Trudeau “Played Doctor” With Children

Alberta Health hides data against the wishes of Premier Danielle Smith

Jeffrey Rath

Does anyone else remember when Justin Trudeau creepily told parents to leave the room so that he could talk to their children about COVID Vaccines? I just re-watched that clip and realized how much creepier it was in retrospect.

Prior to the vaccine roll-out for children, PFIZER’s OWN DATA in Table 14 of its Emergency Use Authorization, admitted that COVID would only notionally kill 1 child per million from original virulent strain COVID but PUT 34 CHILDREN PER MILLION INTO ICU WITH MYOCARDITIS. Pfizer in that same table made the remarkable, but highly questionable statement that they posited 0 DEATHS in children from the vaccine. The table claiming no children would die from the vaccine also only focused on myocarditis and ignored potential deaths from transverse myelitis, anaphylaxis, and RSV which are all well-known potential side effects of the Pfizer COVID shot. Trudeau, Tam, Kenney and Hinshaw were all personally warned by the author of this Substack of those risks. Did they pause the childhood COVID injection roll-out to even investigate if the concerns about the shots killing more children than COVID were accurate? Of course not. It has become apparent that Trudeau’s obvious Narcissistic Personality Disorder leaves no room for self-reflection or ever admitting that he is wrong.

Don’t forget that from a “vaccine” approval perspective if Pfizer put any digit other than “0” on the “DEATHS FROM VACCINE” column the Pfizer shot could not be approved for use in children. Even admitting to 1 death per million from the vaccine would mean that the vaccine was as deadly or more deadly than COVID and could not be approved or justified for an age cohort at statistically zero risk of COVID Mortality. Also, the recent high powered JAMA Cardiology Study referred to below shows that the Moderna shot has an almost 300% greater risk of increased myocarditis risk in children than the Pfizer shot that already increases myocarditis risk in children by 500%. The mixing of the shots which “Doctor Trudeau” recommended exponentially increased the risk of IN-PATIENT myocarditis in children by a shocking 3600%.

Appendix 6 of The “ALBERTA COVID 19 PANDEMIC RESPONSE Alberta COVID-19 Pandemic Data Review Task Force FINAL REPORT” reads in part as follows :

“Nordic countries have restricted use of vaccines in children, referencing a large Nordic population-based study which showed that the 28-day risk of IN-PATIENT MYOCARDITIS wash higher in the vaccinated component compared with the unvaccinated. For males aged 16-24 years the risk of myocarditis was 5x higher following 2 doses of Pfizer, 14x higher following 2 doses of Moderna and 36x higher WITH A PFIZER FOLLOWED BY A MODERNA VACCINE.”

This study was massive. It reviewed health outcomes post COVID vaccine roll out for 23.1 million people. It can hardly be dismissed as “misinformation.”

The same Appendix of the Alberta Government Task Force report notes:

“A US Lancet-published study assessing the long-term health quality of life effects of adolescents and young adults diagnosed with myocarditis following vaccination found that they were unable to complete their usual activities (21%), had pain (20%), and had anxiety or depression (46%) in the 90 days following their diagnosis.” …

The ALBERTA GOVERNMENT TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT In APPENDIX 3 of Chapter 8 on vaccines cites that other well-known source of “anti-science”, “misinformation” and “anti-evidence, the JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS in a 2023 Bullen, Heriot and Jamrozik article on “Herd Immunity, vaccination and moral obligation” showing data at Table A3.2 that demonstrate that in children, COVID related “severe adverse events” were orders of magnitude higher in vaccinated children as opposed to children who just got COVID and recovered.

The TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT is now being attacked by self-appointed “expert” Gary Mason in the Globe and Mail on February 4th, 2025 as being “misinformation” that “is an insult to health care workers and officials”.

Notably Mr. Mason’s scientific credentials are unknown. It is also notable that Mason attacks a reference to a Substack in the Task Force report without acknowledging that the Substack author was likely better educated and accomplished than Mr. Mason or that the Substack in question was simply citing government published data and reports. None of the critics of the TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT including the AMA, CMA, or Trudeau pal “Little Timmy” Caulfield EVER identify specifically what they allege is “anti-scientific”, “anti-evidence”, “misinformation” that takes us back to the “dark age”.

This is reminiscent of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta persecution of Dr. Eric Payne. Last year, the CPSA quietly dismissed “misinformation” complaints brought against Dr. Payne. This followed 4 years of the CPSA steadfastly refusing or being unable to identify a single statement made by Dr. Payne that CPSA or its “investigators” and “experts” could identify as “misinformation”.

Gary Mason in the Globe and Mail takes the same “drive by smear” approach and goes so far as to suggest that:

“Dr. James Talbot an adjunct professor at the University of Alberta School of Public Health, told the Edmonton Journal that Ms. Smith’s Government was sitting on data that showed who got immunized, how many of them developed COVID and whether any developed any rare medical conditions after being inoculated. Yet that information remains a state secret.”

What Mr. Mason ignorantly refuses to acknowledge is the number of times that Dr. Gary Davidson an “Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of Alberta” in good standing, repeatedly stated in the Report that a PUBLIC INQUIRY with subpoena powers is required. The reason for this is that a Government Task Force ORDERED BY THE PREMIER OF ALBERTA was repeatedly refused access to data by Alberta Health and Alberta Health Services bureaucrats who appear intent on continuing to play hide the ball on vaccine safety and efficacy. Mr. Mason also refuses to acknowledge data and tables scrubbed from the internet by these same ALBERTA BUREAUCRATS—opaque, nameless, faceless bureaucrats—which confirm the high-powered Cleveland Clinic study that demonstrates that the greater a person’s vaccine and booster uptake, the worse their health outcomes, including COVID related hospitalization and death.

The Mason hit piece and Talbot quote above demonstrates the degree of dirty propaganda being promulgated in the legacy press. The statement that “The Government was sitting on data that showed who got immunized, how many of them developed COVID and whether any developed any rare medical condition” is largely true. The problem for the pro-pharma propagandists is that the information is being withheld AGAINST THE STRICT INSTRUCTIONS OF PREMIER SMITH in the TASK FORCE MANDATE.

While it may be slimy and underhanded for these Vaccine Propagandists to try to smear Premier Smith’s reputation for integrity with these underhanded insinuations, its simple defamation to suggest that Premier Smith has anything to do with evidence being withheld from her own TASK FORCE.

There is absolutely no way that if AHS or Alberta Health bureaucrats had evidence to refute AHS tables showing increased hospitalization and death among the vaccinated as opposed to the unvaccinated—confirmed by the 56,000-person Cleveland Clinic Study, JAMA Cardiology, Lancet and Pfizer Studies referred to in this column—those same self-serving, insubordinate, bureaucrats would have either gleefully provided the data to Dr. Davidson’s Task Force team or have leaked it to the media long before now.

Premier Smith and Dr. Davidson need to name by name the bureaucrats that are actively smearing both of their reputations by making scurrilous statements to the media that suggest that THEY are the ones hiding the truth as opposed to all the pro-vaccine cultists in AHS and Alberta health.

I know Premier Smith is really busy trying to save Alberta and Canada from the trade war provoked by Justin Trudeau’s despicable degradation of Canadian sovereignty. Howver, she needs to hold a press conference accompanied by Dr. Davidson to defend her own reputation against the faceless, disloyal minions in her own government who continue to hide the truth from Albertans by fraudulently parroting the words “safe and effective”.

Jeffrey R.W. Rath B.A. (Hons.), LL.B. (Hons.)

Foothills, Alberta

February 5th, 2025

Subscribe to Conspiracy Facts With Jeffrey Rath.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Up Next

Don’t default to the Rate of Last Resort

Don't Miss

Liberals, globalists flip out after Trump orders USAID freeze

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

The capital of capitalism elects a socialist mayor

Business / 4 hours ago

Capital Flight Signals No Confidence In Carney’s Agenda

Censorship Industrial Complex / 5 hours ago

How the UK and Canada Are Leading the West’s Descent into Digital Authoritarianism

Alberta

Alberta government’s plan will improve access to MRIs and CT scans

Published on November 4, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail and Tegan Hill

The Smith government may soon allow Albertans to privately purchase diagnostic screening and testing services, prompting familiar cries from defenders of the status quo. But in reality, this change, which the government plans to propose in the legislature in the coming months, would simply give Albertans an option already available to patients in every other developed country with universal health care.

It’s important for Albertans and indeed all Canadians to understand the unique nature of our health-care system. In every one of the 30 other developed countries with universal health care, patients are free to seek care on their own terms with their own resources when the universal system is unwilling or unable to satisfy their needs. Whether to access care with shorter wait times and a more rapid return to full health, to access more personalized services or meet a personal health need, or to access new advances in medical technology. But not in Canada.

That prohibition has not served Albertans well. Despite being one of the highest-spending provinces in one of the most expensive universal health-care systems in the developed world, Albertans endure some of the longest wait times for health care and some of the worst availability of advanced diagnostic and medical technologies including MRI machines and CT scanners.

Introducing new medical technologies is a costly endeavour, which requires money and the actual equipment, but also the proficiency, knowledge and expertise to use it properly. By allowing Albertans to privately purchase diagnostic screening and testing services, the Smith government would encourage private providers to make these technologies available and develop the requisite knowledge.

Obviously, these new providers would improve access to these services for all Alberta patients—first for those willing to pay for them, and then for patients in the public system. In other words, adding providers to the health-care system expands the supply of these services, which will reduce wait times for everyone, not just those using private clinics. And relief can’t come soon enough. In Alberta, in 2024 the median wait time for a CT scan was 12 weeks and 24 weeks for an MRI.

Greater access and shorter wait times will also benefit Albertans concerned about their future health or preventative care. When these Albertans can quickly access a private provider, their appointments may lead to the early discovery of medical problems. Early detection can improve health outcomes and reduce the amount of public health-care resources these Albertans may ultimately use in the future. And that means more resources available for all other patients, to the benefit of all Albertans including those unable to access the private option.

