Deanna McLeod 2
Day 4 · September 11, 2026 · 0:17:56
Key points Deanna McLeod, of Kaleidoscope Strategic medical research firm with 20 years of evidence-based evaluation experience, resumes her presentation of population-level health data. She presents Ontario OHIP billing data for 16 million people showing elevated care-seeking for Bell's palsy following the mRNA vaccine rollout, above chance-level bands. She reports a 13% increase in hospital pulmonary embolisms and myocarditis increases of 87% and 76%, arguing myocarditis was not merely rare and transient. She argues the mRNA products were approved on only two months of trial data via emergency rolling reviews, monitoring harm rather than proving safety. She presents SEER cancer registry and health-seeking data suggesting increases in breast, uterine, ovarian, and cervical cancers, especially metastatic cases in women under 50. She contends the products were regulated as vaccines despite acting as gene therapy, resulting in lower safety-testing standards. She argues inflated projections based on China's data triggered public health orders that gave one chief medical officer authority to direct all provincial healthcare workers.
Speaker 2
0:00 So I'd like to recall as a witness, Deanna McLeod, who we just ran out of time yesterday, but there was more to say. 0:11 And so Deanna, would you please take the Bible in your right hand? 0:18 Deanna McLeod, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? 0:24 So help me God. 0:26 I'll just ask you, we've got about 13 minutes. 0:31 to use that time wisely and continue your presentation. Speaker 1
0:45 Oh, Kaleidoscope Strategic Medical Research firm, 20 years of doing evidence-based evaluations and trying to counter pharmaceutical bias and preparing guidelines for cancer. 0:56 And I'm pressing my slide thing and it is not working. 1:04 Okay. 1:06 So I'm just going to show you a few more slides. 1:09 We got through part of them yesterday. 1:12 The slide on the left is a slide for Bell's palsy. 1:16 So a number of the people who reported injuries. 1:19 neurological injuries following the mRNA vaccine. 1:23 So you can see on the left-hand slide, that is OHIP data, which represents the billing data for 16 million people in Ontario, Canada. 1:35 This is basically health utility data or access to care data. 1:39 So you can see that up until the COVID-19 1:44 MRNA product rollout. 1:47 You had a steady state. 1:49 Whenever we went into lockdowns, it drops down. 1:51 There's a rebound. 1:52 Those are the white dots. 1:53 And then after that, going to the right, you can see that there's an elevation in the number of people on a monthly basis seeking care for Bell's palsy. 2:08 So if you were to look at the steady line in the middle, that would be what would be expected during that time. 2:14 And those little blue dots are all of the increases in what would be expected at that time. 2:19 And these are monthly rates. 2:20 So let's just look at that. 2:22 So we would say maybe seven or eight people would be expected to be looking for care for Bell's palsy in a given time. 2:29 And then we have a jump up to nine, 10 at any given point. 2:32 And the gray line, 2:34 So band is what would be due to chance, and what's above the band would be something that would unlikely be due to chance. Speaker 2
2:41 Right. 2:41 And when you see numbers like seven, that's per 100,000 of the population. Speaker 1
2:45 Yes, thank you. 2:46 Seven per 100,000 per month. 2:48 So if you add that to a year, that would be many more. 2:51 On the right-hand side, you have health-seeking behavior accessing health hospital care. 2:58 So they don't do it on a per-patient basis for that. 3:01 So the hospital care would be, you know, there's an event at the hospital, and it's either going up or down. 3:09 So you can see for Bell's palsy in the hospital, there's a trend towards increased need, but then 3:16 With 2020 and 2021, you see an increase, especially in 2021, and that represents a 4% increase. 3:22 So one is community care. 3:25 The other one is hospital care. 3:26 So you have to kind of look at both of those if you want to understand the trends. 3:30 So pulmonary embolisms, there's been lots of talks about clotting over the inquiry. 3:35 And so you can see here on the left-hand side, when you're looking at community care, you've got a trend going up and the lines don't necessarily align very well, except for maybe whenever the vaccine was rolled out initially. 3:48 But if you look at the hospital care, you can actually see that there's a 13% increase in pulmonary embolisms. 3:54 So those are fatal clots or could be potentially fatal clots potentially. 3:58 going to the lungs. 3:59 So pulmonary embolism, that's an increase of 13%. 4:02 It's well above the boundary of something that would be due to chance. 4:06 So if you were somebody who would be wanting to know what the actual rate of side effects were for an mRNA product, there's a lot of talk about PFAS, which is the passive surveillance system in Canada, but this is much more reliable data because you can't skew this. 4:22 This is people actually looking for care for these actual conditions. Speaker 2
