Embedded Files
Evidence of
UPDATE (October 2025):
UPDATE (October 2025):
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.
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 ‘Cases Following Vaccination’ Reports", Data Evidence for Discussion on GitHub, November 2022.
Open Canada Death Tracker Web App (developed by Dmitry Gorodnichy in 2021):
on Open Canada GitHub portal
on Shiny Apps portal
Source code on GitHub
PHAC "Cases Following Vaccination" data log (googlesheet)
Political Interference: Now vs. Then
Political Interference: Now vs. Then
Political interference in the work of public servant professionals involved in food and drug regulation is not new and is well documented in Dr. Shiv Chopra’s 2009 book "Corrupt to the Core". Dr. Chopra, who lost his job defending his professional recommendation against approving bovine growth hormones for Canadian milk, highlighted these problems years ago. Despite changes in government, the situation has not significantly improved. In fact, it has worsened, particularly during the pandemic, as many professionals, myself included, have witnessed firsthand.
What has changed since Dr. Chopra’s account is the industry's increased ability to control public opinion, including within the governments and professional unions. This is achieved through industry-funded main stream media, gaslighting (discrediting) subject matter experts, and AI-powered censorship tools that are used by global news platforms and search engines (Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc.).
The example below serves to illustrate this point. It was brought to my attention by my colleagues during the data science Lunch and Learn course that I was teaching on GCCollab in the Fall 2021 just when the Vaccination Mandates have been imposed on all Government employees under that premise that there is "clear evidence" that COVID-vaccines stop transmission and significantly reduce the risk of deaths and complications from COVID-19.
As is shown below, the data never showed such evidence, however it was published by the Government of Canada in such a way as to create the perception that they do. The data skewing techniques was used to fit the "evidence" to the desired political narrative. The professionals who observed such professional Integrity breach could not report it, because of Fear of Reprisal.
See also :
Additional Data Evidence: Where is the highest Fear of Reprisal according to Public Service Employee Survey
Electoral Platform: Fearless Advice: Harper Era vs. Trudeau Era
Additional References:
Dr. Shiv Chopra, "Corrupt to the Core: Memoirs of a Health Canada Whistleblower" , 2009 - Available on Amazon. You can also borrom it from PIPSC library.
Regina Watteel (Ph.D. Statistics) ,"Fisman Fraud: The Rise of Canadian Hate Science." 2023. Available on Amazon You can also borrow it from me. Highlights of the book: www.fismansfraud.ca
Evidence: Use of Data Skewing Techniques by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) in “Cases Following Vaccination” Reports to Fit the Desired Political Narrative
Evidence: Use of Data Skewing Techniques by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) in “Cases Following Vaccination” Reports to Fit the Desired Political Narrative
The figure below shows screenshots from two PHAC “Cases following vaccination” reports published 3.5 months apart:
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), and
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, 2022 for
These reports compare the numbers of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths among Canadians with different numbers of vaccine doses: unvaccinated (0 doses), those who completed the primary series, those with one additional dose, and those with two additional doses — 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. This inclusion of unrelated data artificially inflated the number of cases assigned to the unvaccinated group, thereby creating the illusion that receiving vaccine doses reduced COVID-related hospitalization and mortality.
Such manipulation (misrepresentation) of data is evidently done to support a predefined political narrative — that COVID-19 vaccines were effective. Without this adjustment, the data would not have supported that claim. This action 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 an egregious manipulation of data occurred — and remains unaddressed publicly — demonstrates two critical points:
Those who developed this reporting methodology knew that the authentic data might not support the claimed vaccine effectiveness.
The voices of public servants and Canadians who recognized this were likely silenced by fear of reprisal or professional consequences.
This is why the first and primary pillar of my electoral platform is the protection of scientific integrity and the elimination of political interference within the public service.
White Paper:
"Examples of Manipulating Evidence to Fit Political/Industry Interests. Case study: PHAC ‘Cases Following Vaccination’ Reports", Data Evidence for Discussion on GitHub, November 2022.
When the same data are published without politically driven manipulation - 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.
Conclusion
Conclusion
One of the most controversial policies implemented by the Government of Canada in recent years was the Mandatory Vaccination Policy. Canadians were led to believe that this policy was based on evidence. However, the reality—as shown here and witnessed by many professionals who must remain anonymous due to fear of reprisal—was quite the opposite: "the evidence was driven by the policy."
This misuse of our professionals' work to support specific political narratives is tragic for all Canadians. Many assume that government policies are grounded in scientific evidence, when, in fact, the opposite has often been true—particularly in recent years—where evidence has been shaped to justify existing government policies.
Union members who have witnessed such breaches of professional integrity cannot speak out for fear of reprisal. It is time for the union to advocate on their behalf. We need to introduce an "immunity against political interference" provision in the collective agreements of all professionals involved in regulating health, food, and environmental products and policies. This change is crucial to ensure that they can continue to provide fearless professional advice, which is essential for the health and well-being of all Canadians!
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse