Alberta
Open letter to Canada’s Premiers calling for pivot in response, end to lockdowns
Premiers,
It has been over one full year since the declaration of the Pandemic. SARS CoV-2 has been in Canada much longer than that, as you well know.
You are responsible for the response in each of your jurisdictions. While the Medical Officers of Health (MOH) are equally responsible for the advice they have given, you personally were elected to lead. They were not.
Your own statistics prove that for people under the age of 60, SARS CoV-2 is not something to be feared. In one full year, people under the age of 60 are twice as likely to die from a heart disease. For people 20 – 40 years old, they are five times more likely to die in a car accident. Worldwide 2.54 million people die from Pneumonic annually. SARS CoV-2 has killed under 2 Million in a year. The risk from SARS CoV-2 has been widely exaggerated, by you, your MOH and the media.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.625778/full
For people over 60, your approach has failed our seniors.
Canada has ranked last in the Organization of Economically Developed Countries (OECD) in care of those most at risk to SARS CoV-2. Over 96% of all reported SARS CoV-2 deaths were in our seniors. Even Canada’s Chief Medical Officer of Health admitted this is Canada’s shame.
Your use of “lockdowns” did not save over 21,000 of our seniors. It failed them.
The use of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) which we now call “lockdowns” was known to have little effect on the spread of infectious diseases long before SARS CoV-2 arrived. In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) assembled the best infectious disease doctors in the world to write the 2019 version of “Non-Pharmaceutical Public Health Measures”. If you read the document, for a Pandemic of the severity of SARS CoV-2, most of these measures were not recommended for use. Yet we used almost all of them.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf
Top infectious disease doctors in the world have proven in repeated detail peer reviewed research papers all over again that “lockdowns” do not have significant impacts on either the spread or deaths for SARS CoV-2. Yet you and the media constantly tell us they do. But one of the many in depth studies found: “While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less‐restrictive interventions”.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484
What is also know is that “lockdowns” cause terrible collateral damage. The damage to Canadians Mental Health, Societal Health, Children’s Education and Social Development, Patients with other Severe Illnesses and to our National Economy (Federal and Provincial/Territorial) will continue, until you remove and promise never to inflict “lockdowns again. These impacts and deaths seem not to be considered in any cost benefit analysis by you or your MOH.
Many of the world’s experts have tried to help target the response to SARS CoV-2 to save the most vulnerable, while minimizing the effects on the rest of our population. You have ignored these experts. In fact, most of these experts have been completely censored by you, your MOH and the media.
Please read the attached Paper, “One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada”. The Paper states what we had collectively planned to do in a Pandemic, what we have done, and how to pivot out of our failed response.
It is time to stop.
Listen to all expert voices.
Pivot.
Thank you for your time.
David Redman
Lieutenant Colonel (Retired)
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
Emergency Management
Pandemics happen continuously. Since 1955, this is the world’s fifth pandemic. In the next fifty-five years there is going to be five more. We have never responded to a pandemic like we responded to COVID-19.
It must be clear that a pandemic is not a Public Health Emergency, it is a Public Emergency because all areas of society are affected: public sector, private sector, not- for-profit sector, and all citizens.
In Canada, we have an Emergency Management Process that we normally use in a pandemic. We have pre-written Pandemic Response plans. These plans were written incorporating the hard lessons learned from previous pandemics.
Part of the lessons learned from previous pandemics is contained in the World Health Organization (WHO) “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” dated 2019.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf
This document included the world’s best studies and information on the use of 15 separate non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). The use of these NPIs was discussed in the development of the existing Provincial Plans.
The 2019 WHO document was known, or should have been known, by all Medical Officers of Health in Canada. The use of each of the NPIs was dependant on the severity of the pandemic. Even in a High or Extraordinary Pandemic the use of all or most of these NPIs at the same time was not envisioned.
