Dear Premier Smith and Minister LaGrange
My name is Dean Beaudry. I retired from the position of Manager of Operations Safety at Syncrude Canada Ltd., in Fort McMurray in 2017. While at Syncrude, I had leadership positions in operations, maintenance, technical, & projects. In all roles the work unavoidably centred on risk & incident management, incident investigation and both tactical and strategic decision making. In these work disciplines I was a practitioner, facilitator, coach, and leader; my 20 years of formal leadership ended in executive level management. I was the keeper of the corporate risk inventory and was the liaison for the underwriting of $1.6B in single incident liability insurance. I have a Bachelor and Master of Science and have been a professional engineer since 1987. For years, I was the management sponsor of Syncrude’s more than 50 subject matter experts (SMEs); manager salary level engineers of every discipline, geologists, & geoscientists. As a direct leader of some and sponsor of all of these SMEs, I was charged with harnessing the capacity of this technical force into practical value. As a result, I think I am good at being an interpreter of technical to layman’s language.
I share this experience only for a “foot in the door”, not that you ought to agree with the conclusions I have made because of my experience, but rather, that you will please “give me audience”. I leave you to draw your own conclusions from the evidence and analysis I will convey.
Institutional trust is at an all time low because errors of great consequence have been made and continue to reek harm. Intervention is necessary to stop the harm and recover trust. You have the authority and perhaps the will to do this, my job as a caring citizen is to support you, if you want that support.
I have included links throughout this message, they may not work. If they do not work please copy them into your browser. If you cannot access something I have referenced, please contact me, I am at your service.
In the interest of brevity I have only addressed 3 of many important issues. I have also provided one recommendation.
Conclusion #1 – Covid-19 Risks were greatly overstated – for most a non or low risk
With exception of the vaccine risk, this chart both could and ought to have been produced within the first two to six months after covid-19 mortality began. The key takeaway is that covid-19 had a near identical threat profile and order of magnitude risk as the flu / pneumonia. The data told us this and experts told us this; we ignored the subject matter experts, we ignored our own processes.
AHS’s data shows that the 2022-23 flu season caused more deaths in children than 3 years of covid-19. The one page Great Barrington Declaration informed us of this covid risk profile and that flu risk was greater for children than covid risk. It’s a 3 minute read, link here; https://gbdeclaration.org/
The methodology, data, and analysis for this conclusion are included in the attached file Draw Your Own Conclusion R10.1.pdf beginning at the top of page 10.
Conclusion #2 Vaccines are not safe, not effective, and have a net negative risk-benefit profile
The short version is here; this technical paper presents a re-evaluation of the Pfizer / BioNTech clinical trial results after late reported deaths are considered. Stated frankly, the US FDA approvals were, best case, based on error and worst case, based on fraud.
________________________________________________________________________________________________Conclusion point #4 – NOT EFFECTIVE, conclusion point #8 – NOT SAFE
The complete technical paper is attached at the end of this email (Forensic Analysis…PDF)
Here is a table from Pfizer / BioNTech post-authorization follow-up report. The report that comes 3 months after the vaccine is released to the public. The complete trial report is attached in this email (Pfizer_Cumulative…PDF). This document was available to the US FDA in April of 2021.
Notes:
1. In the first 3 months post authorization, the vaccine caused the death of 1,223 and injured 42,086, most of these occurred within 4 days of vaccination
2. 45% of the injured were between 18-50 – the people at negligible risk of covid-19 death (see Point #1 this email), 71% of the relevant cases are female
3. Within the same document this table came from there is a List of Adverse Events of Special Interest; 9 pages long – 1236 different diseases caused by the vaccine (full document attached at the end of this email)
4. There are various expert opinions about the completeness of adverse event reporting; estimates range from 1 to 10% of all events are recorded
The best shortcut to a reasonably comprehensive understanding of the clinical trial and the post-authorization follow-up is here; https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/witness/dr-christopher-flowers/ , alternately you could read the technical paper (attached to this email as previously mentioned). Personally, I would rather listen to fingernails scraping on a chalkboard than read a technical paper so I encourage you to forgo the read and listen to the testimony; faster, better understanding.
