January 25, 2025 • 29 mins
Dr. Gary Davidson compiled a VERY detailed report regarding how the government handled COVID. We've been waiting for this for almost 2 years and it was released today. He joins us to discuss his findings.
https://open.alberta.ca/publications/albertas-covid-19-pandemic-response
January 24, 2025
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Well, good evening, everybody.
(00:22):
Again, it's Chris here from the Whistle Stop Cafe in Mirror, Alberta.
And as promised, I have a very special guest tonight, Dr. Gary Davidson.
So it is a fairly significant day for me today.
It was January 24th.
I'm pretty sure it's four years to the day since I first met Gary.
(00:50):
Gary kind of caught wind of what was going on.
And I was open for business at the Wistop Cafe, and he had to come out and meet me and
see what was going on and have a little chat with me.
So it's very...
I don't want to say the stars aligned, but I suppose it was part of a plan that today
was the day that he released his report that was commissioned by the premier regarding
(01:14):
how the government handled COVID, what they did, what went right, what went wrong, how
we can do better in the future and what we have to do now.
And as many of you may already know, I mean, I've shared little portions of this.
One of the recommendations was to stop what they're doing, stop what we're doing collectively
(01:37):
as a society, get some more information, figure it out, and then make a plan going forward,
which is always prudent in matters of, well, pretty much anything.
So without further ado, I'm going to bring on Gary.
He's taking time while he's traveling.
He's on the road.
He's hitting the skyways tomorrow.
(01:58):
And he decided he's going to take some time and join us anyway while he's traveling.
So welcome Dr. Gary Davidson, and thanks for joining me.
Hi, Chris.
You bet.
I'm happy to be here.
And yeah, I remember that day when we first met, and it was quite a while ago now.
A lot of things have changed, that's for sure.
(02:20):
Yeah, the world is a bit of a different place.
Yeah, folks, just so you know, Gary is traveling, so there might be an interruption here or
there, but we'll just deal with it, make the best of it.
And of course, Kerry will work his magic and edit up the video when we're done.
But I did want to make sure that we got Gary on as soon as we can, because what he's done
(02:41):
in the last couple of years is monumental.
And this is a, you know, you've really shaken things up, and you've done a fantastic job
sticking to your principles.
So maybe do you want to just give people an idea of what it was that you were hired to
do and how you went about that?
(03:02):
Sure.
So the report that came out was came out of a mandate that came out of the Premier's office
in November 2022 to the health food.
And what we were asked to look at was basically the data.
We weren't there to see who did what.
We're not looking for fault.
(03:23):
We're not looking decisions we did.
And so we looked at where the data came from.
Did it work the way we thought it did?
So that was kind of what we looked at.
And then there was areas that we then looked at with the data.
And so one of them was data flow and governance.
So you know, where did it come from and how did that all work?
(03:47):
And then how did the governance work?
And when I say governance, I don't mean the government of Alberta.
It's who regulated how the data moved.
We looked at immunity or infection, originated immunity.
So if you got sick, you build your own immunity.
So how is that factored into our response?
(04:08):
They're looking at the treatments that were available and then some that weren't allowed.
So we looked at both sides of those.
We looked at what we call NPIs, which are non-pharmaceutical interventions.
So that includes masking and lockdowns and things like that.
There was modeling.
So modeling was used to kind of project where we thought things were going.
(04:30):
And then how do we use that to move forward?
Making sure then there's the governing bodies.
And so as a physician, I believe 23 other colleges in Alberta over different medical
(04:50):
bodies.
So we looked at how they factored in to what the response was.
So we looked at those different areas and we looked at them all through the lens of
where the data come from, who chose the data or who collected the data, who applied it
and how they applied it, that kind of thing.
We weren't looking for fault.
We just want to know how it worked.
(05:11):
And then when we looked at how it works, did it work well or was there things that we'd
done better?
And that was really the point of this.
And so that's what our mandate was and that's how we did it.
I guess that's the methodology of it.
So I hope that answers your question, Chris.
It does.
Yeah.
So that sounds like it was a pile of work.
And from what I'm reading here, you had quite the team working with you on this.
(05:35):
Like there's some pretty big names.
As a matter of fact, one of them is now he is to be appointed pending Senate approval
to the National Institute of Health in the United States.
Correct.
Yes.
Yeah.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya was a contributor on the report.
He was very, very valuable insight.
(05:58):
And yes, just yeah, world leader in this area.
So we had a number of them like that, that were world leaders in their area and depended
on their expertise and it made a huge difference.
For sure.
I had an opportunity to meet Dr. Bhattacharya in Victoria.
We spoke at a We Unified conference together and he was he's just a fantastic individual
(06:23):
as are you.
So with all of this work that went into this, what was the what's the crux of the result
of this?
And the kind of this is where we're at and what we need to do.
Right.
So I guess the thing that really struck us is that we had an Alberta pandemic plan that
was largely set up by Lieutenant Colonel David Redmond, which was made Alberta for Alberta.
(06:49):
It dealt with all aspects of society dealt with the economics and every every but it
was kind of discarded or not kind of discarded, completely discarded in favor of of one that
was handed down from somewhere above that anyway from outside influence.
