COVID-19
Vaccines: Assessing Canada’s COVID Response

David Clinton
I planned to be “first in line” for the shots as soon as my age cohort became eligible. By early March however, COVID itself dropped by the house, leading to the most uncomfortable (although non life-threatening) week of my life.
It’s been five years since COVID hit and one part of me wants to stuff it all in a closet somewhere and forget about it. But perhaps certain events – and especially government errors and overreach – should be documented. So this post will identify actions at all levels of government from those early days that, given our understanding of the threat available through the benefit hindsight, were both misguided and damaging.
I haven’t completely forgotten the mood through the early months in 2020. Politicians faced near-unanimous public demand for an aggressive response. Much of that sentiment was the result of messaging coming from foreign governments (mostly in the U.S.). But the local sentiment was definitely there.
To be fair, Governments got some things right and, taking into account the chaos and uncertainty of those early months, even some of their mistakes were understandable. But it’s the job of government to lead. And to avoid making choices – even popular choices – that will lead to predictable harms.
Vaccine mandates starting in 2021 were a case in point. Federal authority largely stemmed from the 2005 Quarantine Act and the Contraventions Act that allowed officials to issue tickets for non-compliance with the Quarantine Act. Provincial mandates were based on laws like Ontario’s Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. The question isn’t whether the mandates and their enforcement were legal, but whether they caused more harm than good.
As the first vaccines started arriving in Canada around February 2021, I planned to be “first in line” for the shots as soon as my age cohort became eligible. By early March however, COVID itself dropped by the house, leading to the most uncomfortable (although non life-threatening) week of my life.
After recovering, my family doctor advised me to wait three months before getting the shots so my body could get back to normal. During those months, I got access to preprint results from the Israeli study into natural immunity which showed that:
Natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity
Those results were later confirmed by CDC and NEJM studies, among others.
Given that context, I didn’t see any justification for exposing myself to even minimal health risks associated with vaccines. Which meant that, despite demonstrably posing no threat to public health, I would (at various times) be unable to:
- Board domestic commercial flights, VIA Rail, Rocky Mountaineer trains, and cruise ships within Canada
- Board international flights or trains departing Canada
- Freely return to Canada through an overland point of entry
- Upon return to Canada, bypass the 14 day quarantine under the Quarantine Act
- Upon return to Canada via air, bypass the three day quarantine in (expensive) government-approved hotels
- Engage in ‘non-essential” activities like restaurants, gyms, events (details varied from province to province)
- Enter Parliament
- Seek employment in federally regulated air, rail, and marine sectors
What should Canadian governments have done? Remove restrictions on individuals with natural immunity, obviously. Which, by the way, would have come with the valuable bonus of entirely avoiding the truckers protest and consequent confrontations.
If authorities were reluctant to take us at our word on immunity, they could have followed the European Union’s lead by emulating their Digital COVID Certificate for proof of recovery. Were they worried about people without immunity creating fake certificates? Hard to take that one seriously. There were more fake vaccine passports littering the streets of Ontario than abandoned Toronto Maple Leafs car window flags in a normal early May.
In the end, my own suffering was negligible. I didn’t really want to visit family in the U.S. all that much anyway. But for millions of other Canadians, the real-world stakes were far higher. And all that’s besides the billions of dollars wasted during those years’ government policies.
To be sure, resisting unscientific street-level calls for vaccine mandates would have required courage. But shouldn’t acts of courage be a source of pride for public officials?
COVID-19
New Peer-Reviewed Study Affirms COVID Vaccines Reduce Fertility

