COVID-19
The Media Wants a Return to 2020
From the Brownstone Institute
By
They’re never going to stop.
We’re a few months away from the end of 2024, four and a half years after the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. It’s a truth that should clearly be universally acknowledged by now, that the pandemic policies enacted by global governments were a catastrophic failure.
Mask mandates were pointless, harmful, and completely ineffective. School closures were one of history’s biggest mistakes, causing learning loss among young people that will set them back an entire generation. Business shutdowns achieved little except for hurting small business owners at the expense of massive corporations and necessitating a rolling series of money printing leading to rampant inflation.
Then we witnessed the formerly unimaginable emergence of vaccine passports.
Regardless, those policies have generally, and thankfully, come to an end. Overwhelming evidence, data, and scientific studies have confirmed that the Anthony Fauci-CDC doctrine was based on nothing, and accomplished less. But among the fearless media columnist set, there’s a desperation to return to the glory days of pandemic restrictions. The latest example coming from an opinion article published over at The Hill, complete with the usual misinformation, poor reasoning, and willful ignorance of current realities.
Continuing the trend that Fauci started.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Chief Medical Advisor to the President, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky on December 27, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Media Personalities Can’t Let Go of Bad Covid Policies
The column by Aron Solomon presents several absurd arguments, blaming a “recent surge” on “new variants” and saying we “need to take stock of where we are” with the virus.
“The recent surge in COVID-19 cases has disrupted summer travel plans, overwhelmed healthcare facilities in certain areas, and left many Americans dealing with the familiar symptoms of fever, cough and fatigue,” Solomon writes. “The summer months, typically associated with lower respiratory virus activity, have instead seen a significant uptick in COVID-19 infections.”
This is factually inaccurate.
The summer months have traditionally been associated with higher respiratory virus activity in certain parts of the country. The South and Southwest have consistently seen higher Covid spread in the summer months, corresponding with past flu patterns. Even the extremist public health agencies such as the one that dictated their edicts to the city of Los Angeles have acknowledged that summer surges have happened every year since 2020.
Sure enough, that’s exactly what the data shows, summer increases in Covid spread, decreasing over time as population immunity grows and testing decreases.
But Solomon’s run of misinformation wasn’t done there.
He then blames the “relaxation of public health measures” for the increased Covid spread this year.
“Second, the widespread relaxation of public health measures has created an environment conducive to transmission,” he writes. “Mask mandates, social distancing guidelines and restrictions on large gatherings have all but disappeared. This return to normalcy, while massively psychologically and economically beneficial, has provided the virus with ample opportunities to spread.”
The pointless mask mandates disappeared years ago in many parts of the country, which is just as well as they conclusively did not matter. Comparing regions with and without mandates has consistently shown that areas with mandates have the same Covid rates, if not worse. Even in California.
It just doesn’t matter, because masks don’t work.
Solomon then advocates for the return of pandemic restrictions and a “commitment to public health” to combat the summer 2024 surge.
“While much progress has been made in terms of vaccination and treatment, the current surge is a stark reminder that complacency is not an option. The road ahead will require a renewed commitment to public health, both from government leaders and from individuals.
We all need to prepare for not only the possibility of continued disruptions but for another new normal that might be a little closer to 2020 than how we’ve recently been living. That means preparing for future waves and the long-term implications of a world in which COVID-19 remains a persistent, if manageable, threat.”
Beyond the absurdity of demanding restrictions that have already failed, Solomon is ignoring that there was effectively no “surge” in summer 2020, in any meaningful metric. Getting sick, unfortunately, is a part of life. People will have colds, flus, Covid, and their resulting symptoms forever. No matter what we do.
But what matters is whether these waves lead to a substantial increase in associated deaths. They conclusively have not. Per the CDC’s Covid Data Tracker, Covid-associated mortality is essentially near all-time pandemic lows.
Roughly 1.8 percent of all registered deaths across the country were even tangentially associated with Covid. Those massive peaks though? Those came with the strictest restrictions of the pandemic, the restrictions Solomon wants to return.
Even the massive increase in 2021-2022 came after vaccines and boosters were widely available.
