COVID-19
College’s COVID vaccine mandate for remote professor was ‘not reasonable,’ arbitrator rules

From LifeSiteNews
Arbitrator Larry Steinberg determined that Fanshawe College erred in mandating that Professor Andrew Wing have the shots as a condition of work despite working from home.
An Ontario arbitrator ruled in favor of a vaccine-free professor who was put on unpaid leave for refusing to comply with his college’s COVID jab policy despite working from home, concluding that the college’s jab mandate was “not reasonable.”
Arbitrator Larry Steinberg, in a ruling released February 20, determined that Fanshawe College, an applied arts college in London, Ontario, erred in mandating that Professor Andrew Wing have the shots as a condition of work despite working from home.
“This case is not about whether the vaccination Policy of the College is reasonable. This case is more narrowly focused only on whether, based on the evidence before me, it was reasonable to apply the Policy to the grievor in the context of his working conditions at the time,” Steinberg wrote in his ruling.
“I find that requiring the grievor to comply with the vaccination Policy was not reasonable and the grievance is allowed. As requested by the parties the issue of the appropriate remedy is remitted to the parties.”
Wing holds a full-time position in the Technical Systems Analysis (TSS) program within the School of Information Technology. All of its classes are remote.
Fanshawe College, like most in Ontario, in November 2021 set mandatory COVID jab policies for staff and students to comply with a provincial government dictate, which was announced a few months earlier. Those that did not comply were fired or placed on unpaid leave.
Wing told the college that he was not going to get the COVID shots and wanted an exemption under Ontario’s Human Rights Code. He was subsequently placed on a three-month leave with no pay that started January 3, 2022.
Wing was not happy with being put on unpaid leave, and with the help of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union Local 110, filed a grievance.
The grievance read, “I grieve that Fanshawe has unreasonably applied its COVID-19 Vaccination policy and as a result has threatened an unreasonable disciplinary action under our Collective Agreement and/or any applicable statues, and in so doing, has violated Articles 4 and 31 of the Collective Agreement along with any other relevant articles and/or laws.”
Wing’s union, as per the arbitrator’s ruling, noted that “There was no credible justification given for the rule requiring that the grievor be fully vaccinated in view of the fact that his work requirements had been and continued to be done remotely.”
Fanshawe College argued that the “policy that everyone who attended on campus had to be fully vaccinated never changed from its inception.”
The college’s human resources department had argued, as per the arbitrator’s ruling, that it was an “administrative burden for the employer to continue to have to check the vaccination status of employees who found it necessary to be on campuses,” and that, “In the grievor’s case this could include meeting with students, attending to technical matters and attending at meetings.”
Steinberg ruled that regarding the human resources department’s claim, “There was no evidence why the grievor could not continue to perform all of these functions remotely as had been since the inception of the program in 2020.”
“I reject this evidence as in any way justifying the requirement that the grievor be vaccinated on the basis of the College’s interest in carrying out its responsibilities,” he wrote.
As for Wing returning to work, in March 2022, he got an email from the college that because he was working remotely he could come back to remote work with pay.
Fanshawe College, like many universities and post-secondary institutions in the Ontario, had in place a COVID jab mandate policy for staff and students that targeted the vaccine-free.
Ontario’s government, under pro-mandate and pro-lockdown Premier Doug Ford, for a time mandated not only mask-wearing, but COVID shots for workers in healthcare and other government settings.
The mandates led to lawsuits against governments and universities and other businesses Canada-wide.
Many institutions along with governments in Canada rescinded vaccine mandates and vaccine passports last year, but not after causing much harm to the unjabbed.
LifeSiteNews has reported on many cases that Canadian arbitrators ruled in favor of the vaccine-free who lost work for not getting the shots.
When it comes to the shots themselves, there is a large body of data showing that COVID jab mandates and passports have been failed strategy for tackling COVID, not to mention the fact that the jabs have been linked to millions of injuries and thousands of deaths.
It is now understood that the COVID virus has a minimal risk of asymptomatic spread, and research indicates that natural immunity from infection of COVID is far superior to vaccine-induced immunity.
COVID-19
Study finds Pfizer COVID vaccine poses 37% greater mortality risk than Moderna

From LifeSiteNews
A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna
A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.
The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:
Study Overview
- Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
- Intervention: Two doses of either:
- BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
- mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
- Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
- Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
- Main Outcomes:
- All-cause mortality
- Cardiovascular mortality
- COVID-19 mortality
- Non-COVID-19 mortality
All-cause mortality
Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.
- Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)
Cardiovascular mortality
Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)
COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)
Non-COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)
Biological explanations
The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:
The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:
- Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
- Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions
Final conclusion
Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.
Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.
As the authors conclude:
These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.
COVID-19
Canada’s health department warns COVID vaccine injury payouts to exceed $75 million budget

Fr0m LifeSiteNews
A Department of Health memo warns that Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program will exceed its $75 million budget due to high demand, with $16 million already paid out.
COVID vaccine injury payments are expected to go over budget, according to a Canadian Department of Health memo.
According to information published April 28 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Department of Health will exceed their projected payouts for COVID vaccine injuries, despite already spending $16 million on compensating those harmed by the once-mandated experimental shots.
“A total $75 million in funding has been earmarked for the first five years of the program and $9 million on an ongoing basis,” the December memo read. “However the overall cost of the program is dependent on the volume of claims and compensation awarded over time, and that the demand remains at very high levels.”
“The purpose of this funding is to ensure people in Canada who experience a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020 have access to a fair and timely financial support mechanism,” it continued.
Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) was launched in December 2020 after the Canadian government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.
While Parliament originally budgeted $75 million, thousands of Canadians have filed claims after received the so-called “safe and effective” COVID shots. Of the 3,060 claims received to date, only 219 had been approved so far, with payouts totaling over $16 million.
Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.
The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.
Additionally, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest showed that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.
Interestingly, while the Department of Health has spent $16 million on injury payouts, the Liberal government spent $54 million COVID propaganda promoting the vaccine to young Canadians.
The Public Health Agency of Canada especially targeted young Canadians ages 18-24 because they “may play down the seriousness of the situation.”
The campaign took place despite the fact that the Liberal government knew about COVID vaccine injuries, according to a secret memo.
-
Alberta2 days ago
New Alberta Election Act bans electronic vote counting machines, lowers threshold for recalls and petitions
-
Alberta2 days ago
Hours after Liberal election win, Alberta Prosperity Project drumming up interest in referendum
-
2025 Federal Election21 hours ago
NDP Floor Crossers May Give Carney A Majority
-
Alberta2 days ago
Premier Danielle Smith responds to election of Liberal government
-
Alberta1 day ago
Premier Danielle Smith hints Alberta may begin ‘path’ toward greater autonomy after Mark Carney’s win
-
Banks2 days ago
TD Bank Account Closures Expose Chinese Hybrid Warfare Threat
-
Business14 hours ago
China’s economy takes a hit as factories experience sharp decline in orders following Trump tariffs
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Post election…the chips fell where they fell