Here’s what the numbers reveal, and what it could mean for humanity
What was once dismissed as a “conspiracy theory” now has hard data behind it.
A new peer-reviewed study out of the Czech Republic has uncovered a disturbing trend: in 2022, women vaccinated against COVID-19 had 33% FEWER successful conceptions per 1,000 women compared to those who were unvaccinated.
A “successful conception” means a pregnancy that led to a live birth nine months later.
The study wasn’t small. It analyzed data from 1.3 million women aged 18 to 39.
Here’s what the numbers reveal, and what it could mean for humanity.
First, let’s talk about the study.
It was published by Manniche and colleagues in the International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine, a legitimate, peer-reviewed journal respected for its focus on patient safety and pharmacovigilance.
The study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023 and examined 1.3 million women aged 18–39. By the end of 2021, approximately 70% of them had received at least one COVID-19 vaccination, with 96% of the vaccinated cohort having received either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.
By 2022, a stark difference was clear.
The vaccinated cohort averaged around 4 successful conceptions per 1,000 women per month.
That’s a staggering 33% LESS than the 6 per 1,000 seen in the unvaccinated group.
This means that for every 2 vaccinated women who successfully conceived and delivered a baby, 3 unvaccinated women did the same.
In 2022, unvaccinated women were 1.5 times MORE likely to have a successful conception.
Again, that’s a conception that led to a live birth nine months later.
The authors did not jump to the conclusion that their study proved causation. They cited that other factors may have played a role, such as self-selection bias
However, the researchers noted that self-selection bias does not explain the timing and scale of the observed drop in fertility.
Moreover, birth rates in the Czech Republic dropped from 1.83 per 1,000 women in 2021 to 1.37 in 2024, adding further evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines may be contributing to the decline in fertility.
That downward trend, the researchers argue, supports the hypothesis that something beyond individual decision-making may be affecting conception rates.
As such, they argue that the study’s results warrant a closer and more thorough examination of the impact of mass vaccination.
If this study holds true, and vaccinated women are really much less likely to have successful conceptions, the implications for humanity are massive.
Millions of babies could be missing each year as a result of COVID vaccination, and recent data from Europe and beyond already point to a deeply disturbing trend.
NOTE: Europe experienced a sharper decline in births than usual from 2021 to 2023.
Live births fell from 4.09 million in 2021 to 3.67 million in 2023, marking a 10.3% decline in just two years.
The new Czech study adds to growing evidence that COVID vaccines may be contributing to a dramatic decline in fertility, just as many feared all along.
As Elon Musk warns, “If there are no humans, there’s no humanity.”
Whether the shots are the cause or not, the trend is real—and it’s accelerating.
It’s time to stop dismissing the signals and start investigating the cause.
Thanks for reading. I hope this report gave you real value. This is a critically important topic that deserves attention.
If you appreciate my work and want to help keep it going, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
99% of readers get this content for free. But just $5/month from the 1% keeps it flowing for everyone else.
If this work matters to you, this is the best way to support it.
Be the 1% who makes it possible.
Catch the rest of today’s biggest headlines at VigilantFox.com.
COVID-19
Ontario man launches new challenge against province’s latest attempt to ban free expression on roadside billboards

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that Ontario resident George Katerberg has launched a legal challenge against the Ontario Ministry of Transportation for banning roadside billboards with social or political messages. Mr. Katerberg believes that the Ministry’s policies go too far and undermine the freedom of expression of all Ontarians.
This case goes back to March 2024, when Mr. Katerberg, a retired HVAC technician, rented a billboard on Highway 17 near Thessalon, Ontario, that featured images of public health officials and politicians alongside a message critical of their statements about vaccines.
After the Ministry rejected his proposed billboard several times on the grounds it promoted hatred, a constitutional challenge was launched with lawyers provided by the Justice Centre. Mr. Katerberg’s lawyers argued that the Ministry’s position was unreasonable, and that it did not balance Charter rights with the purposes of relevant legislation.
The Ministry later admitted that the sign did not violate hate speech guidelines and agreed to reconsider erecting the billboard.
However, in April 2025, the Ministry quietly amended its policy manual to restrict signs along “bush highways” to those only promoting goods, services, or authorized community events.
The new guidelines are sweeping and comprehensive, barring any messaging that the Ministry claims could “demean, denigrate, or disparage one or more identifiable persons, groups of persons, firms, organizations, industrial or commercial activities, professions, entities, products or services…”
Relying on this new policy, the Ministry once again denied Mr. Katerberg’s revised billboard.
Constitutional lawyer Chris Fleury explains, “By amending the Highway Corridor Management Manual to effectively prohibit signage that promotes political and social causes, the Ministry of Transportation has turned Mr. Katerberg’s fight to raise his sign into a fight on behalf of all Ontarians who wish to express support for a political or social cause.”
No date has yet been assigned for a hearing on this matter.
-
Bruce Dowbiggin6 hours ago
What Connor Should Say To Oilers: It’s Not You. It’s Me.
-
Business7 hours ago
Federal fiscal anchor gives appearance of prudence, fails to back it up
-
Business5 hours ago
The Passage of Bill C-5 Leaves the Conventional Energy Sector With as Many Questions as Answers
-
Alberta3 hours ago
Alberta poll shows strong resistance to pornographic material in school libraries
-
Crime2 hours ago
Florida rescues 60 missing kids in nation’s largest-ever operation
-
Business41 mins ago
Canada should already be an economic superpower. Why is Canada not doing better?
-
Banks4 hours ago
Scrapping net-zero commitments step in right direction for Canadian Pension Plan
-
Business1 day ago
Behind the latest CPI Numbers: Inflation Slows, But Living Costs Don’t