Canadians unwittingly funding institutionalized 'debunking' of misinformation and disinformation

Supposed experts are more skilled in science commentating than actual science — but what exactly is being shared in these engagements and how much are the presenters paid?

Remove Ads

Canadian taxpayer dollars are funneling into the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for training opportunities in science communication.

The workshops “offer several training opportunities in science communication” that are free of charge for participants and “available to health researchers across Canada.”

Participants must be based at a Canadian post-secondary or research institute and only those with Canadian post-secondary or research institute email addresses can register, says the online briefing. To ensure only the proper people get into these training sessions, “CIHR actively monitors the registration lists and will remove ineligible registrants.”

As these sessions are completely inaccessible to the laypeople, but the content of which likely affects all Canadians, Rebel News has filed an access to information request (ATIP) to obtain the slideshow deck and determine how much the speaker was paid for this engagement.

The session inquired about was titled, “Combatting Misinformation on Social Media” which ran on March 28 from 12 – 1 PM.

The description reads:

It’s important for researchers to respond swiftly to mis- and disinformation. However, in a digital age where disinformers are savvy with how they attack facts and those sharing them, it is important we debunk mindfully… and strategically. In this keynote, research scientist turned science communicator Samantha Yammine (also known as Science Sam) will share the importance and pitfalls of sharing science on social media, with lessons learned from the comms front lines during the pandemic. She’ll also share best practices and tips for effective myth-busting before a lively discussion. This is a session you’ll want to tune in for before sending that next hot take of a tweet!

So, who exactly is Science Sam and what qualifies her to preach to academics about this topic?

It appears that Sam completed a bachelor of science at the pharma-captured University of Toronto in 2012 and went on to obtain a doctorate in philosophy from the same institution in 2019.

Sam was seen as early as 2018 parading around on the streets of downtown Toronto in a white lab coat, holding a brain model, being followed by the CBC.

She describes herself as a “science commentator” and is the co-founder and co-producer of the “Science is a drag” event where scientists challenge the cis/heteronormative stereotypes of science.

Sam was listed as #34 on Toronto Life’s 50 most influential Torontonians in 2021 for her roll as a “TikTok star and COVID Queen.” She received this recognition for “reaching the 16 to 24 year old demographic with her coronavirus messaging” which apparently “bridged a gap, making her the go to COVID news source for the TikTok Gen.”

As the article points out, her then fiancé, now husband is Rishi Nayyar, the co-founder and CEO of PocketHealth.

PocketHealth is a digital medical records and imaging database that saw a 300% spike in demand in the first months of the pandemic.

According to BetaKit, PocketHealth is “armed with $20 million CAD in Series A financing led by healthcare-focused, US based investor Questa Capital and supported by existing Toronto investor Radical Ventures.”

Questa Capital’s portfolio details heavy collaboration across medical services, medical data capturing, and pharmaceutical companies, while Radical Ventures is an artificial intelligence development firm dedicated to unlocking technology to reshape our world.

Why is it that those who profited off of the pandemic are the ones at the helm of ensuring the general public is properly informed?

During this time Sam went from researching brain development and stem cell recovery to shilling for COVID vaccines.

Watch her prop up a colleague in a 3-part series hosted by University of Toronto (UofT) News called “Talking Shots with Science Sam and U of T Professor Christina Guzzo.”

Guzzo, an assistant professor at UofT’s Department of Cell & Systems Biology, says that “the benefit of being vaccinated is that you provide a dead end for this virus and the more dead ends that we have out there in the community – there ends up being no where for the virus to go and eventually that virus will die out. It will be eradicated.”

She continues on to espouse the false claim that artificially induced (i.e. vaccine derived) immunity is superior to natural immunity.

This is despite the fact that COVID-19 vaccines never stopped transmission or infection and their own studies were never structured to make that determination.

Additionally, real world data as early as April 2022 showed that the more vaccinated you were, the more likely you were to develop COVID-19, as per the Ontario Ministry of Health (MOH). On June 30, 2022, the MOH stopped reporting case rates and hospitalizations by vaccination status, arguably because it did not fit the “safe and effective” narrative.

Natural immunity was always superior to artificial, vaccine-induced immunity.

The latest research from the New England Journal of Medicine shows that COVID-19 vaccination caused children’s natural immunity to wane. Those who were unvaccinated still had strong immunity after 16 months whereas the vaccinated group, whether they had been previously infected or not, wanes within five to seven months.

Yet Guzzo continues to be amplified by Science Sam. Guzz tells the viewer that “the vaccines work really, really well. They are remarkable about protecting us” while downplaying the risks.

“The risks are very, very rare but they’re also very real… I think it’s safe to say that these risks are extremely low and acceptable.”

If those reactions are so rare then why did the federal government introduce the brand new Canadian Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) with a whopping $32 million dollar price tag?

This is a program that budgeted for 400 vaccine injury claims every year for five fiscal years from 2021 until the end of 2026 – that was capped a mere 6 months into it’s unveiling, with a fewer than 5 payouts approved.

It’s been further asserted that one must navigate a bloated bureaucracy and get the approval of a second rate doctor – your local medical officer of health who never assesses you – to have a vaccine injury formally government recognized.

And if you’re like slandered and smeared ER physician Dr. Patrick Phillips, your license to practice medicine will be stripped from you if you try to document vaccine injuries.

As per “acceptable” risks – perhaps Guzzo would like to tell that to Kevin Street, the first person to come forward with debilitating neurological and cognitive malfunction after the AstraZeneca.

Or Maddie de Garay, the 12 year old Pfizer clinical trial volunteer who is tube fed and catheter relieved and completely ignored by the medical establishment.

There’s also 17-year-old Jasmine Comeau who is wheelchair bound post injection, 16-year-old Keyonah who experienced seizures following her 1st Pfizer dose and Meredith, who explains the complexities of the multi-level filtering of Canada's immunization surveillance system keeping track of adverse events.

Then there those who are no longer here to tell their story – as is the case for grieving father Dan Hartman
whose healthy 17-year-old son Sean Hartman died suddenly a month after his first Pfizer dose.

Remember when healthy athletes dropping dead was rare? It’s not so rare anymore.

Next, the holy grail of scientific knowledge tells the viewer about the science-y Swiss cheese model of layered protection. Guzzo states:

“There’s something called the Swiss cheese model of prevention, so every strategy is like a piece of Swiss cheese. No strategy is 100% [effective]; there will always be holes where that virus can get through, but if you stack up enough pieces of Swiss cheese side by side together and then ask that virus to get through all of those different mitigation strategies, it won’t get through.”

Does this sound like science Sam? Or more like science scam?

And how much did Science Sam get paid to put together this lecture and, what did it say?

Remove Ads
Remove Ads

  • By Drea Humphrey

Stop Medical Silencing

42,416 signatures
Goal: 50,000 Signatures

Add signature

Don't Get Censored

Big Tech is censoring us. Sign up so we can always stay in touch.

Remove Ads