In the early days of the COVID pandemic, the scientific community had excellent data about the spread and mortality of this particular virus based on the experience of the cruise ship Diamond Princess..The 3,711 passengers and staff were locked in a closed 'petri dish' for three weeks..Most of the guests were over the age of 60, yet only 634 people were infected by the virus. Of those infected, 328 were asymptomatic meaning they had no symptoms and seven people, all of whom were older than 70, died..It was an excellent database for an epidemiological study, yet it was ignored in favour of inaccurate models that grossly over-exaggerated the COVID threat..I read with interest Christopher Oldcorn’s July 8, 2023, article about the federal government’s claim that its lockdown and injection mandate policies saved 760,000 lives..According to Oldcorn’s reporting, the calculation was contained in a report produced by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHA) and authored by, amongst others, Theresa Tam, the chief public health officer.. Dr. Tam .I don’t think the report, which evaluates epidemic policies based on modeling, supports the assertion that the PHA policies saved 760,000 people..It is my view the study should be revisited to compare policies and results using data from every country to understand which policies worked, which didn’t work and which policies should be implemented in the future to ensure there are no mandates and everyone who takes an injection or other medical procedure does so from a position of informed consent..A complete cost-benefit study of the recent government policies should be undertaken to evaluate the following issues..· The data indicate that, like the Diamond Princess experience, the survival rate of the pandemic worldwide was 99.1%. This implies less than half of the 760,000 people were statistically at risk of dying so perhaps people were 'saved' that didn’t need to be saved. It would be good to understand this more thoroughly..· It would be interesting to understand the data and reasoning that drove the PHA to suggest policies that were a significant departure from established epidemiological practice — particularly lockdowns, masks and a refusal to treat early symptoms..· A review of the recent literature unambiguously suggests that Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine and other early-stage therapeutics were effective in treatment of COVID infections. Without getting into speculation about motives for why doctors were not allowed to prescribe these medicines, the PHA should evaluate the entire database of studies on the efficacy of early therapeutic drugs of all types. Further they should establish protocols for the testing and implementation of early therapeutic drugs in the pressure cooker of future pandemics..· Edward Dowd has published all-cause mortality figures for the United States (and other countries) indicating that total deaths were inexplicably up 23% among working age Americans (25 to 64) in 2021/22 as compared to 2020. This represents 300,000 more deaths among insured, working age Americans than would be anticipated. A similar investigation into this phenomenon using Canadian data should be a priority for the PHA. No one seems to know what is causing these extra deaths and that is the point. Having lost friends and relatives whose deaths were proximate to their taking injections makes me curious. I would expect the PHA to be equally curious..· The PHA should evaluate the arguments and statistics offered by people such as Karen Selick in her May 3, 2022, article regarding the nature of vaccinations and genetic manipulation injections. It is time to get beyond puerile name-calling. People are not “anti-vax” without reason and the argument has not been fairly met in my view. We are owed the truth based on a cold-eyed and impartial review of all the available data..There were things done and policies implemented during COVID that are deeply troubling, in my view..I am willing to overlook what happened but only when there are serious attempts to complete a cost-benefit study that assesses data from every country to determine which policies actually worked..To avoid future knee-jerk policy making (especially when those policies are in lockstep with other western countries), the PHA should establish protocols today that will protect our right to informed consent and maximizes the protection of the Canadian public tomorrow..Publishing a study authored by those who established the policies being assessed, based on modelling that is undoubtedly wrong might be construed as self-serving. It is certainly not a serious attempt to achieve the aims listed above..Over to you Dr. Tam.