Prior to the use of each NPI, the Federal and Provincial/Territorial governments needed to demonstrably justify how each NPI would protect the life of Canadians. Some of the NPIs were not recommended for use in any pandemic, including:
- Contact Tracing (not recommended after first two weeks)
- Quarantine of Exposed Individuals
- Entry and Exit Screening
- Border Closures
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
Some of the NPIs were recommended for use only as a last resort, including: • Workplace Measures and Closures
Despite this, they were used as a first resort.
Some NPIs were not recommended for a pandemic with the severity of COVID-19, including:
- School Measures and Closures
- Face Masks for Public These recommendations were ignored.The lack of any attempt to publicly demonstrate a cost benefit analysis based on life and impact on lives shows a complete disregard for “Due Diligence” by both our Medical Officers of Health (MOH) and our Premiers.
In summary on NPIs, the collateral damage from the use of each NPI needed to be justified in a cost benefit analysis, showing not only what life saving could be expected, but what the short-term and long-term impact on lives would be. Further, it needed to be demonstrably shown why the WHO recommendations were ignored. This was never done for any of the NPIs invoked.
The aim of the pre-written pandemic plans is to allow our leaders to rapidly minimize the impact of a new pandemic on our society. The four goals of the pandemic plans are clearly defined:
• Controlling the spread of influenza disease and reducing illness (morbidity) and death (mortality) by providing access to appropriate prevention measures, care, and treatment.
• Mitigating societal disruption in Alberta through ensuring the continuity and recovery of critical services.
• Minimizing adverse economic impact.
• Supporting an efficient and effective use of resources during response and recovery
https://www.alberta.ca/pandemic-influenza.aspx#toc-1
The purpose in writing these plans in advance is to ensure the government could rapidly advise the public of the scope of the new hazard and publicly issue a complete written plan to address it. That way the public can see the entire plan, see the phases of the plan, and all steps that will be taken. The public understands their role in the plan. The response to the pandemic would then be coherent.
This has not happened.
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
The Canadian Response – Not Based on Emergency Management
The Canadian response to COVID-19 has been incoherent, constantly changing, and with no plan. The sole focus on COVID-19 case counts led to a completely flawed response trying to deal only with the first pandemic goal, and failing.
In February and March 2020 we knew that over 95% of the deaths in China and Europe were in seniors, over the age of 60, with multiple co-morbidities.
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
We should have immediately developed options for the protection of concentrations of our seniors over 60 with co-morbidities. Our Long Term Care (LTC) homes should have developed and offered quarantine options, for both the residents and the staff.
In our first full year of COVID-19 in Canada, 96% of our over 22,800 deaths have been in seniors, over the age of 60, with multiple co-morbidities. See Figure 5 in link below, updated weekly by Health Canada.
https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19- cases.html
That is over 21,890 deaths. It is likely that thousands of these deaths could have been avoided, as over 80% of the deaths in the first wave occurred in LTC homes.
After one full year, we stand at 73% of the 22,880 deaths in LTC homes, 16,700 of our seniors. Our country ranked last in the OECD for protecting our seniors.
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/canadas-nursing-homes-have-worst-record- for-covid-deaths-among-wealthy-nations-report/ar-BB1f76sw
This may have cost $2 billion, but could have saved over 16,700 lives as 73% of Canadian deaths have been in LTC homes in the first year of COVID-19. Instead we locked down healthy Canadians and our businesses and spent well over $240 billion to force over 8 million healthy Canadians to stay at home. The cost mounts daily.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/tracking-unprecedented-federal-coronavirus-spending- 1.5827045
We did not need to follow the failed lock down practice of China or Europe. Lockdowns have not saved 21,890 of our Canadian seniors. We knew who was most at risk and had time to provide the option of quarantine for our seniors, both in LTC homes and in society. Instead, we sacrificed our seniors.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/26/world/elderly-care-homes-coronavirus-intl/index.html
In June 2020, the Canadian Institute for Health Information reported that Canada had a higher
proportion of COVID-19 deaths within LTC settings than other OECD countries included in its
comparison. At that time, deaths in Canadian LTCs from COVID-19 were at 81% of the total, while
OECD countries reported LTC COVID-19 deaths of 10-66% (average of 38%) of their totals.
