Connect with us

General

Is The ‘Leaked Email’ Outlining Trudeau’s Crazy COVID Plan For 2021 Real?

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    An alleged leaked email from a member of an apparent 'LPC Strategic Committee' in Canada contains some warnings from how Canada's COVID plan will roll out. There is no evidence this email is authentic.

  • Reflect On:

    As we explore in this piece, there are reasons to consider what evidence we choose to use to discuss the questionable nature by which government is handling COVID-19. Is this really good evidence?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Around mid October 2020, an alleged email from a member of a committee group in Canada was apparently leaked to the public. Firstly, there is no evidence this email is real, but it has been shared and talked about by a lot of people as if it were real. Some online fact checkers have debunked the piece as fake, however, the discussion I wish to have here is a bit different, and I will get to it by the end of this piece.

advertisement - learn more

In the alleged email we hear a warning from an supposed member of an ‘LPC Strategic Committee,’ a group that we can’t find proof actually exists just yet, which doesn’t mean it couldn’t exist, just that there is no evidence of it. Nonetheless, the email outlined an intense plan for Canada’s COVID-19 response that the Trudeau government was allegedly working on.

--> Become A CE Member: The only thing that keeps our journalism going is YOU. CE members get access to exclusive benefits and support our shared mission.. Click here to learn more!

Let’s dive into the claims made in the piece back in October and see if any are even accurate. Remember, there is no evidence up to this point that this piece is real, and I will get to the implications of that a bit later.

Claim: Phase in secondary lock down restrictions on a rolling basis, starting with major metropolitan areas first and expanding outward. Expected by November 2020.

This wasn’t necessarily a tough one to predict. Most big cities experienced harsher restrictions in Canada, eventually spreading outwards to more rural areas.

This happened.

advertisement - learn more

Claim: Rush the acquisition of (or construction of) isolation facilities across every province and territory. Expected by December 2020.

There has been some discussion of construction for isolation centers in Ontario. Toronto and Peel region were funded to establish a few small isolation centers for voluntary use. Governments around Canada have also been using hotels at the expense of the citizen for temporary isolation after travel. COVID positive individuals isolate at home currently.

Partly happened, nothing large scale however.

Claim: Daily new cases of COVID-19 will surge beyond capacity of testing, including increases in COVID related deaths following the same growth curves. Expected by end of November 2020.

This did not happen. Cases did slowly rise up to Jan 2021, a lockdown ensued in various provinces that appeared to drop cases. Then cases rose again leading up to April, but not outside the testing capacity.

Didn’t happen.

Claim: Complete and total secondary lock down (much stricter than the first and second rolling phase restrictions). Expected by end of December 2020 – early January 2021

We did have a lockdown in some areas of Canada in January, but it was less strict than previous lockdowns. A later lockdown occurred in late March but did not have as strict measures as the first lockdown. What’s sort of accurate is the timing of lockdown.

Sort of happened but less intense.

Claim: Reform and expansion of the unemployment program to be transitioned into the universal basic income program. Expected by Q1 2021.

This did not happen it seems. Most financial support for businesses and people under COVID have tapered off as time went on. Some businesses can apply for help but many are still struggling. Some governments have announced more funding for businesses, but no change in the EI program from what I found.

Didn’t happen.

Claim: Projected COVID-19 mutation and/or co-infection with secondary virus (referred to as COVID-21) leading to a third wave with much higher mortality rate and higher rate of infection. Expected by February 2021.

One could argue that this claim is the most accurate. While global discussion of variants began In January, by mid Feb 2021 we saw a huge conversation begin around variants in Canada, and it’s when tracking of these variants began. Thus far, the general message is that these variants are more infectious and more deadly. Now the question of “much higher mortality rate”: what does this mean to different people? Thus far, the reports are claiming that some variants have a 60% greater death rate, but given the death rate is so small with COVID to begin with, this still isn’t a big number. So this one depends on how you want to see it.

