5.4 Health

Introduction

This section of the Supplemental Report provides an overview of the additional witness testimonies received at the Regina, Saskatchewan hearings, updating the section 7.5 Health contained in the original November 28, 2023 report.

Witness Testimony

In preparing this commentary, the authors relied on the following list of witnesses:

Kevin McKernan

Mr. McKernan is an expert in the analysis and classification of the human genome and has significant expertise in developing procedures for accurate genetic sequencing. His company has developed a specialized technique for sequencing the genetic material in COVID-19 vaccines.

Through their sequencing efforts, Mr. McKernan’s team discovered that some COVID-19 vaccines contain DNA contamination, specifically SV40 (simian vacuolating virus 40), a viral element. He explained that while vaccines were approved based on laboratory production techniques, the vaccines that were actually produced and distributed to the public were not tested using the commercial production techniques employed during mass production.

Mr. McKernan discussed several potential mechanisms through which this contamination could negatively impact human health, including the risks of cancer and reproductive health issues. He also testified that expired vaccines were administered to patients.

Mr. McKernan’s testimony raises serious concerns, highlighting gaps in the testing and approval processes, about the safety and integrity of the COVID-19 vaccines distributed to the public.

Dr. Jessica Rose

Dr. Jessica Rose, who previously testified during the 2023 NCI hearings, appeared at the Regina hearings to provide an update on her findings, particularly regarding adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination and DNA contamination in the vaccines.

Dr. Rose’s testimony was grounded in her analysis of data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). She emphasized that VAERS is a voluntary reporting system and that, according to her analysis, the actual number of adverse events is likely under-reported by a factor of 31 times. She explained that VAERS was not designed to capture the total number of adverse effects but rather to detect unusual trends or safety signals.

Dr. Rose highlighted that the contracts between vaccine suppliers and government purchasers include clauses acknowledging that the long-term effects of the vaccines are unknown. She noted that the reported number of adverse events in VAERS is approximately 116 times higher for COVID-19 vaccines than for influenza vaccines.

When examining adverse events per million injections, Dr. Rose reported that COVID-19 vaccines resulted in 25 times more adverse effects and about 70 times more deaths per million injections compared to influenza vaccines. She discussed a range of adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccinations and suggested the possibility of a dose-response relationship.

A significant portion of her testimony focused on the observed increase in cancer rates, which she suggested could be directly linked to DNA and RNA contamination in the COVID-19 vaccines during the manufacturing process. This DNA contamination, including the presence of SV40, had been confirmed by several independent laboratories. Dr. Rose pointed out that no genetic toxicity testing was conducted before the COVID-19 vaccines were authorized for human use.

Additionally, recent laboratory tests suggest that the spike protein itself may be contributing to an increased incidence of breast cancer. Dr. Rose referenced the decision by the Surgeon General of Florida to discontinue the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines based on adverse event signals identified in the VAERS data.

She also testified that the Australian Federal Court has evidence indicating that all COVID-19 injections are classified as Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Dr. Rose concluded by noting that it remains unknown how long the body would continue to produce spike proteins following vaccination.

Dr. Richard Schabas

Dr. Richard Schabas, a retired physician with specialist qualifications in public health and internal medicine, served as the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario for ten years. Drawing on his extensive experience, including his involvement in the public health response to the SARS outbreak of 2003, Dr. Schabas provided a critical analysis of the public health measures implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dr. Schabas highlighted that following the 2003 SARS outbreak, no serious efforts were made to review public health actions or learn from the successes and failures of that period. He emphasized that the concept of “quarantine“ had been largely abandoned by public health over 40 years ago, describing it as highly ineffective and inefficient. He clarified that quarantine should not be confused with case isolation, which remains a valid public health strategy.

He testified that in 2007 the WHO revised their Control of Communicable Disease Manual and the WHO did not include quarantine as a control strategy for SARS. Despite this, Canada chose to follow China’s approach by implementing quarantines and lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dr. Schabas urged Health Canada to invest time and resources into understanding what happened during the pandemic, learning what was effective and what was not, and assessing the costs of each measure. He criticized the widespread use of surgical masks, stating that there was no supporting evidence for their effectiveness and that the public was misled about their benefits.

He also expressed concerns about the types of studies that guided public policy during the pandemic. According to Dr. Schabas, “ecological“ and “anecdotal“ studies were used inappropriately to shape public health policy, despite their unreliability and their proper role being limited to forming scientific hypotheses.

