4000 Health Care Workers in BC, Canada, Told By Health Minister to “Get a New Job”

On October 26, British Columbia Health Minister, Adrian Dix, told over 4000 unvaccinated health workers to get a new job. They have been terminated.

“throughout the pandemic these individuals risked their lives and were regarded as heroes”

The BC Area article states, While many in the community celebrate the departure of those workers, accusing them of being ‘against science’ or not wanting to get over this pandemic, others have tried to remind us that throughout the pandemic these individuals risked their lives and were regarded as heroes; they risked their livelihoods and careers over making this choice for themselves.

I cannot imagine how people could be celebrating the departure of health workers.

This loss of skill will not only affect nurses in hospitals, but numerous areas of health care.

Here is a breakdown by region as reported in Kelowna Now.

  • British Columbia-wide: 4,090 unvaccinated, 2,626 partially vaccinated
  • Interior Health: 1,369 unvaccinated (7%)
  • Northern Health: 376 unvaccinated (5%)
  • Island Health: 678 unvaccinated (3%)
  • Fraser Health: 644 unvaccinated (2%)
  • Vancouver Coastal Health: 522 unvaccinated (2%)
  • Providence Health: 122 unvaccinated (2%)
  • Provincial Health Services: 496 unvaccinated (2%)

Note that Interior Health is losing around 7% of their healthcare workers. The list does not include the 1,1996 long-term care or acute care workers who were suspended without pay on Oct. 12, as reported by CTV News Vancouver, bringing the total to over 6,000 workers.

A CBC article related that B.C.’s Minister of Jobs and Economic Recovery, Ravi Kahlon, said the B.C. government will invest in the health-care system to mitigate any challenges that arise from workers choosing not to get vaccinated and, ultimately, being let go.

In the same article Troy Clifford, president of the Ambulance Paramedics and Emergency Dispatchers of BC, estimates that up to 200 of 4,500 paramedics in the province risk job loss. 

The ambulance shortage in BC was felt keenly during the summer heat wave as reported by The Globe and Mail in the article, ‘This isn’t a heat wave issue’: B.C. paramedics say there’s a systemic crisis in emergency care.” Here is an excerpt:

At least 719 people died in a week during the heat wave, three times what the BC Coroners Service says would be normal for that period. BC Emergency Health Services did not activate its emergency coordination centre until the day the heat began to subside.

“Our entire pre-hospital system collapsed, and it collapsed with warning that it was going to collapse,” a Greater Vancouver paramedic, who Global News is not identifying to protect his employment, said in an interview Friday.

The paramedic told Global News that one of the major problems first responders have faced for years is the requirement to stay at hospitals with the patients they are transporting until beds or nurses are available.

He said that often results in delays of 30 minutes to several hours, during which they are unavailable to take urgent calls.

“We have eight paramedics at any given time that are held at (Vancouver General Hospital), that are held at Burnaby General, because the nurses are overwhelmed with the amount of patients coming in,” he said.

Back in February of 2021, Vancouver City News reported a paramedic shortage that left 29 ambulances unstaffed on a weekend and increased urgent wait times to one hour and non-emergency calls up to 16 hours. A woman who had fallen on a sidewalk and broken her hip would be considered non-emergency.

Troy Clifford blames failures in recruitment and retention, a situation which hasn’t happened overnight and highlights issues with BC Emergency Health Services (BCEHS), responsible for running the ambulance service, and Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA), the health authority that BCEHS falls under.

Nurses are overwhelmed at hospitals when ambulances arrive because hospitals are short of nurses. I am interested hearing just how the province plans to “mitigate” this exodus of workers. Since it takes 4-5 years to train an R.N., perhaps we can have an increase in nurses in five years. It’s unlikely that we will recruit nurses from other countries and leave them short, but it could happen. Throughout the pandemic our nurses have travelled to the U.S. to work, as they did beforehand. Maybe some of these nurses can be recruited.

And this is not a new problem. It is a “long-standing problem exacerbated by COVID-19,” according to a July 16, 2021 article in The Globe and Mail, entitled, Canadian nurses are leaving in droves, worn down by 16 merciless months on the front lines of COVID-19. Hospital beds have been closed, emergency hours scaled back and operating rooms shuttered. The Ontario government offered $75,000 bonuses to attract experienced out-of-province critical care nurses.