And so I think that what we need to go back to is a made in Alberta approach.
(07:14):
And that works well for the people.
And it has to be well rounded.
We can't just look at health because, you know, if you look at Alberta's data, when
we locked down in March 2020, there's a massive spike in accidental deaths and overdose and
that kind of thing.
Some of them were an accidental, but that's what they're called massive increase.
(07:37):
More people died of that than they did covid.
And those numbers have never come back to baseline to this day.
And we haven't had a lockdown for a couple of years now.
So it had huge impact so that that we maybe didn't foresee coming.
But I think that we have to have a more rounded approach is my feeling from it.
So I just some of the things we saw and then made some recommendations based on that.
(08:00):
So when this all occurred, like when we were going through all these things, we're going
through the restrictions, you were actually on the other side of this conversation.
You were one of those who were taking, you know, basically orders from from the top.
And it seems like those it didn't really make a heck of a lot of sense.
You want to maybe share what your experience was during that time of, you know, early 2020
(08:24):
kind of in 2021 as what was your title?
You were the manager for the department of Central Alberta.
Is that correct?
Yeah, that's correct.
So for the central zone, it was a clinical lead for emergency medicine and and the job
I enjoyed and I just I was starting to have some problems with how things were being done.
(08:47):
They weren't making sense to me.
You know, I was reading very keenly the Pfizer's own research material coming off their studies
and I couldn't understand why we were doing what we're doing.
So in vaccine research, you look at things called all cause mortality, because whenever
you come up with a new drug, if the drug treats a heart disease, the only thing you you don't
(09:13):
just look at poor outcomes for heart disease, you look at poor outcomes for anything because
the side effect for a drug for heart disease might have to do with another system of the
body.
So you have to look at something we call all cause mortality and the all cause mortality
in the treatment arm or the vaccine or the vaccines was worse than the people that didn't
get anything.
(09:34):
And so that that wasn't a good idea.
They were saying it was safe and effective long term, but but the study was only two
months long.
You know, there's forty four thousand people recruited twenty two thousand each arm at
the end of two months.
They gave the people that that were in the control arm the unvaccinated vaccine.
So now you can't track anything at that point.
(09:54):
It's all done.
So you couldn't make any claims of long term safety.
Just to say that was just confusing to me.
There was no pregnant women that were vaccinated in the study at all.
If you're pregnant, you weren't allowed to get the shot.
And out of the twenty thousand people that got the shot, two hundred seventy became pregnant.
This is Pfizer's own material of the two hundred and two hundred seventy that became pregnant.
(10:19):
They lost two hundred and thirty eight charts.
That's eighty percent of them.
That made no sense.
How do you lose them to follow up when you're when you're all the guys?
You can't do this.
And so we had discussions with leadership and you know, if you work somewhere, you've
got to do what you're told.
And I understand that and it came to the point where actually I couldn't
(10:41):
come out of that position.
So it was fine.
It was a choice I made and stayed on as a position for a while longer.
And then I wouldn't get the vaccines in October of twenty twenty one.
And that was the end of working there altogether.
And that was a choice I made.
But you know, so I was a little bit on the other side of the.
(11:05):
I was treating people in the community for covid and and with with stuff that we were
talking about.
And it's you know, in the report, we would have for instance.
And I prescribed I've remitted hundreds of times and said I've read all very well.
(11:29):
But I know how it works.
By far the safest drug I've ever prescribed.
It's like I say, I can't believe I'm at the hospital.
Aspirin, Benadryl, you know, gas line, antifreeze, you name it, just when anything in there,
probably energy drinks, probably all more dangerous than I've ever mentioned.
So I didn't understand that.
I made no sense.
(11:52):
But I prescribed it legally as I should with prescriptions and two pharmacies and wasn't
handing down forced pace for whatever was going on.
And I had no ill effects and it seemed to really help people.
So that's what I was doing.
And when we were not allowed to prescribe it anymore, September 22nd, 2021, then I couldn't
(12:13):
alone use that.
Oh, that went.
But yeah, so I was kind of on the other side of all this stuff and had a lot of questions
about it.
And yeah, so that that's where that's how I went through covid.
Little different than most people.
Is there any other time that you can recall in your career where you were threatened or
(12:35):
persecuted or even damn near crucified for participating in science as a scientist and
using off label drugs to treat things?
I watching people die in the department in front of me, you know, some days it was horrendous
with covid.
You know, we are 2020 are down 30 percent.
(12:56):
We actually cut a shift off.
We we actually let one doctor home every day because we didn't have enough work.
So it was a totally different thing.
And so I did.
But I'd never, you know, going through that pandemic, you know, Ebola scare.
If you remember, we all had to learn to.
Ebola, if it ever came to North America.
(13:21):
So we had other scares that came, but it was never anything like this.
I didn't quite understand it.
So you went you went through this on that side and then you find yourself in a position
where it's you who is being, you know, you were you were commissioned to ask the questions
and find out what happened.
One of the things that I notice in there is that there was a recommendation that the Alberta
(13:46):
government stop using the covid-19 vaccines until we find out what's going on.
Do you want to speak a little bit to that?