But a combination of immunity across a wide swath of the population effectively ended the pandemic. It had nothing to do with any pandemic policies from governments here or abroad. The fact that this is even remotely up for debate is a testament to the power of media misinformation and a willingness from people like Solomon to ignore contradictory information.
There is no emergency, there is no need to reinstate restrictions of any kind to deal with Covid. Especially because those restrictions are useless anyway.
Republished from the author’s Substack
COVID-19
Dr. Trozzi expresses optimism after day in court appealing to overturn ban on his medical license
From LifeSiteNews
The outspoken critic of COVID-19 shots said the judge appeared interested in learning more about the underlying cause of accusations made against him by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.
Canadian medical freedom fighter Dr. Mark Trozzi passionately appealed his legal case before a court on Tuesday with the help of his lawyer. The outcome will determine whether he regains his right to practice medicine again after it was taken away because he spoke out against COVID shots.
Trozzi told LifeSiteNews he is “optimistic” about the outcome, noting that the judge seemed interested to find the underlying cause of accusations made against him by his medical regulator, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO).
“I think the judge was pretty curious to dig into the science files which they (CPSO) ignored and see why I accused them of these things. They are counting on the judge to just think I am nuts and punish me for strong words,” Trozzi told LifeSiteNews after his hearing.
During the hearing, the CPSO had its lawyers go over their reasons for stripping Trozzi of his medical license earlier in the year.
His appeal case was heard by the Ontario Divisional Court (ODC). The banned doctor is hopeful he will be successful in having a decision overturned by the CPSO, which stripped him of his medical license earlier this year because he spoke out against COVID jabs and mandates.
According to Trozzi, who has 25 years of experience working in emergency rooms, the CPSO’s court “strategy was trying to make me sound crazy,” but he does not “think it will work.”
“I am optimistic that these judges are going to do their part to start restoring some sort of worthwhile future for their grandkids and ours,” he told LifeSiteNews.
Trozzi’s case, should it be successful, attorney Michael Alexander said it would have far-reaching legal implications that directly impact Canadians’ freedom of expression rights across “all domains of government regulation,” including all health colleges.
On January 25, the CPSO’s Discipline Tribunal, led by registrar Dr. Nancy Whitmore, stripped Trozzi of his license because he exposed the truth of the COVID ‘pandemic’ and its vaccines.
According to Trozzi, the CPSO left “little room” for “significant criticism or substantial challenge scientifically or legally” in what he referred to as its “kangaroo court” ruling that stripped him of his license.
“In essence the CPSO has just abused their authority and violated doctors, running their tribunal as a kangaroo court and torture chamber. Their science was minuscule, and they never even refuted the volumes of scientific evidence which we placed before them,” he told LifeSiteNews.
“We have them in the appeal court now to rope them in from their extreme abuse of power, for starters.
During the hearing, the CPSO, as noted by Trozzi, talked about its accusations against him, regarding COVID jabs as well as PCR tests.
“The CPSO talked about strong accusations I have made against them and others, for things such as experimental genetic injections not ‘safe and effective vaccines,’ no real pandemic, PCR scam, obstructed treatment, the criminality of the college,” he said.
“They climaxed these portions with quoting my most stern moments that are founded on those true accusations, things like ‘they should be prosecuted, imprisoned, lawfully hung.’”
The CPSO has thus far initiated legal action against Trozzi and at least five other doctors who are committed to their Hippocratic Oath responsibilities related to COVD: Mary O’Connor, Rochangé Kilian, Celeste Jean Thirlwell, Patrick Phillips, and Crystal Luchkiw.
Hearing panel ‘fair,’ Trozzi’s lawyer says
During the court hearing, Alexander made some exceptionally good arguments to support Trozzi’s claims that he was unfairly targeted by the CPSO in “biased” proceedings.
In speaking to LifeSiteNews, Alexander said in his view he felt that the hearing panel “was fair,” adding that he and Trozzi “had a good day.”
“I mean in the sense that I got out the core arguments that we needed to make to succeed in this,” he said.
“I don’t feel that the lawyers for the college really grappled with our arguments. They just repeated their own arguments. But I cannot say at the end of the day how the court will deal with that, but that’s my observation of it.”
