Why are BC Chiropractors refusing mandatory vaccination policies?

And why won't the "fair and balanced" corporate/state media ask this question?

Disclaimer: I earned a healthy mistrust of the Big Media decades ago so I don’t pay much attention to it. But a friend sent this CBC article to me and, while it doesn’t offer much insight, it does offer an excellent opportunity to examine the way CBC (and other Big Media) manipulates reality and manufactures consent on behalf of the ruling elite.

Is Fair and Balanced Media Reporting Even Possible?

Before we get into it … another disclaimer … I published the Victoria Street Newz for a decade (2004-2014) and during that time I learned a considerable amount about how media works.

The Street Newz was focussed on examining the root causes and consequences of poverty and homelessness. Whenever possible we published stories, poems, and art created from people who were living, or had lived, the street experience. Was it “fair and balanced?” Heck, no. But we were honest and upfront about our intentions - to provide a voice for people who are marginalized and under represented.

The Street Newz experience helped me realize that “fair and balanced” isn’t actually possible. It seems very media outlet has an unspoken agenda that either upholds the status quo, or in some way challenges it. And, people write from their own experience. It’s extremely difficult to step outside your own world-view, even if you try.

For example if you’re raised in the suburbs and study journalism school at an accredited university where the dominant economic system is accepted as the only possible solution, then reporting from inside the dominant culture becomes your perspective. On the other hand if you’re born into poverty and grew up listening to your family and friends criticizing the dominant culture and its chosen economic system which maintains low wages, inadequate housing, and functions best when there’s a percentage of the population living homeless, then that becomes your worldview. A rich kid has no clue what living in poverty is like, just as a poor kid has no idea what it’s like to grow up wanting for nothing.

I think journalism will be better served when we stop pretending that “fair and balanced” is even possible. Why not just admit that when we consume corporate and state media we’re reading “news” that is funded by advertisers that include, for example, Big Pharma. We won’t find criticism of Big Pharma in that media. It’s not censorship, per se, but everyone from owners to editors and reporters know that you simply don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Self-censorship is fundamental to survive in the world of Big Media.

As journalists, why not just be honest and say “this publication is the perspective of …” whatever … the street community, or a vegan environmentalist, or male corporatists, and allow consumers to choose what they’re interested in. Wouldn’t we all be better off if we knew whose viewpoint we were consuming, so we could better understand different perspectives and worldviews?

OK, onto the CBC article …

The Power of Words

Every writer, regardless of their upbringing and their worldview, knows the power of words. One little word can make the difference between really making a point, or causing confusion and conflict, whether intentionally or not. Let’s look at some of the language used in the CBC article.

“Vaccines are expected to be made a requirement for licensing of all regulated health professionals in B.C., but that's not a decision that was made by the college. Instead, it's been promised in the form of an order from Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.”

I highlighted the words “expected,” and “promise” and “regulated” because those stand out to me. Let’s look at these a bit further.

What is an “expectation”?

My first question is, who “expects” that vaccines are to be made a requirement for all regulated health professionals? The government? The public health authority? The vaccine manufacturers? The general public? Surely the CBC is aware that there is a growing “vaccine hesitant,” and “anti-vax” and “anti-mandate” movement among the public. It’s not the CBC’s job to judge whether or not we should agree with or join that movement, but it is their job to acknowledge the fact that it exists. These folk definitely do not “expect” that all regulated health professionals will be required to maintain their vaccination status. Is the CBC saying, in this article, that the opinion of the resistors simply doesn’t matter? It would seem so.

Also, why pluralize the word “vaccines” rather than say “the vaccine”? How many different vaccines will all health professionals be “expected” to take?

