COVID-19
Ontario court throws out Dr. Trozzi’s appeal after medical license revoked over COVID stance

From LifeSiteNews
‘the Court has released its decision in my case against the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO). Unfortunately, the ruling went against us on every point, disregarding key evidence and legal standards to reach its decision’
As many of you know, the Court has released its decision in my case against the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO). Unfortunately, the ruling went against us on every point, disregarding key evidence and legal standards to reach its decision. This disappointing outcome reflects the Tribunal’s previous findings, which accused me of spreading so-called “misinformation” and acting dishonorably for providing alternative viewpoints on COVID-19. Despite the setback, I remain committed to defending the right to ethical medical practice and freedom of expression in healthcare. I am grateful for your continued support.
You can read the court’s ruling here: (Click Here)
Here is the latest Justice for Medicine Case Update from my lawyer and friend, Michael Alexander.
Case Update
November 8th, 2024
Hi Everyone,
As many of you may have already heard, the decision in the Trozzi case was released last Friday, far in advance of normal timelines. I am sorry to report that the Court ruled against us on all points of law, and in fact, ran roughshod over major issues to get where it wanted to go.
By way of background, the Tribunal had ruled in November of 2023 that Dr. Trozzi had been spreading misinformation concerning COVID-19, which had the potential to cause harm to the public, for instance, by encouraging people to take ivermectin or stating that the COVID-19 shots had not met appropriate standards of safety and efficacy. The Tribunal also ruled that Dr. Trozzi had failed to maintain the standard of practice by providing medical exemptions for COVID-19 shots. As well, it found that Dr. Trozzi had acted dishonorably by engaging in uncivil discourse.
I launched an appeal of the Tribunal decision in early 2024, and the matter was heard by the Divisional Court on October 8th. The decision was reviewed on the standard of correctness, which is the highest standard of review in the court system. It requires the Court to hold the lower decision-maker to the single, right answer on every point of law.
READ: Dr. Trozzi appeals revocation of his medical license in ‘existential moment’ for Ontario courts
In my written and oral submissions before the Court , I argued that the College Tribunal had failed to consider relevant evidence and had otherwise misrepresented relevant evidence. The Tribunal did not even mention Dr. Trozzi’s two scientific reports on COVID-19 science, which were tendered to respond to the expert witness report provided by Dr. Andrew Gardam, the College’s main expert on COVID-19 science. Dr. Trozzi’s reports contained references to over 160 articles from internationally recognized peer-reviewed journals, dozens of articles waiting for publication approval and statistics taken from Public Health England, Our World in Data, Statistics Canada and Public Health Ontario, while Dr. Gardam’s brief report referred to less than a dozen sources.
Dr. Trozzi’s reports were put into evidence at the Tribunal hearing. They were the subject of my cross-examination of Dr. Gardam, the College’s re-direct of Dr. Gardam, and were also hotly debated during closing submissions. Yet, the Court ruled that the reports had never been introduced into evidence and were, therefore, irrelevant. This is an absurd ruling on its face, and flies in the face of the fact that the parties had reached a pre-hearing agreement to put the studies into evidence in a joint book of documents.
In my oral and written submissions, I noted that the Tribunal had failed to even mention my cross-examination of Dr. Gardam, during which Dr. Gardam admitted that he agreed with the major points of science advanced by Dr.Trozzi’s reports. In legal parlance, this is referred to as “impeaching the witness.” It refers to a mode of questioning whereby the witness is put in contradiction with his or her previous oral or written statements.
It goes without saying that impeaching the College’s main expert witness and turning him into a witness for Dr. Trozzi is highly relevant since it subverts the College’s allegation that Dr. Trozzi had been spreading misinformation that could cause public harm. However, the Tribunal did not even mention the cross-examination in its decision. That is clear evidence of bias and should have led the Court to overturn the Tribunal decision.
In the course of its decision, the Court approved the Tribunal’s failure to grapple with my cross-examination of the College’s expert witness on “misinformation,” Dr. Noni MacDonald, and brushed over the fact that the Tribunal illegitimately applied mere guideline documents as if they had the force of law; as well, the Court refused to recognize pre- and post-Charter Supreme Court cases that have established the absolute right of every citizen to express a minority or dissenting opinion on matters of public importance.
READ: Dr. Mark Trozzi: COVID tyrants must face justice, or we’re all at risk
While there was always the chance that the Court would affirm the Tribunal decision, since Dr. Trozzi did provide medical exemptions contrary to the College’s standard of practice, though without causing any patient harm, and had also engaged, at times, in uncivil discourse, it does not follow that the Tribunal had the right to ignore material evidence or misrepresent guidelines as legal norms. A positive ruling on those points could have been a major victory for all health care professionals, even if the Court had still chosen to affirm the Tribunal’s decision.
