On Monday, the Alberta Medical Association (AMA) issued a statement in response to the final report of the Alberta COVID-19 Pandemic Data Review Task Force. This 269-page report, commissioned by the Government of Alberta and authored by eminent medical doctors and other scientists, thoroughly reviews the shortcomings of the government's response to COVID-19, and explores how lockdowns and vaccine passports harmed many Albertans. Rather than reviewing the report and seeking to debate areas of disagreement that might exist, the AMA has simply dismissed the entire report as “anti-science, anti-evidence, biased, spreading misinformation,” and advancing “fringe approaches.”The statement does not provide any reasons for regarding the final report in this way, providing not one single example of what the AMA considers to be anti-science, anti-evidence or misinformation. A scientific statement from the AMA would challenge specific assertions in the report, point to inadequate evidence, debunk flawed methodologies, and expose incorrect conclusions.Sadly, the AMA statement appeals to consensus rather than to science.As a medical doctor, AMA President Dr. Shelley Duggan is no doubt aware of the “consensus” whereby medical authorities in Canada and around the world approved the use of thalidomide for pregnant women in the 1950s and 1960s, resulting in miscarriages and deformed babies. No doubt she is aware that for many centuries the “consensus” amongst doctors was that physicians need not wash their hands before delivering babies, resulting in high death rates among women after giving birth. This international scientific consensus was disrupted in the 1850s by a true scientist, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, who advocated for handwashing. Dr. Duggan should know that science is not consensus, and that consensus is not science.The AMA has reiterated its support for lockdowns and vaccine passports, declaring boldly that “science and evidence brought us through [COVID-19] and saved millions of lives.” What evidence does the AMA rely on for this assertion? Surely the doctors in charge of the AMA know that lockdowns did not stop COVID-19 from spreading to every city, town, village and hamlet, or from spreading into nursing homes (long-term care facilities) where COVID-19 claimed about 80% of its victims. Can AMA President Dr. Duggan explain how lockdowns saved lives? Or is this just media-driven wishful thinking?It appears that Dr. Duggan is very confident that lockdowns did more good than harm, but she provides no data or other evidence to support her view. It appears that she has not given serious consideration to the very real lockdown harms that were suffered by Albertans.As a medical doctor, Dr. Duggan is no doubt aware that the mRNA vaccine, introduced and then made mandatory in 2021, did not stop the transmission of COVID-19. Nor did the mRNA vaccine prevent people from getting sick with COVID19, or dying from COVID-19. Why would it not have sufficed in 2021 to let each individual make her or his own choice about getting injected with the mRNA vaccine? Yet Dr. Duggan still believes today that mandatory vaccination policies were justified. Does she believe that Albertans should be coerced or pressured to get injected with the mRNA vaccines in future?The AMA statement’s reference to “fringe approaches” is particularly troubling, because it suggests that the majority must be right just because it’s the majority, which is the antithesis of science. When studying the history of scientific progress, one can easily find dozens, and likely hundreds, of examples showing that true science is a process of open-minded discovery and honest debate, not a process of dismissing as “fringe” the individuals who challenge the reigning “consensus.”The AMA statement asserts that the final report “makes recommendations for the future that have real potential to cause harm.” However, the AMA provides no examples of such recommendations, nor does it explain the kind of harm that it has in mind. I have invited Dr. Duggan to a public, livestreamed debate on the merits of lockdowns and vaccine passports. I would argue for the following: “Be it resolved that lockdowns and vaccine passports imposed on Albertans from 2020 to 2022 did more harm than good,” and Dr. Duggan (or another medical doctor, if she is not willing) would argue against it. I predict that no doctor in Alberta will step up to the plate and engage in scientific debate. I hope that my prediction is proven wrong.John Carpay, B.A., LL.B. is president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (jccf.ca).