Still we have no mention of ‘COVID-21’, but perhaps the variants are similar to ‘COVID-21.’ I also want to mention in this moment, variants on viruses are common. They happen all the time, and I mention this because if this were a hoax email, the writer could have easily predicted the onset of variants.

This happened.

Claim: Daily new cases of COVID-21 hospitalizations and COVID-19 and COVID-21 related deaths will exceed medical care facilities capacity. Expected Q1 – Q2 2021.

From what I understand in Canada as a whole, this has not been happening. But some hospitals in Ontario have transferred patients to prepare for what they feel is a big coming wave of patients. That said, hospitals are not yet at capacity and people are not being turned away with serious COVID cases.

Ontario has discussed its ICU Protocol for deciding what to do if care had to be turned away. We are technically still in Q2 so this one is a bit on the table still.

We can note that many elective surgeries have been cancelled, and that arguably people have not been able to go to hospital to get certain treatments, but since this claim is not specific enough with regards to what would be turned away, we can only assume it’s referring to COVID, and thus far capacity has not been met.

Again, we are still not hearing of COVID-21 and would have to assume it’s variants.

Partially happened.

Claim: Enhanced lockdown restrictions (referred to as Third Lock Down) will be implemented. Full travel restrictions will be imposed (including inter-province and inter-city). Expected Q2 2021.

We have seen an increased lockdown known as third lockdown in some provinces. The lockdowns are still not quite as intense as the first, but Ontario did try a ‘stop and ask”‘ program where police were given the power to stop people in their cars to find out if their travel was essential. This did not go over well and police rejected the order.

Suggestions have been made by government to stop non-essential interprovincial travel. However, inter city travel is not halted.

Since we are still in Q2, we can’t say this may not happen, but so far this one looks to be partly true.

Claim: Transitioning of individuals into the universal basic income program. Expected mid Q2 2021.

Thus far the IMF still hasn’t mentioned anything of this nature. We shall see in 2 months. The IMF is claiming Western economies are recovering faster than expected, why push out that message if the sentiment is to move towards UBI? But then again, the World Economic Outlook also stated:

“Income inequality is likely to increase significantly because of the pandemic,” […] Close to 95 million more people are estimated to have fallen below the threshold of extreme poverty in 2020 compared with pre-pandemic projections.”

The IMF does seem to project that debt relief will be needed until 2022. Of course this could increase.

All in all, time will tell, but so far this looks unlikely.

Claim: Projected supply chain breakdowns, inventory shortages, large economic instability. Expected late Q2 2021.

Again, we’ll have to wait and see, but looking unlikely based on current time and strength of inventory.

Claim: Deployment of military personnel into major metropolitan areas as well as all major roadways to establish travel checkpoints. Restrict travel and movement. Provide logistical support to the area. Expected by Q3 2021.

I couldn’t find any murmurs of this sort of thing just yet, but Q3 represents summer in Canada. Claims have been made that by Summer things will be better thanks to lockdowns and vaccines, but the again who knows? Governments said the first closure was supposed to solve the problem to begin with. It would have been hard for them to know what was going on at that time which is fair, but it certainly does feel like most of what we’ve gotten from government is a lack of transparency and optics.

Things would have to escalate fast for this to be here in just a few months.

Other Claims

In the alleged email, there were also some interesting claims brought up about how his story would unfold over time. Let’s examine them.

“Along with that provided road map the Strategic Planning committee was asked to design an effective way of transitioning Canadians to meet an unprecedented economic endeavor. One that would change the face of Canada and forever alter the lives of Canadians. What we were told was that in order to offset what was essentially an economic collapse on a international scale, that the federal government was going to offer Canadians a total debt relief. This is how it works: the federal government will offer to eliminate all personal debts (mortgages, loans, credit cards, etc) which all funding will be provided to Canada by the IMF under what will become known as the World Debt Reset program.”

