Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]


Vaccines, Herd Immunity, Vaccine Passports and Fear 


9 minute read

Since covid vaccines have become one of the early issues of Canada’s election campaign, this article and the article linked within are worthy of our attention.

Submitted by David Redman.  

After a twenty-seven year career as an officer in the Canadian Armed Forces, David Redman engaged with government and the private sector to develop emergency management in Alberta, and throughout North America.  His experience in emergency management is extensive with three military tours as a Commanding Officer, responsible for international logistical operations such as the withdrawal of all Canadian personnel from Canadian Forces Europe in Lahr, Germany as well as the deployment of Canadian NATO Forces to Bosnia.  

David joined the Government of Alberta in 2000, as a Director of Emergency Management Alberta and in 2001 he was appointed Director of Crisis Management Programs.  He was Executive Director of Emergency Management Alberta from 2004 to his retirement at the end of 2005.  Since his retirement David has remained active as a respected consultant in emergency management.  

Vaccines and the idea of Herd Immunity

Herd immunity does mean different things to different folk.

Scenario “a”. I remember when I was young, before solid vaccines for mumps and measles, parents would hold parties for all the kids in the neighbourhood, if one kid caught them. It was known that measles and mumps could have serious consequences if you were past puberty and caught them, so the idea was to catch them young, ONE AND DONE. If you caught them when young, you never suffered from them again.

Herd immunities mean that if most caught these diseases young, then those who did not have them young, for whatever reason, were better protected. We now have a vaccine, that needs a booster every 10 years, that does what our parents did with parties. But basically, ONE and DONE.

Scenario “b”. Things like the cold, and seasonal flus, just happened, you caught them and got better, sometimes every year. Why? These bugs / viruses transformed a bit each year and so having caught them did nothing, other than perhaps decrease the severity. Herd immunity was never even discussed, because it did not exist for things that evolve like this.

Vaccines in Emergency Management of a Pandemic

From the start of this pandemic, the MOH and Politicians have been talking about the silver bullet of a vaccine. They have always talked about it like it was going to be scenario “a” above. It was implied that “lockdowns” were needed to get us to the silver bullet, and then everything could go back to normal. You know that from the very start I did not support this approach. 

I did not believe that a vaccine was a given, as they take years to be safely developed, and SARS CoV-2 was a coronavirus, so a vaccine simply might not be possible (read my April 2020 letter to Kenney)

Lockdowns would not and did not protect those most vulnerable.

Lockdowns do far more collateral damage than any good they may ever do. We knew that. I do not believe they do any measurable good in a country like Canada.

Even if a vaccine did come along to meet scenario “a”, then damage done by “fear” to enforce lockdowns would last a generation. (see my August Letter to the 13 Premiers)

COVID-19 Vaccines – The UK Data

If you have not read the article by Dr Ramesh Thakur, please read it now. He has summarized all the important FACTS coming out of countries around the world on the vaccines and Covid as of August 2021.

The facts coming out now from the massive data available in the UK show that at best, scenario “b” was always the case. Even with the ‘so-called-vaccines’, the situation is that you still catch, transfer, and may even need to be hospitalized, even when fully vaccinated. That term, “fully vaccinated” will now evolve in a new fear campaign to mean three, four, endless doses, with a mythical advantage from each, if we lockdown long enough.

I define the term ‘so-called-vaccine’ because I, like many perhaps, thought of a vaccine to mean protection like the vaccines we get for measles, mumps, rubella, cholera, etc. Turns out, the manufacturers never claimed these ‘so-called-vaccines’ were like that. But our MOH and Politicians acted like they would be. 

The manufacturers said, and are saying again, we told you these ‘so-called-vaccines’ would decrease the effects of the disease once caught, particularly for the most vulnerable, but we told you that they would not stop spread. So now, after 18 months of lockdowns, we must realize that there is no silver bullet and there never was going to be one, and our MOH and Politicians knew, or should have known (Due Diligence), this fact.