The CBC News analysis has tracked $105.66 billion in federal payments to individuals; $118.37
billion that has gone to businesses, non-profits and charitable organizations; and a further
$16.18 billion in transfers to provinces, territories, municipalities and government agencies.
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
Our leaders and doctors constantly tell us we are in danger of overwhelming our medical system. If we had acted to quarantine our seniors’ long term care facilities, our hospital capacity would not have been challenged, as 71% of our hospital beds and 64% of our ICU capacity continue to this day to be filled with seniors. See Figure 5 in link below, updated daily by Health Canada.
https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19- cases.html
We would not have needed to stop other medical procedures.
https://lfpress.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-canadas-medical-wait-times-longest- ever-because-of-covid-19
We should never have forced healthy medical staff to self-isolate. We should have made rapid testing a priority for all orders of government.
We ignored the other three goals of our pre-existing pandemic plans:
• Mitigating societal disruption in Alberta through ensuring the continuity and recovery of critical services.
• Minimizing adverse economic impact.
• Supporting an efficient and effective use of resources during response and recovery
Ignoring these three goals and following a failed lockdown response has caused massive collateral damage in terms of deaths and long-term effects on our population. Collateral damage, largely ignored by mainstream media, includes but is not limited to:
- Societal health,
- Mental health,
- Other health conditions,
- Children’s education and social development,
- Economic healthhttps://pandemicalternative.org/ https://collateralglobal.org/
We are told that lockdowns (i.e. the persistent use of NPIs) has decreased the spread and deaths from COVID-19. Therefore, it is assumed that the collateral deaths are somehow justified. Nothing could be further from the truth.
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
We knew from the WHO 2019 NPI document cited earlier that the use of most NPIs have little effect on the spread of a virus. It was a lesson learned. Unfortunately, it had to be proved again through studies by some of the best infectious disease doctors in the world. One such study on the spread of COVID-19 is quoted:
“European Journal of Clinical Investigation
Assessing mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closure effects on the spread of
COVID‐19
Methods
We first estimate COVID‐19 case growth in relation to any NPI implementation in subnational regions of 10 countries: England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, South Korea, Sweden and the United States. Using first‐difference models with fixed effects, we isolate the effects of mrNPIs by subtracting the combined effects of lrNPIs and epidemic dynamics from all NPIs. We use case growth in Sweden and South Korea, 2 countries that did not implement mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closures, as comparison countries for the other 8 countries (16 total comparisons).
Conclusions
While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less‐restrictive interventions.”
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484
Further comment on deaths from COVID-19 and non-lockdown countries compared to lockdown countries:
https://off-guardian.org/2021/03/23/lockdown-one-year-on-it-doesnt-work-it-never- worked-it-wasnt-supposed-to-work/
COVID-19 has followed the annual seasonal infection curve almost exactly, in spite of lockdowns in our country. Our MOH and Premiers take credit for the seasons when it is in their favour and blame their citizens when seasons dictate “exponential increases”. Our Premiers and MOHs continue to abandon our Emergency Management Process and give in to fear.
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
Conclusions – An Emergency Management and Science Based Way Ahead
Canadians deserve a confidence-based response to the COVID-19 pandemic and all future pandemics. An eight-point process is proposed for the immediate future:
|
1. Releaseacomprehensive,FourGoal-basedPandemicPlan,showingwhatis to be done phase by phase, and what the public’s role is in each phase. |
|
One Year of COVID-19 Pandemic Response in Canada March 31, 2021
David Redman
Former Head of Emergency Management Alberta
7. Geteveryoneunder65withoutpre-existingcompromisedimmune systems, who can and want to work, fully back to work.
8. Continuetovaccinateassafeandeffectivevaccinesbecomeavailable,for the current strain of COVID-19.
Canada’s Response to COVID-19 After One Year
Alberta
Alberta school boards required to meet new standards for school library materials with regard to sexual content
Alberta’s government has introduced new standards to ensure school library materials are age-appropriate.