This similar sounding idea has been discussed in the World Economic Forum’s plan called ‘The Great Reset’ (TGR). TGR has been around for longer than this email, therefore it’s reasonable to theorize that if this email were fake the writer could have easily looked to TGR to get their ideas. However, if it were real, it would align somewhat closely to a plan many people are discussing as the only viable recovery to our global economic challenges. That said, and as mentioned above, the IMF is sending a message that Western economies are actually doing better than expected right now. They have not planned any major debt reset programs that could fire off in the next few months. The ‘World Debt Reset Program’ doesn’t appear to exist, however it does sound similar to what is presented in The Great Reset.

Is individual inequality enough to push people into accepting TGR if the overall economy seems to be OK? That’s a tough one, you decide.

The IMF, back in April 2020, did begin a grant-based debt relief program for 86 member countries who were deeply burdened by debt. This can be extended up to 2022. Note, this relief happened prior to this email being written, and the debt relief covers the countries for only a short period of relief. Some countries are receiving greater amounts of help than others.

Back to the claims in the email:

“In exchange for acceptance of this total debt forgiveness the individual would forfeit ownership of any and all property and assets forever. The individual would also have to agree to partake in the COVID-19 and COVID-21 vaccination schedule, which would provide the individual with unrestricted travel and unrestricted living even under a full lock down (through the use of photo identification referred to as Canada’s HealthPass) .”

COVID-21 still doesn’t exist in the public eye, but perhaps it’s the variants? Will we see vaccines for each variant? Thus far not much is known about how successful the current vaccines are with variants. Some early results show they work, others suggest maybe not. We shall see. This is important because if this claim were accurate, this point is something to consider. Vaccine passes have certainly been in discussion quite a bit around the world, but not much has been presented in Canada yet. Thus far, Prime Minister Trudeau has stated the following about vaccine proof with the US:

“We will continue to work with our partners in the United States and internationally to ensure that this is done properly,[…] We have already seen the importance of proof of vaccination for international travel … in a pre-pandemic period in recent years. It will surely be important, but the details of what we are going to do about it, we are still fine-tuning.”

Seems like it’s being considered according to what has been said to the public.

In other areas of the world, people have to show proof of negative COVID test or vaccination in order to do certain things like enter non essential shops or travel. So this isn’t too far fetched of an idea.

Back to the claims in the email:

Committee members asked who would become the owner of the forfeited property and assets in that scenario and what would happen to lenders or financial institutions, we were simply told “the World Debt Reset program will handle all of the details”. Several committee members also questioned what would happen to individuals if they refused to participate in the World Debt Reset program, or the HealthPass, or the vaccination schedule, and the answer we got was very troubling. Essentially we were told it was our duty to make sure we came up with a plan to ensure that would never happen. We were told it was in the individuals best interest to participate. When several committee members pushed relentlessly to get an answer we were told that those who refused would first live under the lock down restrictions indefinitely. And that over a short period of time as more Canadians transitioned into the debt forgiveness program, the ones who refused to participate would be deemed a public safety risk and would be relocated into isolation facilities. Once in those facilities they would be given two options, participate in the debt forgiveness program and be released, or stay indefinitely in the isolation facility under the classification of a serious public health risk and have all their assets seized.

This one is obviously troubling if it is real. But we’d have to ask some key questions, have facilities been built yet? If not, what might be used as facilities to pull this off? Hotels? How many facilities would be needed? Existing facility plans only account for perhaps hundreds of people, there would need to be many more for this to be pulled off unless existing structures like hotels are used.

The next question is, would police enforce this if force was needed? Since police in Ontario backed away from Doug Ford’s ‘stop and ask’ program, might they walk away from this too? If the military got involved, would they walk away from this also?