4:28 And I had to stop because we get witness after witness saying they couldn't get care. 4:32 So this is actual data for witnesses who got care. 4:35 Yeah. Speaker 1
4:36 When I'm saying care, that's like health seeking behavior. 4:39 I have a problem. 4:40 The doctor comes in, sees them, and then they have to bill for that interaction. 4:45 And so what they bill is it's pulmonary embolism. 4:48 where I'm billing for Bell's palsy. 4:49 So this is a qualified medical professional making a diagnosis and assigning a diagnostic code. 4:56 So it's unlikely. 4:58 I mean, maybe some people won't bill or maybe they bill incorrectly, but those billing inconsistencies would be consistent over time. 5:06 It's not like they would change during COVID. Speaker 2
5:07 What I was getting as we have witnesses being sent away from ER without any diagnostic at all, and it keeps repeating, but then later on they're diagnosed. 5:18 with these conditions so it's just it's an interesting twist. Speaker 1
5:21 So this is hospital care data I'm going to keep going this is hospital care data for myocarditis there's various codes for myocarditis or hospital codes for myocarditis you can see on the right hand side the one this is annual numbers now it's it's fairly consistent but then you have the mRNA product rollout 5:41 You see this big jump, it's above the boundaries for chance. 5:46 On the right-hand side is another code for myocarditis. 5:49 It's consistent again, mRNA rollout, big jump in 2021 and again in 2022. 5:55 These represent increases of 87% and 76%. 5:59 And so a lot of the talking points that we've heard have been that myocarditis is rare and transient. 6:06 I would probably argue that the data for 16 million people in Ontario would 6:11 say something other than that. 6:14 I just like to go through, this is just a timeline of the data that came out at various time points for myocarditis. 6:22 So this was one of the side effects that was attributed to the vaccine. 6:26 So on the far left-hand side, you can see that that's kind of time zero. 6:31 And that's whenever the mRNA product was rolled out. 6:34 And it was rolled out based on level one evidence, which is a randomized controlled trial, but only two months of level one evidence. 6:42 It was a fairly large study, but it's very difficult to understand within two months if something could be harmful to the heart or not. 6:49 A little bit longer. 6:50 So each of those bands afterwards are six-month intervals. 6:54 So a little further along, you get the six-month follow-up data for the randomized controlled trial, specifically for Pfizer. 7:00 And in that trial, which came out, you know, in September 2021, you have this, if you actually looked and analyzed the deaths, you have nine cardiovascular deaths in the mRNA product arm and five cardiovascular deaths in the placebo arm. 7:17 So what that tells you, and this was a population of healthy individuals, so there was a signal as early as six months after rollout. 7:26 But I'm just going to pause right now because I'd just like to explain something about the regulatory framework. 7:32 So on a normal regulatory framework and standard practice, a pharmaceutical company would have to prove 7:39 that a product was safe before it accessed the market. 7:43 So you prove safety and you do that through rigorous testing. 7:47 The testing would include clinical examinations. 7:49 It would include lab work. 7:51 You'd look for biomarkers. 7:53 You do an extensive testing. 7:54 It would take years to complete that trial. 7:56 And then at the end of the trial, you would look at the results and you would be able to say, is it safe or is it not? 8:02 And does it meet the standards for regulatory approval? 8:05 However, during the pandemic, 8:07 Because this was a public health crisis, a new emergency framework was put in place and they were able to conduct approvals based on what they call rolling reviews. 8:18 And a rolling review basically means that you get to take sneak peeks at the trial. 