Dr. Schabas condemned the ethics of the medical profession in implementing many pandemic interventions, arguing that they failed to adhere to the principle, “do no harm.“ He asserted that there was little consideration of the consequences of these interventions. He was particularly critical of the loss of personal sovereignty due to vaccination mandates, noting that there was no evidence that vaccines would prevent transmission or that they would alleviate the strain on the healthcare system.

He spoke about the damage these mandates inflicted on public trust in the healthcare system, undermining public confidence. Dr. Schabas stated that the risks of COVID-19, particularly for younger people, were grossly overstated. He expressed deep concerns about the principle of Informed Consent, given the misleading information provided to the public regarding both COVID-19 and the vaccines.

Dr. Schabas also criticized public health officials for intentionally scaring the population to enforce compliance, pointing out that their reports vastly exaggerated the risk of death from COVID-19. He testified that he faced significant censorship from the CBC when attempting to express these concerns.

Moreover, Dr. Schabas raised serious concerns about the actions of the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons and the Colleges of Nurses. He argued that these professional bodies, which are publicly accountable, either took disciplinary actions against practitioners or threatened such actions. He noted that the College of Physicians and Surgeons issued a policy paper instructing physicians not to make public statements critical of vaccines, mandates, or related issues.

In his testimony, Dr. Schabas concluded that public health officials were more influenced by the prevailing ideology surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic than by science. He stressed that the consequences of the government’s actions are still being felt today, with overall mortality rates remaining elevated and significant societal impacts that will affect Canadians for years to come. He observed that there appeared to be no rational consideration of the side effects of the government’s actions.

Dr. Roger Hodkinson

Dr. Roger Hodkinson, a Cambridge-trained and certified pathologist, has decades of experience in public health, including his early work in the 1970s when he took action against the tobacco industry. As a pathologist, he specializes in understanding how illnesses and diseases progress, and he is regarded as an expert who advises doctors on the treatment of their patients.

Dr. Hodkinson asserted that the actions taken during the COVID-19 pandemic were not genuinely about public health, but rather about controlling the public through the use of the Emergencies Act. He argued that the pandemic could have been managed with common sense, and if the government had not intervened, the public at large would likely have barely noticed COVID-19.

In Dr. Hodkinson’s opinion, the pandemic was a “hoax,“ and he maintained that none of the measures implemented were effective in treating or preventing COVID-19. He stated that the measures taken—the cure—were far worse than the disease itself.

He expressed deep concern that, while many jurisdictions have halted the use of COVID-19 vaccines, Canada continues to recommend them for children as young as six months old. Dr. Hodkinson is particularly worried about the potential long-term effects of these vaccines, including an increase in chronic diseases and the possible transcription of DNA, which could permanently alter the human genome.

He strongly advocated for the immediate cessation of gain-of-function research, highlighting the dangers it poses. Dr. Hodkinson also pointed to the pandemic as having exposed massive institutional corruption across various sectors, including the courts, Big Pharma, medical regulators, and the media.

He suggested that “wokeism“ is one of the underlying causes of the issues seen during the pandemic. Additionally, he noted that national debts have significantly increased due to the government’s actions in response to the pandemic.

Dr. Hodkinson outlined several side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, including:

• Micro-clotting: The formation of micro-clots in small blood vessels, leading to cellular death, which could have long-term health consequences.

• Cancer Patterns: A shift in cancer patterns, with new, aggressive “turbo“ cancers being reported, particularly in young people.

• Reduced Fertility: A decrease in human fertility due to changes in the endometrium, leading to spontaneous abortions, stillbirths, and infertility.

In 2020, Dr. Hodkinson presented his concerns to the Edmonton City Council regarding the ineffectiveness of masking, social distancing, and the use of PCR testing to diagnose COVID-19. Despite his warnings about the serious consequences of these measures, his recommendations to discontinue the mandates were ignored.

Dr. Hodkinson also criticized the use of PCR tests, describing them as fraudulent. He stated that 95 per cent of positive test results in asymptomatic patients were false positives, undermining the reliability of these tests during the pandemic.

Dr. Tess Lawrie

Dr. Tess Lawrie is a medical doctor with over 30 years of experience in obstetrics and gynecology. She is the founder of The Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy, an independent medical research company that specializes in systematic reviews, clinical trial design, scientific manuscript authoring, and the development of clinical practice guidelines. Dr. Lawrie has published over 80 peer-reviewed journal articles and has contributed to the development of several health guidelines for the WHO.

From the onset of the pandemic, Dr. Lawrie was concerned that the actions taken by governments in Canada were not aligned with recommended guidelines and were not based on solid evidence. She was particularly troubled by the rapid adoption of COVID-19 vaccines, as opposed to exploring better-known alternatives like ivermectin. This concern led her to conduct a rapid review of available studies, which ultimately supported the recommendations of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance (CCCA).