I don’t know about you, but alternative complimentary health professionals are the mainstay of my preventative maintenance healthcare regime. For the past three decades I’ve relied on Massage Therapy and Chiropractor and Acupuncture and Herbalists, Energy Healing and Osteopathy, Reflexology and Naturopathy and Yoga and more, as I am able to afford them. I love and respect those healers tremendously! I figure if I maintain a healthy body, I won’t need to see my doctor and get medications and surgeries. Kind of like if I maintain my car (or in my case, my bicycle) by taking it to the mechanic regularly to change the oil and check the battery, my car will not die on me on a dark isolated road somewhere, unexpectedly.

I’m 60 and healthy, pain free and drug free … so far my Zen and the art of Body Maintenance philosophy is working.

In my opinion it’s way more fun to maintain a healthy immune system, and trust the natural healing process, than to invest in a brand new toxic drug that isn’t proving to be 100% safe and effective, and that might cause disability and death. Many hundreds of thousands of people have reported adverse reactions¹, after the jab, including permanent disability and death. These vaccine victims have struggled to be believed, and to find support, when they do find a sympathetic ear even senior medical staff (specialists) are baffled about how to treat the new symptoms (and diseases?) presented. You can find news about and from them here and in a 3 hour hearing here and in an interview with a British nurse and doctor here, or this interesting discussion here, and growing numbers of other places on the web too.

Many of us are choosing, as we have the right, to combat SARS CoV2 infection by living in a healthy body, and being prepared with an early treatment protocol, rather than take the risk of debilitating or deadly adverse effects.

So, whereas the CBC article suggests that we should all “expect” our health care friends and providers are marching in lock-step towards the “promise” of on-going experimental gene therapy from a Provincial Health Authority, I would assume these are each individuals capable of making up their own minds about what kind of healthcare they choose for their own bodies. And really, their (and my) personal medical history is none of anyone else’s business. If I were “expect”anything from my healthcare providers it would be to engage in the fight to protect their patients’ rights to informed consent and private medical records by challenging the medical apartheid state that they will otherwise become responsible for policing.

What is a “promise”?

What does the word “promise” mean to you? When someone promises something to me I think of something that I want, something I’ve requested, something I’d be happy to receive. If someone ORDERS you to do something, and threatens to take away your livelihood and your ability to participate in society if you refuse, is that the same thing as PROMISING it?

According to my trusty thesaurus, other words for “promise” include word of honour, assurance, pledge, vow, guarantee, oath, bond, agreement, guarantee. Which word do you think would best replace “promise” in this sentence, from the article?

Vaccines are expected to be made a requirement for licensing of all regulated health professionals in B.C., but that's not a decision that was made by the college. Instead, it's been promised in the form of an order from Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.

These two words, “expected” and “promised,” are perhaps intended to remind us there is a one-size-fits-all-must-jab “solution” that we dare not question. They certainly do not invite a consideration of other options. The author of this article neglects to remind us of our right to informed consent, a right we were all “promised” when the Nuremberg Code was established following WWII.

Who is “the regulator?”

Rather than referring to The College of Chiropractors which currently oversees Chiropractic practice in BC, and is who the motion was addressed to, the CBC article repeatedly uses the words “regulator” and “regulated.” Why?

1. In the title: “B.C. chiropractors vote for regulator to 'take a stand' against COVID-19 vaccine mandate”

2. In the photo caption: “Vaccination against COVID-19 is expected to become a requirement for licensing of all regulated health professionals in B.C.”

3. In the opening paragraph: “B.C. chiropractors voted overwhelmingly this week for their professional regulator to "take a stand" against a promised COVID-19 shot mandate, bringing a long-running conflict over vaccination back into the spotlight.”

4. “Vaccines are expected to be made a requirement for licensing of all regulated health professionals in B.C …”

I don’t know why they are drilling this idea of a “regulator” into us, rather than naming the College (CCBC), but I have an idea.

Don’t quote me on this, I don’t have documented evidence, but I’ve heard (from a trusted source) that the BC Government is, and has been for several months, undergoing a radical overhaul of the way alternative complimentary practitioners, like chiropractors and acupuncturists and herbalists and massage therapists, are “regulated.”