“We’ve seen nurses leave and leave and leave,” said Bernard Mathieu, an emergency physician at Montreal’s Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital. “We see new, fresh nurses come in for orientation who decide not to stay because they see the quality of life they’re being offered is terrible.”

The article says that in Manitoba, more than 60 emergency doctors from three hospitals in Winnipeg sent a missive to the province, warning of epic levels of burnout. “Many senior experienced nurses in our EDs have resigned, while many others are planning to leave,” the letter said. “Morale and staffing are at all-time lows. We view the situation as critical, unsustainable and in need of immediate action.”

The reassurance from the Minister of Jobs and Economic Recovery regarding mitigating the problem is anything but reassuring.

CanSino and the Vaccine that Canada Helped Engineer but was Never Allowed to Distribute

I just watched The Fifth Estate report, How Trudeau’s failed vaccine deal with China wasted millions, published on October 14, 2021.

Scott Halpron, who works for the Centre for Vaccinology in Halifax, never got to oversee the trials for a vaccine that Canadian scientists helped to engineer. After over a year of delays, he now acknowledges that the vaccine, which scientists in Canada developed in cooperation with the Chinese company CanSinoBIO, does not have a future in Canada.

From the report we learn that the key to the Canadian/CanSino deal was that the Canadian National Research Council had licensed the National Research Counsel cell line to CanSino. This is Canadian medical technology that’s a building block for vaccines.

The official narrative is that the vaccine wasn’t let through customs in China, as it sat waiting for shipment in a special facility at the airport. It easily passed customs for shipment to Russia, Pakistan, Mexico, Chili, and other countries. Only not to Canada, the country that collaborated in the vaccine’s development.

Halpron says, “Part of Canada’s contribution to the global battle against COVID-19 is that we’re collaborating with a country that’s supplying the vaccine to other places, including emerging nations.”

Margaret McCuaig-Johnston, who has worked for the Canadian government and promoted science and technology partnerships between Canada and China was not as kind in her summary. “You would think that vaccines are perfectly innocent science….But in our case CanSino’s vaccine was weaponized by Chinese authorities.”

When The Fifth Estate interviewed Dr. Xeufeng Yu, CEO and co-founder of CanSino, a Canadian citizen and PhD graduate of McGill University, the interview tape was seized by Chinese authorities and released ten days later with half the footage removed. CBC had their own copy and the video shows redacted portions in the documentary.

The procurement of vaccines was needlessly delayed while Canada waited in good faith for the fulfillment of the contract with CanSino, something which would never happen.

The Fifth Estate, October 14, 2021

Viewing An Example of Biased Journalism

We have a strong political divide and it’s not healthy. But this is not about politics. It is about journalism. Having said that, journalism has become political. Nothing has exposed this as well as the Trump election and his failure to be re-elected. This piece points out not only bias, but complete loss of journalistic objectivity.

When it is only acceptable to write one view, then journalism becomes suspect.

When it is only acceptable to write one view, then journalism becomes suspect. It trespasses the high journalistic standard–the code of objectivity–which is ultimately the foundation of public journalistic trust.

You’ve all seen them–the articles covering Trump’s claim of American election fraud. Maybe the election was stolen. Maybe it wasn’t. But one thing I know. It’s not up to journalists to print a verdict before the evidence is examined and tried in court. However, this is what happened, right out of the election gate, and we all witnessed it.

I’m not American. I hope the election wasn’t stolen. But how can I know, if nobody is willing to examine the evidence, much less give it credibility?

From the perspective of the media, election fraud is completely preposterous. The obvious bias of journalists, supported by–probably encouraged by–the news outlets, is almost laughable, but for the implications. Journalism that is influenced can be corrupted. When the public feels that journalism is influenced, it loses confidence in the reporting of news. In recent years there has been a shocking erosion of public trust in media.

I’ve taken an article printed on various new sites such as The Guardian, the Business Insider and The Washington Times for my illustration of media bias. The articles look much the same and there are numerous similar articles in print, with different angles, regarding the US election.

The article headline is Steve Scalise, No 2 House Republican, refuses to say election was not stolen. Below is the complete article with my personal observations in bold.

