Read on Twitter
*A lot* of people are asking me about Dr. Hopkins, Dr. Deeks' replacement.
Sorry to be lazy, but I'll tweet the answer for everyone if that's OK:
I don't know her.
We didn't interact that I can recall.
Sorry to be lazy, but I'll tweet the answer for everyone if that's OK:
I don't know her.
We didn't interact that I can recall.
It will not matter who is in the role if the Premier and the CMOH persist in ignoring PHO advice.
So, it's not clear any personel change will impact anything.
So, it's not clear any personel change will impact anything.
I strongly believe Public Health Ontario has an obligation to the people of Ontario to share all of their advice with us regardless of whether it is accepted or refused.
I also believe Public Health Units and local Medical Officers of Health are obliged to share all of their advice to governments, regardless of whether it is accepted or not.
I am not aware of any law or specific precedent that says they may not.
That they don't is simply based on assumptions.
It's a practice, not a law.
That they don't is simply based on assumptions.
It's a practice, not a law.
Until a court rules, no one can say for sure that it's legal and constitutional for politicians to force Public Health to carry out their most sacred duty in secrecy.
It has not been tested, not that I'm aware of?
It has not been tested, not that I'm aware of?
Putting the legal bullshit aside.
Speaking not just as former PHO who served at the side of public health leaders during the most crisis filled year for public health before pandemic after Sars1/H1N1.
But as a HUMAN who is HIV+ and lives with my hyper vulnerable father...
Speaking not just as former PHO who served at the side of public health leaders during the most crisis filled year for public health before pandemic after Sars1/H1N1.
But as a HUMAN who is HIV+ and lives with my hyper vulnerable father...
It is *outrageous* and *indefensible* we continue to exist in a condition of never really knowing what Public Health advice is.
As a citizen I believe it is our RIGHT to know Public Health advice.
And as a human being, speaking from the middle of Second Wave.
Exploding exponentially all around me.
(Note: footage at end may be disturbing to some.)
And as a human being, speaking from the middle of Second Wave.
Exploding exponentially all around me.
(Note: footage at end may be disturbing to some.)
And as a human being with a mass death horror underway as we speak just 10 minutes down the road from where I am writing this.
I don't give a flying fuck what technical bureaucratic excuses - legal or otherwise - various people use to suggest Public Health advice to government should be secret.
Or that Public Health's hands are tied.
I don't give a shit about the merits of arguments technocrats make.
Or that Public Health's hands are tied.
I don't give a shit about the merits of arguments technocrats make.
Because we can't afford to.
Because people are dying.
And I'm holed up in our household bunker hoping the killer virus doesn't somehow find a way inside and kill my father, my mother or me.
Technical excuses for PUBLIC Health advice to be secret is MADNESS to me right now.
Because people are dying.
And I'm holed up in our household bunker hoping the killer virus doesn't somehow find a way inside and kill my father, my mother or me.
Technical excuses for PUBLIC Health advice to be secret is MADNESS to me right now.
I've seen public health advice to government.
No reasonable person would conclude public health recommendations is a threat to public safety and the public interest if it was public.
The Inquiry will no doubt conclude that when reviewing & judging pandemic response in Ontario.
No reasonable person would conclude public health recommendations is a threat to public safety and the public interest if it was public.
The Inquiry will no doubt conclude that when reviewing & judging pandemic response in Ontario.
Try to see how this looks 5 years from now.
10 years from now.
20 years from now.
Imagine the students who will be studying this event, and discussing this question, in a lecture hall.
They will review the shocking death toll and illness spread. Extreme suffering.
10 years from now.
20 years from now.
Imagine the students who will be studying this event, and discussing this question, in a lecture hall.
They will review the shocking death toll and illness spread. Extreme suffering.
They will ask, why did Public Health *follow orders*?
When so many innocent precious lives were in jeopardy.
Why didn't they tell the public what they were recommending, defying the politicians who didn't want the public to know they rejected advice?
When so many innocent precious lives were in jeopardy.
Why didn't they tell the public what they were recommending, defying the politicians who didn't want the public to know they rejected advice?
Was following orders and technocratic rules more important to them than lives?
Didn't they feel as publicly funded but independent officials, they had an obligation to share their recommendations with us?
Didn't they feel as publicly funded but independent officials, they had an obligation to share their recommendations with us?
Dr. Hinshaw used demented logic to validate public health secrecy.
She absurdly suggested it was undemocratic to make recommendations to the premier in public.
As if only elected officials are allowed to speak in a democracy
It was bonkers but a standard excuse PH hides behind
She absurdly suggested it was undemocratic to make recommendations to the premier in public.
As if only elected officials are allowed to speak in a democracy
It was bonkers but a standard excuse PH hides behind
Dr. Hinshaw, no one suggested you should have unilateral power to make all decisions.
You were deflecting from the uncomfortable, inconvenient question at hand.
You were deflecting from the uncomfortable, inconvenient question at hand.
I referenced Dr. Hinshaw but technocratic public health leaders in Ontario, including Dr. De Villa, use the same wildly absurd excuse that for some reason, no one questions.
(because they're doctors
)
Play this out: expert advice to govt threatens democracy if made public!
(because they're doctors
)Play this out: expert advice to govt threatens democracy if made public!
No. That's nazis.
This is about sharing expert *PUBLICLY* FUNDED *PUBLIC* HEALTH recommendations with the *PUBLIC* during a mass death calamity that is killing the *PUBLIC*.
No one is burning down the Reichstag.
This is about sharing expert *PUBLICLY* FUNDED *PUBLIC* HEALTH recommendations with the *PUBLIC* during a mass death calamity that is killing the *PUBLIC*.
No one is burning down the Reichstag.
Unelected public officials make public recommendations all the time that govts implement, reject or ignore.
*Her name is the Auditor General*.
The govt doesn't get to decide which of her recommendations we can hear.
Yet that's what many govts in Canada do with Public Health.
*Her name is the Auditor General*.
The govt doesn't get to decide which of her recommendations we can hear.
Yet that's what many govts in Canada do with Public Health.
Dr. Hinshaw and #TeamTechnocrat don't understand democracy.
Democracy is an informed public making informed civic and voting decisions.
Public recommendations isn't usurping elected officials bc they are recommendations not decisions! Electeds are still the deciders!
Democracy is an informed public making informed civic and voting decisions.
Public recommendations isn't usurping elected officials bc they are recommendations not decisions! Electeds are still the deciders!
The public depends on transparency, like knowing what recommendations the govt approved AND rejected, to hold the govt account properly. It informs democratic processes.
Keeping it secret harms democracy bc we can't make informed decisions ie: like when we vote.
Keeping it secret harms democracy bc we can't make informed decisions ie: like when we vote.
