National Citizen Inquiry releases Interim Report amidst new Covid-19 posturing in Canada
by Dan Fournier, published Sunday, September 17, 21:05 EDT on fournier.substack.com
Screen capture of the NCI’s home page taken on September 17, 2023, commemorating Sheila Annette Lewis who was refused a life-saving organ transplant due to her vaccine status and subsequently died.
The National Citizens Inquiry (NCI in English or CeNC in French) just released its Interim Report amidst the government’s fresh Covid-19 recommendations.
For those unfamiliar, the National Citizens Inquiry, or NCI for short, is a citizen-led inquiry into Canada’s COVID-19 response during the pandemic that is completely independent from government. It started in February of 2023 and saw three days of hearings in eight cities across Canada.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023, the NCI released its first recommendations following its investigation in the form of an Interim Report.
Though a full report is still being drafted, the NCI Commissioner, Ken Drysdale, urged the release of the Interim Report which is titled In the Public Interest: An Interim Report on the Covid-19 Vaccine Authorization Process (click here for the English PDF and here for the French version) due to the announcement on September 12, 2023 that Health Canada has authorized the use of an updated Moderna vaccine for COVID-19 for all Canadians over the age of six months.
In addition to the report, Ches Crosbie – the National Citizens Inquiry Administrator – penned an open letter dated September 14, 2023, to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau which was issued and delivered. Part of the letter states the following [with some emphasis added]:
“The issue of the test applied by the drug safety regulator Health Canada, to approve the Covid-19 Vaccine, was among the issues on which the Commissioners heard evidence.
Contrary to what the great majority of Canadians were told, the regulator has not made a determination that the products are safe. The absence of a safety and effectiveness determination is plain on the face of the statutory instruments of approval, and not subject to reasonable dispute. Worse, Health Canada’s website continues to make the positive misrepresentation to Canadians that the products are “proven safe and effective and of high quality,” although Health Canada made no such determination of proof.
Canadians are relying on representations as to the safety and effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines, which safety and effectiveness Health Canada has never determined.”
The letter also stated pressing recommendations made by the NCI as well as stating that the pending session of Parliament provides an “opportunity to be truthful with Canadians by confirming that Health Canada has not found the Covid-19 Vaccines to be proven safe and effective, and to do the right thing by withdrawing them pending full review in accordance with the traditional objective test.”
The Prime Minister and his Liberal government have yet to respond to the letter.
In its accompanying video press conference, spokesperson Michelle Leduc Catlin mentioned that the NCI heard over 200 hours of testimony from over 300 witnesses (experts and victims) and introduced the four Commissioners:
Heather DiGregorio, a tax lawyer and senior partner at an Alberta law firm;
Dr. Bernard Massie, a retired biotechnologist in Quebec;
Janice Kaikkonen, an Ontario school trustee who works with vulnerable populations; and
Ken Drysdale (Chair of the Commissioners), a professional engineer from Manitoba.
Here are some notable highlights and statements from the Commission Chair Ken Drysdale and Ches Crosbie, the NCI Administrator:
Ken Drysdale
World-renowned experts provided valuable testimony and insights during the hearings to better understand the complex challenges faced during the Covid-19 crisis.
The hearings did not include testimony from government agencies involved with implementing the pandemic measures. Non-judicial subpoenas were sent out to 63 members of government, regulators, and authorities, but none agreed to attend and testify.
Portions of the NCI’s findings from their investigation report were shared.
The FDA (Food and Drug Administration in the United States) recently approved new Covid-19 vaccines despite the absence of complete clinical testing.
The CDC (Center for Disease Control in the U.S.) also endorsed the use of these new vaccines for individuals as young as six months of age.
Such decisions have prompted the questioning of the regulatory process for approval of said vaccines.
Health Canada has also recently green-lit a new Covid-19 vaccine produced by Moderna, following a similar path to that of the United States.
Moderna has also announced the construction of a new mRNA vaccine production facility in Montreal (Quebec). And it is reported that they are expected to produce 100 million doses of the mRNA vaccine in 2024.
The authorisation process for the approval of the Covid-19 vaccines was put into question, also prompting clarity on how these decisions were (and are) made at the federal level.
This portion of their investigation report (Interim Report) seeks to shed light on this process and provide insights into the concerns and recommendations arising from their comprehensive examination.
In these times of uncertainty and rapid changes, is essential for the public to have a clear understanding of the basis upon which medical interventions are authorised.
And for regulatory agencies to maintain the highest standards of safety and efficacy for Covid-19 vaccines.