Dr. Lawrie discussed a study on the use of ivermectin, conducted by Dr. Andrew Hill, highlighting her concerns and issues with his conclusions. In her view, there was no need to utilize the novel COVID-19 vaccines when other well-established, proven-safe drugs were available. She suggested that the use of ivermectin was suppressed because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could not issue an Emergency Use authorization for new vaccines if there were adequate, approved, and available alternatives. Essentially, had ivermectin been authorized for use, the FDA would not have been able to authorize the novel COVID-19 vaccines.

Dr. Lawrie argued that the pandemic was more accurately described as a pandemic of vaccine injuries rather than a pandemic of the virus itself. She noted the concerted propaganda campaign against ivermectin, exemplified by its labeling as “horse paste.“ Dr. Lawrie cited a CNN health article which included an interview with Anthony Fauci, and a headline which read, “Officials: Don’t Take Anti-Parasite Horse Drug For Virus.” Dr. Lawrie believed it was intended to vilify ivermectin.

She compared the reported number of adverse reactions and deaths associated with ivermectin versus those related to the COVID-19 vaccines, using data from the WHO’s VigiAccess system. As of February 8, 2023, VigiAccess reported over 5 million adverse drug reaction reports related to COVID-19 vaccines, while only 7,125 adverse drug reaction reports were related to ivermectin, despite the reporting period for ivermectin spanning from 1992 to 2023. It is noteworthy that the COVID-19 vaccine data only began being collected in late 2021.

According to Dr. Lawrie:

• COVID-19 was a manmade health crisis.

• Safe, established medicines and remedies were withheld or undermined.

• Dangerous GMO “vaccines“ were deployed.

• Dangerous surveillance technology was implemented.

• Political representatives ignored warning signs.

• A globalist minority is seeking legally binding control over humanity through the WHO and the United Nations.

• The actions of various governments and related parties indicate an anti-human, anti-earth agenda.

Dr. Lawrie expressed grave concerns about the WHO pandemic treaty and international health regulations, citing the dangers of centralizing healthcare decisions within a single agency, especially given the failures of these organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

She also pointed out that the Canadian government recently passed legislation allowing new drug treatments to be approved without Health Canada‘s direct approval, provided the drug had already been approved by another foreign entity, such as the WHO. Dr. Lawrie highlighted that 80 per cent of the WHO’s funding comes from private organizations, including the pharmaceutical industry and entities like the Gates Foundation, which she sees as a significant conflict of interest.

In response to these concerns, Dr. Lawrie introduced a new organization, the World Council for Health (WCH), a decentralized global health organization. The mission of the WCH is to:

• Raise awareness of the root causes of disease.

• Educate on healthy living and self-determination.

• Co-create new, ethical, and better systems that respect and support individual health, sovereignty, and human freedom.

Dr. Lawrie recommended that Canada withdraw from the WHO and reclaim its own policymaking authority.

She also spoke about the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant and nursing women, asserting that these vaccines should never have been administered to this vulnerable group. She cited reports of increased infertility and stillbirths following COVID-19 vaccination. Additionally, she warned that COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of blood clots, reduce immune system response, and have contributed to a significant number of miscarriages and stillbirths.

Dr. Lawrie believes that many frontline doctors complied with the vaccination program due to fear and financial incentives. She concluded her testimony by stating unequivocally that the use of COVID-19 vaccines must be halted.

Lorrie and Boyd Harrison

Lorrie Harrison, a retired nurse with experience in infection control, and Boyd Harrison, a retired police officer, appeared before the commission to share their experience crossing the Canadian border during the pandemic.

At the time of their experience, both Lorrie and Boyd were fully vaccinated, including three booster shots. They diligently followed all the rules, including using the ArriveCan App and undergoing the required PCR testing before crossing the border. However, on one occasion, while returning to Canada from the United States, one of their PCR tests returned a positive result for COVID-19.

Upon arriving at the border, they disclosed their positive COVID-19 test to the border agent, who seemed unsure of how to proceed. Health Canada contacted them and informed them that they could not re-enter Canada. The Harrisons challenged this directive, citing information they had reviewed on the Health Canada website. Despite being threatened with a fine, they were eventually allowed to enter Canada, albeit with various instructions regarding quarantine and additional testing.

During their interaction with the border agent, Lorrie Harrison pointed out that the agent was using incorrect PPE. The border agent acknowledged this, explaining that they had not been provided with the required PPE and were unable to use the ArriveCan App. The Harrisons observed significant failures by the government in educating and informing border agents properly.

