who were old and chronically ill.
. . . most of the nursing- and retirement-home residents who have succumbed to COVID-19 in Canada died inside the virus-stricken, understaffed facilities, while many of the hospital beds opened for coronavirus patients sat empty.
. . . Jane Meadus, a lawyer with the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly in Toronto: “. . . had they moved people out [of nursing homes] when they became aware they were COVID-positive, they might have been able to slow or stop the infections from continuing through the homes.”
. . . 80 per cent of the Canadians who’ve died of COVID-19 have been residents of seniors’ facilities. . .
Quebec: 2,355 long-term care residents and 653 retirement-home residents died (officially of “COVID-19”)
Ontario: 1,427 for LTC homes and 125 for retirement homes
For whatever reason, the other provinces had much lower numbers by that point, which is a sign that there were operational or policy differences (or values differences among some) in Ontario and Quebec.
Basically, based on on Denis Rancourt’s research, the deaths did apparently spike higher than normal in some jurisdictions with the elderly dying prematurely due to infection and the consequences of isolation, intensified neglect and fear. This is in addition to the cause of death due to COVID being deliberately inflated because of policies from WHO relating to death certificates (mentioned in the article and discussed earlier) and also the broad list of symptoms–but there could have been a wide range of actual causes that were worsened due to the circumstances–and there is an example in Rosemary Frei’s article.
In March, the Quebec government told hospitals to do “load shedding” by postponing procedures and transferring patients.
Ontario transferred 2,200 patients from March 2 to May 3 (to LTC and retirement homes).
Dr. Fred Mather, the president of Ontario Long Term Care Clinicians, said that a surge in acute care had been predicted for the Easter weekend, but it didn’t happen.
They had the impression that they were supposed to avoid sending residents to hospitals.
Some hospitals asked LTC managers to “talk to families about why they shouldn’t send their COVID-19-positive relatives to the emergency department.”
Analysis: How Montreal’s CHSLDs mirrored the Diamond Princess outbreak | Montreal Gazette | May 14, 2020
The article compares what happened to the Diamond Princess cruise ship where 13 passengers died during the quarantine:
Here in Quebec, and especially in Montreal, it has become clear that our landlocked long-term care centres (CHSLDs) have also become incubators for the coronavirus. . .
Like the passengers on the Diamond Princess, authorities in Quebec were late in transferring residents out of CHSLDs. They did so only after many fell ill, moving them to acute-care hospitals . . . . Some of those residents were malnourished and dehydrated.
Primary: Nine residents die, 34 staff suffer symptoms as coronavirus devastates Bobcaygeon, Ont. nursing home | The Globe and Mail | March 29, 2020
In this case, the care home tried to convince families to not transfer their loved ones to hospital:
“It’s possible that you may face the decision to send your loved one to the hospital, especially if they develop pneumonia and have trouble breathing,” Michelle Snarr wrote on March 21. “This would raise the question of going on a ventilator. A frail nursing-home patient who is put on a ventilator is quite likely to suffer a great deal, and may not survive … I am asking all of you to think hard about what would be in the best interest of your loved ones.”
Notice the reason she gives to discourage them from going to hospital. This really makes me wonder about why there was this fear of ventilators being put out if it really is such an inappropriate treatment for the elderly!? Do hospitals in “normal times” put elderly patients on ventilators so quickly? Aren’t there many other possible measures to take?
Just by the way:
Thirty-four workers – more than half of Pinecrest’s staff – had symptoms of the coronavirus . . . . Seventeen had tested positive, four had tested negative and the others were awaiting results.
Notice that there were 34 workers who “had symptoms”–presumably there could be varying degrees of severity–and FOUR of them tested negative. So that was flu? Or the test failed! Maybe half had influenza or something else!? And the others were “awaiting results” but what good does a test result do? Why don’t they just see a doctor or do the usual thing? Why are we hearing about people getting tested AND WAITING FOR RESULTS? For mild symptoms in most cases. Why?
My answer: In order to assert control and shut down our lives whenever there is a positive result. What else “good” does it do? The elderly patients and workers if they were very sick should have been sent to hospital to get treated, because if someone is sick, they want to get better. Why would they want to get “tested”?! A top health official in Ontario has said that the tests give false positives half the time.
Testing is about control, numbers and fear. None of the COVID-19 policies and propaganda, including testing, did any good to TREAT the elderly who were sick. All of this propaganda and all the press conferences did NOT prevent their deaths–it boosted the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19.
“I’ve never had four deaths in a day at any nursing home I’ve worked at,” he said.
They should have been sent to the hospital and they should have figured out a way to treat them–because there have been accounts of successful treatment of the elderly since the beginning of this.