So in the in the paper, you'll see we were very large study that was done in the Scandinavian
countries and they recruited about two point one million people in the study, which showed
(14:07):
that the risk benefit profile was absolutely against getting the vaccine if you were under
50 years old without some serious comorbidity.
So in those countries, they you can't get it unless a doctor prescribed it because you
need it for some reason.
So we read that study very carefully.
We researched that, like I say, read through Pfizer's own material.
(14:32):
We've got the V-safe data on the vaccines, which came from CDC.
CDC conscripted 10,000 people that got the vaccine to write all of their symptoms every
day, you know, everything from mild symptoms to severe symptoms.
And they wouldn't release it.
They actually had to be sued to release it.
We got the material and showed that seven point seven percent of people needed medical
(14:56):
attention after being vaccinated.
I mean, you know, so didn't sound like a very good product.
So that along with the Scandinavian study and then those jurisdictions in the world
that have actually come along and said that not just the Scandinavian countries.
And so we looked at what they were using for research.
And largely it comes from the manufacturers data themselves.
(15:18):
That's enough to to show you that it's not, you know, it just didn't make sense to us.
So that's what we recommended.
So that's where we're at.
So that is completely contrary to what the media told us and what politicians and government
told us about safe and effective and scientific consensus.
So I also read a article in the Globe Mail today and the reporter that I use the word
(15:43):
loosely journalists that wrote it, she framed the report as just some kind of wacky conspiratorial
thing.
I mean, this reporter, this journalist must know better than a dozen scientists spending
a year and a half going through hard data.
What do you say to the reporters that are acting that way?
(16:05):
I just that might be the same one that contacted me today.
I just encourage you to read the report and we can have a fulsome conversation on it because
we're not going to attack calling people conspiracy theorists, her or I.
But you know, just read it.
And I'd love to sit down and say, show me where we missed something, because if we did,
(16:26):
then it needs to be corrected.
And then if they missed something, that's something that they need to look at themselves.
But you know, science, there's no such thing as consensus in science.
That makes no sense.
Science is about questioning everything, experimenting and proving whether it's true or not.
That's science.
And consensus is a religion idea.
(16:46):
And I don't think it belongs in this field personally.
But so we want to question, we want to ask, we do have to do it in a way that doesn't
harm patients and populations that that's completely understandable.
But the dialogue between high level scientists and those that knew should have been allowed
(17:08):
to flow freely, which it seemed when we did our research, that didn't happen.
And so I don't we didn't point fingers at the government.
The government made the decisions they had under a lot of pressure with data that seemed
to be incomplete.
And so the question, you know, so we did a data review.
(17:29):
Where did that come from?
Who has given it to them?
Who's analyzing it?
Who's applying it?
And that wasn't the politicians.
That will be them that would give recommendations on which they're viewing laws.
Would it be fair to say that if we had followed the procedures in the plan that we had before
(17:52):
this rather than abandoning everything and taking talking points from bureaucrats, things
would have been better if we followed the original pandemic plan?
Well, you know, hindsight is always 20-20.
I have read the pandemic plan we had in place before and I believe it would have worked
(18:13):
better to impose any of the restrictions.
People were voluntary allowed to do what they felt was best.
I've talked to the medical director for Sweden, who was in charge at the time, and had a personal
conversation about this with him.
And I think what governments can do is sit down and do reports like this and review it
(18:37):
differently.
And that's the best way to find out what really did work best or what would work best next
time.
So, you know, that's, yeah, hindsight's really good, but it was difficult times in Oregon.
And I don't fault the things that were made.
Well, I got to say, you're a better man than me because I'm a little bit on the other side
(19:03):
of that.
I find fault with some of the actions that certain people took.
And I know that I have to extend them a measure of grace as I've been extended myself.
But this report, how well was it received by the Alberta government?
(19:24):
You know, that's going to take time to help you.
You know, some of us are all seen at the same time here.
I mean, I've been involved in it for two years now.
So I know what it said, and I know what it said for a while, but I know that there's
people in the government, they're just still reading through it.
There's quite a bit there.
And so as they read through it, it'll be interesting to see what they say about it.
(19:47):
I have to say it was very courageous of the Alberta government to say, let's do this,
you know, for better for worse, let's review what happened and make sure we do it better
next time.
That's the only way you can do it.
And that shows a lot of courage.
So I appreciate that.
One of the things I respect Danielle Smith tremendously for is her willingness to be
(20:09):
a leader when the country is severely lacking one.
She's been a leader in dealing with these issues.
She's been a leader in even international relations.
Like right now, she's fighting for the province.
She's apologized to the people that have been harmed by the actions of the government, the
preceding administration.
(20:31):
And now she's released a report that she really didn't have to.
I mean, this was something for her and for government to see, and she made the decision
to make it public.
And I'm very happy that she did that because now people can look at the information and
folks watching, read it, read the whole thing.
I put the link up there to the Alberta government website.
And if you feel like there's something more that we should do as a society to, you know,
(20:55):
for some accountability or prevent it from happening in the future, then we got to get
together and do it.
That's our job.
Dr. Davidson has done his job in getting the information, getting the data.
The premier has done her job and being transparent and allowing us to see what happened in the
inner workings.
And now it's up to us.