Alexander told LifeSiteNews that as he has said before, the CPSO proceedings against Trozzi were “biased.”
“If my arguments are accepted about the fundamental errors, relating to the evidence that were made by the tribunal. If those are accepted it really impugns the entire decision and I would hope leads to an assumption that the proceeding was biased,” he said.
Alexander noted that once there is “evidence of bias,” the decision, in this case, the CPSO against Trozzi “must be overturned.”
“The proceeding certainly was biased, and I have argued that” he said.
Alexander noted how he had hoped for a full-day hearing, but he had to make do with a half-day hearing because the court is slammed with various cases.
A ruling in favor of Trozzi would overturn his medical license ban, but Alexander noted that a decision is not likely until the new year. LifeSiteNews will report on the judge’s ruling on today’s court hearing once that decision has been made public.
The hearing was open to the public, but the live stream suffered from outages for some, and others could not even log in, in after the capacity limit of the stream was reached.
In 2020 during the COVID crisis, Trozzi became concerned after the mainstream narrative regarding the virus and various public health emergencies were severely skewed.
He observed that his hospital’s ER was mostly empty despite claims they were overflowing.
Trozzi came under the CPSO spotlight for promoting alternative COVID treatments and publicly explained why the COVID shot is “not a vaccine.”
In retaliation for speaking out, he was barred from issuing medical exemptions for COVID-19 injections as well as masking requirements and testing, in 2021.
The CPSO has cracked down on numerous physicians who failed to comply with standard protocol during the COVID outbreak. It has done this so assiduously that Dr. Robert Malone spoke out last year against what he described as the “re-education” of dissident Canadian doctors.
COVID-19
Dr. Trozzi appeals revocation of his medical license in ‘existential moment’ for Ontario courts
Dr. Mark Trozzi
From LifeSiteNews
Tuesday, outspoken COVID science critic Dr. Mark Trozzi will appeal a decision to take away his medical license. Due to a new legal standard, a successful outcome may positively impact Canada ‘in all domains of government regulation.’
Medical freedom champion Dr. Mark Trozzi will present his legal case on Tuesday when he appeals the stripping of his medical license in January by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO).
The case will be heard by the Ontario Divisional Court (ODC) and, according to attorney Michael Alexander, a successful result would have far-reaching legal implications impacting freedom of expression rights across “all domains of government regulation,” including all health colleges.
Appearing in a late September interview with Canadian politician Derek Sloan, Alexander explained the history of the case leading up to the revoking of Trozzi’s license on January 25. In their view, “the college was primarily concerned … that Mark had been making statements about COVID-19 science and public policy that amounted to ‘misinformation’ and he was misleading the public and in doing so causing harm.”
It was also relevant that Trozzi was not even in practice at this time but had taken a sabbatical to study these issues more carefully and start a daily newsletter regarding his research.
The concern of CPSO “was the substance of his views,” the attorney assessed, “so they wanted to censor him in some way” and “eventually took him to a discipline hearing where he was found to be unprofessional, incompetent, and in violation of the standard of practice in the profession, primarily because he just presented an alternative point of view.”
READ: Dr. Trozzi stripped of medical license over COVID stance, plans to appeal
Ironically, Trozzi was not able to be present for the interview himself because he was traveling in Japan, with an invitation to speak before its parliament. He had already addressed the Romanian parliament on issues related to the COVID-19 response.
While the highly regarded former emergency room specialist “is a persona non grata in Ontario,” Dr. Trozzi’s attorney observed, “he’s in high demand around the world as someone who is providing important insights into the whole COVID era, COVID science, COVID public policy, and his criticisms are taken very seriously.”
“We have to ask ourselves what the authorities in Ontario are doing when in other parts of the world serious people are taking Dr. Trozzi’s criticisms very seriously,” Alexander proposed.
Trozzi case could impact ‘the country in all domains of government regulation’
For more than three decades, the Ontario Divisional Court has been legally directed to judge such cases only according to a low-threshold standard called “reasonableness” that Alexander describes as the court basically deferring to the judgment of such regulatory tribunals as CPSO with regard to facts, the law, and “particularly on the interpretation of the law that the tribunal adopts.”
