This document was sent to Premier Ford by a group of CCCA members as well as a group of academics and health professionals, as a warning against the mass delivery of experimental COVID-19 injections recommended by the Science Table Advisory COVID-19 for Ontario in their recent report "Behavioural Science-Informed Strategies for Increasing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Children and Youth". Concerns were carefully and conscientiously documented. They are grounded on scientific, ethical, and legal aspects of what authors of the letter believe is an extremely misguided policy, likely to have an unprecedented, negative impact on the health and well-being not only of children and youth, but of all Ontarians, for years to come.
Here is a link to the document that is being addressed for readers to assess for themselves.
November 6, 2021
Dear Premier Ford,
Please accept our response to the October 26, 2021 Report of the Science Table COVID-19 Advisory for Ontario (STA) concerning COVID-19 Injectable Biological Products (hereafter 'COVID products') for children and youth. We represent scientists, health and other professionals, and academics from various disciplines who have followed, evaluated, and reported on the handling of COVID-19 for over a year. In an earlier letter, we expressed our opposition to mandating COVID products for health workers, and our support for prevention and early treatment, for well-staffed health establishments, and for the best possible work conditions for health workers.1 We are encouraged that our recommendations may have informed your decision to abandon the policy of COVID-product mandates for these workers.
We are writing to you again to plead that you oppose authorizing COVID products for our children and youth. Such authorization is likely to result in a public health disaster, for years to come, and of a magnitude that is hard to anticipate.
Once again, our position departs radically from the position of the STA as presented in their recent report, "Behavioural Science-Informed Strategies for Increasing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Children and Youth".2 The reference to 'science' in its title notwithstanding, the report offers no scientific evidence that COVID products are safe, effective, or necessary to protect the health of our children and youth. Instead, it assumes safety, effectiveness, and necessity and, based on these (false) assumptions, elaborates on what psychological strategies can be deployed by "trusted sources" - health-care professionals, educators, and other community leaders - to persuade young Ontarians and their adult caretakers to embrace these COVID products. The authors also seem to assume, again without evidence, that COVID products are like traditional vaccines delivered in Canada and elsewhere for years. That much can be gleaned from the claim that "in the last two decades, there has been an increase in the development of strategies aiming to promote vaccine uptake in children and youth." (p. 4).
But what if our children were better off without those COVID products, such that persuasion would be tantamount to false advertising? What if COVID products were nothing like traditional vaccines, such that it would be scientifically unfounded and even morally wrong to prey on the public's trust in vaccines to persuade it to accept a very different, potentially harmful, medical product?
To set the record straight, allow us to present an overview of the science underlying COVID products, especially as they concern young Ontarians:
1) Risk of death of COVID-19 for children is statistically zero.
The major risk factor for serious COVID-19 is age. For ages 0 to 19, the death rate is statistically zero.3 COVID-19 is mostly mild in this age range and long-term sequelae are rare.4 In Sweden, with a population of 10 million, no children died of COVID-19 even though there were no lockdowns, no masks, and hardly any school closures5. A recent, widely circulated New York Times article falsely claimed that over 900,000 children in the USA had been hospitalized due to COVID-19, overestimating the real number of 63,000 hospitalized children by a factor of 14.6 Even the lower number of 63,000 has been questioned, with some estimates of 39% to 48% of children originally admitted to hospital for unrelated illness but acquiring COVID-19 in the hospital.7 The roughly 300 deaths of children in the USA were among children with multiple comorbidities who were not offered early treatment. However, by the time the paper retracted its error the false information had already impacted public opinion.
2) Children pose no risk to adults
A peer-reviewed article in the prestigious journal Pediatrics found that most studies indicate that children are very unlikely to transmit the infection to adults in the household or at school, and when they develop COVID-19 it is generally a very mild form,8 one that elicits durable, comprehensive, and strong natural immunity.9 These data, combined with the Swedish data showing that leaving schools open did not lead to higher rates of COVID-19 among teachers, should reassure policymakers that children pose no risk to adults - grandparents, parents, or teachers. Moreover, it would be unprecedented in a democratic society like Canada if children were used as a means to an end - subjected to an experimental medical treatment, as these COVID products are, to shield adults or the elderly. As Dr. Peter Doshi, Associate Editor of the British Medical Journal, has pointed out, 'even if we were to assume [protection against COVID-19 with vaccines], the number of children who would need to be vaccinated to protect just one adult from a bout of severe COVID-19 [...] would be extraordinarily high [and] would compare unfavorably to the number of children that would be harmed, including for rare serious events.'4
3) Children who develop COVID-19 can be treated with safe and effective drugs
There exist multiple safe, effective, and inexpensive, generic drugs to treat COVID-19 - for the rare cases when treatment is necessary, i.e., among children with multiple comorbidities - that have been used in all age groups, even young children10. A systematic review of 15 clinical trials indicated that the Nobel Prize-winning antiparasitic drug Ivermectin (IVM) can be successfully applied to the treatment of viral diseases, including COVID-19, and reduces infection by an average of 86%.11 A more recent report of 64 clinical trials, 30 of them randomized and controlled, indicated 67% effectiveness in prophylaxis, 84% in early treatment, and 20% in late treatment using protocols that include IVM at different doses and for different periods of time.12 Another meta-analysis of 18 Randomized Controlled Trials of IVM in COVID-19 found large, statistically and clinically significant, reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance.13 Finally, many examples of IVM distribution campaigns - in Mexico City, several states in India, and several Argentinian provinces - leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality among all age groups, indicate the safety and effectiveness of this oral medication in all phases of COVID-19.14 In light of the wealth of data supporting treatment modalities that can help to overcome the current public health, social, and economic crisis in Canada, the suppression and gross misrepresentation - by leading regulatory agencies and mainstream media15 - and the efforts of medical colleges to criminalize doctors who treat COVID-19 patients with IVM and other repurposed drugs,16 is unjustified and nothing short of scandalous. It is also unjustifiable to risk the health of young Ontarians by subjecting them to unnecessary medical experiments when safe and effective alternatives exist.
4) COVID-19 products are not like traditional vaccines
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
