Connect with us

COVID-19

Free speech victory: Charges against nurse who opposed vaccine mandates defeated

Published

9 minute read

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedom

The Justice Centre is pleased to announce that the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan (CRNS) has ruled in favour of nurse Leah McInnes following an October and November 2023 disciplinary hearing. The Investigation Committee of the CRNS had charged Ms. McInnes with spreading “misinformation” because she had voiced her concerns about vaccine mandates. The outcome vindicates her right to professionally advocate for medical ethics and evidence-based health policy.“This is a significant victory for free expression and democratic participation. Nurses, doctors, psychologists, teachers, lawyers, engineers and all Canadians who work in a regulated profession have the freedom to advocate for their beliefs and should not face threats from their own professional association or professional regulator,” stated John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre. Ms. McInnes had been charged by the CRNS’s Investigation Committee, which investigates and prosecutes professional misconduct complaints, for her social media advocacy and for protesting vaccine mandates. The Investigation Committee’s broad allegation against Ms. McInnes was that her advocacy, including her use of the common term “vaccine mandate,” amounted to “misinformation.” Ms. McInnes is a mother of two and has been a Registered Nurse in Saskatchewan since 2013.  Ms. McInnes’s advocacy was measured and balanced. She had supported vaccines as an important tool in Covid-management efforts while also pointing to emerging scientific evidence regarding viral loads and transmission, which showed that Covid vaccines did not eliminate transmission. Ms. McInnes opposed vaccine mandates as a violation of basic ethical principles of autonomy and informed and voluntary consent of each and every patient. When Covid vaccines were introduced and voluntarily received in the spring and summer of 2021, the question of vaccine mandates was publicly debated across Canada. On June 30, 2021, the Saskatchewan Government indicated that it would not enforce a vaccine mandate because doing so would pose a “potential violation of health information privacy,” and, later, that it would “infringe on people’s personal rights.” The Saskatchewan Government also stated that a vaccine mandate for provincial employees was not being considered and, on September 10, 2021, rejected a proof-of-vaccination system, stating that mandates create “two classes of citizens based on… vaccination status,” and would be a “divisive path for a government to take.” Similar sentiments were echoed by Alberta’s Jason Kenney and Ontario’s Doug Ford, who claimed it would lead to a “split society.”Around the same time, the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses was calling for the “mandatory immunization” of all healthcare workers–a demand repeated by many, including Saskatchewan NDP leader Ryan Meili and a group of Saskatchewan Health Authority’s Medical Health OfficersGuided by her conscience and professional ethics, notably, her respect for bodily autonomy and informed consent, Ms. McInnes vocally opposed vaccine mandates. She protested vaccine mandates by holding a sign that read, “RN against Mandates and Vax Passports.” According to the Investigation Committee of the College, this sign amounted to “misinformation” with an intention to deceive.   Shortly after Ms. McInnes’s advocacy began, the Saskatchewan Government changed course and imposed a vaccine mandate.

