Connect with us

COVID-19

Canada is replacing healthcare staff who’ve refused the COVID jab with foreign workers

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

While hospitals remain understaffed, many provinces still refuse to allow unvaccinated staff return to work.

Canada is bringing in record numbers of foreign healthcare workers while unvaccinated staff remain barred from work in many provinces.

According to information obtained June 25 by CBC News, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government has allowed 4,336 temporary healthcare workers to enter Canada in 2023, as hospitals remain understaffed amid ongoing COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

“It’s unreasonable that some provinces are still blocking unvaccinated nurses from working,” an Ontario nurse told LifeSiteNews under the condition of anonymity.

“But it’s even more shocking that the Canadian government would rather bring in foreign workers than drop a vaccine mandate for Canadian staff, especially with so much evidence now that the COVID shots are not effective in preventing transmission,” she continued.

According to government data, the number of foreign healthcare workers skyrocketed from 447 in 2018 to 4,336 in 2023. Healthcare workers now make up about two percent of the total temporary foreign worker positions that were approved in 2023.

In 2023, the Trudeau government approved 2,514 foreign nurse aides, orderlies and patient service associates to work in Canada, compared with 16 in 2018.

Similarly, Canadian nurses and doctors are being replaced with foreign workers. In 2023, 612 nursing positions for foreign workers were approved, up from 65 in 2018.

Additionally, 216 family doctor positions were approved in 2023 compared with 72 in 2018.

In Canada, hospitals must first prove that there is no one already in Canada who can take the position before being eligible to ask for a foreign worker.

Where are Canadian healthcare workers?

A recent Health Canada memo revealed that a shortage of 90,000 doctors, nurses and other frontline healthcare workers has caused a “health worker crisis” in Canada.

Similarly, wait times to receive care in most provinces have gone up dramatically in recent years, with the national average now at 27.7 weeks.

However, while hospitals remain understaffed, many provinces still refuse to allow unvaccinated staff return to work.

Ontario, in particular, has been criticized for exacerbating its healthcare worker shortage by levying COVID vaccine mandates as a condition of employment.

According to recently released figures, Ontario will need 33,200 more nurses and 50,853 more personal support workers by 2032 to fill the healthcare workers shortage – figures the Doug Ford government had asked the Information and Privacy Commissioner to keep secret.

While the official number of nurses and other workers relieved of their duties for refusing to take the experimental injections remains uncertain, Raphael Gomez, director of the Centre for Industrial Relations and Human Relations at the University of Toronto, told CTV News that as many as 10 percent of nurses in the province either quit or retired early as a result of the mandates.

Similarly, British Columbia’s top court recently ruled that healthcare workers can still be mandated to receive the experimental COVID injections as a condition of employment, meaning hundreds of healthcare workers still cannot work as hospitals remain understaffed.

Despite the recent ruling, hundreds of British Columbia healthcare workers are still suing provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry over a mandate that prevents them from working.

However, those who dare to speak out against the dangers of the COVID vaccine are punished even more severely than those who quietly refused the shot.

In April, LifeSiteNews reported that Canadian nurse Kristen Nagle was found guilty of violating Ontario’s COVID rules for participating in an anti-lockdown rally and speaking out against COVID mandates.

While her fine was massively reduced, she was still placed under a two-year probation, which she said is designed to stop her from “speaking out or going against public health measures.”

Similarly, Ontario pro-freedom Dr. Mark Trozzi recently announced he plans to appeal the stripping of his medical license for criticizing the mainstream narrative around the COVID-19 “pandemic” and the associated vaccines.

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

COVID-19

Employee wins lawsuit filed by gov’t agency after losing job for refusing COVID shot

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

The federal government successfully sued on her behalf, citing a Title VII violation.

A former assistant manager who was fired after applying for a religious accommodation to refuse the COVID shot has been awarded a six-figure payout after a federal government agency filed a lawsuit on the employee’s behalf.

Federal Judge M. Casey Rodgers on Thursday ordered the Pensacola, Florida store Hank’s Fine Furniture (HFI) to pay a former manager, identified in the lawsuit as “K.M.O.,” $110,000 for refusing to accommodate her request for exemption from the COVID shot due to her “sincerely held Christian beliefs.”

“HFI is permanently enjoined from discriminating against any employee on the basis of religion in violation of Title VII,” Rodgers wrote, the Pensacola News Journal reported Monday. He further declared that HFI “will reasonably accommodate employee and prospective employee religious beliefs during all hiring, discipline and promotion activities,” and “any activity affecting any other terms and conditions of employment.”

Significantly, the store also “cannot require proof that an employee’s or applicant’s religious objection to an employer requirement be an official tenet or endorsed teaching of said religious belief,” according to Pensacola News Journal.

Hank’s Furniture must also adopt a written policy, disseminated to all employees, declaring that HFI “will not require any employee to violate sincerely held religious beliefs, including those pertaining to vaccinations, as a condition of his/her employment.”

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued on behalf of K.M.O. (EEOC v. Hank’s Furniture, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-24533-MCR-HTC) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida after it was unable to reach a pre-litigation settlement “through its administrative conciliation process.”

According to Pensacola News Journal, about two weeks after HFI implemented a policy mandating that its employees receive a COVID shot, K.M.O. told the company she would not get the shot due to her “sincerely held religious beliefs,” and then requested a religious exemption.

According to the lawsuit, HFI ignored her request and asked if she would comply with their COVID shot policy, and K.M.O. then told HFI she planned to submit a written religious accommodation request, asking “whether HFI had a particular form she should use.”