School libraries should be safe and supportive places where students can learn and explore without being exposed to inappropriate sexual content. However, in the absence of a consistent standard for selecting age-appropriate library materials, school boards have taken different approaches, leading to concerns about safeguards in place.
In response to these concerns, and informed by feedback from education partners and the public, Alberta’s government has created standards to provide school boards with clear direction on the selection, availability and access to school library materials, such as books.
“Our actions to ensure that materials in school libraries don’t expose children to sexual content were never about banning books. These new standards are to ensure that school boards have clear guidance to ensure age-appropriate access to school library materials, while reflecting the values and priorities of Albertans.”
The new standards set clear expectations for school library materials with regard to sexual content and require school boards to implement policies to support these standards.
Standards for school library materials
Under the new standards, school libraries are not permitted to include library materials containing explicit sexual content. Non-explicit sexual content may be accessible to students in Grade 10 and above, provided it is age-appropriate.
“Protecting kids from explicit content is common sense. LGBTQ youth, like all children, deserve to see themselves in stories that are age-appropriate, supportive and affirming – not in material that sexualizes or confuses them.”
School boards must also regularly review their school library collections, publish a full list of available materials and ensure that a staff member supervises students’ access to school library materials. School boards will have to remove any materials with explicit sexual content from their school libraries by October 1.
School board policies and procedures
All school boards must have publicly available policies that align with the new standards for selecting and managing library materials by January 1, 2026. School boards can either create new policies or update existing ones to meet these requirements.
These policies must outline how school library materials are selected and reviewed, how staff supervise students’ access throughout the school day, and how a student, parent, school board employee or other member of the school community can request a review or removal of materials in the school library. School boards are also required to clearly communicate these policies to employees, students and parents before January 2026.
“A robust, grade- and age-appropriate library catalogue is vital for student success. We welcome the ministry’s initiative to establish consistent standards and appreciate the ongoing consultation to help craft a plan that will serve our families and communities well.”
“Red Deer Public Schools welcomes the new provincial standards for school library materials. Our division is committed to maintaining welcoming, respectful learning spaces where students can grow and thrive. Under the new standards for school libraries, we remain dedicated to providing learning resources that reflect our values and support student success.”
Quick facts
- The new standards will apply to public, separate, francophone, charter and independent schools.
- The ministerial order does not apply to municipal libraries located within schools or materials selected for use by teachers as learning and teaching resources.
- From May 26 to June 6, almost 80,000 people completed an online survey to provide feedback on the creation of consistent standards to ensure the age-appropriateness of materials available to students in school libraries.
Related information
- Ministerial Order
- School library standards engagement
- Reference Materials: Content warning: this document contains graphic content that may be disturbing to viewers and is not appropriate for young viewers. Viewer discretion is advised.
Regional health councils give Albertans a voice
Albertans want a health care system that reflects where they live and adapts to the unique needs of their communities. As part of the province’s health care refocus, Alberta’s government committed to strengthening community voices by providing more opportunities for Albertans to bring forward their local priorities and offer input on how to improve the system.
The regional advisory councils, made up of 150 members from 71 communities, will advise Alberta’s four health ministries and the newly refocused health agencies: Primary Care Alberta, Acute Care Alberta, Assisted Living Alberta and Recovery Alberta. Each council will explore solutions to local challenges and identify opportunities for the health system to better support community decision-making.
“By hearing first-hand community feedback directly, we can build a system that is more responsive, more inclusive and ultimately more effective for everyone. I am looking forward to hearing the councils’ insights, perspectives and solutions to improve health care in all corners of our province.”