A fellow Registered Nurse filed a complaint, calling Ms. McInnes, “Leah aka anti-vaxxer.”The complaint resulted in charges, including the charge that Ms. McInnes knowingly spread misinformation on the basis that, purportedly, no “vaccination mandates” had ever been implemented. It appeared that, according to the Investigation Committee, only a policy of “restrain and vaccinate” qualified as a “vaccine mandate.”After an initial investigation, the Investigation Committee proposed an agreement that would have Ms. McInnes admit to professional misconduct, but she rejected this offer, choosing instead to stand up for her professional and Charter rights. The Investigation Committee charged her on March 28, 2023, and filed a Notice of Hearing, the details of which were later expanded after counsel for Ms. McInnes demanded clarity from the College as to what exactly the College alleged to be “misinformation”, “disinformation” or “misleading” information.Ms. McInnes’s expert witness, former Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario Dr. Richard Schabas, confirmed that the term “vaccine mandate” had, in the medical profession, no special meaning beyond its meaning in everyday language. In all contexts, “vaccine mandate” refers to a requirement to either get injected or lose certain rights or freedoms. “Ms. McInnes used the term ‘vaccine mandate’ just as nearly everyone else did in public discourse, including the Toronto Star, the CBCCTV, the Saskatoon Star PhoenixCKOM, the Saskatchewan Union of Nursesacademia, Occupational Health and Safety, Saskatchewan Health Authority, the Saskatchewan NDP, and governments,” stated Andre Memauri, co-counsel for Ms. McInnes. “But the Investigation Committee nevertheless forced Ms. McInnes through this painful process, causing her needless grief,” continued Memauri.The Investigation Committee also alleged that Ms. McInnes knowingly spread misinformation about Covid vaccines. Ms. McInnes had posted that vaccines did not provide sterilizing immunity, i.e., that vaccinated people could contract and transmit the virus. During the hearings that took place in 2023, experts, including the Investigation Committee’s own expert, testified that vaccines do not provide sterilizing immunity, vindicating Ms. McInnes. Co-counsel to Ms. McInnes, Glenn Blackett, says, “It’s chilling to recall that this vitally important fact, that the Covid vaccine did not provide sterilizing immunity, was broadly censored while Canadians were supposedly debating the wisdom of vaccine mandates. Poor information makes for poor decisions.”Thankfully for Ms. McInnes and all Canadians who depend on an informed and ethical nursing profession, the Discipline Committee of the College accepted the evidence presented to them and found that Ms. McInnes had, in no way, misinformed the public.Mr. Blackett continued, “This is a hugely important decision, not just for Ms. McInnes, who embodies the ‘moral courage’ Canadians should expect of all health professionals. It is perhaps most important for upholding a nurse’s right to voice ethical and scientific dissent and to participate in democratic discourse. The importance of professional freedom of speech and conscience can hardly be overstated. Science, ethics and democracy simply do not operate without freedom to think and speak. If you can’t trust a professional, be it a nurse, doctor or lawyer, to tell you what they think is true, you can’t trust them at all.”As for Ms. McInnes, she sees this as a victory for free speech in the medical community which will only lead to better outcomes. “I very much value the right of my colleagues to express opinions different than mine and support them in their endeavours to seek change in healthcare and government policy they perceive to be in the public interest. I’m grateful that the CRNS Discipline Committee recognized my right to do the same, as it’s only in the collection of our opinions that the public truly benefits,” she stated. After hearings and submissions in October and November 2023, the College’s Discipline Committee published their decision on January 12, 2024, dismissing all charges against Ms. McInnes. In their decision, the Discipline Committee stated that the case against Ms. McInnes should not have even proceeded to a hearing.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Peer-reviewed study finds over 1,000% rise in cardiac deaths after COVID-19 shots

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

A new study published in the Journal of Emergency Medicine by a team of McCullough Foundation doctors reports significant links ‘between excess fatal cardiopulmonary arrests and the COVID-19 vaccination campaign.’

A new peer-reviewed study reports that it has found a more than 1,000 percent increase in heart-related deaths among a large pool of people who have taken the COVID-19 shots.

On October 24, the Journal of Emergency Medicine published a study by a team of McCullough Foundation doctors who reviewed the annual reports of cardiopulmonary arrests, survival rates, and emergency medical services (EMS) incidents from King County, Washington, from 2016 to 2023. The county presented a “unique opportunity” for analysis because nearly the entire population (an estimated 98%) had received at least one COVID shot dose.

“As of August 2nd, 2024, there have been approximately 589,247 confirmed COVID-19 cases in King County,” the study found.

“In 2021-2022, Total EMS attendances in King County sharply increased by 35.34% from 2020 and by 11% from pre-pandemic years. Cases of ‘obvious death’ upon EMS arrival increased by 19.89% in 2020, 36.57% in 2021, and 53.80% in 2022 compared to the 2017-2019 average. We found a 25.7% increase in total cardiopulmonary arrests and a 25.4% increase in cardiopulmonary arrest mortality from 2020 to 2023 in King County, WA.”

“Excess fatal cardiopulmonary arrests were estimated to have increased by 1,236% from 2020 to 2023, rising from 11 excess deaths (95% CI: -12, 34) in 2020 to 147 excess deaths (95% CI: 123, 170) in 2023,” the study continued. “A quadratic increase in excess cardiopulmonary arrest mortality was observed with higher COVID-19 vaccination rates. The general population of King County sharply declined by 0.94% (21,300) in 2021, deviating from the expected population size. Applying our model from these data to the entire United States yielded 49,240 excess fatal cardiopulmonary arrests from 2021-2023.”

The authors concluded that there was a “significant ecological and temporal association between excess fatal cardiopulmonary arrests and the COVID-19 vaccination campaign,” but allowed that “COVID-19 infection and disruptions in emergency care during the pandemic” could be an alternative explanation.