The Trozzi decision and other recent cases involving doctors dissenting from the public COVID-19 narrative have confirmed the following propositions:
- Any health college may conduct an unlawful search and seizure of a member’s office, which is to say, without establishing reasonable and probable grounds, as required by the Health Professions Procedural Code;
- Colleges may apply mere guideline and recommendation documents as if they have the force of law;
- Any College discipline tribunal may ignore or manipulate material evidence;
- Health professionals do not enjoy the fundamental right to register disagreements with government public health policies and recommendations.
For the time being, we have lost in spite of our best efforts because the Divisional Court of Ontario is perversely committed to enforcing the government’s narrative concerning COVID-19, even though we all know that it is utterly false and has caused injury and death to hundreds of thousands of Canadians.
This, however, is not the end of the road. Trump’s victory in the U.S. will change the zeitgeist around all public health issues, as will the appointment of RFK Jr. to a Cabinet position.
READ: Canadian doctors warn against new ‘self-amplifying’ COVID shots rolled out in Japan
Further, currently, I am defending municipal council members who have been penalized under a new provincial censorship regime simply for expressing an independent point of view on policy matters. These cases involve many of the same legal principles at play in the Trozzi case. If I am successful in one of the municipal cases, this could lay down some case law that will help our beleaguered doctors and their patients.
Best wishes,
Michael Alexander
Reprinted with permission from Dr. Mark Trozzi.
COVID-19
Study finds nearly half of ‘COVID deaths’ had no link to virus

MxM News
Quick Hit:
A groundbreaking new study has delivered a searing indictment of the global health and media establishment’s COVID death narrative. According to Ian Miller’s analysis on OutKick, a thorough investigation into hospital deaths in Greece reveals that nearly half of the cases officially labeled as “COVID deaths” had nothing to do with the virus. The findings undermine years of data used to justify lockdowns, school closures, and vaccine mandates. Miller argues that the so-called scientific consensus pushed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the media is collapsing under the weight of real evidence.
Key Details:
-
A Greek study found that 45.3% of registered COVID deaths were not caused by COVID at all.
-
Just 25.1% of deaths were directly caused by the virus, with 29.6% contributing indirectly.
-
Only 54.9% of death certificate-listed COVID deaths matched reality after rigorous review.
Diving Deeper:
For years, COVID death tallies dominated media coverage and shaped public policy. Networks like CNN broadcast running totals, while bureaucrats and politicians used them to enforce sweeping restrictions. But according to OutKick’s Ian Miller, a new peer-reviewed Greek study discredits much of that narrative by proving that the way deaths were defined was deeply flawed—and in many cases, outright misleading.
“In Greece, a more concise and simple definition was used, defining as COVID-19-associated death, any death occurring in a person with positive testing for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of death,” the researchers stated. That definition, however, failed to discern whether the virus actually caused the death.
The study, which covered seven major hospitals in Athens over an eight-month period in 2022, went beyond death certificates. Researchers analyzed medical charts, lab results, imaging data, and conducted interviews with treating physicians. As Miller notes, they did “the work that the ‘expert’ community should have been doing” all along.
The findings were stunning. Just 133 of the 530 recorded deaths (25.1%) were directly due to COVID. Another 157 (29.6%) were cases in which COVID contributed to a chain of events. But a full 240 deaths—45.3%—had no connection to the virus, despite being officially registered as COVID deaths.
What’s worse, Miller reports that death certificate data was wildly unreliable. COVID was listed as the primary or contributing cause in 528 out of 530 cases. After the study’s thorough review, that number dropped to 290. “Just 54.9% of the deaths labeled as primary or contributing COVID, per death certificates, actually met that criteria,” Miller writes.
The data also crushed another major narrative: that the unvaccinated were overwhelmingly the ones dying. Of the 290 deaths partially or fully attributed to COVID, 53.8% were fully vaccinated or boosted. In the group labeled “with” COVID, that figure jumped to 63.3%. “Remember the ‘95% of deaths are among the unvaccinated!!!1!!’ hysteria?” Miller quipped. “There was no statistical significance to vaccination when it came to predicting outcomes.”
And perhaps most damning, 42.5% of COVID-positive patients had contracted the virus inside the hospital—despite mandatory masking and PPE policies. “Because masking does not stop COVID transmission,” Miller points out bluntly.
Miller didn’t mince words in his conclusion: “This study quite frankly obliterates almost every single facet of ‘expert’ and scientific consensus. Masking doesn’t work. A significant portion of COVID deaths were not directly caused by the virus… and death certificate data is not reliable.”
As policymakers and media figures continue to sidestep accountability, this study provides hard proof of what many Americans already suspected: the public was misled. And those who raised questions were dismissed as “deniers” or “conspiracy theorists.” In Miller’s view, this was not just a public health failure, but a failure of integrity and truth. And the consequences, from economic devastation to lost trust in institutions, are still being felt.
COVID-19
US Government ADMITS It Approved Pfizer’s COVID “Vaccine” Despite Knowing About a Long List of Trial Violations

The Vigilant Fox
The US government just admitted something shocking.
They KNEW Pfizer’s COVID “vaccine” trials were a complete sham back in 2020.
