Opinion
The Dystopian Future of Canada, Part 2-Corona Virus Testing Cause or Curse?
Pandemic Elements 1: PCR Testing-
During this ‘pandemic,’ world citizens have been subjected to a daily dose of case numbers from provincial or federal health ministers both sides of the border that have the power to paralyze or to set communities and citizens free from constraining governmental measures.
Decreasing ‘numbers’ spread hope that the curve is flattening while increasing ‘positives’ send frightened citizens and companies into a tailspin.
At the heart of the debate is the PCR test which magnifies RNA strands anywhere from 30 to 40 times to create the reaction necessary for a ‘conclusive’ test. Yet according to medical professionals forensic technicians only use a magnification of 17 in their quest for trace compounds during investigations.
Even Dr. Anthony Fauci has admitted that the chances of a positive result being accurate at 35 cycles are “miniscule,” yet the Alberta Government relies on such testing levels (35) to determine the severity of the Covid 19 infection. Other groups such as the Ontario Government, the FDA, the CDC and the World Health Organization recommend 40 to 45 cycles.
REF: Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. – The New York Times (nytimes.com)
The PCR test was developed in 1985 by Dr. Kary Mullis for a primary application in biomedical research and criminal forensics yet it has become the foremost tool for Covid 19 detection. (see end of article for video)
In a 2019 interview, Mullis noted that it was never intended for detecting disease he felt that ‘Scientists are doing an awful lot of damage to the world in the name of helping it.’
Further research into PCR testing has yielded interesting results.
In addition to the inaccuracy of cycles above 17 which provide 100 % accuracy which drops to 20% with 33-34 cycles according to Dr. Mercola, the spectre of exactly what the test is searching for is raised.
With more than one Covid 19 test available, RNA (PCR), rapid (Antigen) or Serology (Antibody) there are also claims from the CDC that they do not have a sample of Covid 19 that they can produce to create a test from!
With numbers in the range that the Province of Alberta is reporting, the ‘pandemic,’ if PCR testing is performed with 17 cycles, would drop to a mere 8500 and across Canada, to 63,000. Looking at deaths, 11, 265 deaths have been attributed to Covid 19, yet according to many statistics 10% of deaths can only be attributed directly TO Covid 19 with the remainder being linked with co-morbidities. A comparison of death rates across Canada shows that from January to September 2018, 2019 and 2020 are nearly identical in total numbers despite our ‘pandemic.’
Another suspicious fact is that Dr. Hinshaw stated recently that there have been NO cases of the Flu reported (Global News November 13, 2020). If this is a flu season, where are the sick people? Could they have been tagged as Covid patients?
On November 18, 2020 Dr. Roger Hodgkinson, Hodkinson, Chairman of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons committee in Ottawa, CEO of a large private medical laboratory in Edmonton, Alberta and Chairman of a Medical Biotechnology company that sells Covid 19 tests addressed Edmonton City Council and passionately chastised the government response to the ‘pandemic.’
The video can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEo3rnU12jw
“There is utterly unfounded public hysteria driven by the media and politicians. This is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspected public. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to contain this virus. This is nothing more than a bad flu season. It’s politics playing medicine and that’s a very dangerous game. There is no action needed,” he said. “Masks are utterly useless!”
“Positive testing results do NOT indicate clinical infection. It is simply driving public hysteria and ALL testing should STOP immediately,” he added. “The scale of the response is utterly ridiculous…all kinds of business closures, suicides …. you’re being led down the garden path by the Health Minister of this province.”
There is another side to danger of PCR testing; fraud.
Reports of positive tests results have been reported with NO testing done by labs in Red Deer on patients who registered to test but left before any test could be performed. From anecdotal evidence, there are at least 4 cases the writer has heard of the week of November 15th! I can imagine that there Legally speaking, if 4 false cases have been reported in addition to a 20% accuracy rate, then the government response is incredibly over the top and lockdowns, mask bylaws and cohort regulations are unwarranted.