So, Gary, what would you recommend people do with this information after they read it
(21:19):
and actually read it, not just skim it with their own preconceived biases and have emotional
responses, but really read it and know it?
What should they do with this?
Yeah, read it and understand the science behind it the best they can.
Ask people that know.
And don't make it a personal thing.
Science is not personal.
(21:40):
In science, it's either true or it isn't, regardless of what I think of it.
So I can easily be wrong.
That's what science is.
And then I go and I look at it and I change.
So I just say, you know, same thing to everybody.
I don't care what side of the fence they're on.
I don't care what your position was during the pandemic.
Read it.
And if there's something in there that you think, well, that's good, I can take that
(22:03):
away.
Excellent.
If you think this isn't useful, it's okay.
Just leave it alone.
And let's move on.
Let's just have a really open, transparent debate and let's really find out what entirely
happened and go on from there.
Some good advice.
Now you're being awfully, awfully humble about this.
So let me just let me just fix that.
(22:26):
I want to extend my thank you to what you did throughout this this whole time, Kerry.
I mean, you obviously devoted your life to helping people as a physician.
And then when you saw something wrong, you stood up and you stood on your principles
and in truth and you did what you knew was right.
And people that are watching, they may or may not know this.
(22:49):
I know that you saved dozens, if not hundreds of lives with what you did in putting your
career, your future and your life on the line.
I know that for sure.
I watched it unfold.
I followed this whole thing from the very beginning and you know, I'm extremely grateful
for what you've done and for the work that you put in in getting this information out.
(23:13):
So on behalf of me and likely most of the people that are watching tonight and probably
the majority of the province, once they read this, thank you very much for your service
to the province.
And now I'm going to let you get some much deserved rest and spend some time with your
family, but yeah, I don't think we could say thank you enough.
(23:35):
I'm just, I'm very honored to be asked to help and to have the opportunity to help.
And that's, that's what I want to do.
So I appreciate it and appreciate what you're doing as well.
Thank you.
There you have it folks.
Dr. Gary Davidson released the report on how the government handled COVID with the restrictions
and mandates, lots of information on the vaccine.
(23:58):
What's going on with that?
Of course, the recommendation is to stop administering that and find out what's going on, get some
proper testing done and then decide where to go from there.
And yeah, Gary, enjoy your time off and I look forward to seeing you at the Whistle
Stop Cafe in Meere, Alberta.
That looks a little bit different than last time you were there, but it's just as good
(24:20):
and looking forward to spending some more time with you.
Awesome.
Thanks.
Thanks again.
Take care.
Well, there you have it.
Dr. Gary Davidson, his story is absolutely epic.
My story is interesting.
I'm a burger flipper that fought for my right to sell hamburgers and pour coffees for people.
(24:47):
Gary Davidson is a physician who was willing to sacrifice everything he had worked for.
And I know the story of how he got through medical school and stuff that it wasn't easy
for him.
It wasn't the silver spoon thing.
He worked for it.
And he was willing to sacrifice that to do what he knew was right.
And by doing that, he saved a lot of lives.
(25:11):
Gary administered what was known and I guess still known as the McCullough Protocol.
Peter McCullough in the United States, Dallas, Texas, he's been on the show as well.
He developed a protocol for early treatment of COVID-19 and saved thousands and thousands
of lives.
He published this information.
It was known worldwide that it had a very, very high success rate.
(25:34):
And our governments here in Canada and in Alberta scoffed at him and they persecuted
him.
And instead of following the science like they told us to do here, they followed, I
don't even know what they're following.
They were doing things to people that were not beneficial to their health.
(25:57):
And Gary said that this was about the data and the statistics and what it looked like.
When you look at that information, there's something much deeper, a much bigger problem
than just a mask or a closure of a business to protect against a virus.
(26:20):
And the issue is governments acting in a manner that is not in our best interests, acting
in a manner where they forget that they work for us and their job is to make sure, their
job, their job is to make laws on our behalf.
(26:41):
Their job was never, ever to lock my business down.
Their job was never to have teenagers beat up for playing hockey outside.
That wasn't their job.
And I'm very grateful to live in a province where at least some of our elected officials,
(27:05):
our politicians have the balls to stand up and do the right thing.
Because when you do that, just like what Gary did, the world gets better.
And it doesn't have to be a big thing.
It doesn't have to be this major thing changing the world.
Like, what?
They're doing self at the border right now.
It can be as simple as just standing up and saying, hey, you know what?
(27:28):
This isn't right.
And we really need to rethink this.
So I hope that's the lesson from this.
There's a lot more work to do and I know there's going to be a lot more come from this.
It's a very, very exciting time to be alive.
And I'm looking forward to the day when there is either a very heartfelt and sincere apology
(27:56):
or some much deserved accountability.
Either way, it's going to be great.
Thank you very much for staying up late with me.
I'm sorry that the connection wasn't great.
Gary's on his way to the airport and he agreed to do that on the road.
So it was the best we could do.
But I wanted to make sure that on this day, four years to the day when Dr. Gary Davidson
(28:19):
walked into the whistle stop cafe, introduced himself and encouraged me to stand up for
myself and not back down from my principles.
Today was the day to do this.
So thanks for being with us.
