Health
Jury deliberating in Calgary trial for parents charged in baby’s death

CALGARY — A jury is deliberating whether a couple should have done more for their sick 14-month-old son before he died in hospital.
Jennifer and Jeromie Clark have pleaded not guilty to criminal negligence causing death and failure to provide the necessaries of life for their son John.
Calgary Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Paul Jeffrey spent nearly three hours Thursday instructing jurors on how to reach a verdict.
He told them they must not be swayed by public opinion or by the Clarks not testifying in their own defence.
“The death of John Clark is a tragic loss, but his death in and of itself does not mean that a criminal offence must have been committed,” Jeffrey told jurors.
“If you conclude Jennifer Clark or Jeromie Clark are not guilty of a criminal offence, it does not mean you agree with their decisions or actions or that you condone some or all of their possible choices. It is only a statement of whether they committed a criminal offence.”
The Crown argued John was on the verge of death when he arrived in hospital on November 28, 2013, and that his parents played with his life by not seeking treatment sooner.
Jurors were shown pictures of John after he died. He had blackened toes and a red rash that covered almost three-quarters of his body. The forensic pathologist’s report said John was malnourished and died from a staph infection.
The Clarks’ lawyers say doctors at the Alberta Children’s Hospital were to blame because they raised the boy’s sodium and fluid levels too aggressively.
The trial heard John died the day after he was brought to hospital, where he had a seizure and two cardiac arrests.
David Stephan, who with his wife Collet are to be tried a second time next spring in the 2012 death of their son, sat in the gallery with a notebook during the Clarks’ trial. He was not present Thursday for the jury instructions.
The Stephans were found guilty in 2016 of failing to provide the necessaries of life to 19-month-old Ezekiel, who died from meningitis.
Their trial in Lethbridge, Alta., heard evidence that they treated the boy with garlic, onion and horseradish rather than take him to a doctor. The Stephans eventually called 911 but the toddler died in hospital.
In May, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial for the Stephans, saying the judge did not properly instruct jurors on what would be a marked departure from reasonable behaviour “in a way that the jury could understand and apply.”
In a Facebook video from outside the courthouse on Tuesday, Stephan said even if the Clarks win, justice will not be served until the doctors who cared for him are held accountable.
“All it’s doing is preventing further injustices from taking place. All it’s doing is preventing the dirty pharmaceutical agenda from spreading at a greater rate,” he said.
“All it’s doing is hopefully preventing parents from engaging unnecessary treatments, unnecessary vaccinations because they’re not terrified of going to jail like Jennifer and Jeromie Clark did or like David and Collet Stephan did.”
Lauren Krugel, The Canadian Press
Brownstone Institute
The Plan: Lock You Down for 130 Days