So herd immunity in scenario “a” is NOT possible. Scenario “b” is how we will live with the coronavirus, SARS CoV-2.

The ‘so-called-vaccines’ are very good for our seniors, but for no one else. In fact the data now emerging shows that they may even be slightly harmful to those under 50, as they do not stop you catching Covid, but there seems to be a slight increase in negative outcomes if you do catch Covid.

Below is Table 5, out of the United Kingdom, Technical Briefing 20, dated August 6, 2021, by the Public Health Agency of Great Britain. This is part of the evidence quoted by Dr. Ramesh Thakur in his Article, Vaccination certificates – An idea whose time must never come (linked above).

From Dr. Thakur’s article “In the UK,  the Delta variant accounts for 99% of all Covid hospitalizations. Of these, 34.9% were fully vaccinated and 55.1% had received at least one dose. Public Health England’s Technical Briefing 20 in early August showed that while vaccination does reduce mortality in the over-50s by more than threefold, for those under 50, the fatality rate among the vaccinated is 57% greater than in the unvaccinated. On 10 August, a panel of experts, including most importantly the head of the Oxford vaccine team, called for an end to mass testing in Britain because the Delta variant has destroyed any chance of herd immunity through vaccination. The scientists believe it’s time to accept there’s no way of stopping the virus spreading through the entire population and monitoring people with mild symptoms is no longer helpful.”

Also from Dr. Thakur’s article:

The waning efficacy of vaccines is also seen in Israel, including some who have been thrice-jabbed. In a locality in Jerusalem where only 42.9% of the population has been fully vaccinated, 85-90% of all hospitalised patients were fully vaccinated.”

Because vaccinations do not prevent infection or transmission, they cannot stop the spread of the virus. Because they do reduce the severity of the illness and mortality rates, they remain important. Putting the two together, vaccines should be made available to all, strongly recommended for all vulnerable groups but not made mandatory for anyone.” 

The Way Ahead 

I have avoided the discussion of herd immunity, as it became a lightning rod very early in this pandemic. It is not part of the discussion about emergency management in a pandemic anyhow.

Protect the most vulnerable, and for the rest


After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author


Civil liberties group demands Fauci preserve records with Big Tech for COVID collusion lawsuit

Published on

Dr. Anthony Fauci, testifies during a Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions hearing about the federal response to monkeypox, on Capitol Hill September 14, 2022, in Washington, D.C.           Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

From LifeSiteNews

By Didi Rankovic for Reclaim The Net.

The records in question are relevant to a major First Amendment case alleging collusion between the government and tech companies, Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden), which is currently in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) non-profit has sent a letter to Dr. Anthony Fauci and several medical and other U.S. officials, as well as to Google, making sure they are formally notified of their obligations to preserve communications records.

The records in question are relevant to a major First Amendment case alleging collusion between the government and tech companies, Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden), which is currently in the U.S. Supreme Court.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

The NCLA letter specified that the request pertains to all documents and electronically stored information, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34.

Those named in the letter are former chief medical adviser to President Biden Dr. Anthony Fauci, his colleague from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (that Fauci headed during the pandemic) Dr. David Morens, Adam Kirschner of the U.S. State Department, and Google General Counsel Halimah DeLaine Prado, among others.

The letter recalled that Fauci is a defendant in the landmark First Amendment case, alleging that he and other government officials named in Murthy v. Missouri – including the president himself – engaged in unconstitutional censorship of social media around Covid issues such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccines.

NCLA has joined the plaintiffs in Murthy v. Missouri and is now in that capacity requesting that Fauci, Morens, and others preserve all documents, including drafts and copies, and paper files maintained by their staff that are relevant to the case.

The letter lists examples of the sort of communications that, if deleted to further the interests of the defendants, would in effect unfairly influence the outcome of this pivotal case.

Additionally, the letter warns that Fauci and Morens were using private emails unlawfully, but that an act or attempt of deleting those messages would in itself be illegal.