According to the Saskatchewan Occupational Health and Safety Act, employers are required to ensure that employees are adequately trained and provided with appropriate PPE. The lack of proper equipment and training for border agents raised serious concerns.

After being allowed to return home, the Harrisons were provided with a COVID-19 self-testing kit. However, they encountered difficulties with the instructions for using the kit, including unclear procedures for submitting the test materials to the designated laboratory. The information they received about what they were required to do varied significantly, depending on who provided it, and led to confusion. Some of the instructions were contradictory and did not make sense, further complicating their experience.

Dr. Sabine Hazan

Dr. Sabine Hazan is the founder and CEO of Progena Biome, a research lab specializing in genetic sequencing and the analysis of the human microbiome. She is also the CEO and principal investigator at Ventura Clinical Trials, founder of the Microbiome Research Foundation, founder of the Malibu Microbiome Meeting, creator of the BIOME SQUAD, and co-founder of Topelia Therapeutics. With over 200 medical trials to her name, Dr. Hazan is a leading authority on the microbiome and has played a significant role in understanding the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dr. Hazan presented findings from her research, particularly focusing on the presence of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in patients’ stools. Her lab conducted whole genetic sequencing (NGS) of fecal matter to determine if the virus was present. She pointed out that the PCR tests used by public health authorities for diagnosing COVID-19 only detected fragments of the virus’s genome. If a fragment was found, it was assumed that the patient had a COVID-19 infection.

By June / July 2020, her research confirmed that people who tested positive for COVID-19 had the virus in their stool samples, as verified by whole genetic sequencing. Additionally, her testing identified genetic variations in the COVID-19 virus, indicating that the virus was mutating continuously. These mutations complicate the development of an effective vaccine, as vaccines designed for one strain may not be effective against new mutations.

Dr. Hazan shared that some patients who initially tested positive for COVID-19 through both nasal swabs and stool samples later tested negative within five days after using a hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin protocol. Following these findings, she and her colleagues designed a clinical trial to explore this treatment further. The trial protocol, which included hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, Vitamin C, Vitamin D, and Zinc, was submitted to the U.S. FDA in April 2020. While the FDA initially approved the trial within 24 hours, the approval was later rescinded; Dr. Hazan faced censorship and was not allowed to advertise for participants. As a result, the clinical trial could not proceed due to difficulties in recruiting participants.

The protocol was later revised and rebranded as “A Study of Hydroxychloroquine, Vitamin C, Vitamin D, and Zinc for the Prevention of COVID-19 Infection,” which was posted on www.clinicaltrials.gov. The results showed that the COVID-19 virus was eradicated within five days of starting the protocol in all but one patient, who had an immune system deficiency.

Further genetic testing of fecal matter suggested that vaccinated individuals might have been transmitting COVID-19 to unvaccinated individuals. The original strain of the COVID-19 virus was detected in the stool samples of vaccinated patients, despite the virus’s ongoing mutations. This finding implied that the vaccine, designed for the original strain, could be causing the infection itself. Dr. Hazan reported that anecdotal evidence from frontline doctors supported the link between vaccinated patients infecting unvaccinated patients.

Dr. Hazan also conducted research comparing the microbiomes of patients who contracted COVID-19 with those who did not. Published in 2021, her study of 72 patients suggested that individuals with higher levels of Bifidobacterium and Faecalibacterium were more resistant to COVID-19 infection. Her research indicated that the COVID-19 vaccines could affect the microbiome, with reductions in Bifidobacterium observed in the stools of vaccinated patients.

Dr. Hazan expressed concerns that her work was being censored and suppressed. She faced increased scrutiny from the FDA, censorship on social media, and rejection from many medical journals, leading to significant delays in publishing her research.

In Dr. Hazan’s opinion, Informed Consent was never adequately obtained from patients regarding the use of COVID-19 vaccines. She also hypothesized that COVID-19 could spread through “shedding“ of the spike proteins produced by the body as a result of vaccination.

Finally, Dr. Hazan stated that the COVID-19 vaccines were never properly studied and vetted before being authorized for use in the general population, which raised serious concerns about their safety and effectiveness.

Dr. Robert Chandler

Dr. Chandler is an orthopaedic surgeon, medical practice manager, lecturer, and a published author in numerous medical journals. His research has primarily focused on the Pfizer mRNA vaccine and its impact on women’s health.

Dr. Chandler expressed concerns that the public health advice provided during the pandemic, including measures like masking and social distancing, did not make sense. Despite these concerns, he received two doses of the Moderna vaccine. Within eighteen hours of receiving his second dose, he experienced several adverse effects, including lassitude, fatigue, nausea, loss of appetite, myalgia, mental fogginess, and a rapid spike in fever.