During an October 24, 2020 rally in Edmonton (a, retired Dr. Lorna Levesque called on provincial and federal politicians to let ‘teachers teach instead of playing doctor,’ and to ‘stop testing and give our rights and freedoms back.’
The video can be found at:
She also represented the Great Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/), signed by close to 50,000 doctors and 640,000 citizens which calls on governments to stop lockdowns and mandatory masks. A short summary of the declaration follows:
“Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. “
“Why are my colleagues silent,” she asked. “When we took our Hippocratic Oath we swore to ‘do no harm,’ and yet here we are silent while our government mandate masks which are bacteria factories if not sterile and decrease oxygen into our lungs while increasing carbon dioxide. I am stunned by your silence!”
She also noted that ‘we cannot control the virus but Vitamin D helps build immunity just as Zinc does.’
The big question asked by citizens across Alberta is WHY are we using a flawed test procedure to decide the future of our economic, social and spiritual futures? Why do citizens have NO say in how we respond as a society?
In my November 18th piece, I answer that question. (https://www.todayville.com/the-dystopian-future-of-canada-part-i/)
“The pandemic gives us an opportunity to reshape society…” Justin Trudeau said in his UN speech.
Further information from Dr. Mullis is below: (language warning)
A late addition to this piece is the following letter from Dr. Stephen Malthouse to the BC Minister of Health, due to the length of the piece, I include a link but add this short excerpt:
“Why are you still using PCR testing? The Deputy Chief Medical Officer for Health in Ontario has publicly stated that the PCR test yields over 50% false positives. A New York Times investigative report found that PCR testing yields up to 90% false positives due to excessive amplification beyond the recommendations of the manufacturer. The PCR test was never designed, intended or validated to be used as a diagnostic tool. Even the Alberta Health Services COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Group has stated “clinical sensitivity and specificity values have not been determined for lab developed RT-PCR testing in Canada”.8 Despite expert consensus, you continue to use this inappropriate and inaccurate test to report so-called “cases” and justify your decisions.9-18“
Footnotes in original letter.
https://www.pandemicdebate.com/post/letter-by-dr-stephen-malthouse-md-to-dr-bonnie-henry-b-c-provincial-health-officer
If you have any comments, please contact me through comments OR via email at [email protected]
Be awake, aware and alert for our enemy the devil seeks to destroy, deceive and create confusion….
From the Fraser Institute
By Annika Segelhorst and Elmira Aliakbari
Canada’s rivers are vital to our environment and economy. Clean freshwater is essential to support recreation, agriculture and industry, an to sustain suitable habitat for wildlife. Conversely, degraded freshwater can make it harder to maintain safe drinking water and can harm aquatic life. So, how healthy are Canada’s rivers today?
To answer that question, Environment Canada uses an index of water quality to assess freshwater quality at monitoring stations across the country. In total, scores are available for 165 monitoring stations, jointly maintained by Environment Canada and provincial authorities, from 17 in Newfoundland and Labrador, to 8 in Saskatchewan and 20 in British Columbia.
This index works like a report card for rivers, converting water test results into scores from 0 to 100. Scientists sample river water three or more times per year at fixed locations, testing indicators such as oxygen levels, nutrients and chemical levels. These measurements are then compared against national and provincial guidelines that determine the ability of a waterway to support aquatic life.
Scores are calculated based on three factors: how many guidelines are exceeded, how often they are exceeded, and by how much they are exceeded. A score of 95-100 is “excellent,” 80-94 is “good,” 65-79 is “fair,” 45-64 is “marginal” and a score below 45 is “poor.” The most recent scores are based on data from 2021 to 2023.
Among 165 river monitoring sites across the country, the average score was 76.7. Sites along four major rivers earned a perfect score: the Northeast Magaree River (Nova Scotia), the Restigouche River (New Brunswick), the South Saskatchewan River (Saskatchewan) and the Bow River (Alberta). The Bayonne River, a tributary of the St. Lawrence River near Berthierville, Quebec, scored the lowest (33.0).
Overall, between 2021 and 2023, 83.0 per cent of monitoring sites across the country recorded fair to excellent water quality. This is a strong positive signal that most of Canada’s rivers are in generally healthy environmental condition.
