Connect with us

Community News

DECISIONS, DECISIONS Parents are being forced to balance their beliefs about the benefits versus the potential risks of vaccinating their children

Published

on

BY SIMONE J. SMITH

My heart goes out to all parents who have made or are going to make the tough decision to vaccinate their children against Covid-19. Parents that I have spoken to say that making vaccination decisions was a complex process. They had to balance their beliefs about the benefits versus the potential risks. Some mentioned feelings of anxiety about making the wrong decision.

What most parents are looking for is peace of mind – a sense of wellbeing and reassurance – knowing that their children are safe. Some parents are a little suspicious and nervous that this vaccine was produced and distributed so quickly. They feel that the longer a vaccine has been available, the safer it feels to them. They spoke of being reassured by knowing a vaccination had been used for many years.

Then there were other parents who felt strongly about following the guidelines that our world governments have presented to us; facts and statistics touted by mainstream media that have made them believe that vaccinating their child with an experimental vaccine is the right thing to do. I am sympathetic and understanding of both sides of this argument. There is a plethora of information that is pushed out to us, and we must decide what is best for the people we love the most.

What I want to present to you today is the other side of this discussion, the side that will show research and data cautioning parents on making a hasty decision to inoculate their child. The point of this article is not to sway your decision, but to provide perspective. Are you ready? Please navigate this article with an open mind, and research the information before making a decision.

In late June, the United States became the first country in the world to grant Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID vaccines for toddlers as young as six months. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued the EUA on June 17th, 2022, and the very next day, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended all toddlers get the shot as soon as possible.

What continues to be ignored, and not reported is the fact that every day patients are suffering from life-altering changes after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Unfortunately, many have not connected their symptoms to the shots. 223 million fully vaccinated Americans have reported serious vaccine reactions. As of July 22nd, 2022, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, or VAERS, received more than 1.3 million reports of COVID-19 vaccine injury, including 29,790 deaths.

What is troubling are the reports that have come out about children ages six months to 17 years old. VAERS reported the following “adverse events” through July 22nd, including foreign and domestic reports:

  • 132 deaths (US 56)
  • 484 permanent disabilities
  • 4,106 hospitalizations
  • 1,868 myocarditis diagnosis
  • 52,654 total injuries

Data from the U.S. and five other countries show minimal risk of COVID-19 disease to children (0.17 deaths per 100,000 cases), according to an article in BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics. Given that, it concluded, “COVID-19 vaccines are still very likely to be in the best interest of the elderly and more vulnerable, but not of children.”

Let’s take a look at specific vaccines.

The Moderna shot was only 51% effective against symptomatic Omicron infection in 6-month-olds to 2-year-olds, and a mere 37% effective in 2- to 5-year-olds. This is lower than what is expected for vaccines, which makes authorizing them for this age group even more irrational. Why use such an experimental injection with such poor effectiveness in children who aren’t at grave risk of death from the infection in the first place?

The Pfizer vaccine’s effectiveness “Declined rapidly for children, particularly those 5-11 years,” an Omicron study by New York State officials found, with “low protection” one month after two doses. At thirty-five days post-inoculation, efficacy went negative for 5- to 11-year-olds, meaning an increased likelihood of infection. Even more troubling, is that vaccinated toddlers in Pfizer’s trial were more likely to get severely ill with COVID than those who received a placebo. I WANT YOU TO READ THIS AGAIN!

Most kids who developed multiple infections during the trial were vaccinated. This warranted more investigation since experimental vaccines for other diseases sometimes increase susceptibility to infection.

A new Singapore study found efficacy of two doses was 48.8% just one to two weeks after dual vaccination; it declined to 25.6% at two months, meaning only one in four infections were avoided. Among vaccinated children, 22 unspecified “serious adverse events,” and three with COVID-19 were admitted to intensive care units. What is interesting is that among the unvaccinated, no children suffered vaccine injuries, and just one unvaccinated child was admitted to the ICU.

In February, the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine reported on two teenage boys who died “suddenly and unexpectedly in their sleep without resuscitation” three and four days after their second Pfizer vaccine.

“Neither boy complained of fever, chest pain, palpitations, or dyspnea (laboured breathing),” two physicians wrote, warning of the atypical nature of the heart inflammation, called myocarditis that killed these boys. The CDC then responded by asserting the boys had likely died of other causes.

