The blockade in Canada opposed the “hard lessons” learned from previous pandemics: emergency management experts

WHO guidelines issued prior to COVID-19 warned against measures such as closing businesses and schools to curb pandemics.

The use of the Canadian blockade during the COVID-19 pandemic violates all previous knowledge, published research, and the Canadian Pandemic Response Plan. To tell A former director of the Alberta Office for Emergency Management added that collateral damage would last for at least a generation...

“”Ignored [existing pandemic plans] We then assigned an untrained medical officer to do this. ” Said David Redman said that their existing plans from all states and territories, not just the federal government,

Redman was talking at Webinar hosted by Frontier Public Policy Center on July 29 Comment on how the government avoided a pre-established emergency plan based on “all the difficult lessons learned” from a previous pandemic.

He was published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in September 2019 before the arrival of COVID-19.Non-pharmaceutical public health measures to mitigate the risks and effects of epidemics and pandemic influenza.

“The world’s best infectious disease doctors repeatedly created this document about every five years and last updated it just before this pandemic,” Redman said.

“Of 15 [non-pharmaceutical interventions listed in the document]— What we have come to know, business closures, school closures, isolation of exposed people — this kind of pandemic was highly recommended for all three, ”he said. rice field. “Why? Because previous pandemics have shown that these measures do not have a significant impact on the spread of viral diseases of the nature of COVID.”

Epoch Times Photo
In August 2018, David Redman, former Executive Secretary of the Alberta Office for Emergency Management. (Distribution material)

Quarantine of exposed individuals, screening of traveler infections, border closure, and contact tracing are among the six non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) listed in the WHO document and are not recommended under any circumstances. ..

This document further states “tEvidence based on the effectiveness of NPIs in a community environment is limited, and the overall quality of the evidence is limited. [of their effectiveness in reducing influenza transmission] Very low with most interventions.

“Workplace closure should be the last step to be considered only in very serious epidemics and pandemics,” said the WHO document. He also said that school closures could be used “in the event of a serious epidemic or pandemic.” The timing and duration should be limited to what is considered optimal, taking into account the negative impact on the community (family burden, financial considerations, etc.).

Due diligence issues

Much scientific research was done during the COVID-19 pandemic to review the effectiveness of the blockade. Published in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation in JanuaryAssessment of the impact of a compulsory stay-at-home order and business closure on the COVID-19 epidemic,Called these measures “the most restrictive NPI for controlling the spread of COVID-19,” and concluded that they did not produce the desired results.

“Small benefits cannot be ruled out, but there is no significant benefit to increasing cases of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achieved with less restrictive interventions. “The study said.

In his treatise, “Canada’s deadly reaction to COVID-19Redman wrote that the use of these NPIs was, in fact, identified, considered and discussed during the development of pandemic plans at all state and territory and federal levels. I am.

“I don’t know why they didn’t follow the plan itself, which they knew existed,” he said in a webinar. “And that’s due diligence for me. You knew or should have known.”

By mid-March 2020, Redman also stated in a treatise that by mid-March 2020, older people were known to be at greatest risk for COVID-19.

For example, his treatise March 23-29Showed an increase in mortality among people over the age of 50 in 2020 Europe region.. For people under the age of 50, COVID-19 “is almost never fatal and appears to be less serious than the annual seasonal flu,” Redman writes. “The COVID-19 virus was perceived as a serious concern for people over the age of 70 and people over the age of 60 with other serious comorbidities.”

Redman argued that due diligence was lacking and the government jumped on “clear or seemingly logical assumptions about how to solve the task.” One example was “the assumption that the only way to deal with COVID-19 is to enact a severe authoritarian blockade as witnessed in China,” he said.

“We had time to develop options for our most endangered care, but chose to follow the blockades of China, Italy and Spain that failed in the first wave,” he said. wrote. “In subsequent waves, ignoring all evidence and science, we continued to track the failed use of the blockade, killing tens of thousands of the most endangered.”

Epoch Times Photo
Paramedics will take an elderly patient from a care facility at the Tendercare Living Center during a COVID-19 pandemic in Scarborough, Ontario on December 23, 2020. (CanadianPress / Nathan Denette)

Use of fear

Redman said the “use of rude fear” during this pandemic to ensure public compliance caused “a breach of trust in the government that lasted more than a decade.” The damage to our democracy will last for at least a generation. “

“Intentional use of modeling to create fear (use in this way is not considered), use of daily case counts to generate fear, COVID-19 is equally deadly for all ages. Use of certain cases to manipulate the public in the belief that there is a misleading proportion of spreads The use of the terms “variant of concern” and “may be more fatal” Never try to put COVID-19 in terms of other everyday risks and behave as if blockade is the only way to save lives. These are all horror tools to rule the masses, “he writes.

The use of fear, intentionally or unintentionally, will result in long-term, unpredictable, uncontrollable, and serious secondary damage, he said in a treatise.

Overall, the blockade caused significant incidental damage to mental health, social health, children’s education and socialization, individuals with other serious illnesses, national economy, civil rights, and confidence in democracy, Redman said. Wrote.

Mr Redman said the prime minister, prime minister and medical officers were responsible for this “deadly Canadian response.”

“If the area of ​​responsibility is not met by a lack of due diligence or deliberately ignoring requirements, accountability must be enforced.”