Their report highlights concerns about the process through which vaccines are granted approval.
The traditional process for approving new drugs in Canada is outlined in Division 8 of Canada’s Food and Drug Regulations, demanding rigorous evidence of both safety and efficacy.
It follows a sequence were safety is established first, followed by efficacy, and then a risk-benefit analysis.
This process is fundamental in ensuring that Canadians are not exposed to unknown risks when it comes to medical interventions.
However, what the NCI learned is that the Canadian Government has not adhered to this conventional evaluation and endorsement process when authorising Covid-19 vaccines.
Health Canada authorised these vaccines under an Interim Order which later became a permanent regulation.
Under this alternative authorisation process the necessity to objectively establish the safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines appears to have been set aside.
Objectively and independently proving the safety of a new drug before its introduction into the market is a cornerstone of responsible health care and public safety.
It is crucial to instill trust among healthcare professionals and the public, and to ensure that medical interventions are based on the most accurate and reliable information available.
In the context of a global health crisis, these principles are vital in ensuring that public health measures are not only effective, but respectful of individuals rights and dignity.
This stringent approach becomes even more important when a drug is intended for widespread use across all segments of the population, including children and pregnant women.
The authorisation of Covid-19 vaccines in Canada followed the Interim Order which required a subjective assessment of whether the benefits outweighed the risks.
This subjective approach rather than the objective proof has raised concerns about the rigorousness of the authorisation process.
He concluded the need for a thorough investigation into the authorisation for Covid-19 vaccines in Canada.
The issue of the Interim Order is one that this author has covered extensively in a prior post.
Mr. Drysdale then listed four recommendations:
Rescind the newly implemented revisions to the Food and Drug regulations related to Covid-19 vaccine authorisation;
Immediately halt the current use of Covid-19 vaccines in Canada that were authorised under the revised provisions of the Interim Order and a newly revised Food and Drug regulations.
Conduct a full judicial investigation into the authorisation process of Covid-19 vaccination in Canada with the possibility of addressing any criminal liability that might be found.
Make all documentation concerning the authorisation process and information provided to regulatory agencies by the [Covid-19 vaccine] manufacturers publicly available.
The Commission Chair concluded by stating that these recommendations are critical to restoring public trust in the vaccine authorisation process and ensuring the safety and well-being of all Canadians.
Ches Crosbie
No government in Canada wants to do an inquiry into their management, or mismanagement, of the response to Covid; so, a group of dedicated and freedom-loving Canadians from all walks of life decided to hold a citizen-led and citizen-funded inquiry.
The “safe and effective” slogan repeated over and over by politicians and health officials is nothing but a marketing pitch.
The statement on the Health Canada website that Covid-19 vaccines are proven safe and effective is a lie.
Politicians lie, officials lie, and the regulators Canadians trusted to protect them have been corrupted.
Don’t let the lying government, the fake health experts, and the corrupt media press your fear button.
Questions posed during the Press Conference
The first question came from Trish Wood, a former science reporter. She first showed her concern regarding how the recent [Covid-19] vaccines were approved for use, but never tested (as per her understanding), for children; and then asked how the NCI views that situation and how their report and recommendations could have affected the health authorities decision (to approve these new vaccines).
She further noted that when employed as a science reporter, they use to hold to account the government on issues such as pharmaceutical drugs being safe and effective.
Mr. Drysdale replied that they were looking into these which will be addressed in the NCI’s Final Report, adding that they are not in a position to discuss [some of] those findings as of yet. He added that the report will address a wide variety of related issues and that they make recommendations on all of them.
Trish Wood followed up with a questions regarding the use of masks and whether such issues would also be included in the final report. “I can assure you that we’re looking into all of that,” Mr. Drysdale responded, further adding that “the report is .. without the appendices is over a thousand pages long.”
“What do you hope is going to happen as a result of the report?” Mrs. Wood then asked. Commissioner Heather DiGregoria replied that the role of the NCI was primarily to report the testimony of Canadians and make it available for them to use “as they see fit” and to pursue the purposes that they see coming out of their recommendations.
The following question came from Rick from Caravan to Midnight and was related to conveying the information to people who are “less than informed” and are “worshipping at the altar of mainstream media,” as he put it. “How can we package this to get it into a condensed version so that the program directors in our major media outlets will have no excuse...to say that they didn’t know about the National Citizens Inquiry.”
Mr. Drysdale replied that that was not within the purview of the Commissioners, but that the report has been set up in different volumes which examines the evidence, what happened, and that it has conclusions and recommendations. But in order to simplify that, they added another section where they simply list the recommendations to make it more accessible.