Motivated by his own experience, Dr. Chandler began researching adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines. In his analysis of the VAERS data for patients aged zero to seventeen, he discovered that as of May 30, 2024, the system reported 36,768 procedural errors in the administration of COVID-19 vaccines.

Dr. Chandler also highlighted the efforts of attorney Aaron Siri, who submitted a Freedom of Information request for data related to the development of the COVID-19 vaccine. Although Pfizer attempted to suppress this data for 75 years, a judge ordered its release. Upon the publication of this information, Dr. Chandler became involved in analyzing the data, noting that some of the released information was redacted and that millions of lab values were missing.

He raised significant concerns about the unblinding of the control group (placebo group) in Pfizer’s original vaccine trials, which he suggested could be an example of premeditated fraud. The unblinding effectively eliminated the ability to monitor the vaccine’s effectiveness or identify adverse effects, compromising the integrity of the study.

Dr. Chandler testified that there were other significant deficiencies in the protocols and procedures used by Pfizer during the testing of the COVID-19 vaccines. He reviewed information available from animal testing, conducted on the mRNA vaccine between 2014 and 2019, identifying 16 major flaws in Pfizer’s testing process.

He also presented data from Pfizer’s February 28, 2021, post-marketing study on adverse effects reports. His analysis revealed that women were more likely to experience adverse events following vaccination, with 72 per cent of adverse reactions occurring in women. Furthermore, 16 per cent of all adverse events in women involved the reproductive system, with evidence of damage to the ovaries, pituitary gland, and uterus.

Dr. Chandler pointed to a significant decline in live births following vaccination, with an approximate 8 per cent drop observed in European data. He proposed establishing a new area of investigation into what he termed “CoVAX disease,“ focusing on the study of adverse effects related to the vaccine.

He noted that prior to 2021, there were no reports of Multi-system Inflammatory Disease in the VAERS system. However, following the vaccine rollout, cases of this disease began to appear in the system. Given these findings, Dr. Chandler strongly recommended an immediate halt to the use of mRNA vaccines.

Dr. Pierre Kory

Dr. Pierre Kory is a pulmonary and critical care specialist with extensive experience, including serving as the former chief of Critical Care Service and medical director of Trauma and Life Support Services at the University of Wisconsin. He also led the ICU in New York City during the initial five-week surge of COVID-19 and managed COVID-19 critical care units in several locations. Dr. Kory has authored numerous papers on COVID-19 and is recognized as an expert on the use of ivermectin, about which he has written a book.

At the onset of the pandemic, Dr. Kory dedicated himself to studying COVID-19. He was among the first to advocate for the use of corticosteroids in treating the disease and, by October 2020, recommended the use of ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment.

Dr. Kory’s presentation focused on what he referred to as “the war on ivermectin.“ He argued that resistance to ivermectin was largely driven by financial interests, as the drug was off-patent and therefore not lucrative for pharmaceutical companies. He presented a table showing 47 different medications that demonstrated efficacy in treating COVID-19, none of which were expensive or authorized for use.

Dr. Kory shared personal experiences of being censored and discredited for his support of ivermectin. He specifically noted that Merck, one of the inventors of ivermectin, refused to conduct clinical trials on its effectiveness against COVID-19 and took active steps to discredit the drug, despite lacking data to support such claims. He also highlighted that many studies claiming ivermectin was ineffective were flawed due to various methodological issues.

He pointed out that medical journals were rejecting or retracting studies that showed ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19. Furthermore, Dr. Kory discussed the significant censorship on social media and mainstream media aimed at discouraging the use of ivermectin and promoting mRNA vaccines instead.

Doctors who advocated for early treatment drugs against COVID-19 faced targeted attacks, and many lost their jobs as a result. Dr. Kory addressed the propaganda campaign against ivermectin, including the derogatory label “horse dewormer,“ and presented media stories that falsely claimed toxicity related to the drug.

In Dr. Kory’s opinion, the majority of COVID-19 deaths could have been prevented if the standard of care had included ivermectin and Vitamin D. He also presented a review of the phenomenon known as “shedding,“ which he explained using the FDA’s guidance document on shedding studies for virus or bacteria-based gene therapy and oncolytic products.

Dr. Kory stated that Pfizer was aware of the shedding potential of their mRNA vaccines as mRNA vaccines, a form of nanoparticle technology, can penetrate various membranes. Although FDA guidelines required shedding studies to be conducted, none were carried out. He cited scientific evidence showing that mRNA and spike proteins are found in all tissues of the body and can be transmitted to unvaccinated individuals through shedding—particularly via exhalation, inhalation, breast milk, and skin exfoliation.