In line with that, the letter says the request to preserve documents applies not only to communications made through official but also unofficial channels – including third-party messaging and social media apps.

NCLA’s own, direct “skin in the game” is spelled out in a statement that says, “Our clients, who include top doctors and scientists, were censored for social media posts that turned out to be factually accurate, depriving the public of valuable perspectives during a public health crisis.”

This refers to epidemiologists and co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, Aaron Kheriaty, and Jill Hines. The statement added:

We’re optimistic that the majority will look at the record and recognize that this was a sprawling government censorship enterprise without precedent in this country, and that this cannot be permitted to continue if the First Amendment is to survive.

Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.

Continue Reading


Federal court rules COVID shots don’t stop transmission of virus, sides with anti-mandate lawsuit

Published on

An appeals court ruled that mRNA COVID-19 shots do not prevent viral transmission and therefore that mandating COVID injections lacks legal basis.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Friday vacated the dismissal of a lawsuit against a California school district for mandating COVID shots, brought forth by the Health Freedom Defense Fund, California Educators for Medical freedom, and other plaintiffs.

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) had required that employees get the injections or “lose their jobs,” which the plaintiffs said “interfered with their fundamental right to refuse medical treatment,” the appeals court noted.

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California had defended LAUSD’s jab mandate on the grounds that the 1905 Supreme Court decision Jacobson v. Massachusetts upheld the right of states to mandate smallpox vaccinations.

READ: CDC discloses 780,000 new reports of serious side effects after COVID-19 vaccination

However, in an opinion penned by Judge R. Nelson, the Ninth Circuit appeals court said that the whole basis of Jacobson was the assumption that vaccines prevented the transmission of smallpox, whereas the plaintiffs in this case “have plausibly alleged that the COVID-19 vaccine does not effectively ‘prevent the spread’ of COVID-19.”

“At this stage, we must accept Plaintiff’s allegations that the vaccine does not prevent the spread of COVID-19 as true. And, because of this, Jacobson does not apply,” wrote Judge Nelson.

The plaintiffs also asserted that the mRNA COVID shots are not “traditional” vaccines, in part because the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) changed its definition of a “vaccine” in September 2021, from a product that “produce[s] immunity” to a “preparation” which “stimulate[s] the body’s immune response.”

“Their complaint’s crux is that the COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ is not a vaccine,” Nelson explained. “’Traditional’ vaccines, Plaintiffs claim, should prevent transmission or provide immunity to those who get them. But the COVID-19 vaccine does neither.”

As LifeSiteNews has previously reported, Pfizer’s president of international developed markets, Janine Small, affirmed during a European Union (EU) hearing that the pharma giant did not test the ability of its mRNA COVID-19 jabs to stop transmission of the virus, but pushed them through anyway to keep up with “the speed of science.”

This contradicted prior claims by CDC Director Rochelle Walensky and other prominent U.S. “experts” that the vast majority of people who had gotten “fully vaccinated” would not get or transmit COVID-19. U.S. President Joe Biden also falsely asserted that people who had gotten jabbed couldn’t spread COVID to others. Their claims lent credence to efforts in the United States and abroad to require people to get injected with the experimental shots before being allowed to participate in social life.

Dr. Anthony Fauci himself declared numerous times that people who take the injections become “dead ends to the virus,” before later reversing himself, as others supporters of the COVID jabs have done, including Bill Gates.

Small’s admission that Pfizer did not determine whether the COVID shots could stop transmission prompted Member of European Parliament Rob Roos to publicly declare that it was “shocking” and “even criminal” that governments allowed vaccine passports to become a reality when Pfizer had not even tested whether the shots stopped transmission.

READ: ‘So many have died’: Former Japanese minister apologizes for COVID jab-linked deaths

significant body of evidence links serious risks to the COVID shots. Among it, VAERS reports 37,544 deaths, 216,213 hospitalizations, 21,668 heart attacks, and 28,366 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of April 26, among other ailments. U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.

Continue Reading