Dear Members of the COVI Committee,
The World Health Organization, our federal, provincial and municipal governments, chief medical officers, and the mainstream media would have us believe that we are facing the biggest threat to humanity in our lifetime. Predictions of wide-spread infection with high rates of mortality persuaded governments that unprecedented containment measures were necessary to save us from certain peril.
While there is much about the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus that is yet to be understood, the emerging evidence clearly demonstrates that the mathematical modeling used to justify these extreme containment measures are invalid and that the vast majority of the population are not at serious risk of complications or mortality as a result of exposure to SARS-CoV-2.
Further, the drastic isolation measures that have been introduced by our governments for an undetermined period of time are not supported by scientific evidence, nor do they have the consensus agreement of the scientific community. There is much severe and valid criticism from recognized experts who dispute the governments’ position and response to SARS-CoV-2. [i] [ii] [iii]
There are reasons for Canadians to be concerned that an over-hyped SARS-CoV-2 pandemic narrative is creating unnecessary panic. This panic is then being used to justify systemic governmental violations of the rights and freedoms that form the basis of our society, including our constitutional rights, sovereignty, privacy, rule of law, financial security, and even our very democracy.
Vaccine Choice Canada has sought a legal opinion on our government’s actions, and it is clear that significant violations of our rights and freedoms are being perpetrated by our governments, health authorities, and municipal, provincial and federal policing.
Basis for Concern:
- There is no scientific evidence to substantiate the effectiveness of 2 meter ‘physical distancing’ as an intervention to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission and infection.
- The imposition of mass and indiscriminate self-isolation measures prevents the development of natural immunity necessary to secure herd immunity. [iv]
- It is the opinion of experts that efforts to suppress the virus through self-isolation measures prolongs the outbreak and puts more lives at risk, damages our economy and the mental stability and health of the more vulnerable.[v]
- The reported number of deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 is unreliable given the inclusion of “presumptive” deaths, and the failure of the medical establishment to differentiate between individuals dying from COVID 19 and those with co-morbidities dying with COVID 19. [vi]
- This failure inflates the risk of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 and undermines confidence in any actions based on mortality statistics.
- The presentation of the mortality data, expressed as a percentage of deaths of tested and confirmed cases, is distorting the data and creating undue panic. This data fails to include a significant number of individuals who contracted the virus but were not tested nor confirmed and who recovered without medical intervention.
- The number of reported deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 is not out of “normal” range when compared to the annual mortality from influenza and pneumonia recorded through the last decade. [vii] [viii]
- There is no data to indicate that the total mortality in Canada has increased substantially from previous years.
- Mortality modeling by the World Health Organization, Imperial College of London, and the US Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation have all been drastically downgraded. Strategies based on these erroneous numbers are not valid.
- The Canadian government has not been transparent with its data and modeling.
- The Canadian government has not been transparent with its exit strategy.
- The suspensions of our rights to participate in community and in commerce is causing substantial and irreparable harm to our economy, livelihoods, communities, families, and the physical and psychological well-being of Canadians. There is no evidence that these harms are being considered in the modeling. [ix]
- SARS (2003), Swine Flu/H1N1 (2009), and MERS (2012) were all considered pandemics and were contained without lockddowns, economic ruin, violations of privacy, or the loss of personal freedoms.
- The number of SARS -CoV-2 deaths is significantly less than the number of deaths reported from each of these recent pandemics.
- The suspension of our civil liberties is not justified by the level of risk posed by SARS-CoV-2.
- The suspension of our right to liberty, to travel, and to conduct commerce is not justified by the level of risk posed by SARS-CoV-2.[x]
- The use of surveillance technologies to monitor citizens constitutes a clear violation of our right to privacy.
- The closure of our courts of law is unprecedented, illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic, unnecessary, and impedes the ability of Canadians to hold our governments accountable.
- The closure of our parliaments is unprecedented, illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic, unnecessary, and impedes the ability of Canadians to hold our governments accountable.
- As of this date, the Prime Minister of Canada has not invoked the Emergencies Act. Therefore, emergency measures announced by the Prime Minister and his public statements to Canadians to “just stay home” have no legal basis or authority, are an abuse of power, and is resulting in confusing, dangerous and unlawful messaging.
The following questions need to be answered to ascertain whether the government’s response to SARS-CoV-2 is measured, reasonable, and supported by demonstrable evidence:
- What evidence supports the strategies and actions enacted by the government?
- What data informs the government’s intervention strategy for SARS-CoV-2?
- What is the source of this data?
- What scientific data is the government relying on to justify the imposition of ‘physical distancing’ as an effective method to reduce transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus?
- What scientific data is the government relying on to justify the use of masking as an effective method to reduce transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus?
- Do the mortality numbers justify the response?
- What data exists to indicate that the total ‘excess mortality’ in Canada has increased substantially during this period of SARS-CoV-2 infection?
- Is the mortality data reliable given the inability of the medical establishment to differentiate between individuals dying from SARS-CoV-2 and those dying with SARS-CoV-2?
- What is the justification for the continued restrictions given the number of reported deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 is not out of the normal range when compared to the annual mortality from influenza and pneumonia through the last decade?
- What is the merit of continuing mass and indiscriminate restrictions?
- The reason given for imposing mass and indiscriminate restrictions was to “flatten the curve” in order to prevent overwhelming of our medical services. Given that our hospitals are now operating at 50 – 60% capacity, what is the justification for continued restrictions?
- What efforts and actions are being implemented by the government to support the acquisition of natural immunity and thus the development of herd immunity?
- What does the scientific evidence indicate is the impact of ‘physical distancing’ on the development of natural herd immunity?
