Doctors pen open letter to Alta. premier dismissing post-pandemic task force report

A person draws out Moderna vaccine at St. Lawrence College in Kingston, Ont., on Sunday Jan. 2, 2022. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Lars Hagberg) (Lars Hagberg/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

A group of doctors, scientists and researchers has penned an open letter to Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in response to a recently released post-pandemic review over concerns it “inaccurately reflects the body of scientific evidence.”

The letter, signed by dozens in the health and science fields, requests the document “be officially dismissed for use as a source of information for both public and provincial policy.”

-The information you need to know, sent directly to you: Download the CTV News App

The $2 million report commissioned by the province was released on Jan. 24 and swiftly rejected by the Alberta Medical Association, Friends of Medicare and others in the health and science fields.

Among the recommendations of concern are ending the use of vaccines in healthy children and teenagers and halting the use of vaccines without full disclosure of their risks.

The letter said the report “mischaracterizes the extensive scientific knowledge on vaccine benefits, safety and the full disclosure that is provided during vaccination.”

The group said the report omits studies and guidelines from national bodies, such as the Canadian Paediatric Society.

“The report conclusions misrepresent the large body of knowledge about vaccine risks and benefit-to-risk ratios.”

The letter urges the government to not implement the recommendations to halt vaccines.

“This not only contradicts the support for personal choice but prevents access to potentially life-saving vaccines. Such actions would go against the principles of public health, endangering Albertans and risking further burden to our healthcare system.”

The health ministry said the government is reviewing the report and no policy decisions in relation to it have been made at this point.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said she was pleased with the report but hasn’t made any policy decisions related to it.

“Anyone who doesn’t think that science is a process of point, counterpoint, and then being able to synthesize information is somebody who doesn’t believe in science,” Smith said Wednesday.

“I know there has been a narrative, and the narrative has been enforced to shout down contrarian voices, and that is not what we’re going to do; we’re going to listen to every voice and make our best assessment based on what we’re seeing on the evidence and the evidence has changed.”

Smith said it will be important to restore “the rights of doctors to be able to speak their minds without punishment from their colleges.”

“I think that’s going to be important; otherwise, politicians will make bad decisions, so this is the kind of approach you should probably expect from me, I will always seek out contrarian voices to make the best decisions,” the premier said.

The lead author of the report, Dr. Gary Davidson, defended the its findings in a statement on Monday.

“We ask for open scientific debate without an agenda,” it read in part. “As far as being antivax, there are no grounds for that. I have been vaccinated many times to different pathogens.”

The group also takes issue with the task force’s recommendation to allow for greater flexibility in the use of therapies like off-label medications such as Ivermectin.

“These therapies are a good choice for a number of infectious diseases; there is now a large and diverse body of evidence, including a variety of clinical trials, that have consistently shown these drugs are not an effective treatment for COVID-19 and are associated with potentially harmful side effects,” reads the letter.

Some health experts argue the task force was biased at its inception and made up of those opposed to health restrictions and omits important studies.

“Numerous passages in the report appear to be directly copied from other, pre-existing documents,” reads the letter.

It cites instances where references are absent and instead cited as “TBD” (to be determined).

“Overall, the report’s selective presentation and lack of contextualized data contribute to misinformation and public mistrust.”