HFI reportedly did not respond to her request. When K.M.O. complained that HFI’s unwillingness to grant her a religious exemption was “unjust,” her new supervisor reportedly told her that “HFI did not care why she would not take” the COVID shot and that HFI “would never grant an accommodation.”

When K.M.O. emailed HMI on September 6, 2021, asking for the status of her religious exemption request, HFI informed her that her religious exemption request was “severely lacking,” and then denied it.

K.M.O. then “asked for help to submit an acceptable religious exemption request,” but HFI refused to discuss any accommodation, according to the lawsuit. Then on October 31, she was fired by HFI because she did not comply with their COVID “vaccination” policy.

Birmingham District Director Bradley Anderson remarked regarding the case for an EEOC press release, “Employees should not have to renounce their religious beliefs in order to remain employed. Let this case serve as a reminder that employers should afford accommodation for religious beliefs unless doing so would cause an undue hardship.”

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Undue Censorship Still Skews COVID Treatments

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

The censorship and institutional capture evident in the pandemic should be an ongoing concern for policy-makers, scientists, and the medical field. Someone who encountered this first-hand was clinical trials researcher Sabine Hazan, who testified to the National Citizens Inquiry on COVID-19.

Hazan, the CEO and principal investigator at Venture Clinical Trials is also the founder and CEO of Progena Biome, a genetic sequencing lab. Starting in 2020, she subjected stool samples of COVID-19 patients’ to next-generation sequencing (NGS) of the entire genome of the virus.

It wasn’t long before the tests, which were $3,000 each, showed the virus mutating into four different spike proteins. Patients had anywhere from one to all of them.

“‘How is the vaccine going to work if the spike protein itself is mutating into multiple combinations?’” she asked herself.

“Vaccinating against viruses is not a really a good idea because unfortunately, viruses mutate more than bacteria.”

Hazan was curious about three cases where the virus had completely disappeared by day five. Two of these patients said they had been taking hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin.

On April 2, 2020, Hazan submitted a protocol to treat COVID-19 consisting of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, vitamins C, D, and zinc. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a request to do clinical trials within 24 hours, yet Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram blocked her advertisements for patients.

The few patients Hazan could recruit faced another hurdle as medical authorities warned pharmacists not to prescribe hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin together because of cardiac problems. Her monitoring of patients never revealed such problems.

“These drugs have been given to millions of people with arthritis, and all of a sudden, they’re bad?” she asked.

In the first 16 of 17 patients, the virus disappeared from stool samples between 5 to 8 days after being on the regimen. Hazan applied for a patent for her protocol in July 2020 and received it in December 2020. An unnamed party or parties offered her $10 million, then $40 million for her patent, but refused the money to continue her research.

Hazan found newborns have a lot of bifidobacteria and the elderly have little to none. Her research suggests that boosting a person’s microbiomes can address c difficile, anxiety, Lyme Disease, Crohn’s, psoriasis, Alzheimer’s, and cancer, while its deficiencies may be related to autism.

She had concerns from the vaccines from the start, but authorities kept doctors in California like her from warning patients about possible side effects.

“What I realized doing clinical trials is I couldn’t always trust pharmaceutical companies,” she said.

“When people are coming at me with a new medication that has been tested on animals for one week, I start freaking out.”

Some of her studies waited 6 to 8 months to get published, while 52 have not yet found a journal willing to print them.

“I’m trying to publish the data on the messenger RNA [of COVID vaccines] affecting the microbiome, which won a Research Award at the American College of Gastro[enterology], and nobody’s interested in publishing that.”

This study of more than 150 vaccine-injured patients found the entire phylum of bifidobacteria had been “wiped” out.

Frontiers in Microbiology published her most popular paper, Microbiome-Based Hypothesis on Ivermectin’s Mechanism in COVID-19: Ivermectin Feeds Bifidobacteria to Boost Immunity in July of 2022. The paper received 47,000 views before a complaint led to its retraction in May of 2023.

Twitter deemed her hypothesis as “misinformation” long before the retraction and blocked her account. Some of Hazan’s own patients who worked for Twitter helped get her account reinstated but could not keep her from a ‘misinformation’ label on her posts.

“I was doing the clinical trials. I was treating the patients, I was analyzing the stools. I was working with the FDA. Who’s giving misinformation? I’m publishing. You’re telling me I’m misinforming people?” she recalled thinking.

Hazan expressed concern that a “movement” to retract papers has yanked more than 14,000 of them and artificial intelligence will ignore them.

“What’s interesting about these papers is they all go against the narrative that is meant to sell you something. So that’s dangerous…if you’re trying to push a drug, or biologic, and now you’re removing everything else,” she said.

Such one-sided medical dogma is wrong, she insisted.

“That’s not science. That’s propaganda. That’s what we saw this pandemic,” said Hazan.

“Now I’m blacklisted from a lot of pharmaceutical companies…It actually killed my business of doing clinical trials.”

The fact that mRNA vaccines are still being pushed concerns the Moroccan-born doctor.

“You talk to scientists who do animal studies on the mRNA, they will tell you that the rats are eating their arms. So that’s all I need to hear,” she said.

“The technology may be promising, maybe, but it’s not there yet. It’s still very much experimental.”

Let’s hope more scientists, doctors, and journal publishers will find the integrity and courage of Hazan. Citizens have reason for concern that regulators have pushed risky mRNA vaccines while undermining the legitimacy of other promising options. When will honest science prevail?

Lee Harding is a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X