The next question came from Sherry Strong, the Alberta Provincial Director from Children’s Health Defense Canada. She shared the same concern about the mainstream media and asked whether there existed plans to create some sort of ‘Coalition Task Force’ to reach people in their homes, at the grassroots level, to help them “see what’s actually going on.”
Mr. Drysdale emphasised that the Commission was also working on some methods to disseminate that information. The spokesperson for the NCI, Mrs. Leduc Caitlin, further replied in the form of a question: “What are you going to do with this report?”, similar to what she said in this author’s interview with her. She then added:
“This is an unprecedented organisation, and unprecedented process. We are building a new muscle in democracy here. We have created this mechanism for gathering this evidence with sworn testimony led by lawyers in the most official way we possibly can. But there is no legal, binding way for us to implement this. So, this is going to be like everything else that’s happened with the NCI – something that is up to the citizens of Canada. So, I put it back to all of you. What are you going to do with this?”
The following question came from Jason Lavigne, an independent journalist and politician in Alberta. He asked about what criminal aspects may have been involved in what was investigated by the NCI. The Commissioner lawyer, Heather DiGregoria, mentioned that though there has been criminal activity [with the Covid-19 Pandemic response], they don’t rule out that a “proper investigation” into the actions of the approval of the Covid-19 vaccines could arise which would be dealt with under criminal law; and, they are not recommending any changes to the [existing] laws in that respect.
Vlad Tepes from the RAIR Foundation – an American grassroots organisation, first noted that the NIH and the CDC in the United States had just approved a new emergency use authorisation for the “new flavor of the mRNA injection without any kind of actual emergency taking place.” His question was concerned with whether any kind of equivalent in Canada regarding emergency use and authorisation was granted for the newest mRNA Covid-19 vaccine and what was the nature of the [current] “emergency.”
“The process in Canada is significantly different than that of the United States,” Mr. Drysdale replied.
“They don’t have emergency use authorisation in Canada; we had an interim authorisation that was temporary,” he added.
The next question came from Ted Kuntz of Vaccine Choice Canada. He first conveyed his concern about the violation of the fundamental ethic of informed consent during the roll-out of the Covid-19 vaccines. “In this country [Canada], we hold that informed consent as fundamental in foundation to an ethical medical system; and it would seem that that was completely violated during the last three years,” he further noted. He then observed that under ethics found in medical codes that if a medical practitioner doesn’t secure informed consent, they could be [found] liable of assault and battery. He thus asked if these were taken into consideration in their report and recommendations.
“Absolutely. We have an entire section related to medical ethics,” Commissioner Drysdale immediately responded.
“We[‘ve] gone through and examined some College of Physicians and Surgeons requirement, including requirements for informed consent,” he added before further noting that they have done a significant amount of related research on the topic, and that they have a wide variety of recommendations that they are still working on.
Commissioner Dr. Bernard Massi added that there was a “fine balance to strive between ethics and law.” The main issue should be, however, that doctors “do no harm.”
“If you are posing to your patient or administering to your patient something that you are unaware of potential harm, this is something that raises all kinds of issues,” he added.
Dr. Massi further noted the complication that medical doctors faced when administering the vaccines since the drug packages (inserts) that came with the Covid-19 vaccines were “blank,” i.e., they did not contain the associated risks.
He also shared concerns about the consistency of quality control surrounding the various lots of vaccine vials that were distributed to medical practitioners.
Mr. Drysdale further noted the added complication that their exists variations from province-to-province regarding these standards and that the Commission had done a deep-dive into these issues of concern.
The spokesperson for the press release concluded the session by stating that the conclusion of the Interim Report is that the Covid-19 vaccines are neither safe, nor effective.
The mainstream media’s reporting
The distrust in the mainstream media’s reporting of the pandemic and the safety and efficacy of the Covid-19 vaccines was an issue that was often brought up during the NCI’s process.
It should be noted that former CBC journalist Rodney Palmer testified twice at the NCI as an expert witness, harshly criticising the mainstream media – particularly his former employer, the CBC – in falsely reporting and misleading the Canadian population in their reporting of the Covid-19 vaccines and their inherent risks.
At the time, even Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had tweeted about Palmer’s testimony.
The Final Report of the NCI Commission is due out this Fall.
Most articles are free, but please support the work of this independent journalist by considering a paid subscription to his Substack (for only $5 a month, or $50 a year) and following his Twitter. You can also buy him a coffee.
Disclaimer:
See the author’s About page for full disclaimer.