One thing I’ve also seen is that many people assume that police and military will ALWAYS follow orders. But they are people too, with families, and in many cases they are asking questions. If things got this extreme, what choices would they make? I don’t know the answer, but perhaps you can pose the question to a police friend you have and see what they say. Of course, just because some won’t follow orders, there may be some that do. If this scenario were real, would ‘some’ following orders be enough? It’s hard to say. But let me reiterate, other than The Great Reset, there’s no evidence that these claims are accurate.

Further, it’s important to note that The Great Reset does discuss the idea of owning nothing if the plan were to be pushed through. What exactly does it mean to own nothing? It’s tough to say as TGR has not yet made all of that clear. My understanding up to this point, which I will admit requires a bit more research still, is that we don’t know who would ‘own’ private property within The Great Reset if citizens like you and me don’t. This is a HUGE question. While I can envision a world where we recognize nobody truly owns anything, I am not comfortable with billionaires and global financial elite coming up with a plan we all must follow.

In the context of this alleged email, could COVID be used as a means to forcibly take your property from you? Perhaps. I don’t think this would be something happening in the next year or two, therefore I feel this email seems to be pushing the timeline ahead a bit quick, but then again, you never know.

Back to the claims in the email:

“So as you can imagine after hearing all of this it turned into quite the heated discussion and escalated beyond anything I’ve ever witnessed before. In the end it was implied by the PMO that the whole agenda will move forward no matter who agrees with it or not. That it won’t just be Canada but in fact all nations will have similar roadmaps and agendas. That we need to take advantage of the situations before us to promote change on a grander scale for the betterment of everyone. The members who were opposed and ones who brought up key issues that would arise from such a thing were completely ignored. Our opinions and concerns were ignored. We were simply told to just do it.

All I know is that I don’t like it and I think its going to place Canadians into a dark future.”

Indeed the Great Reset does say all nations will be involved, again, making me feel as though the foundation for this email really aligns with TGR but doesn’t make it real per se, it just means someone could have looked at TGR to develop this story, which as you can tell is not all that precise.

Other Considerations

For me, as someone who has worked in journalism for a long time, I don’t find this email to be credible and I’d say it’s likely not real if you had to ask me to make a choice. It has many hallmarks of an internet hoax but I can’t say that for sure. One of the key things to take away from this is if you’re honest about the information that has been out there, anyone could have written this. Nothing new or unknown has happened in the predictions.

That said, in a true journalistic sense, I hold a level of uncertainty about my position that it’s fake. This amount of uncertainty allows me to be open to the story and narrative as it unfolds. It also lets me imagine how I might choose to be vigilant in my choices should something like this be true – after all, if it is true, we’d have to take action as citizens.

For me, the predictions made in here are partly accurate but also not that tough to predict. The timing was impressive on a couple occasions, but on others it reveals why I think this isn’t real. For the world to go from “hey there is a virus let’s lockdown” to a total takeover of everyone’s property and you can’t participate in society unless you’re vaxxed all within a span of about a year is just not realistic. I’m not saying impossible, I’m saying that if the government’s plan was to pull off this type of takeover, they’d do it much more slowly like they have done everything else. After all, the frog boils when the heat very slowly and gradually heats up right?

If such a plan was laid out, is it really to be expected that only a single person would speak out about this? I’m not looking to bring about doubt here but more so asking a serious question.

We have to think critically about this as the stakes are high – very high. Most of what we all expected was going to happen throughout COVID, which this letter does outline to some extent, is happening, and it’s something that does not benefit the masses, only an elite few. For this reason, we need to be looking at what’s happening during this pandemic seriously.

If this letter is not real the stakes remain high because people claim things like this to be true in their presentation of ‘proof’ of conspiracy. Because it’s so easy to poke holes in the email, it becomes an easy way for mainstream conversation to point to ‘crazy conspiracy theorists’ being unhinged instead of addressing the real and evidence based concerns people have about where we’re headed in what honestly looks like a technocractic authoritarian takeover.

There are many odd and fishy things to explore with COVID that have great evidence to back them up, and this is why it’s so important we don’t muddy the waters.