“Regional advisory councils will strengthen acute care by giving communities a direct voice. Their insights will help us address local needs, improve patient outcomes and ensure timely access to hospital services.”
“A ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach does not address unique regional needs when it comes to mental health and addiction challenges. These councils will help us hear directly from communities, allowing us to tailor supports and services to meet the needs of Albertans where they are.”
“Every community has unique needs, especially when it comes to seniors and vulnerable populations. These regional advisory councils will help us better understand those needs and ensure that assisted living services are shaped by the people who rely on them.”
Members include Albertans from all walks of life, health care workers, community leaders, Indigenous and municipal representatives, and others with a strong tie to their region. About one-third of members work in health care, and more than half of the council chairs are health professionals. Almost one-quarter are elected municipal officials, including 10 serving as chairs or vice-chairs. Ten councils also include a representative from a local health foundation.
Council members will share local and regional perspectives on health care services, planning and priorities to help ensure decisions reflect the realities of their communities. By engaging with residents, providers and organizations, they will gather feedback, identify challenges and bring forward ideas that may not otherwise reach government.
Through collaboration and community-informed solutions, members will help make the health system more responsive, accessible and better able to meet the needs of Albertans across the province.
“As Primary Care Alberta works to improve access to primary health care services and programs across Alberta, we are grateful to have the opportunity to tap into a dedicated group of community leaders and representatives. These people know their communities and local needs, and we look forward to learning from their experiences and knowledge as we shape the future of primary care in Alberta.”
“The regional advisory councils will help to bring forward the voices of patients, families and front-line providers from every corner of Alberta. Their insights will help us plan smarter and deliver care that’s timely, effective and truly local. We look forward to working closely with them to strengthen hospital and surgical services across the province.”
“Nobody understands the health care challenges unique to a community better than the people who live there. The regional health advisory councils are made up of those living and working on the front lines across the province, ensuring we are getting the perspective of Albertans most affected by our health care system.”
“Alongside Recovery Alberta’s staff and physician team, these regional advisory councils will build upon the high standard of mental health, addiction and correctional health services delivered in Alberta.”
Indigenous Advisory Council
Alberta’s government continues to work directly with Indigenous leaders across the province to establish the Indigenous Advisory Council to strengthen health care services for First Nation, Métis and Inuit communities.
With up to 22 members, including Indigenous health care workers, community leaders and individuals receiving health care services, the council will represent diverse perspectives across Alberta. Members will provide community perspectives about clinical service planning, capital projects, workforce development and cultural integration in health care.
Related information
Dallas mayor invites NYers to first ‘sanctuary city from socialism’
US airstrike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Was it obliteration?
Lacombe meat processor scores $1.2 million dollar provincial tax credit to help expansion
The Left Thinks Drug Criminalization Is Racist. Minorities Disagree
Canada’s Carbon Tax Is A Disaster For Our Economy And Oil Industry
Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Resets The Energy Policy Playing Field
Alberta Sports Hall of Fame 2025 Inductee profiles – Alpine Skiing Athlete – Brady Leman
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta school boards required to meet new standards for school library materials with regard to sexual content
-
Business2 days agoCarney government should recognize that private sector drives Canada’s economy
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoThe Covid 19 Disaster: When Do We Get The Apologies?
-
Alberta1 day ago
Fourteen regional advisory councils will shape health care planning and delivery in Alberta
-
Environment1 day agoEPA releases report on chemtrails, climate manipulation
-
Crime1 day agoSweeping Boston Indictment Points to Vast Chinese Narco-Smuggling and Illegal Alien Labor Plot via Mexican Border
-
Business2 days agoCannabis Legalization Is Starting to Look Like a Really Dumb Idea
-
Business1 day agoUN’s ‘Plastics Treaty’ Sports A Junk Science Wrapper