Although Dr. Christopher Flowers testimony and the cited technical paper are on their own convincing, it is not necessary to rely only on that to determine vaccines are neither safe nor effective. This can be determined by examining Health Canada and Alberta Health Services data.
A snapshot taken of Alberta Health Services covid-19 death data for the 4 months preceding June 7, 2022;
- 868 reported covid-19 deaths – 79% of deaths were fully vaccinated
- At this time 77% of Albertans were vaccinated
How can one conclude that the vaccine is effective based on this data.
The absolute risk of the vaccine is included in the colourful chart at the start of point 1. This risk is higher than the absolute risk of covid-19 for almost every age group and health status. Therefore, based on risk-benefit, it is not safe.
Another step is to compare absolute risks of death only from vaccination. In the analysis of Canada Health vaccine death data the vaccine can be declared safe in absolute terms, however, comparing it to covid-19 risk in relative terms, for the younger age-groups 10-19, it is calculated that the vaccine is 16x more risk than covid-19; it is not safe. More details on this are included in the Draw Your Own Conclusions document.
Vaccinating children has a net outcome of harm. How can anyone in good conscience continue to promote this?
Conclusion #3 Vaccines in Canada bypassed the legislative requirements – this is the reason why risk-benefit analysis never occurred.
This is well covered by the National Citizens Inquiry in their Sept 14, 2023 interim report and letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, links here;
We have and continue to mislead the public on this. The Alberta Health covid-19 website states the following:
All vaccines approved in Canada undergo a rigorous review and approval process to ensure they are safe and effective.
The link imbedded in this Alberta Health statement leads to Canada Health and the following Canada Heath statement;
The ISAD IO created a more agile pathway to facilitate the availability of COVID-19-related drugs and vaccines for Canadians in 4 ways:
1. authorizing a brand new drug based on available evidence with more agile administrative and application requirements
2. authorizing a new drug based on the approval of a trusted foreign regulatory authority
3. allowing expanded use of an already approved drug to include COVID-19-related indications based on known evidence with or without an application from the market authorization holder
4. permitting the Public Health Agency of Canada to import promising COVID-19 drugs for placement (pre-positioning) in Canadian facilities before they are authorized in Canada
Albert Health’s definition of rigorous review and approval process is;
1. “based on available evidence” – evidence not subject to the high standards of Canadian legislation,
2. “trusted foreign regulatory agency” – an agency that Canada has neither ability to scrutinize nor authority to hold to account, an agency whose country had 4% of the world’s population and 17% of the world’s covid-19 deaths – a worst performer,
3. “with or without an application from the market authorization holder” – Canada Health, at its discretion, will authorize drugs without manufacturer application,
4. “placement in Canadian facilities before they are authorized” – Canada will purchase drugs (possibly spend $100’s of millions) and distribute them without first (in fact never) verifying their safety and efficacy, that sunk cost will not influence the authorization process
Either a new definition of rigorous has been created or the Alberta Health statement is false.
This information (Conclusion #3) has been acknowledged as received by the Federal Health Minister since September 23, 2023, more than six months ago.
Recommendation #1 Establish accountability for the decision to declare that covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective
Determine the position and individual who has ultimate authority for the decision to authorize and promote vaccines in Alberta. Request that officer / agent of the health authority to both verify that the risk-benefit profile of covid-19 vaccines is positive and to approve the documentation via signature and date.
Considering that covid-19 vaccines have now been actively promoted for 3 years, if there is delay in achieving simple, quality documentation, and approval signature, that alone is justification to immediately rescind the vaccine authorization.
The balance of the email is for your reference and verification of the truth and authority of the three conclusions made.
I am available to hear contradicting evidence or to speak directly to anyone who wants. Please allow me to be of service to you.
Dean Beaudry
780-881-9535
GIVEN SOME OF THE MATERIAL MAY NOT TRANSFER WELL I WILL DO ANOTHER ONE ON THIS BLOG BY COPY LINK IMMEDIATELY!!
___________________
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: brianpeckford
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://peckford42.wordpress.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.