Where’s the Evidence Supporting the Drastic Measures Against COVID-19?
By Rosemary Frei | Torontonians for Transparency | March 29, 2020
There are a lot of important details in this article. I just picked out a few points:
. . .the March 16 Imperial College of London paper lauded by politicians and the mainstream press as proving that ‘suppression’ – i.e., extreme social distancing measures such as lock-downs – is effective in significantly reducing COVID mortality rate and may have to remain in effect for 18 months – and which convinced U.K. prime minister Boris Johnson to proceed with the lock-down of the entire U.K. — is patently biased. Here is one of several searing critiques of it.
That inaccurate information includes very weak evidence for the effectiveness of the most stringent measures being used in the war on COVID, such as social distancing. Yet politicians and public-health professionals claim such distancing is highly effective and evidence-based (without offering any proof of this) and impose heavy fines for not maintaining it.
Another point: Dr. Joel Kettner, a former Manitoba Chief Provincial Public Health Officer, spoke out and said:
sequestering vast portions of the population, a measure with severe mental- and physical-health effects, is an extreme measure to take when there’s so little proof it works.
Low death rates:
This is despite the fact that death rates in China, Italy, South Korea and other countries from COVID are in the range of only 0.002% to 0.025% of the population
Federal Bill C-13
. . . passed unanimously on the morning of March 25 gives the finance minister the unilateral power to spend “all money required to do anything in relation to that public health event of national concern.” This new power extends until September 30, 2020.
There are a lot of details and links in the article. These includes references to prominent critics of the lockdown and isolation measures. There is information about the restrictions imposed by Canadian provinces and cities. It discusses the Event 201 pandemic drill from 2019. There were propaganda plans to “flood the zone” with information to counter opposition, including the strong anti-vaccine movement. Trying to force a vaccine on the public appears to be a key goal.
The facts about Italy and China are discussed.
One of the intensive propaganda messages was that hospitals would be overwhelmed and
“horrible decisions will have to be made about who gets to live and who doesn’t.”
I noticed this in Ontario early on and it had no basis in reality (only in their belief system and intentions to use euthanasia and eugenics). It was a preplanned story for the media in order to dramatize their fearful and overwhelming COVID-19 warnings. Dramatizing and elaborating on a topic makes it seem more real and convincing.
A likely consequence of isolating people in their homes:
Therefore sequestering the vast majority of the population, as well as making people fear contact with COVID — and even fear touching anyone else except those who live with them — together with panic buying masks, gloves and cleaning supplies to keep their home environments squeaky clean, is like putting oil on a fire: if they haven’t been exposed to COVID they will be vulnerable to it in the coming days, months and years.
The mayor of Toronto:
. . . started making executive decisions without council’s approval before he officially had the right to do so: via video interview on March 23 he told thousands of members of a group named TechTO that “I asked for and I’m getting it: we had the cellphone companies give us all the data on the pinging off their network on the weekend so we could see, ‘Where were people still congregating?’”
This type of move is illegal, whether the mayor acts unilaterally or with council approval, Canadian Civil Liberties Association executive director Michael Bryant told The Logic, which broke the story. On March 26 Tory denied that the cell-information-collecting had happened.