Now, let's get to work and fix this stuff.
(28:41):
Good night.
Meow.
(29:02):
Even the cat knew it wasn't right.
Jason Kenney should have known.
Well, good evening, everybody.
(00:22):
Again, it's Chris here from the Whistle Stop Cafe in Mirror, Alberta.
And as promised, I have a very special guest tonight, Dr. Gary Davidson.
So it is a fairly significant day for me today.
It was January 24th.
I'm pretty sure it's four years to the day since I first met Gary.
(00:50):
Gary kind of caught wind of what was going on.
And I was open for business at the Wistop Cafe, and he had to come out and meet me and
see what was going on and have a little chat with me.
So it's very...
I don't want to say the stars aligned, but I suppose it was part of a plan that today
was the day that he released his report that was commissioned by the premier regarding
(01:14):
how the government handled COVID, what they did, what went right, what went wrong, how
we can do better in the future and what we have to do now.
And as many of you may already know, I mean, I've shared little portions of this.
One of the recommendations was to stop what they're doing, stop what we're doing collectively
(01:37):
as a society, get some more information, figure it out, and then make a plan going forward,
which is always prudent in matters of, well, pretty much anything.
So without further ado, I'm going to bring on Gary.
He's taking time while he's traveling.
He's on the road.
He's hitting the skyways tomorrow.
(01:58):
And he decided he's going to take some time and join us anyway while he's traveling.
So welcome Dr. Gary Davidson, and thanks for joining me.
Hi, Chris.
You bet.
I'm happy to be here.
And yeah, I remember that day when we first met, and it was quite a while ago now.
A lot of things have changed, that's for sure.
(02:20):
Yeah, the world is a bit of a different place.
Yeah, folks, just so you know, Gary is traveling, so there might be an interruption here or
there, but we'll just deal with it, make the best of it.
And of course, Kerry will work his magic and edit up the video when we're done.
But I did want to make sure that we got Gary on as soon as we can, because what he's done
(02:41):
in the last couple of years is monumental.
And this is a, you know, you've really shaken things up, and you've done a fantastic job
sticking to your principles.
So maybe do you want to just give people an idea of what it was that you were hired to
do and how you went about that?
(03:02):
Sure.
So the report that came out was came out of a mandate that came out of the Premier's office
in November 2022 to the health food.
And what we were asked to look at was basically the data.
We weren't there to see who did what.
We're not looking for fault.
(03:23):
We're not looking decisions we did.
And so we looked at where the data came from.
Did it work the way we thought it did?
So that was kind of what we looked at.
And then there was areas that we then looked at with the data.
And so one of them was data flow and governance.
So you know, where did it come from and how did that all work?
(03:47):
And then how did the governance work?
And when I say governance, I don't mean the government of Alberta.
It's who regulated how the data moved.
We looked at immunity or infection, originated immunity.
So if you got sick, you build your own immunity.
So how is that factored into our response?
(04:08):
They're looking at the treatments that were available and then some that weren't allowed.
So we looked at both sides of those.
We looked at what we call NPIs, which are non-pharmaceutical interventions.
So that includes masking and lockdowns and things like that.
There was modeling.
So modeling was used to kind of project where we thought things were going.
(04:30):
And then how do we use that to move forward?
Making sure then there's the governing bodies.
And so as a physician, I believe 23 other colleges in Alberta over different medical
(04:50):
bodies.
So we looked at how they factored in to what the response was.
So we looked at those different areas and we looked at them all through the lens of
where the data come from, who chose the data or who collected the data, who applied it
and how they applied it, that kind of thing.
We weren't looking for fault.
We just want to know how it worked.
(05:11):
And then when we looked at how it works, did it work well or was there things that we'd
done better?
And that was really the point of this.
And so that's what our mandate was and that's how we did it.
I guess that's the methodology of it.
So I hope that answers your question, Chris.
It does.
Yeah.
So that sounds like it was a pile of work.
And from what I'm reading here, you had quite the team working with you on this.
(05:35):
Like there's some pretty big names.
As a matter of fact, one of them is now he is to be appointed pending Senate approval
to the National Institute of Health in the United States.
Correct.
Yes.
Yeah.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya was a contributor on the report.
He was very, very valuable insight.
(05:58):
And yes, just yeah, world leader in this area.
So we had a number of them like that, that were world leaders in their area and depended
on their expertise and it made a huge difference.
For sure.
I had an opportunity to meet Dr. Bhattacharya in Victoria.
We spoke at a We Unified conference together and he was he's just a fantastic individual
(06:23):
as are you.
So with all of this work that went into this, what was the what's the crux of the result
of this?
And the kind of this is where we're at and what we need to do.
Right.
So I guess the thing that really struck us is that we had an Alberta pandemic plan that
was largely set up by Lieutenant Colonel David Redmond, which was made Alberta for Alberta.
(06:49):
It dealt with all aspects of society dealt with the economics and every every but it
was kind of discarded or not kind of discarded, completely discarded in favor of of one that
was handed down from somewhere above that anyway from outside influence.
And so I think that what we need to go back to is a made in Alberta approach.
(07:14):
And that works well for the people.
And it has to be well rounded.