In a television interview aired Sunday, Oct. 10, 2021, Scalise, the House’s second-ranking Republican, stood by Trump’s lie (should be “claim”) that Democrat Joe Biden won the White House because of mass voter fraud.
By Hope Yen – Associated Press – Sunday, October 10, 2021

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House’s second-ranking Republican, Rep. Steve Scalise, repeatedly refused to say on Sunday that the 2020 election wasn’t stolen, standing by Donald Trump’s lie (should be “claim”) that Democrat Joe Biden won the White House because of mass voter fraud.
More than 11 months after Americans picked their president and almost nine months since Biden was inaugurated, Scalise was unwilling during a national television interview to acknowledge the legitimacy of the vote, instead sticking to his belief that the election results should not have been certified by Congress.


“I’ve been very clear from the beginning,” he said. “If you look at a number of states, they didn’t follow their state-passed laws that govern the election for president. That is what the United States Constitution says. They don’t say the states determine what the rules are. They say the state legislatures determine the rules,” the Louisiana congressman said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Pressed by moderator Chris Wallace on whether the election went beyond a few irregularities to be considered “stolen,” Scalise responded: “It’s not just irregularities. It’s states that did not follow the laws set which the Constitution says they’re supposed to follow.”
Trump left office in January a few weeks after a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol in a violent riot in an attempt to prevent Congress from formally declaring Biden the winner. (placed here for effect)

As Trump mulls a 2024 presidential bid, he has been intensifying efforts to shame – and potentially remove – members of his party who are seen as disloyal to his bogus claims (should leave out bogus) that last year’s election was illegitimate. House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy of California, who is vying to become speaker if the GOP takes control after the 2022 midterm election, continues to defend Trump and his false assertions (should leave out false).
At a rally Saturday in Iowa, Trump spent almost 30 minutes arguing falsely (should leave out falsely because this is inserting a belief of the author) that he had won Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds stood by and welcomed his return to their state.

In fact, no election was stolen (appropriate wording would be, “According to….no election was stolen”) from Trump. His former attorney general, William P. Barr, found no evidence of widespread election corruption. Allegations of massive voting fraud also have been dismissed by a succession of judges and refuted by state election officials and an arm of the Homeland Security Department during the Trump administration. (A good journalist would dig into this and also include information from those bringing the allegations. There is a story here.)

Scalise on Sunday appeared to be referring to the legal argument, made in several lawsuits backed by Trump before and after last November’s election, that the Constitution gives the power of election administration exclusively to state lawmakers. (What exactly does the Constitution say? Why not a quote here?) The suits sought to invalidate a number of pandemic-era accommodations including expanded mail voting that were put in place by governors, state election officials and judges. (Did Trump have a case, based on the Constitution? Was there any question of legality here? We need more information. We rely on journalists for this information.)

The high court ultimately turned away the cases, declining to rule on the matter. There’s no indication in any of the suits (not one example is given of a suit…bad journalism) that changing the COVID-19 accommodations would have altered a state’s election results.

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who is serving on a House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection, on Sunday slammed Scalise for spreading Trump’s “Big Lie.”

“Millions of Americans have been sold a fraud that the election was stolen,” Cheney tweeted. “Republicans have a duty to tell the American people that this is not true. Perpetuating the Big Lie is an attack on the core of our constitutional republic.”

END OF ARTICLE

It is the responsibility of journalists to present evidence and then to trust the public to have the intelligence and insight to come to a reasonable conclusion.

“Journalists and the news outlets have the responsibility to tell the American people what to believe.” –False

The beauty of the article is that the last two paragraphs reveal the logic of the writer. We might rephrase, “Journalists and the news outlets have the responsibility to tell the American people what to believe.” This, of course, is false. It is not the role of journalism, in a democratic society, to push a certain narrative. We see this happening in totalitarian states where news sites and journalists are the propaganda arm of the government and must tout the party line, or face consequences.

Readers want information. We want to be able to trust journalists to give us both sides. We want to examine the evidence for ourselves. We don’t want to be told what to believe. And we would like to see journalists’ opinions reserved for Commentary and Opinion columns.

How Will the New Rules Impact My Thanksgiving Dinner?

My eighty-five year old mother, who was hospitalized with covid-19 and recovered, does not want the vaccine. We have had a difficult time getting her to take any medication at any time. Now the Manitoba provincial government is telling her she cannot have her children over for Thanksgiving. If our politicians were up on the latest discoveries they would know that she has less of a risk of getting, and therefore spreading covid, than a vaccinated person. So is this really about health care?