He noted a consistent correlation between excess mortality and fertility issues in unvaccinated individuals following the vaccine rollout, suggesting that shedding from vaccinated to unvaccinated individuals could be a contributing factor. Sensitivity to shedding varies widely, particularly affecting environmentally or physiologically sensitive people, with the highest risk occurring after a booster shot of mRNA vaccines. Even vaccinated individuals are at risk of becoming ill due to shedding. However, the long-term risks of this phenomenon remain unknown, and medical journals have been reluctant to publish studies on shedding.

Dr. Kory also addressed vaccine injuries and post-vaccine injury syndrome, asserting that the reported numbers of COVID-19 deaths were inflated due to incentives for medical practitioners to do so. He found that in the United States, vaccination status was only recorded if the vaccines were administered within the hospital system, leaving out those vaccinated at pharmacies or vaccination centres.

Dr. Kory called for a worldwide moratorium on the use of mRNA vaccines, expressing his belief that the medical system had been weaponized for profit rather than being focused on patient health.

Dr. Marian Laderoute

Dr. Laderoute has built a career in pandemic and infectious disease prevention, and her presentation focused on the shedding of spike proteins from mRNA COVID gene therapy injections.

She asserted that mRNA products are so dangerous that they should never be allowed to be used again. Dr. Laderoute explained that Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) allows the SARS-CoV-2 virus to enter macrophages and blocks the natural response of the HERV-K102 (human endogenous retrovirus K102) protector system. She stated that spike protein antibodies can actually lead to the progression of severe COVID-19 when the virus is present as these antibodies do not prevent the disease.

According to Dr. Laderoute, this is why COVID-19 vaccines may increase the risk of death in patients who are subsequently exposed to SARS-CoV-2. She argued that no adaptive-immunity-vaccine generating antigens to the RNA spike protein of an emerging pathogen can be considered safe due to the risks associated with ADE.

Her research suggests that following a second dose of the vaccine, there is a potential for spike protein shedding through the respiratory system for up to three months post-vaccination. She also emphasized that the spike protein is highly toxic and causes micro-clotting in the blood.

Dr. Laderoute referenced statistical data from the UK Office of National Statistics, which indicated that the risk of all-cause mortality was higher for vaccinated individuals compared to the unvaccinated. She further analyzed the data and suggested that mortality rates increased in both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations following the administration of the second vaccine dose, supporting the hypothesis that shedding was contributing to higher death rates among the unvaccinated.

She claimed that for every life saved by the vaccine, there were 103 deaths caused by it. Dr. Laderoute also noted that people who were most at risk of shedding were those who had been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus before being vaccinated.

Given these findings, Dr. Laderoute strongly advocated for a permanent ban on the use of mRNA technology in both humans and animals.

Yvonne Nickel

Yvonne Nickel, a retired public health nurse and currently a lactation consultant, shared her observations regarding an increase in “tongue-tie“ among newborns and her sensitivity to shedding from vaccinated patients.

In 2020, Yvonne lost her job with Public Health after raising concerns that the health unit was not obtaining Informed Consent for childhood vaccines. She also questioned a potential link between childhood vaccines and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). After leaving her position, she began working as a private lactation consultant.

Yvonne expressed concerns about what she perceives as a rising number of babies being born with tongue-tie following regular vaccinations, including flu vaccines and DTaP vaccines administered to pregnant women. She noted that these vaccines contain toxins known to cross the placental barrier.

In 2021, after the rollout of COVID-19 vaccinations, Yvonne observed an even greater increase in the incidence of tongue-tie in babies born to mothers who had received the COVID-19 vaccine during or prior to pregnancy.

Yvonne contracted COVID-19 in March 2020, an infection that lasted about five weeks. She has a heightened sensitivity to various environmental factors. Her first experience with shedding occurred in May 2021, following a church service. She noticed symptoms such as brain fog, abdominal pain, and increased blood pressure, which seemed to be triggered when she was in close contact with vaccinated individuals, particularly in confined spaces. These symptoms would appear within minutes of exposure.

To manage her symptoms, Yvonne follows protocols from the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), which have helped mitigate her condition. She supplements these protocols with additional therapies and estimates that she has spent approximately $40,000 on her treatments.

Yvonne expressed her belief that there was no Informed Consent for those who were vaccinated, and similarly, no Informed Consent for the unvaccinated who have been affected by shedding.