As I’ve discussed before in an essay I wrote about the need to have more serious conversations about conspiracy, there is a downside to sharing pieces of information like this in the wrong context. If you share this as a passive “hey, what do you think of this, we know it may be totally fake, but what are your thoughts?” That’s one thing. But to share it, like I saw so many times, even from big names like Dr Buttar, as if it’s a proven accurate piece of information, you have to expect two things. 1. You’re going to lose A LOT of people who can clearly see this is not proof of anything. And 2, it opens the door for ‘authoritative voices’ to crush a culture of inquiry outside of mainstream conversation.

In the simplest way to look at it, if you needed a strong piece of evidence to open up other people’s minds about the fishy nature of the government response to COVID, is this really a strong piece of evidence?

What I’m saying here is, some conspiracy is simply a hypothesis, we can’t verify if they are even a little bit true, but others have a great deal of evidence that turn them into a meaningful theory worthy of further discussion. In the case of the hypothesis type, we HAVE to admit to a level of uncertainty and see how that changes our approach to conversations. You might find that sharing stuff like this only hinders opening people up to conversation.

All in all, a few details of what was shared in this alleged leaked email seem to be accurate, some easy to predict, others that are actually somewhat impressive, but many details aren’t, and the timeline seems way too hasty.

That isn’t to say things couldn’t change, but for me, this is a mysterious and playful exploration, not something to be used as hard evidence.

The Bigger Question

In the end though, what world do you truly want to create? What do you want our collective society to look like? We can continue to wait and see how this plan plays out, but perhaps it’s time for us to truly start asking ourselves what we want for our world. We might say we want our rights back, but is that all you truly want? Perhaps this can be an opportunity for humans to look within and imagine a new world that we can transition to and actively create – after all, powerful ‘elite’ people in the world are using COVID for that, maybe we should do that at a grassroots level as well.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

General

Autistic, Alzheimer’s & Multiple Sclerosis Brain Tissues Have Significant Amounts of Aluminum In Them

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A 2020 study found that the aluminum content in brain tissue of people with Alzheimer's disease, familial Alzheimer's disease, autism spectrum disorder and multiple sclerosis is significantly higher compared to tissues used in the study as controls.

  • Reflect On:

    Could aluminum be playing a role in these, as well as other diseases? How does it get into our brain?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

There is no shortage of studies demonstrating that aluminum is present in human brain tissue. This is a problem given the fact that aluminum is neurotoxic and wreaks nothing but havoc on biology. This is firmly established in scientific literature. There is no debate on whether or not aluminum exists within human brain tissue, the science is settled. The debate is now focused on how much aluminum is too much. How much aluminum does it take to impact the health of a human being in a negative way?

A study published in the journal Nature compared the aluminum content in human brain tissue of people with Alzheimer’s disease, familial Alzheimer’s disease, autism spectrum disorder and multiple sclerosis with healthy controls. According to the authors, “detailed statistical analyses showed that aluminum was significantly increased in each of these disease groups compared to control tissues.” They go on to mention that,

We have confirmed previous conclusions that the aluminum content of brain tissue in Alzheimer’s disease, autism spectrum disorder and multiple sclerosis is significantly elevated. Further research is required to understand the role played by high levels of aluminum in the aetiology of human neurodegenerative and neurodevelopmental disease.

The researchers used tissue from twenty control brains of healthy individuals to compare against the brain tissue of people who have had a diagnosis of the neurodegenerative conditions mentioned. The fact that all disease groups had significantly higher brain aluminum content than the control group is quite concerning. That being said, it’s not proof that aluminum actually plays a direct role in each of these diseases. The important takeaway from the study and what we know about aluminum toxicology is that there is absolutely no debate, at all, as to the neurotoxicity of aluminum in humans. It’s just not a good thing to have in your body.