Opponents of this approach argue that it’s a move towards two-tier health care, which will drain resources from the public system, or that this is “American-style” health care. But these arguments ignore that private alternatives benefit all patients in universal health-care systems in the rest of the developed world. For example, Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands and Australia all have higher-performing universal systems that provide more timely care because of—not despite—the private options available to patients.

In reality, the Smith government’s plan to allow Albertans to privately purchase diagnostic screening and testing services is a small step in the right direction to reduce wait times and improve health-care access in the province. In fact, the proposal doesn’t go far enough—the government should allow Albertans to purchase physician appointments and surgeries privately, too. Hopefully the Smith government continues to reform the province’s health-care system, despite ill-informed objections, with all patients in mind.

Nadeem Esmail

Director, Health Policy, Fraser Institute

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Alberta

Canada’s heavy oil finds new fans as global demand rises

Published on November 3, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Will Gibson

“The refining industry wants heavy oil. We are actually in a shortage of heavy oil globally right now, and you can see that in the prices”

Once priced at a steep discount to its lighter, sweeter counterparts, Canadian oil has earned growing admiration—and market share—among new customers in Asia.

Canada’s oil exports are primarily “heavy” oil from the Alberta oil sands, compared to oil from more conventional “light” plays like the Permian Basin in the U.S.

One way to think of it is that heavy oil is thick and does not flow easily, while light oil is thin and flows freely, like fudge compared to apple juice.

“The refining industry wants heavy oil. We are actually in a shortage of heavy oil globally right now, and you can see that in the prices,” said Susan Bell, senior vice-president of downstream research with Rystad Energy.

A narrowing price gap

Alberta’s heavy oil producers generally receive a lower price than light oil producers, partly a result of different crude quality but mainly because of the cost of transportation, according to S&P Global.

The “differential” between Western Canadian Select (WCS) and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) blew out to nearly US$50 per barrel in 2018 because of pipeline bottlenecks, forcing Alberta to step in and cut production.

So far this year, the differential has narrowed to as little as US$10 per barrel, averaging around US$12, according to GLJ Petroleum Consultants.

“The differential between WCS and WTI is the narrowest I’ve seen in three decades working in the industry,” Bell said.

Trans Mountain Expansion opens the door to Asia

Oil tanker docked at the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, B.C. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation

The price boost is thanks to the Trans Mountain expansion, which opened a new gateway to Asia in May 2024 by nearly tripling the pipeline’s capacity.

This helps fill the supply void left by other major regions that export heavy oil – Venezuela and Mexico – where production is declining or unsteady.

Canadian oil exports outside the United States reached a record 525,000 barrels per day in July 2025, the latest month of data available from the Canada Energy Regulator.

China leads Asian buyers since the expansion went into service, along with Japan, Brunei and Singapore, Bloomberg reports.

Asian refineries see opportunity in heavy oil

“What we are seeing now is a lot of refineries in the Asian market have been exposed long enough to WCS and now are comfortable with taking on regular shipments,” Bell said.

Kevin Birn, chief analyst for Canadian oil markets at S&P Global, said rising demand for heavier crude in Asia comes from refineries expanding capacity to process it and capture more value from lower-cost feedstocks.

“They’ve invested in capital improvements on the front end to convert heavier oils into more valuable refined products,” said Birn, who also heads S&P’s Center of Emissions Excellence.

Refiners in the U.S. Gulf Coast and Midwest made similar investments over the past 40 years to capitalize on supply from Latin America and the oil sands, he said.

While oil sands output has grown, supplies from Latin America have declined.

Mexico’s state oil company, Pemex, reports it produced roughly 1.6 million barrels per day in the second quarter of 2025, a steep drop from 2.3 million in 2015 and 2.6 million in 2010.

Meanwhile, Venezuela’s oil production, which was nearly 2.9 million barrels per day in 2010, was just 965,000 barrels per day this September, according to OPEC.

The case for more Canadian pipelines

Worker at an oil sands SAGD processing facility in northern Alberta. Photo courtesy Strathcona Resources

“The growth in heavy demand, and decline of other sources of heavy supply has contributed to a tighter market for heavy oil and narrower spreads,” Birn said.

Even the International Energy Agency, known for its bearish projections of future oil demand, sees rising global use of extra-heavy oil through 2050.

The chief impediments to Canada building new pipelines to meet the demand are political rather than market-based, said both Bell and Birn.

“There is absolutely a business case for a second pipeline to tidewater,” Bell said.

“The challenge is other hurdles limiting the growth in the industry, including legislation such as the tanker ban or the oil and gas emissions cap.”

A strategic choice for Canada

Because Alberta’s oil sands will continue a steady, reliable and low-cost supply of heavy oil into the future, Birn said policymakers and Canadians have options.

“Canada needs to ask itself whether to continue to expand pipeline capacity south to the United States or to access global markets itself, which would bring more competition for its products.”