What CDC has been unable to explain are the many other sudden deaths that have occurred in children:

  • A Georgia boy, 16, who suffered “headache and gastric upset over two days following second dose. Then I felt fine. Found the following day dead in bed.”
  • A Texas girl, eight, who suffered multi-system inflammatory disease seventy days post-vaccination, with carditis in her heart and inflammation in the intestines, lungs, skin, and liver. Her belly distended and lungs filled with fluid, and she went to ICU. “Her heart stopped beating right there.”
  • A Wisconsin girl, 16, suffered heart failure and pulmonary embolism nine days after her second dose; she died two days later, with an oral contraceptive possibly contributing.
  • A Colorado boy, 15, died of heart failure one day after his first dose
  • A Florida boy, one year old, suffered “increased body temperature, seizure, death” two days after his first dose.
  • An Iowa girl, five who had an unspecified “complex” medical history, stayed overnight in a hospital as a precaution after the first dose. Two days later, “she was found pulseless and not breathing” at home.

Parents of these children have been left without answers; they trusted their physicians and their government, and they lost their children. That is why what I am going to report on next needs to be taken very seriously…

“It would normally be in the best interests of the child to have contact with his father, but it is not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is unvaccinated and opposed to health measures in the present epidemiological context.”

Judge Jean-Sébastien Vaillancourt (December 23rd, 2021)

April 14th, 2022 9:12 p.m. EDT

Parents in Quebec are expressing their concern over a recently passed child protection bill, which allows the state to override the principle of parental primacy and natural ties.

Quebec’s Health Minister Lionel Carmant introduced Bill 15 in December 2021. It was adopted unanimously in April 2022 in the Canadian provinces’ National Assembly: 115 votes in favour and none against. This bill promises to prioritize the interests of children over all other considerations, including the interests of parents.

The new law will facilitate the placement of children into foster care, overhauling the principle of parental primacy, which favours keeping children within their biological families — even in cases of neglect and abuse. It will also ease confidentiality rules, allowing personal information to be shared about children to be shared among authorities and caregivers.

Some argue that the overriding of parental primacy could set a dangerous precedent and give the state too much power over children, and this was see when a Superior Court judge temporarily suspended the child visitation rights of a Quebec man after the court heard he was unvaccinated and opposed the province’s COVID-19 health regulations.

The mother sought to have all access to the child suspended for the father, on the grounds she had recently learned that he was unvaccinated and, according to the judgment, a “conspiracy theorist” and “anti-vaccine.”

The father said he was unvaccinated and had “reservations” about vaccines but told the court that he respected health regulations and rarely left his home. However, the child’s mother produced excerpts from the father’s Facebook page containing anti-vaccine messaging and articles.

It was ruled that under the circumstances, it was not in the interest of any of the three children that (the unvaccinated father) have access to them.

It is scary that now the government has extended their control into the homes of families under the guise of child protection. Bill 15 is necessary in the case of abuse and neglect, but not administering a vaccine to your child should not fall under this bill, and at this time it does.

When will it stop? It all depends on us, the citizens of Canada. We are in control, not the officials that we have elected. As citizens, we need to remember that.

We, as humans are guaranteed certain things in life: stressors, taxes, bills and death are the first thoughts that pop to mind. It is not uncommon that many people find a hard time dealing with these daily life stressors, and at times will find themselves losing control over their lives. Simone Jennifer Smith’s great passion is using the gifts that have been given to her, to help educate her clients on how to live meaningful lives. The Hear to Help Team consists of powerfully motivated individuals, who like Simone, see that there is a need in this world; a need for real connection. As the founder and Director of Hear 2 Help, Simone leads a team that goes out into the community day to day, servicing families with their educational, legal and mental health needs.Her dedication shows in her Toronto Caribbean newspaper articles, and in her role as a host on the TCN TV Network.

Community News

You get vaccinated, get Myocarditis, and then have a ticking time bomb in your chest

Published

on

BY MICHAEL THOMAS

According to a new peer-reviewed study funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), sixty per cent of young people who were hospitalized with Myocarditis after receiving an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine still showed signs of this disease six months after being injected.

Some 307 out of 333 patients they started with had their health data collected from April 2021 to November 2022. The time between injection and follow-up varied, with a median of 178 days, almost six months.

What is worse is the study authors are said to be making fun of the seriousness of the findings. They are calling the results reassuring and describing these cases of Myocarditis as mild.

Who are these study authors? Why are they acting so recklessly? Critics said that some of those study authors who published their report in The Lancet on September 6th, 2024, also have ties to the government and the big drug companies that may have influenced the research.

One such person is lead author Dr Supriya S. Jain, a pediatric cardiologist and researcher at Maria Fareri Children’s Hospital in Valhalla, New York. Daniel O’Conner of Trial Site News criticized the FDA as the study’s funder. “The FDA is not keeping up with its tradition of ‘patient safety first,’” he said.

O’Conner said he believes the outcome is much more severe than is reported, and The FDA study authors do not have the urgency they should, given the vulnerabilities of the population.

Chief Scientific Officer of The Children’s Health Defense Brian Hooker agreed, saying he was “disgusted” by the study authors’ downplaying of cardiac harm caused by the COVID-19 mRNA injections. Hooker is quoted as saying, “You get vaccinated, get Myocarditis, and then have a ticking time bomb in your chest for the rest of your life.”