- What does the scientific evidence indicate is the impact of ‘physical distancing’ on prolonging the epidemic?
- What consideration is being given to the wider consequences of mass containment?
- What is the anticipated impact of mass and indiscriminate containment on overall health, including the loss of life, as a result of restricted access to social supports, earning a livelihood, medical and dental services, religious services and recreational resources?
- What consideration is being given to the impact of the current restrictions on our economy and on individual and national debt?
- What is the government’s exit strategy from the imposed restrictions?
- What is the timeline for this exit strategy?
- What evidence supports this exit strategy?
- What is the rationale for preventing those with low/no risk of mortality and those who have already developed immunity from returning to normal life?
- Given that other countries have already lifted restrictions, or never imposed such mass restrictions, what evidence does this government rely on to justify continued restrictions?
- What is the rationale for the closure of our courts?
- When can we expect our courts to re-open?
- What is the justification for the effective closure of our parliament?
- How can we hold our government accountable for their actions when our parliament is effectively closed?
- When can we expect our parliament to fully re-open?
- What is the rationale for reliance on a vaccine?
- How is it logical that life will ‘return to normal’ only after a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is available, when humanity is exposed to incalculable numbers of infectious viruses and bacteria in daily living – for which there are no vaccines?
- Is testing underway for other treatment modalities, including VitaminsC and D, zinc, HCQ, GTH precursors and oxygen treatments such as hyperbaric chambers, and Remdesivir – all of which have shown promise in the treatment of CV 19? If not, why not?
- Who will assume legal and financial liability for any injury or death resulting from a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 given important safety protocols, including animal testing, are being bypassed?
- What consideration is being given to protecting our rights and freedoms?
- If a vaccine is developed for SARS-CoV-2, will this government support the right of individuals to fully informed consent, security of the person and bodily sovereignty?
- Will this government protect our right to privacy and forbid the use of surveillance technologies to monitor citizens?
The Onus is on Government
During this time of extraordinary measures, it is critical that the government’s response be measured, reasonable, and supported by demonstrable evidence that is widely and openly shared with the electorate. The severe curtailment of civil liberties without projected timelines for their rescission, the shutdown of economic activity and resulting job losses, the increase of human suffering through confinement and restriction of liberty, and the closure of courts of justice denying citizens a ready recourse, are all factors which bear close scrutiny, and must be weighed in the balance of a Constitution which zealously guards the rights and freedoms of citizens.
During times of emergency, constitutional rights don’t stop being important. They become even more important. We recognize that governments may enact laws and pursue policies that limit Charter rights and freedoms, but the onus is on the government to prove that the limit is minimal, necessary, and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society.
Canadians are losing confidence that this government is acting responsibly in this matter. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the government imposed intervention is worse that the virus itself, and that decisions are based on a political or ideological agenda, rather than scientifically supported, evidence-based practices. We need policymakers who have the courage to ignore the panic and rely on facts. Leaders must examine accumulated data to see what has actually happened rather than relying on hypothetical projections; then combine that empirical evidence with fundamental principles of biology.
Key Facts That Are Being Ignored
Five key facts are being ignored by those calling for continuing the containment measures:
Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19.
Fact 2: Vital population immunity is prevented by isolation policies, prolonging the problem.
Fact 3: People are dying because other medical care is not getting done due to hypothetical projections.
Fact 4: We have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected with targeted measures.
Fact 5: Our economy and livelihoods are being negatively affected by current policies.
What Is Needed Now
It is time for all levels of Canadian governments, beginning at the federal level, to immediately answer the legitimate concerns and criticisms of experts who do not concur with this governmental over-step.
It is time for the Government of Canada to be transparent as to what “advice” they are following and from whom. It is not justifiable to blindly follow and simply reference the directions of the World Health Organization, an organization fraught with conflicts of interest. The policies, on their face, appear to be reckless, from a public health perspective.
It is imperative and urgent that Prime Minister Trudeau, all elected officials, and public health officers lawfully, clearly, and openly reveal the detailed scientific evidence and data that justifies the current violations of the rights and freedoms of Canadians.
The Government of Canada needs to honour the duty and sacred trust given them to protect our democratic and free country, our livelihoods and communities, and to ensure that the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution are first and foremost.
Anything less is not just irresponsible, it is unconscionable.
Ted Kuntz, President
Vaccine Choice Canada
Vaccine Choice Canada has a long history and enviable reputation of advocating for and defending our rights and freedoms in Canada when it comes to public and individual health.
[i] TWENTY-TWO Experts Questioning the Coronavirus Panic. Europe Reloaded. April 1, 2020.
[ii] Criticism of Government Response to COVID-19 in Canada. Denis G. Rancourt, PhD Researcher, Ontario Civil Liberties Association
[iii] Facts about Covid-19. Swiss Propaganda Research.
[iv] Stand Up for Your Rights, says Bio-Statistician Knut M. Wittkowski. American Institute for Economic Research. April 6, 2020
[v] Individual preventive social distancing during an epidemic may have negative population-level outcomes. Interface. August 2018
[vi] Why the exact death toll for COVID-19 may never be known. CTV News, April 3, 2020
[vii] Strictly by the numbers, the coronavirus does not register as a dire global crisis. Richard Schabas. The Globe and Mail. March 9, 2020
[viii] New Data Suggest the Coronavirus Isn’t as Deadly as We Thought. WDJ/Opinion. April 17, 2020
[ix] Rethinking the Coronavirus Shutdown. WSJ/Opinion. March 19, 2020
[x] The Coronavirus mass panic is not justified. Professor Peter C. Gøtzsche24 March 2020
Contact information for the COVI Committee.
Return to our COVID-19 PAGE.