We can't just look at health because, you know, if you look at Alberta's data, when
we locked down in March 2020, there's a massive spike in accidental deaths and overdose and
that kind of thing.
Some of them were an accidental, but that's what they're called massive increase.
(07:37):
More people died of that than they did covid.
And those numbers have never come back to baseline to this day.
And we haven't had a lockdown for a couple of years now.
So it had huge impact so that that we maybe didn't foresee coming.
But I think that we have to have a more rounded approach is my feeling from it.
So I just some of the things we saw and then made some recommendations based on that.
(08:00):
So when this all occurred, like when we were going through all these things, we're going
through the restrictions, you were actually on the other side of this conversation.
You were one of those who were taking, you know, basically orders from from the top.
And it seems like those it didn't really make a heck of a lot of sense.
You want to maybe share what your experience was during that time of, you know, early 2020
(08:24):
kind of in 2021 as what was your title?
You were the manager for the department of Central Alberta.
Is that correct?
Yeah, that's correct.
So for the central zone, it was a clinical lead for emergency medicine and and the job
I enjoyed and I just I was starting to have some problems with how things were being done.
(08:47):
They weren't making sense to me.
You know, I was reading very keenly the Pfizer's own research material coming off their studies
and I couldn't understand why we were doing what we're doing.
So in vaccine research, you look at things called all cause mortality, because whenever
you come up with a new drug, if the drug treats a heart disease, the only thing you you don't
(09:13):
just look at poor outcomes for heart disease, you look at poor outcomes for anything because
the side effect for a drug for heart disease might have to do with another system of the
body.
So you have to look at something we call all cause mortality and the all cause mortality
in the treatment arm or the vaccine or the vaccines was worse than the people that didn't
get anything.
(09:34):
And so that that wasn't a good idea.
They were saying it was safe and effective long term, but but the study was only two
months long.
You know, there's forty four thousand people recruited twenty two thousand each arm at
the end of two months.
They gave the people that that were in the control arm the unvaccinated vaccine.
So now you can't track anything at that point.
(09:54):
It's all done.
So you couldn't make any claims of long term safety.
Just to say that was just confusing to me.
There was no pregnant women that were vaccinated in the study at all.
If you're pregnant, you weren't allowed to get the shot.
And out of the twenty thousand people that got the shot, two hundred seventy became pregnant.
This is Pfizer's own material of the two hundred and two hundred seventy that became pregnant.
(10:19):
They lost two hundred and thirty eight charts.
That's eighty percent of them.
That made no sense.
How do you lose them to follow up when you're when you're all the guys?
You can't do this.
And so we had discussions with leadership and you know, if you work somewhere, you've
got to do what you're told.
And I understand that and it came to the point where actually I couldn't
(10:41):
come out of that position.
So it was fine.
It was a choice I made and stayed on as a position for a while longer.
And then I wouldn't get the vaccines in October of twenty twenty one.
And that was the end of working there altogether.
And that was a choice I made.
But you know, so I was a little bit on the other side of the.
(11:05):
I was treating people in the community for covid and and with with stuff that we were
talking about.
And it's you know, in the report, we would have for instance.
And I prescribed I've remitted hundreds of times and said I've read all very well.
(11:29):
But I know how it works.
By far the safest drug I've ever prescribed.
It's like I say, I can't believe I'm at the hospital.
Aspirin, Benadryl, you know, gas line, antifreeze, you name it, just when anything in there,
probably energy drinks, probably all more dangerous than I've ever mentioned.
So I didn't understand that.
I made no sense.
(11:52):
But I prescribed it legally as I should with prescriptions and two pharmacies and wasn't
handing down forced pace for whatever was going on.
And I had no ill effects and it seemed to really help people.
So that's what I was doing.
And when we were not allowed to prescribe it anymore, September 22nd, 2021, then I couldn't
(12:13):
alone use that.
Oh, that went.
But yeah, so I was kind of on the other side of all this stuff and had a lot of questions
about it.
And yeah, so that that's where that's how I went through covid.
Little different than most people.
Is there any other time that you can recall in your career where you were threatened or
(12:35):
persecuted or even damn near crucified for participating in science as a scientist and
using off label drugs to treat things?
I watching people die in the department in front of me, you know, some days it was horrendous
with covid.
You know, we are 2020 are down 30 percent.
(12:56):
We actually cut a shift off.
We we actually let one doctor home every day because we didn't have enough work.
So it was a totally different thing.
And so I did.
But I'd never, you know, going through that pandemic, you know, Ebola scare.
If you remember, we all had to learn to.
Ebola, if it ever came to North America.
(13:21):
So we had other scares that came, but it was never anything like this.
I didn't quite understand it.
So you went you went through this on that side and then you find yourself in a position
where it's you who is being, you know, you were you were commissioned to ask the questions
and find out what happened.
One of the things that I notice in there is that there was a recommendation that the Alberta
(13:46):
government stop using the covid-19 vaccines until we find out what's going on.
Do you want to speak a little bit to that?
So in the in the paper, you'll see we were very large study that was done in the Scandinavian
countries and they recruited about two point one million people in the study, which showed
(14:07):
that the risk benefit profile was absolutely against getting the vaccine if you were under
50 years old without some serious comorbidity.