Andre Boucher

Andre Boucher, a 21-year veteran who worked in safety monitoring for a mine company at mine sites, recounted his experience regarding the company’s recommendation to receive the experimental gene therapy injections. After conducting his own research, Andre decided not to participate in the vaccination program. When he shared some of his findings with colleagues, he was instructed not to discuss the matter with anyone. Shortly thereafter, he was placed on unpaid leave and ultimately terminated from his position, before he was due to receive his yearly bonus.

Dr. James Thorp

Dr. James Thorp, an obstetrician and gynaecologist with over 45 years of medical practice, had recently focused his attention on the impact of COVID-19 on gynaecology. In his testimony, Dr. Thorp shared his growing concerns about pharmaceutical companies, medical journals, and the disastrous effects of COVID-19 vaccines on the global population.

Dr. Thorp explained that his concerns about vaccines began around the year 2000, particularly regarding what was being reported in medical journals. He noted that pregnant women are now subjected to receiving four vaccines during their pregnancy, while infants are exposed to 42 vaccines. He observed a correlation between the increase in vaccines and a rise in autism, SIDS, and other chronic diseases.

He emphasized that none of the vaccines included in the FDA’s recommended schedule have been proven safe through randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Dr. Thorp stressed the importance of avoiding the use of novel substances during pregnancy, citing historical examples like Diethylstilbestrol (DES) and thalidomide, both of which caused significant harms which included unprecedented deaths and multi-generational effects.

According to Dr. Thorp, medical boards not only ignored scientific data but also pressured frontline doctors to administer the novel COVID-19 injections to pregnant women. He referenced Pfizer’s post-market analysis, which in his view, clearly demonstrated the dangers of the Pfizer mRNA vaccines. The analysis reported an 81 per cent miscarriage rate, a fivefold increase in stillbirths, an eightfold increase in neonatal deaths, and a 14 per cent increase in breastfeeding complications. The data also indicated that women reported significantly more adverse reactions to the vaccine than men.

In Pfizer’s Phase 2 / 3 Clinical Trial, only 234 pregnant women were included. The published data on the effects of the vaccine on newborns showed significant health issues and, according to Dr. Thorp, clearly indicated that the vaccines should never have been used during pregnancy.

Dr. Thorp also reviewed a paper titled “COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function,“ which examined 18 different reported complications using data from the VAERS system in the United States.

He alleged that the approval and review system for vaccines is corrupt and has been fraudulently manipulated with censorship of any information that did not align with the “safe and effective” narrative. Based on the data he presented, Dr. Thorp estimated that there have been approximately 82,000+ deaths due to vaccine injuries and 2.72 million vaccine injuries of Canadians.

Dr. Thorp further alleged that massive financial incentives were paid to hospitals, pharmacies, practitioners, regulators, and faith leaders to influence them to promote the COVID-19 vaccines. He concluded by stating that the COVID-19 vaccines represent the greatest medical disaster in history.

Colleen Brandse

Colleen Brandse, a nurse with over 28 years of experience, returned to the NCI after previously testifying at the Toronto hearings in 2023. She shared her experiences over the past year as a vaccine-injured individual within the healthcare system, detailing the challenges of her injury, the loss of her husband, and the strength she continues to find despite the hardships her family has faced since receiving the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

Colleen was initially reluctant to take the COVID-19 vaccine due to her existing health condition, including T-cell lymphoma, and her own research. However, after consulting with and following her oncologist’s advice, she received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, administered two weeks apart.

After her first injection, Colleen experienced minor tingling in her face. Two weeks later, she received the second Pfizer injection. Within two weeks of the second dose, she began to suffer from adverse reactions, including necrosis on her feet, shooting pains in both legs, and random stabbing pains throughout her body. Approximately four to five weeks after the second injection, Colleen went blind in her right eye due to a cataract. She also developed chest pain, brain fog, shortness of breath, sensitivities to various allergens, and other symptoms.

When she informed an emergency room doctor that her symptoms began two weeks after her second COVID-19 vaccine injection, the doctor’s attitude changed abruptly, and she was sent home without further assistance. For months Colleen sought help from various doctors but found no relief.

Her son Connor was vaccinated in 2021, when he joined the army. By July 2022, he had developed a pulmonary embolism, a condition where a blood clot blocks an artery in the lung. Connor was only 23-years-old at the time.

In July 2021, Colleen’s husband was diagnosed with colon cancer, which was surgically removed. However, during a one-year follow-up in July 2022, multiple blood clots were discovered in his lungs. Five months later, he was diagnosed with terminal cancer and has since passed away. Her husband had received a COVID-19 booster shot in December 2021.