A total of 13.3 per cent of stations were deemed to be marginal, that is, they received a score of 45-64 on the index. Only 3.6 per cent of monitoring sites fell into the poor category, meaning that severe degradation was limited to only a few sites (6 of 165).
Monitoring sites along waterways with relatively less development in the river’s headwaters and those with lower population density tended to earn higher scores than sites with developed land uses. However, among the 11 river monitoring sites that rated “excellent,” 8 were situated in areas facing a combination of pressures from nearby human activities that can influence water quality. This indicates the resilience of Canada’s river ecosystems, even in areas facing a combination of multiple stressors from urban runoff, agriculture, and industrial activities where waterways would otherwise be expected to be the most polluted.
Poor or marginal water quality was relatively more common in monitoring sites located along the St. Lawrence River and its major tributaries and near the Great Lakes compared to other regions. Among all sites in the marginal or poor category, 50 per cent were in this area. The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region is one of the most population-dense and extensively developed parts of Canada, supporting a mix of urban, agricultural, and industrial land uses. These pressures can introduce harmful chemical contaminants and alter nutrient balances in waterways, impairing ecosystem health.
In general, monitoring sites categorized as marginal or poor tended to be located near intensive agriculture and industrial activities. However, it’s important to reiterate that only 28 stations representing 17.0 per cent of all monitoring stations were deemed to be marginal or poor.
Provincial results vary, as shown in the figure below. Water quality scores in Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta were, on average, 80 points or higher during the period from 2021 to 2023, indicating that water quality rarely departed from natural or desirable levels.
Rivers sites in Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba and B.C. each had average scores between 74 and 78 points, suggesting occasional departures from natural or desirable levels.
Finally, Quebec’s average river water quality score was 64.5 during the 2021 to 2023 period. This score indicates that water quality departed from ideal conditions more frequently in Quebec than in other provinces, especially compared to provinces like Alberta, Saskatchewan and P.E.I. where no sites rated below “fair.”
Overall, these results highlight Canada’s success in maintaining a generally high quality of water in our rivers. Most waterways are in good shape, though some regions—especially near the Great Lakes and along the St. Lawrence River Valley—continue to face pressures from the combined effects of population growth and intensive land use.
This is a special preview article from the:
U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade policy is often chaotic and punitive. But on one point, he is right: Canada’s agricultural supply management system has to go. Not because it is unfair to the United States, though it clearly is, but because it punishes Canadians. Supply management is a government-enforced price-fixing scheme that limits consumer choice, inflates grocery bills, wastes food, and shields a small, politically powerful group of producers from competition—at the direct expense of millions of households.
And yet Ottawa continues to support this socialist shakedown. Last week, Prime Minister Mark Carney told reporters supply management was “not on the table” in negotiations for a renewed United States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement, despite U.S. negotiators citing it as a roadblock to a new deal.
Supply management relies on a web of production quotas, fixed farmgate prices, strict import limits, and punitive tariffs that can approach 300 percent. Bureaucrats decide how much milk, chicken, eggs, and poultry Canadians farmers produce and which farmers can produce how much. When officials misjudge demand—as they recently did with chicken and eggs—farmers are legally barred from responding. The result is predictable: shortages, soaring prices, and frustrated consumers staring at emptier shelves and higher bills.
This is not a theoretical problem. Canada’s most recent chicken production cycle, ending in May 2025, produced one of the worst supply shortfalls in decades. Demand rose unexpectedly, but quotas froze supply in place. Canadian farmers could not increase production. Instead, consumers paid more for scarce domestic poultry while last-minute imports filled the gap at premium prices. Eggs followed a similar pattern, with shortages triggering a convoluted “allocation” system that opened the door to massive foreign imports rather than empowering Canadian farmers to respond.
Over a century of global experience has shown that central economic planning fails. Governments are simply not good at “matching” supply with demand. There is no reason to believe Ottawa’s attempts to manage a handful of food categories should fare any better. And yet supply management persists, even as its costs mount.