It’s my understanding the currently the College of Chiropractors Board (CCBC) is comprised of half chiropractors and half representatives from the general public, and these people are elected by the College membership. What I’ve heard (but haven’t yet officially confirmed) is that the current BC Government is working to replace this elected board (and the boards of other “Colleges” that oversee other groups of medical professionals) with government appointed personnel.

What does it mean to have government appointed boards overseeing all medical organizations? In my estimation it means that medicine will become even more politicized. We’re already seeing Health Care be replaced by Pharma Care.

Imagine if boards and policies are subjected to electoral changes every few years. I suppose, if we lived in a true democracy, we might consider this level of government involvement to be a good thing, we can just elect someone different next time. But is there really a “someone different” anymore? Really, what’s the difference between this NDP government (that’s destroying ancient forests and imprisoning Indigenous land protectors etc) and the Gordon Campbell BC Liberals who gutted healthcare back in the 2000s?

Do you remember, pre-Liberal, when low income people had access to 36 subsidized visits per year - 12 for Registered Massage Therapy, and 12 for Physiotherapy, and 12 for Chiropractic? The Liberals changed that to 10 combined visits, 10 in total per year, where previously we’d had access to 36.

And what happens when people don’t have access to natural pain relief and preventative health care maintenance? I’m not a qualified practitioner but as a client I can tell you that the body doesn’t become naturally healthier and pain free as we age without some kind of on-going maintenance. Who can forget the opioid crisis, Big Pharma centred pain management brought to you by the very same corporate entities now pushing an experimental gene therapy drug.

Another thing to consider …. when all the critically minded, vax hesitant people are fired from their jobs and the only people left working for government are those who willingly follow orders and go along with the regular booster cycle to keep their vaccination passports up to date, what will our “democracy” look like then?

Hmmm .. can’t think of any historical examples of that kind of one-mindedness going completely sideways …

What can Chiropractors teach us about healthy living?

The CBC article states that:

78 per cent of those in attendance voted in favour of a resolution to "maintain the right to medical freedom of choice" for chiropractors.

This is great! 78% are saying if you want to follow the Big Pharma-Government-Health Authority protocol and take your chances with their one size fits all solution, that’s your choice and you’re entitled to it. They’re also upholding the right to informed consent enshrined in the Nuremberg Code, and the right to freedom from discrimination outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But rather than focussing on this leadership role that Chiropractors are bravely taking, in this time of censorship and increasingly authoritarian control, the article attacks the validity of Chiropractors to even weigh in on the issue:

Because of their lack of training in infectious disease treatment and prevention, they are specifically prohibited from providing advice on vaccination in B.C. 

Is it appropriate to assume that among the 78% who voted in favour of maintaining bodily autonomy, none of them have ever taken courses or done research into infectious disease treatment and prevention? Why not focus on what Chiropractors actually do know about maintaining healthy immunity through proper spinal alignment and healthy neurotransmitters and all that stuff they studied and practice every day as medical professionals?

It seems the government regulated and advertiser maintained CBC are not really interested in, or able to, establish an environment where we can have an intelligent discussion and hear the opinions of dissenting health care professionals and make up our own minds about what is best for us as individuals, and as communities. It’s get the jab, or go home. Nice.

Digging up the manipulated past

Not long ago, a chiropractor friend (hereafter known as CF) told me about an unfortunate situation in 2018 with a Chiropractor posting a video intended to remind people that living in a healthy body is as important, perhaps more important, than getting and annual flu shot. My CF agreed the video shouldn’t have been posted, but said it was unfair the way the comments were taken out of context by the media, and the entire CCBC was subsequently reprimanded.

The December 2021 CBC article makes sure we all know about this incident:

… there have been issues in the past with college board members posting anti-vaccine materials online — a problem that led to the resignation of the board's vice-chair in 2018 after CBC reported on an anti-vaccine video he'd created.

