reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker claims that law c 69 guarantees there will not be a one-stop shop because it requires the Canadian government to duplicate regulations. They argue that there should be strong rules enforced once, rather than multiple levels of regulation. The speaker states that it currently takes seventeen years to get a major project approved in Canada. They assert that in the last ten years, Canada has had the worst economic growth and cannot afford a fourth Liberal term.

The Prime Minister is under fire for his "radical liberalization of hard drugs," specifically the decriminalization of fentanyl, crack, and heroin in partnership with the BCNDP, and lowered jail sentences for fentanyl producers. Eighty percent of fentanyl ingredients enter Canada unregulated, threatening the trade relationship with the U.S. The Prime Minister is accused of scoring "cheap political points" instead of delivering solutions based on science, compassion, and a public health approach to the toxic drug epidemic. The opposition claims it is irresponsible to allow unregulated fentanyl ingredients into the country and to decriminalize hard drugs, which has allegedly led to increased deaths. They also allege that the Prime Minister, along with the Bloc and NDP, recently voted in favor of a committee report to decriminalize fentanyl nationwide. The question is raised whether the Prime Minister opposes the decriminalization of the export.

The Prime Minister is under fire for his "radical liberalization of hard drugs," specifically the decriminalization of fentanyl, crack, and heroin in partnership with the BCNDP, and lowered jail sentences for fentanyl producers. Eighty percent of fentanyl ingredients enter Canada unregulated and are then manufactured into fentanyl. This threatens the trade relationship with the U.S. The Prime Minister is accused of scoring "cheap political points" instead of delivering solutions based on science, compassion, and public health. The opposition claims it is irresponsible to allow unregulated fentanyl ingredients into the country, decriminalize hard drugs, and then support decriminalization nationwide despite rising deaths. The Prime Minister is asked to confirm he opposes decriminalization.

The conversation centers on serious concerns about medical assistance in dying (MAID) in Canada, with Dr. York Sang offering observations from his experience as a retired vascular surgeon and professor. The discussion covers how MAID is carried out, what drugs are used, how death is defined and monitored, and broader systemic issues in Canadian healthcare and autopsy practices. Key points raised - Realities of MAID versus expectations: The hosts note that MAID is not quick or necessarily painless, and that its dignity is attributed to one drug that causes paralysis, making death appear orderly to onlookers rather than to the patient. Dr. Sang agrees that, based on a large Canadian cohort, the process is not always quick or painless, and its perceived dignity largely stems from the paralytic drug used. - Drug regimens and their administration: The described MAID protocol commonly uses a sequence mirroring execution methods: a sedative (a large dose of a benzodiazepine, such as midazolam), followed by an anesthetic (propofol), then a paralytic, and finally a cardiotoxic agent to cause death. The typical MAID drug kit is presented as a standard set, with most patients receiving the sedative, anesthetic, and paralytic, but only about a quarter receiving a cardiotoxic “kill shot” (e.g., potassium chloride or a high-dose local anesthetic to cause fatal rhythm disruption). Approximately 90% of patients receive the sedative, anesthetic, and paralytic; about 25% receive the cardiotoxic agent. The time to death varies widely, with an average around nine minutes but ranges from one minute to over two hours; about a quarter die after more than an hour, according to the cited data. - Training and oversight concerns: Dr. Sang and Odessa discuss that most MAID providers are not anesthesiologists, and that a small minority of doctors—predominantly family physicians, rural GP-anesthetists—provide MAID without specialized training in anesthesia or MAID pharmacology. They argue that 79% of MAID providers had little to no formal training in the drugs used. This raises questions about monitoring, recognition of pain or distress, and ensuring consistency in death certification. - Monitoring and definitions of death: A major thread is the lack of continuous monitoring during MAID and the reliance on clinical death (no heart sounds, no breathing). Dr. Sang notes that the brain is likely still functioning for several minutes after clinical death, suggesting that the patient may still experience distress or wakefulness prior to the official death declaration. There is debate over whether brain activity should guide the determination of death, with some arguing for brain-wave monitoring to avoid premature cessation of artificial support. - Autopsy and post-mortem questions: The discussion references historical concerns from Dr. Joel Zivitt (a Canadian-turned-U.S.-based anesthesiologist) about deaths in the U.S. execution context and why autopsies were performed there. He reported that many blood samples showed anesthetic levels below surgical anesthesia at the time of death, and autopsies revealed pulmonary edema in a large majority of examined cases, raising questions about whether the anesthesia dosing and drug combinations may contribute to distressing end-of-life phenomena. - The pool of providers and ethics: The conversation touches on the notion that MAID is driven by a small, possibly specialized group of physicians, with concerns about whether some providers “hold back” from giving a full, lethal cocktail or whether systemic issues (time pressures, workload) influence practice. Dr. Sang emphasizes that the problem is not that MAID is necessarily too available, but that its execution lacks standardized training, monitoring, and ethical safeguards. - The broader policy and culture context: BC and Quebec are highlighted as leading provinces in MAID uptake, with BC representing nearly seven percent of all deaths due to MAID—almost double the national average. The participants discuss how expanding indications, including discussions about younger individuals or even pediatric cases, are part of ongoing debates in Canada, contrasted with other Western jurisdictions that push back against broader MAID access. - Alternatives: Dr. Sang advocates for palliative care as the preferable approach for terminal illness, noting that opioids (e.g., morphine) and comfort-focused care can offer relief without MAID. A striking point raised is that in the discussed MAID data, zero-point-six percent of patients received any narcotics during MAID. In summary, the dialogue presents a critical view of MAID implementation in Canada, focusing on drug cocktails and their administration, the adequacy of training and monitoring, the meaning and verification of death, and calls for greater emphasis on palliative care and autopsy-based scrutiny to ensure end-of-life practices align with patients’ comfort and dignity. The conversation also situates these concerns within broader provincial trends and policy debates around MAID’s expansion.