The study emphasizes,

Animal models of aluminum intoxication reproduce the neuropathologies and neurodevelopmental effects of human neurodegenerative disease, if not the diseases per se. Cell models and in vitro studies demonstrate mechanisms of aluminum toxicity known to be involved in human neurodegenerative disease. Perhaps the information that is still missing from understanding of aluminum’s role in each of the diseases compared herein is how much aluminum is too much in human brain tissue. The comparison we have made herein between control brain tissue showing no signs of neurodegenerative disease and the disease groups…is beginning to answer this question. Only further measurements on more donor brains will enable a definitive conclusion to be reached on the role played by aluminum in human neurodegenerative disease.

The authors make it clear that aluminum and its presence in human brain tissue “cannot be without consequence” given everything that’s been discovered about aluminum toxicity. There is a great need for further study here and to determine how much aluminum the brain, and other organs for that matter, can tolerate before there are detrimental effects. These effects may be short term as well as long term, and they may play a role in neurodegenerative disease like the ones the study examine. It’s hard to think that the high aluminum content in the brain tissue of people with these diseases  is simply a coincidence, especially given the fact that the aluminum content in “normal” brains is significantly less.

Once you start to see these sort of data together, once you start to see the levels of a known neurotoxic metal accumulate to these levels, it is absolutely inevitable that they will contribute to disease. – Professor Christopher Exley, lead author of the study, taken from the interview below.

Exley is a Professor at Keele University, and arguably the world’s leading expert in aluminum toxicology. Exley and his work is supported by many scientists from around the world, yet he is facing a potential set back with regards to continuing his research on aluminum and disease. One hundred scientists came together and recently wrote a letter of support, stating,

We are writing to express our concern over the possible interruption of research on aluminum and disease conducted by Christopher Exley and his group in your (Keele) University. We feel that Christopher Exley’s work conducted for so many years in line with the previous research of late Pr Birchall at Keele University has been an important service to the scientific community, patients and society in Europe and globally. We firmly declare that Pr Exley has always defended rigorous research independent of commercial conflicts of interest, and has freely carried out his research without any control by any of his sponsors.

You can read more about what’s going on with regards to this situation, and access the correspondence that’s happened between Keele University (Exley’s employer), Exley, and the academics who support his work, here.

Below is a very informative interview with Exley if you’d like to learn more about aluminum and its accumulation within humans. On a side note, ask yourself, what products and substances may contain aluminum that could be contributing its accumulation in various human organs like the brain?

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

General

Texas Bans All Government Entities & Businesses From Requiring Proof of Vaccination

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 4 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Greg Abbott, the Governor of Texas, recently announced that it will be illegal for government entities and businesses within the state to require proof of vaccination in order to access their services.

  • Reflect On:

    Is the idea of "vaccine passports" just? Should governments have the authority to implement measures against the will of so many people? Do we give them too much power?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

“Texas is open 100%. Texans should have the freedom to go where they want without any limits, restrictions, or requirements. Today, I signed a law that prohibits any TX business or gov’t entity from requiring vaccine passports or any vaccine information,” tweeted Greg Abbott, the Governor of Texas. He made the announcement on Monday and the news went viral across social media platforms and independent media outlets. It hasn’t really received much substantial coverage from mainstream media, in fact, debating or calling into question the idea of “vaccine passports” has not really been a welcomed conversation despite the fact many health experts have been condemning the idea since they were first introduced.

Texas will be the seventh state to sign such a measure into law. Alabama, Indiana, Iowa, and North Dakota have also banned businesses and government entities from requiring proof of vaccination, while Utah and Arkansas have barred just governments from requiring proof of vaccination.

As far as the United States as a whole, the Biden administration has said on multiple occasions that a national vaccine passport won’t happen. Instead the U.S. is working on a system that will allow Americans who travel internationally to show proof that they have been vaccinated. This will be required given the fact that multiple countries around the world will saying they will require it, like several European Union nations, and Canada.