Those costs fall squarely on consumers. According to a Fraser Institute estimate, supply management adds roughly $375 a year to the average Canadian household’s grocery bill. Because lower-income families spend a much higher proportion of their income on food, the burden falls most heavily on them.
The system also strangles consumer choice. European countries produce thousands of varieties of high-quality cheeses at prices far below what Canadians pay for largely industrial domestic products. But our import quotas are tiny, and anything above them is hit with tariffs exceeding 245 percent. As a result, imported cheeses can cost $60 per kilogram or more in Canadian grocery stores. In Switzerland, one of the world’s most eye-poppingly expensive countries, where a thimble-sized coffee will set you back $9, premium cheeses are barely half the price you’ll find at Loblaw or Safeway.
Canada’s supply-managed farmers defend their monopoly by insisting it provides a “fair return” for famers, guarantees Canadians have access to “homegrown food” and assures the “right amount of food is produced to meet Canadian needs.” Is there a shred of evidence Canadians are being denied the “right amount” of bread, tuna, asparagus or applesauce? Of course not; the market readily supplies all these and many thousands of other non-supply-managed foods.
Like all price-fixing systems, Canada’s supply management provides only the illusion of stability and security. We’ve seen above what happens when production falls short. But perversely, if a farmer manages to get more milk out of his cows than his quota, there’s no reward: the excess must be
dumped. Last year alone, enough milk was discarded to feed 4.2 million people.
Over time, supply management has become less about farming and more about quota ownership. Artificial scarcity has turned quotas into highly valuable assets, locking out young farmers and rewarding incumbents.
Why does such a dysfunctional system persist? The answer is politics. Supply management is of outsized importance in Quebec, where producers hold a disproportionate share of quotas and are numerous enough to swing election results in key ridings. Federal parties of all stripes have learned the cost of crossing this lobby. That political cowardice now collides with reality. The USMCA is heading toward mandatory renegotiation, and supply management is squarely in Washington’s sights. Canada depends on tariff-free access to the U.S. market for hundreds of billions of dollars in exports. Trading away a deeply-flawed system to secure that access would make economic sense.
Instead, Ottawa has doubled down. Not just with Carney’s remarks last week but with Bill C-202, which makes it illegal for Canadian ministers to reduce tariffs or expand quotas on supply-managed goods in future trade talks. Formally signalling that Canada’s negotiating position is hostage to a tiny domestic lobby group is reckless, and weakens Canada’s hand before talks even begin.
Food prices continue to rise faster than inflation. Forecasts suggest the average family will spend $1,000 more on groceries next year alone. Supply management is not the only cause, but it remains a major one. Ending it would lower prices, expand choice, reduce waste, and reward entrepreneurial farmers willing to compete.
If Donald Trump can succeed in forcing supply management onto the negotiating table, he will be doing Canadian consumers—and Canadian agriculture—a favour our own political class has long refused to deliver.
The original, full-length version of this article was recently published in C2C Journal. Gwyn Morgan is a retired business leader who was a director of five global corporations.
Death by a thousand clicks – government censorship of Canada’s internet
Chinese Billionaire Tried To Build US-Born Baby Empire As Overseas Elites Turn To American Surrogates
Viral TikTok video shows 7-year-old cuddling great-grandfather before he’s euthanized
Politicians should be honest about environmental pros and cons of electric vehicles
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s huge oil sands reserves dwarf U.S. shale
-
Alberta2 days agoCanada’s New Green Deal
-
Energy1 day agoCanada’s sudden rediscovery of energy ambition has been greeted with a familiar charge: hypocrisy
-
Business2 days agoCOP30 finally admits what resource workers already knew: prosperity and lower emissions must go hand in hand
-
armed forces2 days agoOttawa’s Newly Released Defence Plan Crosses a Dangerous Line
-
Indigenous1 day agoResidential school burials controversy continues to fuel wave of church arsons, new data suggests
-
Business1 day agoOttawa Pretends To Pivot But Keeps Spending Like Trudeau
-
Daily Caller1 day agoParis Climate Deal Now Decade-Old Disaster