This Thanksgiving, you may have to ask your guests to bring their vaccine cards along with cranberry sauce….Private indoor gatherings will be restricted to two households if any person at the gathering has chosen not to get vaccinated.

CBC: These new pandemic rules apply to all Manitobans

We are now seeing stats where countries with higher vaccination rates are actually experiencing higher case rates of covid than countries with lower vaccination rates.

Meanwhile VAERS, to date, shows in excess of 10,000 deaths within weeks of the vaccine and possibly 15,000 vaccine-related deaths in the USA. Mortality rates rose consistently in countries during vaccination periods. This is brushed aside because, as one doctor stated, the only time a vaccine can be noted on a death certificate as a cause of death is if the patient dies within an hour or two of receiving the vaccine. I read a series of VAERS reports and the correlation to the administration of the vaccine seemed apparent to me. We have seen a few incidents reported in the news. It appears they are not as rare as we are led to believe with women reporting injuries more frequently than men.

We were told the vaccine is safe, but then I noticed the wording changed to, “as safe as other vaccines.” Well, apparently, if you look at the data, this is the most unsafe vaccine ever to have been administered.

We were told the vaccine prevents people from getting covid, but this was quickly down-graded to preventing severe illness.

We were told that the vaccine reduces transmissibility, but then we learned that the viral load of vaccinated people was just as high as the unvaccinated in the initial stages of the disease.

Maybe we can believe that it reduces the infection rate. Maybe not. Reports out of Israel are now saying that the vaccine is only 39% effective against the Delta variant. This explains the extent of covid in Israel which was supposed to be Pfizer’s model country.

My mother is a stoic woman who takes her blows, but I don’t know how this will affect her. She lives in Manitoba, Canada, where 3 million dollars of fines have already been handed out for violations around covid restrictions.

Many nurses and doctors are quitting their jobs due to the recently imposed vaccine mandates for health care workers. Their “fine,” if they don’t quit, will be the erasure of their income–“leave without pay.” We will see the impact of this by mid-November in Canada. We cannot afford to lose a single nurse or doctor.

My whole issue with the lockdowns has always been that hospitals were over-crowded and short-staffed before the coronavirus. Lockdowns were imposed to protect the hospitals from being overwhelmed, and I get the logic. But we should have provided extra facilities for covid patients if we wanted to be pro-active. This was never done. In my province of British Columbia we have about 400 ICU beds, total. One can easily imagine that just the flu season would overwhelm the hospitals. So add a few hundred cases…and then we go into lockdown, affecting the mental health and financial future of hundreds of thousands. I know the first argument is about grandma in the care home, but let’s just say that was handled very, very poorly.

Doctors are doing their best to help their patients but are being told by our health authorities how they can and cannot treat patients with covid, what they can and cannot say to them. Anything that does not support the vaccination effort is off limits.

I just read that Bolivia asked a Canadian company to manufacture the Johnson and Johnson vaccine, but due to patent issues, months later they are not getting vaccines produced. Are we really wanting to help people or is this all about money? I’m not the first person to ask the question.

Merck has come out with a new med that is supposed to cost $700 per treatment for covid, Molnupiravir. Watch Dr. John Campbell compare Merck’s Ivermectin, which costs about $.50 per treatment with the new medication. Dr. Campbell goes into a detailed comparison of how the two drugs perform in the body, as presented in a report by another specialized doctor. He speculates that the two meds could be used in conjunction with each other for greater efficacy. Yet we have seen Ivermectin maliciously maligned, continuously, despite evidence of its effectiveness. If you look at these two articles then you will see what I’m talking about. Read carefully for bias and manipulation of facts in this article. Compare it with the chart below, from this article.

Prime Minister Trudeau has made it his mission to ensure that nobody slips through the cracks in terms of vaccine requirements for federal employees.

Trudeau and Freeland both mentioned “personal conviction” as insufficient to gain a religious exemption — which is interesting, because that’s exactly what courts look for when considering a request for religious accommodation. “Religion is about freely and deeply held personal convictions or beliefs connected to an individual’s spiritual faith and integrally linked to one’s self-definition and spiritual fulfilment,” the Supreme Court wrote in one landmark freedom-of-religion case.