Why ban vaccine passports? Well, there are multiple reasons, and I’ve covered these reasons in depth before. In an article I published in April titled “The top four reasons why some people, doctors & scientists refuse to take the COVID vaccine,” many of the points outlined indicate why freedom of choice and informed consent are paramount when it comes to COVID vaccines.

The fact that many of these points, as well as the doctors, scientists, and peer-reviewed papers that are raising concerns about the COVID vaccine, are being completely censored, and in some cases ridiculed and called a “conspiracy theory,” is also very unsettling and suspicious. You would think in a time of a global pandemic, all concerns that are being raised would be open to discussion, transparency and a healthy debate.

Critical criminology repeatedly has drawn attention to the state-corporate nexus as a site of corruption and other forms of criminality, a scenario exacerbated by the intensification of neoliberalism in areas such as health. The state-pharmaceutical relationship, which increasingly influences health policy, is no exception. That is especially so when pharmaceutical products such as vaccines, a burgeoning sector of the industry, are mandated in direct violation of the principle of informed consent. Such policies have provoked suspicion and dissent as critics question the integrity of the state-pharma alliance and its impact on vaccine safety. However, rather than encouraging open debate, draconian modes of governance have been implemented to repress and silence any form of criticism, thereby protecting the activities of the state and pharmaceutical industry from independent scrutiny. – Paddy Rawlinson, Law Professor, Western Sydney University. (source)

Is the push for vaccinating the entire population actually justified and scientifically sound? If it’s not, then why is there such a hard push for it? Is it really about our health? Or are there other agendas and conflicts of interests at play here? Why can’t freedom of choice remain for people who want to travel, attend sporting events and more? Do mandatory vaccine measures separate and divide society even more? Should people who want to take the shot and those who do not want to take the shot all unite as one to push for the freedom of choice? If a large portion of the citizenry can be made to believe that vaccine passports are just, what else would they agree to in the future? Would they agree with the idea that unvaccinated people cannot work, that it is just to take away their ability to feed themselves and keep a roof over their head? Would they agree with the idea that the unvaccinated should simply be exterminated?

A lot of questions, and important ones.

We are in a time where humanity must question the power and authority they are given to governments who implement these measures against the will of so many people. We have to question the motives of governments and whether they have the best interests of the citizenry at heart, or whether allegiances exist elsewhere.

Perhaps it is time to look elsewhere for solutions instead of constantly relying on our political system for significant change.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

General

Facebook Fact Checker ‘Lead Stories’ Can’t Answer Why My Report on Masks Is “Missing Context”

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 6 minute read

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Do masks work in stopping the spread of viruses? Do they work to stop the spread of COVID? Are they harmful to human health during prolonged use? These are all key questions that have been asked since the start of this pandemic, however, getting clear answers has been tough. Then came a meta analysis on mask wearing that I wrote about at the end of April 2021. This large meta analysis was published in the journal Environmental Research and Public Health and is titled, “Is a Mask That Covers the Mouth and Nose Free from Undesirable Side Effects in Everyday Use and Free of Potential Hazards?”  It looked at 65 studies pertaining to prolonged mask wearing to examine whether or not there may be any health consequences. In short, the study found that masks can lead to “relevant effects and consequences in many medical fields,” and also clearly outlined why the effectiveness of masks to stop the transmission of COVID is highly questionable.

Not long after we published our balanced reporting on the study, it was subjected to a “fact check” via third party Facebook fact-checker Lead Stories. When I clicked on the notification sent through our Facebook Page (Collective Evolution), it took me straight to an article published by Lead Stories claiming masks are effective at stopping the spread of COVID. They claimed that my article was “missing context” and were essentially saying the scientists who published the large meta analysis I reported on were wrong, and that they (Lead Stories) were right.

Lead Stories’ article and headline irrefutably claiming ‘masks work.’