Evelien Wiersma

On December 16, 2021, Evelien’s husband fell ill with COVID-19. Three days later, on December 19, they both tested positive for the virus. Her husband, who was 67-years-old, had been in excellent health, with no medications or comorbidities.

Upon contacting their doctor, Evelien was instructed to keep her husband at home until his oxygen levels dropped to 85 and his temperature rose to 103 degrees Fahrenheit at which point she was to call an ambulance. On December 23, 2021, as her husband’s condition deteriorated and he became non-responsive with low oxygen levels, Evelien contacted her daughter, who then called an ambulance.

However, because they were not vaccinated, the ambulance attendants refused to enter their home. Evelien and her daughter managed to get her husband outside in the cold, where the attendants refused to cover him. He received no treatment during the ambulance ride, and Evelien was not allowed to accompany him.

Upon arrival at the emergency room, her husband was given oxygen and Tylenol. Evelien was not permitted to stay with him in the hospital. On December 24, 2021, he was moved to the ICU. Throughout his hospital stay, no doctor contacted Evelien or her family until December 25, when a doctor informed her that her husband had refused to be placed on a ventilator. Evelien also refused ventilation for him and requested ivermectin, which angered the doctor. The following day, the hospital ventilated him without consent.

The hospital continued to deny Evelien and her daughter entry to visit him. Desperate to get him out of the hospital, Evelien even contacted the police, but they refused to intervene.

On December 30, 2021, the hospital called to inform them that her husband was dying and initially refused to allow them to visit. After 20 minutes of pleading, the hospital relented, permitting Evelien and her daughter to see him, but none of the other children were allowed to enter. Evelien fainted and was taken to the emergency room, where she was detained and not allowed to leave.

After her husband passed away, the hospital finally allowed two family members to see his body. When he was admitted, he had pneumonia; ultimately, he died of sepsis. Evelien later received medical opinions suggesting that if he had been treated with antibiotics, he likely would have survived. The cause of death was listed as sepsis and COVID-19.

Estelle Debae

Estelle shared her experiences of extensive international travel during the pandemic. She discussed the various requirements she encountered and how these requirements changed over time.

Renate Lindeman

Renate is a mother of two special needs children (Down Syndrome). Renate testified on her experiences during the COVID-19 crisis in Canada—how lockdowns and school closures affected her family. She shared her interpretations of how the Canadian government started to make distinctions between: “essential“ and “non-essential“ parts of society; eyeing concerns of history and lessons humanity learned the hard way; when a small number of people decide who is or is not essential.

Based on her experience with measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines and after her own research, she decided not to have her children receive the mRNA vaccines.

She had serious fears that the government would forcibly inject or remove her children; she was concerned about the similarity between what was happening in Canada and the Nazi T4 program. The T4 Program, also called T4 Euthanasia Program, was Nazi Germany’s effort to kill the mentally ill, physically or mentally disabled, emotionally distraught, and elderly.

Major (Ret.) Thomas Haviland

Major (Ret.) Haviland provided detailed testimony regarding a comprehensive statistical survey he conducted with funeral directors and embalmers in the United States, Canada, and internationally. With degrees in mathematics, electrical engineering, and a master’s degree in computer resources and information management, Mr. Haviland brings significant expertise to his work. He also spent 36 years in or associated with the United States Air Force.

In November 2022, Mr. Haviland began reaching out to various embalmer associations to inquire about reports of white fibrous clots being found in individuals who had died suddenly. Leveraging his mathematical expertise, he first conducted a survey of embalmers in the United States, later expanding it to include Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia.

The first survey was conducted in 2022, followed by a second survey in 2023 / 2024. These surveys were distributed to 1700 embalmers and included numerous embalming and funeral director associations. Notably, the survey questions did not reference the COVID-19 vaccines.

In the most recent survey (2023 / 2024), 73 per cent of respondents reported still observing white fibrous clots in 2023. In the first survey, the majority of respondents indicated that they first noticed these clots in 2021, although some reported seeing them as early as 2020. The incidence of these reported fibrous clots appeared to decrease between 2021 and 2023.

Additionally, 79 per cent of respondents noted the presence of “coffee grounds“ in the circulatory system, with 25 per cent of the bodies exhibiting this type of micro-clotting.

Mr. Haviland shared that many embalmers were reluctant to participate in the survey. He contacted the largest 30 state-embalmer-associations in the United States to request that they distribute the survey to their members, but only one association complied.

He submitted the results of his initial U.S. survey to the FDA on January 19, 2023, and followed up by submitting his second survey results to both the FDA and the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on January 9, 2024. To date, he has not been contacted by either organization.