Dr. Snarr had mentioned in her letter to residents’ families that the hospital
had limited resources to look after a surge of patients with COVID. They are also concerned about having COVID brought into the hospital by infected patients.
However, another hospial was willing to take them, but that’s when she used the other argument about ventilators.
So I notice in the article all this talk about testing just like at the press conferences. Commonsense disappeared when they started all this nonsense.
The bottom line is they kept these patients away from hospitals where they should have been, as in “normal” times.
Is there going to be justice someday? Not if people stay in the dark.
Nine residents of Bobcaygeon long-term care home die following COVID-19 outbreak | March 30 | CP24.com
“It’s overwhelmingly sad,” Snarr said in an interview with CTV News. “Once we heard it was COVID, we all knew it was going to run like wildfire through the facility.”
“The reason I sent the email [to the families] was to give them a heads up that this is not normal times,” she said.
“Under normal times, we would send people to the hospital if that was the family’s wishes, but we knew that was not going to be possible knowing that so many people were going to all get sick at once and also knowing the only way to save a life from COVID is with a ventilator and to put a frail, elderly person on a ventilator, that’s cruel.”
I believe, based on what we have heard from mainstream-censored sources, that this information is false–it was not the only way to treat respiratory illness. It was not true when doctors were able to deal with the first SARS in the past and it’s not true with this version either.
Snarr said COVID-19 patients typically spend 11 to 21 days on a ventilator.
“Every day you are on a ventilator, you lose muscle mass, you lose weight. The longer this goes on, you are going to develop bedsores,” she noted.
“Dementia is permanently worsened by even something as simple as a regular pneumonia…to endure that… their quality of life after would just be abysmal.”
So this was one of her arguments to families to keep the residents out of hospitals.
Here is another interview:
‘It’s a gut-wrenching choice’
Michelle Snarr, medical director of Pinecrest Nursing Home in Bobcaygeon, Ont., where at least 20 residents have died of COVID-19, talks about the pros and cons of transporting ill, elderly residents to hospital.
She seems to really believe they were just doomed to die at the hospital if they went–just based on the mythology of contradictory information that had been generated about COVID-19 in a couple of months.
Death is the ultimate result of believing in propaganda systems.
There were 29 deaths at the residence (out of 65) (assigned to COVID-19).
At the time of this story, there was a video report of Prime Minister Trudeau calling on Canadians to sacrifice Easter celebrations “to protect Canadians.” (And then he actually didn’t stay home himself after asking people to do that). This is a highly significant thing they did–to stop people going to churches just before Easter (Sunday Easter 12) and to shut down Easter family visits and church services. Just incredible. This clip belongs in a 1970s Omen horror film. This is what we’re dealing with.
People might remember that Notre Dame Cathedral experienced a fire in Easter 2019, the year before–and the media were particularly sensitive about alleging conspiracies. There was also an attack on Easter celebrations and churches in Sri Lanka on Easter 2019. There were various attacks on houses of worship in 2019.
The following was the narrative generated, that there wasn’t anything they could do for elderly patients:
‘It’s a home — we’re not set up as a hospital,’ says Pinecrest Nursing Home doctor Stephen Oldridge about why COVID-19 has hit so hard and killed so many residents at the seniors facility in southeastern Ontario.
There is no vaccine, we have no effective treatment other than supportive care for these folks, and obviously there’s no cure. So when the infection takes hold in their lungs, in this elderly population we can just make them comfortable.
So that was part of the story put out by a few doctors and the mainstream media. The “future” “vaccine” is highlighted and offered as salvation–like a religion. The doctrine of doom–“obviously” “no cure”, “no effective treatment.” This is what the media tell us. It’s this frightening unbeatable illness supposedly. Never mind all the other illnesses and the many cases of respiratory illness and pneumonia that people have to deal with every year–including tends of thousands of deaths in Canada just in that category.
It’s the impression we are given of this one, all-important, all-powerful illness. There is plenty of information to the contrary. But this is a terror campaign for a political purpose–to introduce a new way of life. And they have to make it hurt for us to believe it.
This report indicates that residents’ families in Canada have been denied the option to transfer to a hospital (even in the case of a 64 year old).
The son was told of his mother:
“She would be denied emergency transfer in the event that she was deathly ill from COVID,” Schmidt says the doctor told him.
“She would be denied access to an ICU. She would be kept in the care facility and treated to the best of their abilities there.”
And they were also pressured to change from life-saving treatment to “Do Not Resuscitate” Orders even though the mother was happy and active.
Her family had no interest in altering the full resuscitation order.
A letter obtained by CBC News sent to a family member by a long-term care facility in Ottawa says residents who get sick with COVID-19 will stay where they are. . . .
Next: Condition Set 3
Continued: Part 12