Meanwhile, the Lead Storied fact check article did not address any of the points I made in my article, nor did they reference it. It felt clear to me that the people at Lead Stories didn’t even read my article, although I can’t know that for sure. My article contained science suggesting masks are not effective, as did the meta analysis, but it also contained a discussion around the science showing that masks may actually be effective in stopping the spread of COVID. It was a well balanced piece, and as a result it was clearly, inarguably, not “missing context” at all. It seems any article or scientific publications that even suggests may be dangerous as well as ineffective is just not allowed to be shared without consequences. This is censorship at its finest.

Furthermore, the bulk of my article, as well as the meta analysis, focused primarily on the health consequences that can occur from extended periods of mask wearing. The Lead Stories article that Facebook was leading our readers to instead of mine didn’t even touch upon that topic at all. This made me wonder, how on earth could a fairly recent, large meta-analysis published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal be considered to be “missing context”? And who exactly at Lead Stories is responsible? How could such a punishment and label be handed down on an article that wasn’t even read? Keep in mind, when a Facebook page receives some sort of ‘fact check’ multiple things happen: the brand’s content reach can be cut, and thus their revenue is cut. The brand has the notion of ‘false information’ associated with its name, defaming and hurting the credibility of the brand. And of course, Facebook users don’t see the content the brand posted as easily, and instead are pressured towards reading the ‘fact check’.

I decided to contact Lead Stories to find out what happened. The contact information on their website provides information for a man named Alan, and another named Maarten. I sent an email to them explaining my concerns, suggesting it felt quite obvious that they did not even read my article before labelling it “missing context”. Perhaps the title and what it implied set them off? But there was nothing misleading about it, I was simply reporting on the study. “Large Meta Analysis: Mask Wearing May Lead To Health “Consequences In Many Medical Fields.”

In an email to Alan I wrote on April 29th, 2021,

Although the article is more so about the physiological and psychological changes that can occur as a result of mask wearing according to the meta-analysis cited, we do not believe our article was read by you. The article clearly outlines many studies that show masks can protect against the spread of coronavirus…So we are quite confused.

Furthermore, this article wasn’t posted on Facebook yet our reach/distribution etc. seem to have been severely punished, and we got the notification via our Facebook Page. I’m not sure if you have put any restrictions on our page as a result?

Please let me know if this is sufficient enough to remote the rating.

Kind regards,

-Arjun

He replied,

This was flagged with a Missing Context label. There is NO punishment imposed by Facebook for that rating.

We are not directly involved in that aspect, but we are assured by Facebook it is only the label.

I have my staff reviewing the merits of the appeal and we will reply soon.

I’m not sure I agree that “NO punishment is imposed by Facebook.” Our business metrics stem greatly off of data, we watch data everyday. It’s always strikingly clear when a Facebook ‘fact check’ has dramatically reduced our traffic. Perhaps Facebook is not being forthcoming about its censorship of pages?

It took over a month and multiple requests to Lead Stories to finally hear back from Alan. And when we did he said:

“Your article is missing context, which is what we rated it. Let us know when you have added the context.”

Once again, Alan has made it clear he has not read the article, nor can explain what the problem with our piece is. As journalists who work incredibly hard, Facebook fact checking has become a joke where ‘fact checkers’ do not respect the hard work of journalists and have the power to hold their stories hostage with little respect given to properly stand by their strong handed claims.

The “missing context” label has yet to be removed, and thus we are unable to post this article on our Facebook Page, because if we do that message will come up for our readers – further harming out brand and potentially adding more ‘instances’ where we ‘repeatedly publish false information’ which is something Facebook has said can lead to permanent page deletion.

Alan has failed to explain how this article is missing context.

I stand by my feeling that there is nothing that Alan and his team can say about this article to claim it is missing context. I still assume they didn’t even read my article before putting a rating on it, and I am still awaiting an appropriate reply Why won’t they simply remove the rating, email me back, and apologize? You can find his contact information at the bottom of this page if you’d like to ask him the same question.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!