Prime Minister, despite travel restrictions, vaccine mandates, and your efforts to encourage vaccination, there is still a significant population in Canada refusing to get vaccinated. President Macron in France is implementing measures to address this issue. What else will you do to reach these unvaccinated individuals who are causing strain on ICUs? The majority of Canadians have been vaccinated, but it's frustrating for both the government and fellow citizens to see the consequences of unvaccinated individuals, such as delayed cancer treatments and lockdowns. We have implemented various measures to encourage, educate, and incentivize vaccination. It's never too late to get vaccinated, and healthcare workers would much rather administer vaccines than treat patients in ICUs.

Under Biden, there has been a significant increase in shortages of essential medicines, with a 30% rise in new drug shortages last year alone. Currently, there is a shortage of at least 14 critical cancer drugs in the US. Delaying cancer treatment by a month increases the risk of death by 10%. It's shocking that this is happening in the US in 2023. China is the top producer of critical medicines, supplying 95% of Ibuprofen, 91% of Hydrocortisone, 70% of Tylenol, and almost half of all penicillin. This poses a national security crisis, not just a public health crisis. To achieve independence from China, I will implement tariffs and import restrictions to bring back production of essential medicines to the US, creating new American jobs.

Under Biden, there has been a catastrophic increase in shortages of essential medicines. Last year, new drug shortages were up by 30%, with 295 shortages by the end of 2022 alone. There is currently a shortage of critical cancer drugs in the US, which increases the risk of death by at least 10% with each month of delay. This is unacceptable in 2023. China is the top producer of critical medicines, supplying 95% of Ibuprofen, 91% of Hydrocortisone, 70% of Tylenol, and almost half of all penicillin. This poses a national security crisis. To address this, I will implement tariffs and import restrictions to bring back production of essential medicines to the US, creating new American jobs.