But they didn’t pursue fraud because exposing it would blow up the very health policy they’re still clinging to today.
This revelation comes from the whistleblower case of Brook Jackson, a former regional director at Ventavia, the company that ran Pfizer’s clinical trials.
In 2021, Jackson filed a lawsuit under the False Claims Act, alleging that Pfizer, Ventavia, and others committed fraud by falsifying data and violating clinical trial protocols.
And now, the government refuses to investigate further—because doing so would expose that they knowingly pushed a harmful product onto the American people.
We’ll show you the court filings with Brook Jackson in this report.
Here’s what Brook Jackson witnessed firsthand.
As regional director at Ventavia, the company running Pfizer’s vaccine trial sites, Jackson said the entire operation was riddled with serious violations. She saw falsified data, trial participants who were unblinded, staff who were poorly trained, and vaccines that were improperly stored.
Worse, she claimed the company FAILED to follow up on adverse events, including serious, potentially life-threatening ones—which recklessly endangered patients and destroyed the integrity of the entire trial.
“We were so inundated with the number of adverse events that we could not keep up,” she said. Pfizer even called asking what the plan was to handle the flood of safety reports.
She said patients weren’t even given full informed consent—her “number one concern.”
Jackson reported these issues to Ventavia. When nothing changed, she went to the FDA.
Six hours later, she was fired. The reason? “I was not a good fit,” she said. “I was not a good fit for reporting fraudulent conduct in a clinical trial.”
Jackson worked at Ventavia for just 18 days but says that’s all it took to get a grasp of the fraud she witnessed.
The court documents reveal a disturbing admission: the government KNEW about ALL the previously listed issues before granting Emergency Use Authorization for Pfizer’s COVID shot.
“The FDA was aware of the protocol violations allegedly witnessed by relator BEFORE it granted Pfizer emergency use authorization for its vaccine.”
That’s the quote from page 19 of the court documents.
The “Relator” they’re referring to is Brook Jackson.
If Jackson’s allegations were true, it would completely undermine the trial’s integrity.
So what did the FDA do with that knowledge?
According to Jackson, nothing.
“I called them. I filed a report. Did they investigate the allegations I was making? The answer is no,” she said.
In a second slap in the face to the American people, the government claimed they moved forward with the COVID shots because they had “continued access” to Pfizer’s vaccine clinical trial data.
That’s the same data the FDA tried to hide for 75 years.
Now that it’s been forced into the light, we know exactly what they were trying to cover up—data showing:
• Heart damage in young people
• A massive volume of adverse events
• Biodistribution to vital organs and dangerous accumulation
• Reproductive harm affecting fertility and pregnancy outcomes
• Deaths and severe injuries linked directly to the shot
• COVID-19 listed as a side effect
• Complete failure to stop transmission
• And much, much more.
They had access to it all. And they pushed the shots anyway.
The most disturbing admission of all comes in the third point of the case.
The court filing states:
“The government further explained that discovery and litigation obligations associated with the case would place significant burdens on FDA, HHS, and the Department of Justice and that the government should not be required to bear such burdens on a case ‘inconsistent with its health policy.’”
In plain English: the government didn’t want to investigate Pfizer, not because the fraud claims lacked merit, but because digging deeper would conflict with its official narrative that the COVID shots are “effective.”
That’s the health policy they’re clinging to.
And they’d rather bury anything that threatens to expose flaws, fraud, or harm from these shots than face the fallout of their own actions.
Jackson emphasized that her lawsuit is about one thing: fraud.
She questioned how exposing fraud could possibly go against public health policy, especially when that policy has never even been clearly defined.
“These were our taxpayer dollars used to fund their experiments,” Jackson said, adding, “these [COVID shots] are not safe or effective products. They’re contaminated, they’re dangerous, and they need to be stopped immediately.”
She called for a full recall, congressional investigations, and accountability for the dangerous experiment that’s been carried out on the American people.
“Fraud should not be allowed to be a part of a clinical trial. Period.”
Thanks for reading.
Subscribe to this page for more COVID reports and stories that matter.
Watch the full conversation with Brook Jackson and Maria Zeee below.
-
Crime1 day ago
Inside B.C.’s Cultus Lake Narco Corridor — How Chinese State-Linked Syndicates are Building a Narco Empire in Canada
-
Alberta2 days ago
Saudi oil pivot could shake global markets and hit Alberta hard
-
Agriculture2 days ago
Canada is missing out on the global milk boom
-
Business1 day ago
Top business group warns Carney’s ‘net zero’ push spells disaster for Canada’s economy
-
Daily Caller24 hours ago
Misguided Climate Policies Create ‘Real Energy Emergency’ And Permit China To Dominate US
-
Alberta22 hours ago
Bonnyville RCMP targeted by suspect driving a trackhoe – Update
-
Business1 day ago
Trump praises Carney at White House, says ‘never say never’ about 51st state
-
International1 day ago
Trump DOJ investigating Washington for new law forcing priests to break Seal of Confession