To more fully understand the problem, they called for “continuous monitoring and analysis of cardiopulmonary arrest data to inform public health interventions and policies, especially in the context of vaccination programs,” as well as for the “U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 vaccination administration data [to] be merged with all death cases so that the vaccine type, dose(s), and date of administration can be analyzed as possible determinants.”

The study adds to a large body of evidence linking significant risks to the COVID shots, which were developed and reviewed in a fraction of the time vaccines usually take under the first Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed initiative.

The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 38,068 deaths, 218,646 hospitalizations, 22,002 heart attacks, and 28,706 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of October 25, among other ailments. U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.

All eyes are currently on former President Donald Trump, who last week won his campaign to return to the White House and whose team, which will be helmed by prominent vaccine critic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as his nominee for secretary of Health and Human Services, has given mixed signals as to the prospects of reconsidering the shots for which he has long taken credit. At the very least, Trump has consistently opposed jab mandates and is expected to fill more federal judicial vacancies with jurists similarly inclined.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Rand Paul vows to target COVID-19 cover-up, Fauci as Senate Homeland Security Committee chairman

Published on

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) speaks to reporters

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

“I think we’re on the cusp of, really, the beginning of uncovering what happened with COVID”

Rand Paul is set to become chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee beginning in January, putting him in a position to more doggedly investigate the government’s role in covering up the truth about the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I chose to chair this committee over another because I believe that, for the health of our republic, Congress must stand up once again for its constitutional role,” Paul told the New York Post. “This committee’s mission of oversight and investigations is critical to Congress reasserting itself.”

“I think we’re on the cusp of, really, the beginning of uncovering what happened with COVID,” the Kentucky senator said. “The biggest item of the COVID cover-up is that for years, we’ve known there is this dangerous research.”

“We are going to, hopefully, have a friendlier administration, and we’re hoping that there will be a friendly person at (the Department of Health and Human Services), and we’re hoping they’ll be friendly at (the National Institutes of Health),” he added.

With President-elect Donald Trump’s appointment yesterday of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Paul has likely gotten his wish.

The Bluegrass State senator has long suspected that the accepted official narrative asserting that the COVID-19 virus did not originate in a Wuhan, China lab was intended to obscure the U.S. government’s role in developing the virus and conducting dangerous “gain of function” experiments with the deadly virus.

Paul recently told Fox News that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and HHS “have refused to turn over the documents as to why Wuhan got this research money and why it wasn’t screened as dangerous research. I’m looking forward to getting those (documents), mainly because we need to try to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”

“The cover-up went beyond public statements. Federal agencies and key officials withheld and continue to conceal crucial information from both Congress and the public,” Paul said in his opening remarks at a Senate hearing in June dedicated to COVID’s origins. “This has been a deliberate, prolonged effort to deceive the committee about certain gain-of-function research experiments that the agencies have been withholding. What we have found as we’ve gone through this is at every step there’s been resistance.”

“So the hearing today is to try and find out whether or not we can get to the truth,” Paul said at the time. “Do we know for certain it came from the lab? No, but there’s a preponderance of evidence indicating that it may have come from the lab. Do we know viruses have come from animals in the past? Yes, they’ve come from animals in the past. But this time, there’s no animal reservoir. There’s no animal handlers with antibiotics. There’s a lot of reasons why there are indications that this could have come from the lab.”

And it seems that Sen. Paul has infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci, the man who quickly emerged as a central figure at the very start of the pandemic, in his sights as well.

Paul and Fauci have long had a combative relationship as exemplified in several committee hearings over the last few years.

Paul has said multiple times that Dr. Fauci should “go to prison” for lying to Congress.

A year ago, Paul told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “We now have proof in Anthony Fauci’s own words, we have his emails.”

“In public he’s saying, ‘Oh, if you say it came from the lab, you’re a conspiracy theorist, you’re crazy, it’s a fringe theory,’” Paul said. “But in private, he’s saying, ‘We’re very concerned because the virus appears to be manipulated. And we’re also very concerned because we know they’re doing gain of function research in Wuhan.’”

A post on X by an RFK Jr. parody this morning said, “Dear Dr. Fauci, I’m still looking for you.”

Sen. Paul reposted it, saying, “I bet we find him.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X