Speaker 0: It was January 2022 when a colleague of mine in the unit came to me saying, something's up. We've had a doubling or tripling of baby deaths in the last year. And that's what got my curiosity piqued. Speaker 1: Their own government told us a medical treatment was safe, and it killed babies. Speaker 2: I have lost all faith that Health Canada is looking out genuine for the best interests of Canadians. Speaker 3: Doctors made extra money to push vaccines and they were given a billing code to do it. I have pulled all the billing codes. Speaker 2: They've purchased the vaccine that hasn't been approved. They've distributed it to the province so the second it's approved, we can start jabbing ourselves with it. We can start jabbing pregnant mothers with it. Speaker 4: Why did we have to get these vaccinations? Like, why was this something that we had to do? You go to the hospital, you expect to have a baby, and you expect to go home, And then you don't. Speaker 0: I was suspect that there was criminal negligence on part of the government and the public health officials. Possible. They pushed on with this narrative to everybody, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, that the mRNA shots were safe and effective. Speaker 2: They had wiretapped her phone. They had harassed her. They had charged her. They didn't allow any expert witnesses to testify. Speaker 1: Our Canadian babies died, and the police are trying to cover it up to the point of stopping detective Helen Greaves from testifying about it. Speaker 2: The dominant individuals keep the subordinates in their place by constant aggression. Speaker 4: If you don't want to get vaccinated, that's your choice. But don't think you can get on a plane or a train besides vaccinated people and put them at risk. Speaker 2: It started off with CBC running a story to implicate her and to paint her with a brush that looks uncomplimentary to the public. Speaker 5: Canada has to shift their understanding of what the CBC is. It is a state broadcaster pushing the agenda of the Liberal government of Canada. Speaker 2: This is the most significant matter affecting our children today from a health perspective, and they're still not investigating. Everything emanates outward from this case involving law enforcement, the judicial system, the pharmaceutical industry, our health agencies, how they work together, how they censored information. It all ties together to this one case, and that's what makes it so dangerous.

Minister LaGrange thanked everyone for attending and introduced Dr. Henshaw. Dr. Henshaw mentioned that during the past 18 months, there were eight times more children hospitalized for anxiety disorders than for COVID. They were asked if this increase was due to the lockdown or health measures and how it compared to previous years. They requested more data on this matter.

The committee is currently distracted from discussing meaningful improvements to Americans' health care. Instead, it is revisiting established science on vaccines and the role of the federal government in providing affordable health care. There is a clear stance among Democrats on the finance committee regarding lowering costs and enhancing care, but the same clarity cannot be applied to the nominee present.

They discuss the number of people who have experienced long-term health issues after receiving the vaccine. The speaker asks if it's hundreds or thousands, and Helen responds that it's actually around 10. She mentions a report from April 2023, which states that there were 11,289 medically significant or serious reports. Out of those, 1,062 were listed as disabled, 118 were considered life-threatening, and 184 resulted in death. Helen clarifies that the long-term consequences are not in the hundreds or thousands, but rather around 10.

In recent years, there has been a concerning increase in chronic illnesses, especially in children. The speaker highlights issues like autism, obesity, and allergies, questioning if it's due to food, environment, or medication. They criticize the influence of big pharma and propose establishing a commission to investigate the root causes of these health problems. The speaker promises to prioritize the health of American children and hold accountable those who prioritize profits over people.

Speaker 0: My last comment is I hope that you will tell the American people how many preventable child deaths are an acceptable sacrifice for enacting an agenda that I think is fundamentally cruel and defies common sense. Thank you, Speaker 1: mister chairman. Do I get a reply? Senator, you've think sat in that chair for how long? Twenty, twenty five years while the chronic disease in our children went up to seventy six percent, and you said nothing. Context: The dialogue centers on accountability for preventable child deaths and a critique of a policy agenda, followed by a response about tenure and rising chronic disease among children.

The key focus is on well-being, which has shifted over the past 20 to 30 years towards expensive remediation rather than wellness and prevention. The FDA plays a crucial role in this discussion. It raises the question of whether it's worthwhile to continue promoting costly drugs while neglecting preventive measures and overall wellness.

We're paying too much for drugs compared to other countries, and existing laws make it hard to lower costs. The middlemen in the drug industry are profiting significantly without adding value. We're going to eliminate these middlemen to reduce drug prices to unprecedented levels. This topic dominated our discussions with executives and others involved.