8:22 And if there's an early sign of benefit, then you actually get to approve the product based on that early data. 8:28 So these products were approved based on two months of data. 8:32 And if you were to actually consider how carefully they were looking at them, they were basically the patients had a phone app and they would basically say, did you get this? 8:39 Did you get that? 8:40 Did you not get that? 8:41 Little clinical examination, no lab marker, no lab reviews. 8:48 It's not a standard clinical trial. 8:50 All of that to say is that the six months, we see that there's some trouble. 8:54 They're relying on post-marketing on pharmacovigilance data. 8:58 There was a report three months later from Pfizer, and it basically highlighted that there were serious cardiovascular deaths worldwide, 1,403 cases, and 135 deaths after the rollout. 9:12 That's within three months. 9:13 So we approve it at two months later. 9:16 At three months, there's this report from Pfizer. 9:19 They had to hire new staff because there were so many side effect reports from the vaccine rollout. 9:26 The six-month data comes out. 9:28 Still, there's not a lot. 9:29 The Israeli study, which is a matched cohort study, which is fairly reliable in terms of, you know, maybe moving the needle in terms of people acknowledging vaccines. 9:39 a side effect. 9:40 And then Ontario Public Health comes out and says, oh, myocarditis, there's an alert. 9:45 So we're concerned with the Israeli study because there was more people getting myocarditis with the Moderna than the Pfizer. 9:52 It's not like don't take it or let's start risk profiling people, which is what you should be doing. 9:59 It was take the Pfizer and not the Moderna and you still can't get an exemption for your vaccine. 10:04 Sorry, don't go to school. 10:06 don't go to your job or whatever it was. 10:09 So this is abnormal clinical practice. 10:12 I've never seen this before. 10:13 We don't do this in cancer. 10:15 A little bit further along, Dr. Davidson mentioned the Nordic matched cohort study. 10:20 It was a very reliable study, fairly well structured, 23 million people. 10:25 They only looked for 28 days after. 10:27 So this is a very short timeframe right after the mRNA product rollout. 10:31 And they basically said, 10:34 there's a real risk in young people. 10:36 So I just want to say, by the time they were able to get a properly designed study, it was two and a half years later. 10:44 So what this means is that the product was put on the market, people were harmed for two and a half years because we were negligent in doing our safety testing prior to rollout, and then we acknowledged the harm. 10:58 So this whole idea of rushing a product to market for the good of the people is ridiculous because what we're actually doing when we do rush a product is we monitor not safety, but harm. 11:10 And the people who witnessed today are the people who've been harmed by this negligent regulatory practice, which needs to stop. 11:19 So I'm just going to zip to another set of slides. 11:23 And these are ones that we've presented in Washington at the President's Council Panel in June 2021. 11:30 And so on the right-hand side, on the left-hand side, sorry, 11:35 You have on the upper panel, you have breast cancer, and that's greater than 50 years old, and then breast cancer less than 50 years old. 11:44 And again, we have a trend for an increase in breast cancer. 11:46 You've got your great confidence intervals. 11:50 And then the yellow band is the rollout of the MMA product in 2021. 11:55 And almost immediately following the rollout, you see that those blue dots start to increase above the gray band. 12:01 And what that means is that there's more health-seeking behavior for breast cancer now from women older than 50, which is when you expect it. 12:10 But tragically, on the right-hand panel, you have incredibly elevated health-seeking behavior for breast cancer in younger women less than 50 years old, well beyond the confidence intervals. 12:26 So if you look at uterine cancer, that's the panel below that. 12:31 You have greater than 50, again, off the charts out of the regular confidence intervals. 12:37 On the right-hand side, less than 50, again, right off the charts. 12:41 So I just want to stress that in our exuberance to get a product available for COVID, which was an incredible threat, we classified this mRNA product as a vaccine. 12:57 And we did the safety testing for a vaccine, even though the actual mode of action was gene therapy. 13:06 So a gene therapy, which is an mRNA product, would be what this would be technically classified for in terms of how it works in your body. 13:14 But the regulatory classification was as a vaccine because it was intended to stimulate immunity or prevent infection. 13:22 So they actually did this switcheroo and called it a vaccine because of the intention to treat. 13:27 And that's never been done. 13:29 And the safety testing, therefore, was very much lower because they considered it a vaccine rather than gene therapy. 13:35 I know I got to go fast. Speaker 2
