Audrey Vanderhoek is a registered nurse in British Columbia, and a graduate of UBC. She has had Covid, is “unvaccinated,” and has been fired. Initially, protocols at her hospital were simple: a “mask,” and a temperature check. Then doctors stopped coming in. Then visitors were banned. When they had an outbreak, they could not contain it, and the Covid unit was shut down—then renovated. As a result, numerous workers came in to do renovations, who were not subjected to the same restrictions. She described her experience with Covid, which got progressively worse, and she suffers from long Covid, she said. Sixteen months later, she was on a gradual return to work, and was told that “vaccine” mandates would soon come into effect. She was told that a medical exemption, like a religious one, was next to impossible. Even early retirement was threatened. She was eventually sent home on a leave of absence, and then was terminated for cause, and was not entitled to severance or Employment Insurance payments. Over 20 years of experience was simply dismissed.
“Shameful” and “inhumane” is how she described the experience. She struggled to regain EI, and ultimately succeeded, and it was acknowledged that she had been wrongfully fired. She also learned that Covid infection was to be treated as two doses of the “vaccine”, following her appeals to the Government of BC, the Ministry of Health, and even the Prime Minister’s Office (I missed some of the details here, which were rushed). Her union promised action, but would not say what action that would be. She went from being a “hero” to being ostracized.
The moderator commented: “if it was really about immunity, they would be asking for Immunity Passports and not Vaccine Passports”.
In response to questions from the moderator and the panel, she reflected how much of our behaviour was shaped by the media and the CDC. During her ordeal, she felt pretty much alone in her struggle. One occupational therapist was especially helpful, however.
Dr. Steven Pelech: “I am a professor in the Department of Medicine at the University of British Columbia, and I have been undertaking COVID-19 related research in my lab for the last two and a half years. My company Kinexus Bioinformatics Corporation have been conducting an ongoing clinical study in which we have developed a highly sensitive test to monitor antibodies present in the blood of recovered COVID-19 patients that recognize 41 parts in 10 of the proteins that are found in the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which includes the spike protein that is targeted by COVID-19 vaccines. After testing over 3600 people from B.C. and other provinces in Canada, we have found that over 90% of the participants in our study have natural immunity with antibodies that bind to multiple SARS-CoV-2 proteins. The patterns of these immunoreactivities with antibodies are very different from person to person, but they are very stable for each individual, and detectable more than two years after initial infection with the virus. By contrast, we have found that the spike antibody signals in blood from COVID-19 vaccinated individuals are usually weaker and less broad against the different parts of the spike protein. These vaccinated individuals almost always have also had antibodies against other SARS-CoV-2 proteins too, so they were also infected with this virus either before or after they were inoculated.”
Allan Rouben, a lawyer, discussed the economic measures in the Emergencies Act. He noted the basic questions that are required to be asked, one of which is whether they cast too wide a net. A protesting person or persons must be shown to represent a serious threat to public order. He then read a series of other provisions concerning cessation of use or lending of property to benefit those accused of destabilizing the security of the state. The freezing of bank accounts is seen as an extraordinary remedy, require extensive justification before a court. He quoted David Sacks who published an article in The National Post on February 22, 2022, showing how the use of the Emergencies Act created a class of economic “untouchables”. The economic measures used, Rouben argues, were extreme and unjustifiable—and that is likely why they were revoked, because they could not survive legal challenge. The individuals affected may well have claims for damages, he argued.
In response to questions from the moderator and the panel, Rouben argued that the media ought to have been doing a much better job in critically examining the blunt use of the Act. Fortunately, there are many cases going before the courts. In his view, the problem is not with the current legislation, but that government went well beyond what legislation permitted—thus it’s not clear that legislation would fix that problem. And if banks went along with the government, it is because they were mandated to do so, but they should have been yelling and screaming about this going against all norms, and there should have been checks and balances.
Andrew MacGillivray, of the Canadian Armed Forces, outlined how the federal government is prepared to flush $800 million+ invested in training, and 2,000 years of combined service, for the 3.6% of the CAF which the government is prepared to terminate. There are, at a minimum, 3,200 armed forces personnel who have already said they will not get the “vaccine”, or will not disclose, and are slated to receive “5 Foxtrot” status (discharge). This is at a time when the Canadian Defence Minister has identified a serious and present danger to the country that requires maximum preparedness. (There was more to this presentation, and I have unfortunately had to abridge the material.)