So in those countries, they you can't get it unless a doctor prescribed it because you
need it for some reason.
So we read that study very carefully.
We researched that, like I say, read through Pfizer's own material.
(14:32):
We've got the V-safe data on the vaccines, which came from CDC.
CDC conscripted 10,000 people that got the vaccine to write all of their symptoms every
day, you know, everything from mild symptoms to severe symptoms.
And they wouldn't release it.
They actually had to be sued to release it.
We got the material and showed that seven point seven percent of people needed medical
(14:56):
attention after being vaccinated.
I mean, you know, so didn't sound like a very good product.
So that along with the Scandinavian study and then those jurisdictions in the world
that have actually come along and said that not just the Scandinavian countries.
And so we looked at what they were using for research.
And largely it comes from the manufacturers data themselves.
(15:18):
That's enough to to show you that it's not, you know, it just didn't make sense to us.
So that's what we recommended.
So that's where we're at.
So that is completely contrary to what the media told us and what politicians and government
told us about safe and effective and scientific consensus.
So I also read a article in the Globe Mail today and the reporter that I use the word
(15:43):
loosely journalists that wrote it, she framed the report as just some kind of wacky conspiratorial
thing.
I mean, this reporter, this journalist must know better than a dozen scientists spending
a year and a half going through hard data.
What do you say to the reporters that are acting that way?
(16:05):
I just that might be the same one that contacted me today.
I just encourage you to read the report and we can have a fulsome conversation on it because
we're not going to attack calling people conspiracy theorists, her or I.
But you know, just read it.
And I'd love to sit down and say, show me where we missed something, because if we did,
(16:26):
then it needs to be corrected.
And then if they missed something, that's something that they need to look at themselves.
But you know, science, there's no such thing as consensus in science.
That makes no sense.
Science is about questioning everything, experimenting and proving whether it's true or not.
That's science.
And consensus is a religion idea.
(16:46):
And I don't think it belongs in this field personally.
But so we want to question, we want to ask, we do have to do it in a way that doesn't
harm patients and populations that that's completely understandable.
But the dialogue between high level scientists and those that knew should have been allowed
(17:08):
to flow freely, which it seemed when we did our research, that didn't happen.
And so I don't we didn't point fingers at the government.
The government made the decisions they had under a lot of pressure with data that seemed
to be incomplete.
And so the question, you know, so we did a data review.
(17:29):
Where did that come from?
Who has given it to them?
Who's analyzing it?
Who's applying it?
And that wasn't the politicians.
That will be them that would give recommendations on which they're viewing laws.
Would it be fair to say that if we had followed the procedures in the plan that we had before
(17:52):
this rather than abandoning everything and taking talking points from bureaucrats, things
would have been better if we followed the original pandemic plan?
Well, you know, hindsight is always 20-20.
I have read the pandemic plan we had in place before and I believe it would have worked
(18:13):
better to impose any of the restrictions.
People were voluntary allowed to do what they felt was best.
I've talked to the medical director for Sweden, who was in charge at the time, and had a personal
conversation about this with him.
And I think what governments can do is sit down and do reports like this and review it
(18:37):
differently.
And that's the best way to find out what really did work best or what would work best next
time.
So, you know, that's, yeah, hindsight's really good, but it was difficult times in Oregon.
And I don't fault the things that were made.
Well, I got to say, you're a better man than me because I'm a little bit on the other side
(19:03):
of that.
I find fault with some of the actions that certain people took.
And I know that I have to extend them a measure of grace as I've been extended myself.
But this report, how well was it received by the Alberta government?
(19:24):
You know, that's going to take time to help you.
You know, some of us are all seen at the same time here.
I mean, I've been involved in it for two years now.
So I know what it said, and I know what it said for a while, but I know that there's
people in the government, they're just still reading through it.
There's quite a bit there.
And so as they read through it, it'll be interesting to see what they say about it.
(19:47):
I have to say it was very courageous of the Alberta government to say, let's do this,
you know, for better for worse, let's review what happened and make sure we do it better
next time.
That's the only way you can do it.
And that shows a lot of courage.
So I appreciate that.
One of the things I respect Danielle Smith tremendously for is her willingness to be
(20:09):
a leader when the country is severely lacking one.
She's been a leader in dealing with these issues.
She's been a leader in even international relations.
Like right now, she's fighting for the province.
She's apologized to the people that have been harmed by the actions of the government, the
preceding administration.
(20:31):
And now she's released a report that she really didn't have to.
I mean, this was something for her and for government to see, and she made the decision
to make it public.
And I'm very happy that she did that because now people can look at the information and
folks watching, read it, read the whole thing.
I put the link up there to the Alberta government website.
And if you feel like there's something more that we should do as a society to, you know,
(20:55):
for some accountability or prevent it from happening in the future, then we got to get
together and do it.
That's our job.
Dr. Davidson has done his job in getting the information, getting the data.
The premier has done her job and being transparent and allowing us to see what happened in the
inner workings.
And now it's up to us.
So, Gary, what would you recommend people do with this information after they read it
(21:19):
and actually read it, not just skim it with their own preconceived biases and have emotional
responses, but really read it and know it?
What should they do with this?
