Okanagan Health Professionals

Please read the attached letter from BC lawyer Peter Gall, K.C. to the Ministry of the Attorney General for BC requesting the BC government to reconsider the validity of the September 12, 2022 public health order that is keeping unvaccinated healthcare professionals from returning to work.  Many other professionals and workers in BC, and other provinces, are also still not allowed to be hired or return to work.  This evidence will be helpful for many to challenge the current order.
Peter Gall references recent comprehensive studies that confirm the negative efficacy of the vaccine and the positive efficacy of natural immunity. It is important to get this out to all of your contacts and to ask your local MLA and Adrian Dix, Bonnie Henry, David Eby and the Minister for the AG why they are ignoring the current science and data and insist they rescind the Sept 12 PHO.
This information may be helpful to others for their legal actions even if not in BC.
BC MLA contact information can be found here – share and email MLAs to give this the attention it needs.  https://www.leg.bc.ca/contact-us
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

 

Gall, Legge, Grant, Zwack LLP

1000 – 1199 West Hastings Street 

Vancouver, BC V6E 3T5 

glgzlaw.com 

VIA E-MAIL 

February 13, 2023  

Ministry of Attorney General 

Legal Services Branch 

PO BOX 9280 STN PROV GOVT Victoria, BC V8W 9J7 

Attention: Julie K. Gibson Dear Julie: 

Peter A. Gall, K.C.* 

Partner 

Direct | Fax | Text: (604) 891.1152 [email protected] 

*denotes Law Corporation

Re: Reconsideration of the Vaccination Mandate on Health Professionals in BC 

We write again on behalf of our clients and the thousands of unvaccinated health care professionals  to request that the PHO’s September 12, 2022 Order (“September Order”) be reconsidered by  Dr. Henry in light of the overwhelming scientific evidence that a primary vaccination series  provides no protection against the Omicron variants and subvariants, in terms of infection,  hospitalization and transmission. 

We have already provided additional evidence about this to the PHO.  

To further assist Dr. Henry in fulfilling her ongoing legal obligation to “continually engage in the  reconsideration of these measures, based upon the information and evidence available to [her]”  (September Order, Recital UU), we bring the following recent and high-quality scientific studies  to the attention of Dr. Henry (see enclosed): 

(i) Wu, N., Joyal-Desmarais, K., Ribeiro, P., et al. Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19  vaccines against infections, hospitalisations, and mortality in adults: findings from a  rapid living systematic evidence synthesis and meta-analysis up to December, 2022.  Lancet Respiratory Medicine. Published Online (February 10th, 2023). 

Summary: This study concludes that: “Estimates of baseline vaccine effectiveness against omicron were not considered adequate for neither infections (…) nor  hospitalisations (…) Our findings provide insights for clinicians, public health-care  policy makers, and researchers about the long-term vaccine effectiveness of COVID 

Gall Legge Grant Zwack LLP 

{GLGZ-00401201;3} 

Barristers and Solicitors 

19 vaccines, which can inform clinical and policy recommendations. Our analyses  indicate that vaccine effectiveness reduces over time for [a] primary series (…) for  preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations, and mortality, a finding which is  most pronounced for infections. Furthermore, we found similar reductions with the  Omicron variant, except that baseline levels of vaccine effectiveness were noticeably  lower and did not meet the WHO criteria for an adequate vaccine response.”  

This Lancet study presents the highest quality of evidence; a systematic review and  meta-analysis, which compiles every study published up to December 2022 regarding  the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a primary vaccination series against Omicron  infection and hospitalization. As mentioned in the study, it was funded by the Canadian  Institutes of Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada. 

(ii) Bobrovitz N., Ware, H., Ma, X., et al. Protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV 2 infection and hybrid immunity against the omicron variant and severe disease: a  systematic review and meta-regression. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. Published  Online (January 18th, 2023)  

Summary: This study concludes that: “Previous infection was found to provide higher  protection against reinfection and more sustained protection against hospital admission  or severe disease than vaccination alone”. 

This study is again the highest quality of evidence, a systematic review and meta analysis, which compiles every study published between January 1, 2020 to June 1,  2022 regarding the effectiveness of natural immunity against Omicron infection and  hospitalization compared to vaccination. Of note, one of the authors is a professor at  the School of Population and Public Health at the University of British Columbia (Dr.  R. Hosseini). 

With the greatest of respect, it is now crystal clear that there is no scientific (or other) basis to  justify the continued imposition of the September Order.  

Further, the Government has recognized the need to have as many possible health care  professionals continue to provide service to meet the needs of patients in the province. There is no  reasonable basis, therefore, for not allowing thousands of unvaccinated health care professionals to return to work – given the desperate need for their services in our health care system. 

It is significant in this regard that to meet this need the Government has confirmed that vaccinated  health care professionals are permitted to work at public health care settings with respiratory  symptoms, without being tested for COVID or quarantining until their symptoms have ceased (see  enclosed Island Health Memo dated February 1, 2023).

{GLGZ-00401201;3} 2Gall Legge Grant Zwack LLP 

Allowing unvaccinated health care professionals to return to work presents a much lesser risk – indeed, no risk – to the health of patients.  

Finally, we wish to point out to Dr. Henry that public officials, including various mayors in the  rural parts of B.C., have called for the elimination of the September Order in light of the worsening  shortages of health care workers across the province. (See enclosed articles) 

To date, the PHO has not responded to the information we have provided for its consideration, and  our clients’ request to discuss this information with them. Again, with respect, we submit that this is not a constructive way for the PHO to deal with this matter. The PHO says that it recognizes it  needs to be transparent with the public about the need for the measures it has adopted to protect  the public health, but this doesn’t mean that the public must accept at face value what the PHO 

says in its public pronouncements. Where there is evidence that contradicts the PHO’s measures,  it is of crucial importance to the credibility and, hence, acceptability and legitimacy, of its  measures, that the PHO publicly respond to the questions raised about the contrary formation. We  respectfully submit that it is incumbent on the PHO to engage with our clients and the public  generally about this contrary information, and if it chooses to do so after this discussion, to fully  explain why it is continuing with these measures in light of clear evidence showing these measures  are no longer needed.  

We look forward to hearing from you about the PHO’s response to our clients’ request for a public  dialogue about this matter.  

Yours very truly, 

GALL LEGGE GRANT ZWACK LLP 

Peter A. Gall, K.C.* 

PAG/encls. 

Copy. Clients

SHARE

1 COMMENT

  1. They knew since Jan ’21 that this garbage was deadly and it WAS (and is and will be) killed people, but they continued to press on with this for… reasons. Maybe not even reasons at all, but a sociopath tendency to go all in for their own benefit, regardless of how many they kill.

    Their actions have been outright criminal and a mere resignation simply won’t cut it.

LEAVE A REPLY