From the Brownstone Institute
BY
What if the coronavirus pandemic was not a once-in-a-century event but the beginning of a new era of regular deadly respiratory viral pandemics? The Biden administration is already planning for this future. Last year, it unveiled a national strategy to develop pharmaceutical firms’ capacity to create vaccines within 130 days of a pandemic emergency declaration.
The Biden plan enshrines former president Donald Trump‘s Operation Warp Speed as the model response for the next century of pandemics. Left unsaid is that, for the new pandemic plan to work as envisioned, it will require us to conduct dangerous gain-of-function research. It will also require cutting corners in the evaluation of the safety and efficacy of novel vaccines. And while the studies are underway, politicians will face tremendous pressure to impose draconian lockdowns to keep the population “safe.”
In the case of COVID-19 vaccines, it took about a year for governments to deploy the jab at scale after scientists sequenced the virus. Scientists identified a vaccine target—fragments of the spike protein that the virus uses to access cells—by early January 2020, even before the WHO declared a worldwide pandemic.
This rapid response was only possible because some scientists already knew much about the novel virus. Despite heavy regulations limiting the work, the US National Institutes of Health had funded collaborations between the EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They collected bat viruses from the wild, enhanced their function to study their potential, and designed vaccines before the viruses infected humans.
While there is controversy over whether this gain-of-function work is responsible for the COVID pandemic, there is no question this research is potentially dangerous. Even cautious scientists sometimes accidentally leak hazardous, highly infectious viruses into the surrounding community. In December 2021, for instance, the virus that causes COVID-19 accidentally leaked out of a laboratory in Taiwan, where scientists were researching the virus.
A promising vaccine target would be needed immediately after a disease outbreak for the Biden pandemic plan to work. For that to be possible, there will need to be permanent support for research enhancing the capacity of viruses to infect and kill humans. The possibility of a deadly laboratory leak will hang over humanity into perpetuity.
Furthermore, before any mass vaccination campaign, pharmaceutical firms must test the vaccines for safety. High-quality randomized, controlled studies are needed to make sure the vaccine works.
In 1954, Jonas Salk’s group tested the vaccine in a million children before the polio mass vaccination campaign that effectively defanged the threat of polio to American children. Physicians need the results of these studies to provide accurate information to patients.
Operation Warp Speed cut red tape so that vaccine manufacturers could conduct these studies rapidly. The randomized trials cut some corners. For instance, the Pfizer and Moderna trials did not enroll enough people to determine whether the COVID vaccines reduce all-cause mortality.
Nor did they determine whether the vaccines stop disease transmission; a few months after the government deployed the vaccines, researchers found protection against infection was partial and short-lived. Each of these cut corners has since created policy controversies and uncertainty that better trials would have avoided. Because of the pressure to produce a vaccine within 130 days, President Biden’s pandemic plan will likely force randomized trials on future vaccines to cut the same corners.
This policy effectively guarantees that lockdowns will return to the US in the event of a new pandemic. Though the lockdowns did not work to protect populations from getting or spreading COVID—after 2.5 years, nearly everyone in the US has had COVID—public health bureaucracies like the CDC have not repudiated the strategy.
Imagine the early days of the next pandemic, with public health and the media fomenting fear of a new pathogen. The impetus to close schools, businesses, churches, beaches, and parks will be irresistible, though the pitch will be “130 days until the vax” rather than “two weeks to flatten the curve.”
When the vaccine finally arrives, the push to mass vaccinate for herd immunity will be enormous, even without evidence from the rushed trials that the vaccine provides long-lasting protection against disease transmission. This happened in 2021 with the COVID vaccine and would happen again amidst the pandemic panic. The government would push the vaccine even on populations at low risk from the novel pathogen. Mandates and discrimination against the unvaccinated would return, along with a fierce movement to resist them. The public’s remaining trust in public health would shatter.
Rather than pursue this foolish policy, the Biden administration should adopt the traditional strategy for managing new respiratory-virus pandemics. This strategy involves quickly identifying high-risk groups and adopting creative strategies to protect them while not throwing the rest of society into panic.
The development of vaccines and treatments should be encouraged, but without imposing an artificial timeline that guarantees corners will be cut in evaluation. And most of all, lockdowns—a disaster for children, the poor, and the working class—should be excised from the public health toolkit forever.
A version of this piece appeared in Newsweek
Health
Premiers need to keep talking about the health-care crisis: medical associations

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, left to right, Manitoba Premier Heather Stefanson, Quebec Premier Francois Legault, New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, Newfoundland Premier Andrew Furey, Yukon Premier Ranj Pillai and Nunavut Premier P.J. Akeaagok, leave following a press conference of Canada’s premiers discussing health care, in Ottawa on Tuesday, Feb. 7, 2023. The Canadian Medical Association and 14 other organizations representing health-workers are urging provincial and territorial premiers to make sure health-care remains at the top of their agenda at their next meeting in July. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick
Ottawa
The Canadian Medical Association and 14 other organizations representing health workers are urging premiers to keep health care at the top of the agenda at their next meeting in July.
The provincial and territorial leaders met several times last year to compare notes on the health-care crisis and call on the federal government to give them more money to fix it.
In February, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a deal that will see Ottawa give $196 billion for the Canada Health Transfer over the next 10 years.
All provinces except Quebec have agreed to the deal in principle.
In a press release on behalf of several doctors’ and nurses’ associations, the Canadian Medical Association says the deals are a positive step but the health-care crisis has not ended.
They say excessive wait times, a lack of primary care, a shortage of workers and overcapacity in emergency rooms should all be on the premiers’ agenda.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2022.
-
Crime48 mins ago
Conservatives call on feds to see killer Bernardo returned to maximum-security prison
-
International1 day ago
Vigilantes in Haiti strike back at gangsters with brutal street justice
-
National3 hours ago
Watchdog’s relations with spy community ‘particularly strained’ over last year
-
Alberta1 day ago
Saskatchewan landowners fight against illegal drainage washing out land, roads
-
International1 day ago
DeSantis hits Trump from the right while the ex-president looks ahead to the general election
-
Brownstone Institute24 hours ago
The Fraying of the Liberal International Order
-
Health3 hours ago
Premiers need to keep talking about the health-care crisis: medical associations
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta’s province wide state of emergency ends as wildfire situation improves