13:37 Well, you've got about a minute. 13:38 Okay. Speaker 1
13:40 So this is cancer registry data. 13:42 So when you look at health care seeking behavior, you think, okay, what is this? 13:46 Is this new cancers? 13:48 Is it people whose cancer progressed because we did lockdowns and shut down cancer care? 13:53 you know, what are we actually looking at? 13:55 And this is SEER data. 13:56 SEER data is cancer registry data. 13:58 It's the most reliable population level data that you can look to. 14:02 This is SEER data in women less than 50 years. 14:06 And this is women presenting with metastatic cancer. 14:10 So breast cancer, cervical cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer. 14:14 And the yellow band is the COVID period. 14:18 It's by year. 14:19 And what you can see over the COVID period, 14:23 not always beginning in 2021, but in around there, you see this uptick. 14:28 So there's always a trend upwards, but you see an extra increase in women with metastatic breast cancer, ovarian cancer, cervical cancer at presentation, meaning that for some reason this cancer is growing very fast. 14:44 This is data that represents half of the U.S. population. 14:47 It's cancer registry data, which means that it's been validated and confirmed as such. 14:52 So I just want to, please give me a little bit of time. 14:57 I want to explain how this happened because it needs to stop. 15:06 So the way that this happens is who recommended, who recommends surveillance? 15:13 As an international health regulation member, we have signed on to collaborate with the World Health Organization in doing surveillance. 15:20 They recommend a PCR test. 15:22 The PCR test is unreliable, and I'm going to show you why it's unreliable right now. 15:27 So at the very beginning in wave one, you have hospital capacity and ICU capacity, which left-hand side is peak inpatient ICU capacity. 15:39 They predicted or they do their projections or their modeling based on information from China. 15:44 So the World Health Organization conveys that there's a crisis in China 15:49 hospitals basically say, we're going to be in trouble. 15:51 We have to actually get some hospital capacity here. 15:54 The red is what they projected based on the numbers from China. 15:58 The blue is what they actually used. 16:01 So we weren't in a health crisis because if we were in a health crisis, all that, and if that data from China were correct, that would be blue all the way up. 16:09 But it's not. 16:10 This is empty hospitals and empty health care units. 16:14 This is an affidavit from Deborah Gordon, who is 16:19 the vice president of Alberta Health Services. 16:24 And the reason I wondered why on earth could they get it that wrong? 16:27 And you know why they got it that wrong is because they needed those accentuated numbers to trigger public health policy right across the province. 16:35 And once public health policy was triggered, then the chief medical officer of health became the quarterback for the pandemic response. 16:45 And 16:46 This is the order number 16, 2020, which basically the public chief medical officer of health basically sent to the regulators to tell all of the doctors in Alberta to come in line. 17:01 And this basically says, 17:03 I'm sending this to you that you have to come in line with me and my public or the COVID-19 policy. 17:09 And I have the authority to take whatever other steps that are, in my opinion, necessary in order to lessen the impact of public health emergencies. 17:18 So once that impact, once those public health orders or acts were triggered, the Quarantine Act at the federal level and each of the public health emergency acts at each of the different provinces are named different things. 17:32 This one person was able to direct every single health care worker in all of the provinces. 17:41 And they were able to do whatever the heck they wanted. Speaker 2
17:45 And Deanna, I have to, I'm sorry. Speaker 1
17:47 And I'm done. Speaker 2
17:48 Okay, good, good, good. 17:49 So we stretched that out. 17:52 We're very thankful that you came back. 17:54 So.