Some of the most vital questions here concerning these injected youths, and the injected population is “What happens as they age?” or “Where do they go from here?”

It is important to know that medical researchers have pointed out that studies show Myocarditis can be life-threatening and can also cause critical changes and scarring of the heart.

“I don’t feel that any incidence of vaccine-induced Myocarditis is reassuring,” Heather Ray, a science and research analyst with CHD told a reputable news source. “Additionally, we have all witnessed several anecdotal, or personal reports of individuals who died from vaccine-induced cardiac issues over the past four years.”

Dr Peter McCullough said, as a cardiologist, he was “Greatly concerned,” that COVID-19 vaccine heart damage in most of the young people studied had not resolved at the time of follow-up. McCullough said that he disagreed with the author’s reports calling this finding mild, “Even small areas of damage invisible to cardiac MRI could put vaccine recipients at risk for a future cardiac arrest.”

It is amazing that with all these findings and recommendations to date, COVID mRNA Injections are still very intentionally and maliciously pushed on the population quietly worldwide, this is especially true here in Canada.

It may interest readers to know that the same people behind these mRNA injections in the Western world have decided to look at Africans as lab rats too. The World Health Organization has approved so-called mpox injections for use in adults and said it can be used for: babies, children, teens, and pregnant women in Africa.

Brian Hooker called the WHO’s approval of the shot for infants and children in Africa “A train wreck in the making.”

Recently here in Canada, Global News is now warning that the CDC is telling folks that COVID injections, and heart inflammation issues between injected teens are related. This is something that Toronto Caribbean Newspaper has been warning Canadians about for years now.

Again, Global News has reported, “Myocarditis is noted by the Canadian Pediatric Society as a possible side effect of mRNA injections.” https://old.bitchute.com/video/EFDWj1rHrX6v/

Now more than ever it is vital that folks think for themselves and quit relying on compromised professionals who are in positions of power but are wolves in sheep’s clothing working for Big Pharma.

A rule of thumb is to question everything because history has shown that liars usually suffer from short memory.

Continue Reading

Community News

New course launched that counters narratives and understands Black children’s humanity

Published

on

BY PAUL JUNOR

The launch of the new course “Black Childhoods in Canada” in the School of Early Childhood Studies at Toronto Metropolitan University is positive and encouraging. Details of the launch of this groundbreaking course were revealed in a post by Clara Wong on May 8th, 2024. For many students it will be the first time formally studying Black experiences; encountering Black scholarship, or even being taught by a Black professor. It was introduced in the winter term of 2024 and was one of the first courses in TMU’s Black Studies minor, which is offered by the Faculty of Community Services.

The course is coded as “CLD540” and details of its content are noted.

“An introduction to Black Canadian Studies in the context of childhoods. Childhoods are considered via Black feminism, Black studies, anti-racism, and de-colonial theoretical and practical frameworks and pedagogy. Students engage in a range of textual, experiential and multi-modal learning opportunities.”

Some of the topics covered include:

  • Black acts and media
  • Black Canadian histories
  • Black families and mothering
  • Black girlhood
  • Blackness and disability
  • Blackness and ECEC and education
  • Black play
  • Black queer activism
  • Global anti-Black racism

Professor Rachel Berman was inspired to enlarge the Black studies content in early childhood studies and reached out to her colleague, Janelle Brady to collaborate on the development of the course. This was financed through the Faculty of Community Services Anti-Black Racism Curriculum Development Fund, which ensured that it was ready.

Professor Berman states, “I’m thrilled now to see the course come to life. It’s long overdue. There’s a deficit assumption about Black children-that Black boys make trouble during play, or that Black girls are made to seem more mature than they are. We need to counter those narratives and understand Black children’s humanity.”

Professor Brady notes, “The course doesn’t resolve everything, but it’s a start in breaking the ‘preschool-to-prison’ pipeline for Black children.”

She observed further that the impact of teaching the course has influenced her greatly. She adds, “It motivated me to do even more and seek more resources. There were so many informal discussions among students inside and outside of class. There’s a real hunger for spaces like this. It was inspiring to see how much students are already engaged in anti-Black racism work, and I feel I was learning just as much as they were.”

There are many testimonials from students who have been enrolled in this extraordinary course. Faizi Ali, an undergraduate student in the early childhood studies program states, “Any forum that allows Black students to lift their voice is cause for celebration. The course provides so much space for us to exchange ideas and thoughtful dialogue. I’ve gained many new perspectives and techniques to better support students.”

Magdalena Grammenopoulos, a media production undergraduate student, talked about the insight that left the biggest impression on her from the course. She states, “The concept of Black ‘futurity.’ It’s about imagining a stronger future for Black children through the ways we live day-to-day-ways that counter the stereotypes and discrimination which prevent Black children from living as freely as others. I want to implement futurity by always taking it upon myself to create safer spaces for Black children, whether it be my friends, family, or strangers.”

