An ATIP request was submitted to PHAC to seek for more information on how PHAC made decisions related to publishing its 'Cases Following Vaccination' data.Â
For more detail and updates on this development, see ATIP to PHAC: Cases Following Vaccination in Action Tracker menu.
White Paper:
"Examples of Manipulating Evidence to Fit Political/Industry Interests. Case study: PHAC âCases Following Vaccinationâ Reports", Data Evidence for Discussion on GitHub, November 2022.
The figure below shows screenshots from two PHAC âCases following vaccinationâ reports published 3.5 months apart:Â
one published on 2022-07-01 (https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/archive/2022-07-01/index.html#a9, Updated: July 4, 2022, 8 am EST), andÂ
another published on 2022-10-21 (https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/archive/2022-10-21/cases-following-vaccination.html, Data extracted on October 14, 2022Â
Data log: PHAC "Cases Following Vaccination" data log (googlesheet)
These reports compare the numbers of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths among Canadians with different numbers of vaccine doses: unvaccinated, those who completed the primary series, those with one additional dose, and those with two additional doses â as observed at the time of publication.
However, instead of publishing the data as observed for a specific week, PHAC published it by adding counts of cases that occurred before doses were administered, which artificially inflated the number of cases among the unvaccinated. Doing this create the impression (illusion) that unvaccinated (or people with less numbers of doses) had considerably more COVID-19 cases - including COVID-19 deaths - compared to vaccinated (or people with larger numbers of doses), which was not the case.Â
When the data are shown without the artificially inflated number of cases among the unvaccinated - as shown in figure below, they show that in reality there were more COVID-19 deaths among the four-dose vaccinated than among the unvaccinated, even though the size of the unvaccinated population was larger than the size of the four-dose population during the considered time frame. This evidence was hidden from public and still is, as much other evidence that went against the official political narratives.Â
Such skewing of data can only be explained by the efforts of the PHAC to provide the evidence for a predefined political narrative that COVID-19 vaccines were effective - regardless of whether the actual evidence supported that claim or not.
Such manufacturing of evidence to fit the desired narrative represents a serious breach of scientific integrity, comparable in severity to falsifying measurement tests in civil engineering or altering results in control-group medical trials.
The fact that such a manipulation of data occurred â and remains unaddressed publicly â demonstrates two critical points:
Those who developed this reporting methodology knew that the data did not support the claimed vaccine effectiveness, which is why they had to employ special data manipulation techniques to skew them towards the desired narrative
The voices of public servants and Canadians who witnessed such serious breach of scientific integrity, were silenced via discipline mechanisms or of fear suchÂ
This is why one of the key pillar of my electoral platform is the protection of scientific integrity and the elimination of political interference within the public service.