Speaker 0 notes a doubling or tripling of baby deaths in the last year, which sparked curiosity. Speaker 1 says their own government told them a medical treatment was safe, and it killed babies. Speaker 2 states they have lost all faith that Health Canada is looking out genuine for the best interests of Canadians. Speaker 1 says doctors made extra money to push vaccines and were given a billing code to do it, and she has pulled all the billing codes. Speaker 3 asserts they’ve purchased the vaccine that hasn’t been approved and distributed it to the provinces, so the second it’s approved they can start jabbing themselves and pregnant mothers with it. Speaker 4 asks why vaccinations were necessary, noting that when going to the hospital for birth, you expect to go home, and then you don’t. Speaker 0 suspects criminal negligence by the government and public health officials. Speaker 2 agrees, saying “Possible.” Speaker 0 contends they pushed a narrative to everybody, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, that the mRNA shots were safe and effective. Speaker 2 recalls wiretapping, harassment, and charges, and that they didn’t allow any expert witnesses to testify. Speaker 1 says Canadian babies died, and police are trying to cover it up by stopping detective Helen Graves from testifying about it. Speaker 3 comments that dominant individuals maintain subordinates’ place through constant aggression. Speaker 5 argues that choosing not to vaccinate is one thing, but being unable to fly or ride trains with vaccinated people and thus putting them at risk is another issue. Speaker 2 says CBC started with a story to implicate her and paint her in an uncomplimentary light to the public. Speaker 6 claims Canada must shift its understanding of CBC, describing it as a state broadcaster pushing the agenda of the Liberal government of Canada. Speaker 3 declares this is the most significant health matter affecting children today, and they are still not investigating. Speaker 2 asserts that everything emanates outward from this case involving law enforcement, the judicial system, the pharmaceutical industry, and health agencies, and how they work together and censored information; all of it ties to this one case, making it dangerous.

Speaker 0 argues that the government and premier treated British Columbians like guinea pigs, forcing experimental procedures without consent. They claim the numbers support this: all seven doctors in the obstetrics department in Kamloops are gone, and the pediatrics unit in Kelowna is gone, describing this as just the tip of the iceberg. The speaker asserts the devastation is widespread and states that the health minister and the premier should not expect applause for the careers wrecked and lives upended by what they call unscientific mandates. They pledge to stand for the voices of thousands of health care workers the government purportedly cast aside. The speaker ends with a question aimed at the premier: will the premier himself apologize to the health care workers whose lives were derailed by these punitive COVID policies?

A company that never had federal government contracts suddenly received a billion dollars for IT, even though it doesn't do IT and has only 4 employees in a basement cottage headquarters. The speaker questions why this suspicious company started getting contracts exactly 21 days after the prime minister took office. The prime minister's response is that the relevant authorities need to investigate the situation. Meanwhile, the focus on the government's side is on making life more affordable for Canadians, such as attracting healthcare workers, forgiving student loans for rural doctors and nurses, and accelerating housing construction. The conservative party is blocking these initiatives, but the government will continue to support Canadians.

In January 2022, a colleague alerted Speaker 0 that there had been a doubling or tripling of baby deaths in the last year, which sparked curiosity. Speaker 1 states that “Their own government told us a medical treatment was safe, and it killed babies.” Speaker 2 says she has “lost all faith that Health Canada is looking out genuinely for the best interests of Canadians.” Speaker 3 alleges that doctors “made extra money to push vaccines” and were given a billing code to do it, and that she has “pulled all the billing codes.” Speaker 4 asserts that “They've purchased the vaccine that hasn't been approved,” distributed it to the provinces so that once it’s approved, they can “start jabbing ourselves with it” and “start jabbing pregnant mothers with it.” Speaker 3 questions the necessity of vaccinations: “Why did we have to get these vaccinations? Like, why was this something that we had to do? You go to the hospital, you expect to have a baby, and you expect to go home, and then you don't.” Speaker 0 speculates on criminal negligence, saying, “I would suspect that there was criminal negligence on part of the government and the public health officials.” Speaker 3 notes that it is “highly recommended that pregnant women get their vaccine as soon as possible.” Speaker 0 contends that a narrative was pushed to everybody, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, that the mRNA shots were safe and effective. Speaker 2 claims wiretapping, harassment, charging, and barring expert witnesses: “They had wiretapped her phone. They had harassed her. They had charged her. They didn't allow any expert witnesses to testify.” Speaker 1 accuses police of trying to cover up Canadian babies’ deaths “to the point of stopping detective Helen Greaves from testifying about it.” Speaker 4 observes that “The dominant individuals keep the subordinates in their place by constant aggression.” Speaker 5 discusses vaccination choice versus public risk, remarking, “If you don't wanna get vaccinated, that's your choice. But don't think you can get on a plane or a train besides vaccinated people and put them at risk,” and claims CBC initially “started off with CBC running a story to implicate her and to paint her with a brush that looks uncomplimentary to the public.” Speaker 6 claims Canada must shift its understanding of what the is, describing it as “a state broadcaster pushing the agenda of the Liberal government of Canada.” Speaker 4 calls this “the most significant matter affecting our children today from a health perspective,” noting that authorities are “not investigating.” Speaker 2 concludes that everything emanates outward from this case involving law enforcement, the judicial system, the pharmaceutical industry, and health agencies, “how they work together, how they censored information. It all ties together to this one case, and that's what makes it so dangerous.”

