Alberta doctors push back on provincial COVID-19 task force report

A task force created by the UCP government to review the province's pandemic response has issued its final report and, while it is currently being reviewed by the province, Alberta doctors are pushing back, saying it contains misinformation and poses a threat to public health.

Among the $2-million report's key recommendations are calls for the provincial government to "immediately halt" the use of all COVID-19 vaccines without "full disclosure" of potential risks and to bar healthy children and teenagers from getting COVID shots.

Underpinning the 269-page document are a number of statements — that doctors argue go against medical and scientific consensus — criticizing the use of vaccines and a range of other pandemic protections while recommending doctors be allowed to prescribe alternative medications, including ivermectin.

Calling it "anti-science" and "anti-evidence," the Alberta Medical Association (AMA) claims the document advances misinformation.

"It speaks against the broadest and most diligent international scientific collaboration and consensus in history.… Science and evidence brought us through [the pandemic] and saved millions of lives," AMA president Dr. Shelley Duggan said in a statement.

The task force review was led by Dr. Gary Davidson, the former chief of emergency medicine at the Red Deer Regional Hospital Centre.

During the height of the fourth wave in 2021, Davidson claimed hospital admission numbers were overblown and being manipulated to justify public health restrictions — accusations Alberta Health Services rejected as false.

Calling him a "contrarian," Alberta Premier Danielle Smith last year defended her decision to appoint Davidson, saying the province wanted to hear from more diverse viewpoints. 

MLA Eric Bouchard, a United Conservative Party (UCP) politician who represents Calgary-Lougheed, posted news of the report's completion on social media on Friday. He touted the report as bringing Alberta "one step closer to the truth."

In a subsequent post, which received hundreds of "likes" on X, formerly known as Twitter, Bouchard said he is committed to working with Albertans to "ensure that the historical pain caused by the response to COVID-19 does not repeat."

But the document's posting on an Alberta government website has also met with strong criticism from the members of the medical community.

'It's dangerous'

A former chief medical officer of health for Alberta is pushing back against the report.

"I think it was a waste of time. It was a waste of money. And under no circumstances should the recommendations be implemented until there's been a full and expert public discussion of the report," said Dr. James Talbot, an adjunct professor at the University of Alberta.

Duggan, with the AMA, said she's hearing concerns from colleagues about "deficiencies and biases" in the report and fully agrees with those concerns.

"It's dangerous, frankly, that this report now exists on a government website," said Dr. Braden Manns, a professor of medicine and health economics at the University of Calgary.

"Distrust of public health officials is at an all-time high. This is not going to help."

The report should be retracted, according to Dr. Lynora Saxinger, an infectious diseases specialist at the University of Alberta Hospital.

"I would classify that as a public health threat. Because I think it actually gives a lot of poor quality information a veneer of respectability and official-ness," she said.

Both Manns and Saxinger were involved in the scientific advisory group, which reviewed emerging evidence as well as national and international guidance and provided recommendations to Alberta Health Services during the worst of the pandemic.

The task force is, at times, critical of the group's work, claiming their rapid turnaround times prevented "a full critical appraisal of the evidence."

Value of vaccines questioned

The report claims COVID-19 primarily affects the elderly, questions the value of vaccines, and calls on the government to rein in their use.

"[The] task force recommends halting the use of COVID-19 vaccines without full disclosure of their potential risks, ending their use in healthy children and teenagers, conducting further research into their effectiveness, establishing support for vaccine-injured individuals, and providing an opt-out mechanism from federal public health policy," it states.

According to Talbot, the recommendations, if adopted, would take away a parent's right to vaccinate their children as they see fit.

"This is a vaccine that's been given in the billions of doses. It's one of the safest, most effective vaccines we've ever had and yet they're calling into question [its] safety," he said.

The authors point to concerns about the risk of myocarditis in adolescent males and claims there is no long-term safety data for mRNA vaccines in minors.

Dr. Sam Wong, president of the section of pediatrics with the Alberta Medical Association, disagrees with the recommendations. He contends the group cherry-picked its data.

"It's kind of based on bad science and their recommendations are not really what I would consider valid.… If the government follows through on it, then it's bad public health," said Wong.

"The risk of myocarditis … is much higher and much more severe with COVID than than it is with the vaccination."

Manns also refutes numbers in the report.

"The risk of myocarditis is not 50 per cent. It's less than one in a thousand. It generally happens within the first couple doses. It [impacts] younger boys. You have to tailor the vaccinations to the type of individual," he said.

A risk-based approach is already used by the National Advisory Committee on Immunization, said Manns, adding there is solid evidence showing COVID immunizations reduce the risk of severe illness.

Ivermectin discussed

The report alludes to a lack of transparency during the COVID-19 pandemic and calls for legislative changes that would give doctors more freedom to prescribe "non-traditional" therapies during future pandemics.

Describing Alberta's approach to drugs such as ivermectin as "restrictive," the task force calls for whistleblower protection for doctors who raise concerns about public health measures or so-called "emerging therapies."

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic medication, for both veterinary and human use, that is not authorized for the treatment of COVID-19 in Canada.

"During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal agencies, health service providers and regulators discouraged the use of potentially lifesaving off-label treatments. This approach compromised the well-being of Albertans and violated their right to informed consent," the authors wrote.

Manns has serious concerns about how data on ivermectin is represented in the report and which information is included.

Several studies examining the efficacy of ivermectin during the pandemic have been withdrawn, he said.

"When you then get down to the good studies, unfortunately, ivermectin just didn't work. It didn't work in early COVID. It didn't work in severe COVID," he said.

The report takes aim at regulatory colleges, saying physicians who wanted to treat Albertans with off-label drugs, such as ivermectin, were "subject to disciplinary review."

It calls for changes to the Health Professions Act that would prevent colleges from obstructing the use of such drugs in the future.

When it comes to pandemic-related closures and restrictions, the report claims they did little to prevent transmission and had negative economic and social consequences. It calls for a more balanced approach to future decisions.

The authors argue Alberta put too much emphasis on immunity derived from vaccination rather than immunity acquired through infection, and say the government should be more balanced in its future communication and avoid "coerced vaccination."

Calling for more transparency about pandemic-related decision-making, the report also recommends future decisions related to a public health emergency should be made by the Alberta Emergency Management Agency or an appointed person.

Questioning 'consensus'

CBC News was unable to reach the task force chair, Dr. Gary Davidson, for comment.

However, during a podcast hosted by Chris Scott — an Alberta restaurant owner who was accused of breaching public health restrictions and later had his charges stayed — Davidson pushed back against the idea of "medical consensus."

"There's no such thing as consensus in science. That makes no sense," he said.

"Science is about questioning everything, experimenting and proving whether it's true or not. That's science. Consensus is a religion idea and I don't think it belongs in this field, personally."

A spokesperson for the minister of health told CBC News the provincial government received the interim report in August, for initial review, and a final report was received in December. 

The government is reviewing it but has yet to make any final policy decisions, the statement said.

"The task force was designed to include health professionals from diverse practice areas, including infectious disease, public health, general practice, acute care, immunology, analytics and emergency medicine," the spokesperson said in an email.

"Their recommendations offer a perspective on how the government can be better positioned to protect the health and safety of Albertans in the future."

Meanwhile, Duggan with the Alberta Medical Association, worries about the implications of the report, arguing it "sows distrust."

"It criticizes proven preventive public health measures while advancing fringe approaches. It makes recommendations for the future that have real potential to cause harm."