Canada’s War on Conscientious Doctors Revs Up

My family doctor closed his 47-year-old practice a few months ago. I had chosen him back in 2003 because he owned an anti-aging clinic, offering unorthodox services such as chelation therapy, intravenous vitamin drips, hair mineral analysis and acupuncture. These weren’t covered by Ontario’s (mandatory) Health Insurance Plan (OHIP), but my independent reading had convinced me that they were worth trying, so I willingly paid for them privately.

My doctor was intelligent and innovative, with a wide-ranging scientific curiosity and enthusiasm. Back in 2003, he was permitted to demonstrate this by offering eclectic treatment options tailored to individual patient needs.

However, as the years went by, I saw him getting beaten down by ever-increasing regimentation within the government healthcare system. He wrangled once or twice with government agencies, possibly OHIP or the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), and lost.

He eventually closed the anti-aging clinic, and stopped offering unconventional treatment suggestions. Over the last few years, his practice seemed to have become little more than a prescription assembly line. Watching in the waiting room, I’d see virtually every patient emerge from his office after about four minutes with a drug prescription in hand. Next!

A few times when I grumbled to him about some idiocy in the government healthcare system, he would say, “Welcome to my world.”  He had plainly lost his enthusiasm for practising this kind of medicine, so I was not surprised when he read the writing on the wall about coming vaccination mandates and threw in the towel. His prescience became apparent on April 30, when the CPSO announced its new policy forbidding doctors from making any statements that might be considered anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing or anti-lockdowns.

This independent, conscientious professional was never going to put up with being told that he had to force all his patients to take the same treatment, regardless of their personal circumstances, when the risk of harm from COVID-19 infection is minimal for most age groups, and the evidence of vaccine injuries continues to mount.

He was not alone in his decision to withdraw from this increasingly oppressive system. Dr. Mark Trozzi, a 25-year veteran of Ontario’s healthcare system, not only closed his practice but decided to devote his time to warning the public, via his website, about the dangers of the medical tyranny that is unfolding. And in Ontario’s Grey Bruce region, Dr. Rochagné Kilian resigned her Emergency Room (ER) position due to ethical concerns. She says 80% of ER patients within the prior three months were fully vaccinated, but this information is being withheld from the public.

Meanwhile, on September 27, the CPSO ratcheted up its persecution – and no, I didn’t mean “prosecution” – of independent-minded Ontario doctors by issuing a Notice of Hearing against Dr. Patrick Phillips of Englehart. It alleges that his communications on social media regarding vaccinations, treatments, and public health measures for COVID-19 have been “misleading, incorrect, or inflammatory”.

Dr. Phillips, on his part, considers vaccine mandates shocking, even criminal. He has been deluged with requests from people seeking vaccine exemptions, people who will lose their jobs and their means of supporting their families due to vaccine mandates imposed by their employers. He describes his situation and front-line experiences eloquently in this video.

The CPSO unilaterally imposed a 12-point order on Dr. Phillips, even before he had an opportunity to present his position (supported by masses of accumulating professional evidence) through a fair hearing process. Portions of the order would be almost comical if they were not so serious. For instance, item 12 commands that Dr. Phillips “shall consent” to the CPSO providing a copy of its order to the head honchos of hospitals or clinics.

Did it never occur to the CPSO that ordering someone to consent makes a mockery of the very concept of consent?

Another prohibition imposed unilaterally upon Dr. Phillips, is that he “shall not prescribe ivermectin”. Yet a plethora of studies and testimony from highly respected experts indicates that ivermectin – a Nobel prize-winning drug – is a safe, inexpensive, and highly effective remedy, both for preventing COVID infections and for treating people after infection. This British site, for instance, contains a resource page with the latest evidence and protocols on ivermectin from around the world. The expert witnesses lined up for the Adamson Barbecue legal challenge in Ontario (especially Dr. Byram Bridle of the University of Guelph and Dr. Harvey Risch the Yale School of Medicine) also testified in sworn affidavits about the merits of ivermectin.

Dr. Phillips is not the only doctor being threatened with de-licensure by his governing body, and Ontario is not the only province making such threats. BC, Alberta, and Quebec have been placing doctors into similar straitjackets.

Benjamin Franklin warned about this stifling of independent thought more than 200 years ago: “If everyone is thinking alike, then no one is thinking,” he said.

Those who value liberty must defend the rights of courageous freethinking doctors to speak their minds without penalty from their licensing bodies or government employers.