First of all, the quote references “members,” as in plural, more than one. But the incident they’re referring to only involved one singular member.

Please take a moment to look at the video that Dr. Avtar Jassal posted in 2018, which has been truncated to 37 seconds. Clearly the good Doctor had much more to say on the issue. And whose idea was it to add the rather ominous music at the end of it?

Again, I have questions. I understand why they dig up this old history, it’s because it supports their narrative. We’re not expected to contemplate why so many health professionals are refusing the jab, we’re being inculcated into an environment that mistrusts any dissenting views on the one size fits all solution. But looking at their wording here, when did we start referring to the flu shot as a “vaccine”? I grew up thinking a vaccine was something you get once in a lifetime, not every once in a while. Will we next be looking forward to forced mandates and passport ID for flu shots?

And I’m sure I’m not the only one who remembers a time before flu shots even existed. I grew up understanding that the body sometimes catches a cold or flu, and this is when we cancel school or work for a few days, go to bed, sleep, take care of ourselves and/or are lovingly cared for so we can rest while our body does its natural healing thing that results in a stronger and more robust immune system.

I’ve never had a flu shot and I am not a client of Big Pharma in any other way either. Also, we had waaayyyy fewer vaccines when I was a kid. What has happened to the health of the soil and water, and our food, and to our natural immune systems, that kids are now required to get over a dozen different types of drug injections just to survive on this planet?

Again, the question becomes, who does it serve to entirely shut down the conversation of “how to live in a healthy body?”

Aside: If you’re really willing to challenge your understanding of the role of viruses in our world, check out this extremely interesting evolutionary explanation from Dr. Zach Bush. This one helped me release a lot of fear.

Is it “news”, or “propaganda”?

The CBC article goes on to claim (wrongfully, I would conjecture) that Mark Foullong has presented his motion “without evidence.”

The resolution's author, Mark Foullong of Kelowna, told the meeting it would be "unlawful and unconstitutional" for the college to mandate COVID-19 vaccines, claiming without evidence that they are not proven to be safe or effective.

Are we expected to believe that a chiropractic doctor has gone through all this effort, and the consequences of it, simply on a whim? Because he sees himself as some kind of Chiropractic rebel? Or, did the CBC reporter ask to see the evidence that Mark (and the 78% voting with him) based their decision on? Did they receive that evidence and then suppress it from their reading public? More likely they did not ask the most important question, in my opinion, which is why. Why, also, does the CBC and other corporate-state media continue to pretend that there is no evidence to consider? Do they think we’ve all been watching silly cat videos since March 2020, haven’t checked into the constantly changing landscape of data and independent journalism, for example this December 6th article about 60,000 scientists calling for an end to mass vaccination?

Is the tax payer subsidized CBC delivering the kind of “fair and balanced” journalism we deserve? Is now a good time to remember that Stephen Harper’s Conservatives gutted the CBC, and subsequent governments have done nothing of significance to reverse that?

What else did the Chiropractors vote on?

If we examine the full text of Dr. Foullong’s resolution we learn that he wasn’t just interested in protecting and maintaining the right to medical freedom for his colleagues, he also wants to protect the rights of patients:

That the CCBC take a stand to protect and maintain the right to medical freedom of choice for all health/medical interventions for BC registrant chiropractic doctors (not impose any conditions on licensure) and BC chiropractic patients (not impose conditional or discriminatory access to chiropractic care). That CCBC registrants and chiropractic patients in BC maintain the right to choose medical privacy and have honoured their medical privacy, and further their right to choose whether or not to engage in health/medical procedures free of coercion, manipulation or mandates. (October 29, 2021 - Dr. Mark Foullong)

What’s there to say about that except thank you, Dr. Foullong and the 78%.