Continue Reading

Community News

“No! You can’t check my phone.” Border officers are not authorized to search your electronic device

Published

on

BY SIMONE J. SMITH

Each year, millions of Canadians travel abroad, and we carry our personal devices (computers, tablets, and smartphones). These devices contain highly sensitive and private information about who you are, reflecting your: lifestyle, beliefs, relationships, finances, and health.

What you may not know is that even though your personal device is very personal, and highly sensitive because of the information on it, section 99(1)(a) of the Customs Act allows Canadian Border Officers to search these devices without any reasonable suspicion. This law was recently challenged by two travelers, Jeremy Pike and David Scott, who were charged with possessing and importing child pornography after their devices were searched. Now, although it is a good thing that this type of behaviour was caught, the key question in their appeal is whether this law is constitutional.

On August 12th, 2024, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in R v. Pike, 2024 ONCA 608, holding that section 99(1)(a) of the Customs Act, which authorizes border officers to search electronic devices without any reasonable basis, is unconstitutional because it violates the section 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. CCLA was an intervener in the case.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is a human rights organization committed to defending the: rights, dignity, safety, and freedoms of all people in Canada. CCLA is the pre-eminent voice advocating for the rights and freedoms of all Canadians and all persons living in Canada. They are leaders in protecting rights and have earned widespread respect for their principled stand on such issues as: national security, censorship, capital punishment, and police and state accountability with a fearless voice on civil liberties, human rights and democratic freedoms.

Shakir Rahim, Director of the Criminal Justice Program, made the following statement, “CCLA applauds this important ruling, which makes it clear the border is not a Charter-free zone. As CCLA argued, standardless limitless searches of electronic devices, which contain highly private information, violate the Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.”

I had a chance to review the decision, and I found direct references of CCLA’s submissions at paragraphs:

  • 63: The Crown’s related counterargument that travelers’ “choice” to travel with digital devices merits a lower threshold also fails. Because digital devices are our “constant companion[s]” (Bykovets, at para. 1), travelers need to bring them across borders to work and communicate. As the trial judge ruled, leaving them behind is not a meaningful choice. Neither is declining to leave and re-enter Canada, which, as the intervener Canadian Civil Liberties Association (the “CCLA”) submits, is not merely a choice but a section 6 Charter Just as “Canadians are not required to become digital recluses” to preserve their privacy (R. v. Jones, 2017 SCC 60, [2017] 2 S.C.R. 696, at para. 45), they also should not have to surrender the ability to enter and leave Canada with an indispensable instrument of modern life.
  • 66: The law’s low threshold increases this risk because, as the CCLA submits, low threshold powers are the easiest for officers to wield to target, whether intentionally or not, racialized and disadvantaged people: R. v. Landry. While the law’s good faith purpose test offers some protection against this risk, its subjective nature makes that risk harder to detect because officers do not have to point to objective facts to justify the search and help negate the possibility of discrimination.
  • 73: Simmons held that the state’s interest in suppressing the trafficking of drugs produced in other countries that had to be transported across the physical border to enter Canada justified the strip search law: at pp. 526-529. In contrast, digital contraband, even when downloaded to a device, is usually also stored on external servers and can be electronically transmitted into Canada, a mode of transmission that the Agency admits it has no mandate to control.

(They refer to Professor Steven Penney’s article “Mere Evidence? Why Customs Searches of Digital Devices Violate Section 8 of the Charter” and an article by Professor Robert Diab “Protecting the Right to Privacy in Digital Devices: Reasonable Search on Arrest and at the Border” (2018)

  • 89: Manual searches can still invade large amounts of highly private information and, if officers invest the time, can be almost as revealing as forensic searches. Further, officers could easily use manual searches as a backdoor to gain information that would meet the higher threshold to conduct forensic searches.

They refer to an article by Bingzi Hu, “Border Search in the Digital Era: Refashioning the Routine vs. Nonroutine Distinction for Electronic Device Searches” (2022)

“Parliament must legislate a stringent standard with clear safeguards for the state to search an electronic device at the border. This reflects the fact that electronic devices are a trove of our most personal, intimate, and sensitive information,” shares Shakir.

The pandemic showed how willing our government is to overlook and ignore our rights and freedoms. This is why the Toronto Caribbean Newspaper will always keep you “In the Know,” when it comes to how to truly live as a FREE Canadian.

REFERENCES:

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2024/2024onca608/2024onca608.html

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2017/2017scc60/2017scc60.html

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11/latest/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11.html

https://ccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/CCLA-Intervener-Factum-R.-v.-Pike-Scott-COA-23-CR-0023-C70656.pdf

Continue Reading

Trending