What makes this case different is that since Trozzi has a “statute-based right to appeal” and thus a 2019 Supreme Court decision now requires the ODC to adopt a higher standard, referred to as “correctness,” in examining the CPSO decision.
Therefore, according to this new standard, “you must get all findings of fact correct, you must get every interpretation of your statute correct, you must interpret all case law correctly,” Alexander explained.
“So, the CPSO has never had to face this before, and this (case) is the first major fundamental challenge to a regulatory body on this standard of correctness in Ontario,” he continued. Thus, this case is “extremely important. If we were to win, it would affect the whole regulatory framework of the province in a positive way.”
“So these same judges, who have been cutting a lot of slack to the College of Physicians in particular, are now going to be facing similar issues that they have faced before but on this new standard of correctness,” the attorney said. “So they are going to have to adopt a completely different mindset in assessing the case.”
Therefore, “I guess you could say (this is) an existential moment for the judiciary in Ontario,” Alexander proposed. “I mean will the Divisional Court step up to the plate and fully apply the standard of correctness and have the courage to do it?”
According to Alexander, a successful outcome in this case “would have a ripple effect not just in Ontario for the 22 health colleges here but for the health colleges all across the country,” forcing them to reconsider their policies in this regard.
And given the case regards the fundamental freedom of expression, a successful outcome on these arguments “would have an impact across the country in all domains of government regulation.”
“So this is not a case that’s just about Mark,” the attorney clarified. “We are trying to change the way this country is governed, and the college’s case has given us that opportunity.”
In 2020 during the “pandemic,” Trozzi, an ER veteran of 25 years, noticed that the mainstream narrative surrounding the public health “emergency” was deeply flawed. While media reported overflowing emergency rooms, Trozzi’s hospital remained relatively empty. This inspired him to research the science facts of COVID.
In the interest of protecting not only his own patients but people everywhere, Dr. Trozzi promoted alternative COVID-19 treatments and publicly explained why the COVID shot is “not a vaccine.”
In retaliation, Dr. Trozzi was barred from issuing medical exemptions for COVID-19 shots, masking requirements and testing in 2021. He was not alone: Ontario’s Dr. Rochagne Kilian was also similarly barred.
At the time, CPSO said the interim orders were given in accordance with the Regulated Health Professions Act, which allow restrictions on a member’s license if a regulator believes a certain practice “exposes or is likely to expose patients to harm or injury.”
The CPSO has cracked down on numerous physicians who failed to comply with standard protocol during the COVID outbreak. It has done this so assiduously that last year Dr. Robert Malone spoke out against what he described as the “re-education” of dissident Canadian doctors.
The CPSO has thus far initiated legal action against Trozzi and at least five other doctors who are committed to their Hippocratic Oath responsibilities related to COVID: Mary O’Connor, Kilian, Celeste Jean Thirlwell, Patrick Phillips, and Crystal Luchkiw.
Alexander also made clear that while the CPSO has the typical governmental “blank check” of “unlimited resources,” including “around 10 lawyers on staff” and “access to outside council,” he is in need to hire “clerks to do special kinds of filing” and is seeking free-will donations.
Having donated “hundreds of thousands of dollars of billable time” into this case, Alexander has no regrets, stating that “it’s too important to the country not to litigate and we are the ones who pioneered this approach, and so it’s us or nobody.”
To assist Dr. Trozzi in winning his precedent-setting case, please donate here.
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Preparing a New Regulatory Framework for iGaming
-
Aristotle Foundation2 days ago
Canada’s immigration system and Islamist terror threats
-
Break The Needle2 days ago
B.C. crime survey reveals distrust in justice system, regional divides
-
Fraser Institute2 days ago
Cost of Ottawa’s gun ban fiasco may reach $6 billion
-
International2 days ago
Evacuations urged in Tampa Bay ahead of Hurricane Milton
-
National1 day ago
Retired judge slams Trudeau gov’t for promoting ‘false’ accusation about residential school deaths
-
Business2 days ago
Taxpayers Federation calls on premiers to join carbon tax court fight
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
Rose & His Thorns: A Failure Of All Parties