National Post: Chris Selley

Meanwhile people who get vaccines have reported vaccine injuries in the hundreds of thousands, aside from deaths. Some reports say millions. I speak from experience, having suffered several serious side effects. Thankfully, for me they have somewhat subsided, although I still have concerns, but this is not the case for everyone. When I mentioned my side effects to a doctor, because the injection site would not vaccinate me after I described what happened after my first dose, the doctor would not entertain the possibility of giving me an exemption. He did not inquire further about symptoms but just focused on whether I should get the same vaccine or a different one. Would it be a “booster” or a “new vaccine” if I switched to a different vaccine?

As far as I am able to detect, in a certain percentage of people the spike protein mRNA ends up circulating in the blood system, as opposed to staying in the muscle tissue to do its job and this is what causes reactions. There is also the possibility that the delivery system, the nanoparticles, cause some problems related to where they end up accumulating in the body. What surprises me even more than the fact that this information is being suppressed is learning of two Facebook sites, dedicated to people with adverse reactions, being shut down. We are not allowed to talk about this.

Meanwhile Pfizer has put out a request to inoculate children as young as five years old.

By requiring vaccine passports to enter certain premises the government has also forced these businesses to vaccinate all of their staff. It never had to be a “mandate.” It saddens me to think of people sitting in a restaurant, for instance, and seeing their friends or relatives outside, unable to come it. I think there must be some hardening of heart in order for people to think this is OK.

I firmly believe people should be able to make their personal health choices without retribution. Now that we know the vaccine is not the cure we’ve been told, I feel even more strongly that it should not be forced on people.

If You Think They are Messing With Our Minds…They Are

The Great British Baking Show

I was going to write about how the vaccine mandate is putting Canadian health care in an unprecedented state of crisis, with services being shut down due to staff shortages and the BC Nurses Union president resigning in objection to the mandate. The last date for vaccination, to get full vaccination before the October deadline, passed on September 27 and that is the date one ER in particular had to close. Those vaccinated against covid appear to be living in great fear of getting covid and they are the ones imposing further restrictions, even on themselves. Of course there are exceptions when it comes to big business and big entertainment such as major sports leagues and the movie industry which have avoided significant disruption throughout the pandemic. I drove by a closed gurdwara (Sikh Temple) at the height of the pandemic lockdowns, only to see trailers and tents of a movie set on the parking lot. Gurdwaras are attended daily and also provide food for the needy, when they are allowed to be open.

Evenings we sit quietly at home, vaccinated, but not supporting mandates and special privileges for special groups. And during recent quiet evenings we’ve watched the latest series of The Great British Baking Show, filmed during the pandemic, everyone quarantined, of course, but it still does give pause for thought when you read the credits. Yes, taking advantage of the very activity I criticized. Well, now I have to pay for it, literally.

On my last post I wrote about the CBC’s drop in ratings. The CBC is Canada’s government-sponsored television and radio conglomerate that receives a base of $1.2 billion in funding annually from the Canadian government. Divide that by approximately 35 million citizens–not households–to figure out our compelled subscription rates.

This week as my husband and I came to the second last episode we paused it, to be continued the next day. To understand the popularity of the show on CBC Gem programming, the Toronto Sun reported recently that, “In the week of Sept. 6-12, just three CBC programs showed up in the top 30 shows watched by Canadians – the English language leaders’ debate, Coronation Street and The Great British Baking Show.”

As my husband and I tuned in the next day, we unexpectedly found we couldn’t access the episode we had paused. We couldn’t press ‘resume. We couldn’t even get into the show we watched the night before. Overnight, the two remaining shows, including the one we started watching, had been placed behind a paywall!

A little red flag on the last two episodes read, Try Premium. My husband kept going back and forth between the subscription requirement and the show, thinking there must be some mistake. I was less surprised.

Not only is our government-sponsored news and entertainment source now asking for premium subscriptions, but the CBC was recently also blasted for introducing paid advertising. To add insult to injury, the Trudeau Liberals promised an extra $100 million, annually, to the CBC in this month’s federal election.

Although the CBC is supposed to represent Canadians, it leans strongly to the left in its content, and is not particularly representative, given that the Liberal party, in the last two elections, lost the popular vote to Conservatives. This sheds light on the drop in ratings. Adding a $4.99 premium subscription requirement in the middle of a series, for the final two episodes, won’t help, even if the first month is free. Incidentally, the new age of consent seems to be 13, as that is the required age for a subscription.

P.S. On Oct 12 we discovered the paywall was removed. I suspect the CBC heard about this matter from a few unhappy viewers.