They received texts claiming extraordinary lives, but the speaker asks how many people have suffered long-term health consequences from the vaccine. The other person, Helen, responds that there have been 10 cases of long-term consequences. In March 2023, MedSafe received 11,289 reports, with 1,062 listed as disabled, 118 as life-threatening, and 184 as deaths. The speaker clarifies if it's 100 or 1,000 cases, but Helen confirms it's around 10 for long-term effects.

After the "stabby jabbies," there were increases in heart issues, kidney issues, and diabetes issues. New diabetes cases went up 75% in 2022, and existing cases became harder to control. Heart issues are out of control, with insufficient specialists and monitors. There are also turbo cancers and kidney issues. Recently, patients are experiencing pneumonia that is difficult to resolve, along with mind-blowing skin issues, bleeding in the eye, and increased strokes, embolisms, and pulmonary embolisms. Skin sores and wounds don't heal, and people are dying at an unprecedented rate. The speaker has never seen this level of mortality in 16 years. A major concern is caring for all the people who have received the "jabbies," especially since many medical professionals have also received them.

Speaker 0 argued that the government and the premier treated British Columbians like guinea pigs, insisting that experimental procedures were imposed without their consent. He asserted that the numbers are telling the truth: seven doctors in the obstetrics department in Kamloops have left, and the pediatrics unit in Kelowna has also disappeared. He described these examples as just the tip of the iceberg, insisting that the devastation caused by these actions is widespread. According to Speaker 0, if the health minister and the premier expect applause for the careers wrecked and the lives upended by what he characterized as unscientific mandates, they should not expect it from him. He stated that he stands in the legislative chamber for the voice of those who do not have a voice in this place—the thousands of health care workers whom he contends this government has cast aside. The speaker then raised a single pointed question that he believes deserves an answer: will the premier himself apologize to the health care workers whose lives were derailed by the government’s punitive COVID policies?

The vote results show 28 yeas and 17 nays, passing Bill 419. Dr. Gus Grant and David Fraser discuss concerns about Section 110 of the Financial Measures Act, which would allow the government access to all medical records. They worry about the impact on patient-doctor relationships and privacy, especially for different age groups. The potential consequences of this amendment are unknown, with younger patients possibly being less concerned about their information being shared with the government compared to older individuals. The College of Physicians and Surgeons aims to raise awareness about this issue and its implications.

Eighty-five percent of Americans report negative experiences with pre-authorization. In 2023, the Medicare Advantage Program, covering 32 million people, denied 3.2 million initial prior authorization requests. Physicians handle about 40 pre-authorization requests weekly, spending around twelve hours on related paperwork. This frustrates doctors, delays care, and erodes trust in the healthcare system. Health and Human Services and CMS are pursuing private solutions to address prior authorization issues. A recent roundtable with CEOs representing 75% of all covered lives in America, approximately 260 million people across Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, and commercial insurance, addressed this problem. There is significant industry interest in resolving these issues.

The speaker asks questions about pregnancy outcomes and the Liberal government platform. They discuss the CBC's income sources, suspecting hidden government funding. The conversation also touches on pharmaceutical advertising differences between Canada and the US. The speaker criticizes CBC reporters for not covering the National Citizens Inquiry, suggesting they are avoiding facing the truth.