Medical Apartheid

Many years ago I attended a roundtable with Dr. Mark Sherman talking about the importance of health care practitioners to collaborate with their colleagues for the most effective patient care. When Dr. Sherman said, “I don’t have all the tools in my toolbox,” I realized he’s one of those rare allopathic doctors who understands he has some very effective tools, but he’s not necessarily the final authority on healing every single condition. Every other health professional also has something to offer, and sometimes it’s in the patients’ best interest to work in collaboration with complementary health care professionals.

Are there any efforts, at any level of government, to incorporate (and subsidize) complementary healthcare practitioners? Or is the current situation being used as simply another reason to privatize and limit healthcare access to an elite portion of society, and to consider pharmaceuticals as the only solution to everything that ails us?

What is happening to Canada’s world class healthcare system? In recent years the discussion has been all about expanding it to include better access to PharmaCare. I get that’s useful for some, I’m not opposed to drugs for people who truly need them, but at this time (and hopefully for the rest of my life), this is of no interest to me, and the many healthy people like me who would prefer to be supported in our quest to remain healthy, rather than only to be treated if/when we become sick.

Alternative Media

In my opinion it’s becoming increasingly important for all of us to open our minds, engage our natural curiosity, and to delve into areas of study that may be new to us.

We are so lucky to have access to the world’s library, at our fingertips! There are so many reputable sources now, but internet search algorithms have been manipulated to return corporate and state media results so those other independent voices are difficult to discover. While the technology remains available I recommend talking with friends, share your favourite resources, and support those content providers that you grow to trust. Keeping them ad-free means keeping their minds independent. If you’re interested in delving into the world of the vaccine hesitant, these are some Substack contributors that I’ve found particularly helpful on this topic:

Alex Berensen, Robyn Chuter, Glenn Greenwald, Charles Eisenstein

Freedom of information and the right to bodily autonomy are some of those important things that our ancestors fought and died for. I believe it’s our responsibility to arm ourselves with knowledge, before we willingly surrender those rights, even as powerful forces insist that it’s absolutely required, for the “greater good.” Rights are hard to win, and much too easy to surrender.

My conclusion

After several months of investigation my own research based conclusion is that these vaccine mandates are not about health care. Digitized passports enabling participation in society is not about the “greater good.” There is something more going on.

The focus from the corporate and state funded media, and the government, isn’t to expand our awareness about illness, natural immunity, alternative health care options, the power of plant based living. The focus has been on dismissing, and in many cases smearing, accredited medical personnel, and journalists, offering dissenting views.

Censorship is happening on a grand scale, they’re removing videos, closing accounts, slapping a “misinformation” banner on posts they don’t like, effectively shutting down curiosity and self investigation and discussion. In most cases they don’t even offer content creators any specific reason for removing their videos or closing their accounts, they’re just re-taking control of the alternative media space which was originally thought of as a place to allow and encourage public opinion and discussion.

Maybe it’s time for journalists, and journalism schools, to stop pretending there is anything “fair” or “balanced” about what they’re doing. Unless they’re making a sincere effort to offer the paying public an opportunity to hear dissenting voices, they are nothing more than a propaganda arm of the corporate influenced governments and their carefully selected personnel. If we’re only offered one message, one solution and all other voices are being silenced, if they are more focussed on convincing us rather than educating us, this is not what democracy looks like.

I’m not asking you to change your mind. I’m asking you to expand your vision. What you choose to do with your body, that’s your choice. Won’t you extend the right to informed peaceful resistance to the rest of us?

1. Most every country maintains a Vaccine Adverse Reaction Database which records side effects from vaccinations. It doesn’t mean all the side effects reported were caused by the vaccine, but it’s intended, presumably, as a scientific way of tracking what’s going on after a drug is rolled out. At least, that’s what my independent alternative health care representatives tell me. Especially with brand new drugs, it’s important to closely monitor reactions, for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, the people and the numbers in the SARS CoV 2 vaccine databases are largely being ignored. It’s an article for another day.

In Canada: https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/

In the USA: https://vaers.hhs.gov/index.html