Yeah, read it and understand the science behind it the best they can.
Ask people that know.
And don't make it a personal thing.
Science is not personal.
(21:40):
In science, it's either true or it isn't, regardless of what I think of it.
So I can easily be wrong.
That's what science is.
And then I go and I look at it and I change.
So I just say, you know, same thing to everybody.
I don't care what side of the fence they're on.
I don't care what your position was during the pandemic.
Read it.
And if there's something in there that you think, well, that's good, I can take that
(22:03):
away.
Excellent.
If you think this isn't useful, it's okay.
Just leave it alone.
And let's move on.
Let's just have a really open, transparent debate and let's really find out what entirely
happened and go on from there.
Some good advice.
Now you're being awfully, awfully humble about this.
So let me just let me just fix that.
(22:26):
I want to extend my thank you to what you did throughout this this whole time, Kerry.
I mean, you obviously devoted your life to helping people as a physician.
And then when you saw something wrong, you stood up and you stood on your principles
and in truth and you did what you knew was right.
And people that are watching, they may or may not know this.
(22:49):
I know that you saved dozens, if not hundreds of lives with what you did in putting your
career, your future and your life on the line.
I know that for sure.
I watched it unfold.
I followed this whole thing from the very beginning and you know, I'm extremely grateful
for what you've done and for the work that you put in in getting this information out.
(23:13):
So on behalf of me and likely most of the people that are watching tonight and probably
the majority of the province, once they read this, thank you very much for your service
to the province.
And now I'm going to let you get some much deserved rest and spend some time with your
family, but yeah, I don't think we could say thank you enough.
(23:35):
I'm just, I'm very honored to be asked to help and to have the opportunity to help.
And that's, that's what I want to do.
So I appreciate it and appreciate what you're doing as well.
Thank you.
There you have it folks.
Dr. Gary Davidson released the report on how the government handled COVID with the restrictions
and mandates, lots of information on the vaccine.
(23:58):
What's going on with that?
Of course, the recommendation is to stop administering that and find out what's going on, get some
proper testing done and then decide where to go from there.
And yeah, Gary, enjoy your time off and I look forward to seeing you at the Whistle
Stop Cafe in Meere, Alberta.
That looks a little bit different than last time you were there, but it's just as good
(24:20):
and looking forward to spending some more time with you.
Awesome.
Thanks.
Thanks again.
Take care.
Well, there you have it.
Dr. Gary Davidson, his story is absolutely epic.
My story is interesting.
I'm a burger flipper that fought for my right to sell hamburgers and pour coffees for people.
(24:47):
Gary Davidson is a physician who was willing to sacrifice everything he had worked for.
And I know the story of how he got through medical school and stuff that it wasn't easy
for him.
It wasn't the silver spoon thing.
He worked for it.
And he was willing to sacrifice that to do what he knew was right.
And by doing that, he saved a lot of lives.
(25:11):
Gary administered what was known and I guess still known as the McCullough Protocol.
Peter McCullough in the United States, Dallas, Texas, he's been on the show as well.
He developed a protocol for early treatment of COVID-19 and saved thousands and thousands
of lives.
He published this information.
It was known worldwide that it had a very, very high success rate.
(25:34):
And our governments here in Canada and in Alberta scoffed at him and they persecuted
him.
And instead of following the science like they told us to do here, they followed, I
don't even know what they're following.
They were doing things to people that were not beneficial to their health.
(25:57):
And Gary said that this was about the data and the statistics and what it looked like.
When you look at that information, there's something much deeper, a much bigger problem
than just a mask or a closure of a business to protect against a virus.
(26:20):
And the issue is governments acting in a manner that is not in our best interests, acting
in a manner where they forget that they work for us and their job is to make sure, their
job, their job is to make laws on our behalf.
(26:41):
Their job was never, ever to lock my business down.
Their job was never to have teenagers beat up for playing hockey outside.
That wasn't their job.
And I'm very grateful to live in a province where at least some of our elected officials,
(27:05):
our politicians have the balls to stand up and do the right thing.
Because when you do that, just like what Gary did, the world gets better.
And it doesn't have to be a big thing.
It doesn't have to be this major thing changing the world.
Like, what?
They're doing self at the border right now.
It can be as simple as just standing up and saying, hey, you know what?
(27:28):
This isn't right.
And we really need to rethink this.
So I hope that's the lesson from this.
There's a lot more work to do and I know there's going to be a lot more come from this.
It's a very, very exciting time to be alive.
And I'm looking forward to the day when there is either a very heartfelt and sincere apology
(27:56):
or some much deserved accountability.
Either way, it's going to be great.
Thank you very much for staying up late with me.
I'm sorry that the connection wasn't great.
Gary's on his way to the airport and he agreed to do that on the road.
So it was the best we could do.
But I wanted to make sure that on this day, four years to the day when Dr. Gary Davidson
(28:19):
walked into the whistle stop cafe, introduced himself and encouraged me to stand up for
myself and not back down from my principles.
Today was the day to do this.
So thanks for being with us.
Now, let's get to work and fix this stuff.
(28:41):
Good night.
Meow.
(29:02):
Even the cat knew it wasn't right.
Jason Kenney should have known.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com