Alberta Doctors Slam Government’s COVID-19 Report as “Anti-Science” and Harmful
The Alberta Medical Association has sharply criticized a recent government report on the province’s COVID-19 response,calling it “anti-science” and a threat to public health. The 269-page report, released without notice on Friday, has sparked outrage among medical professionals for its controversial recommendations and perceived disregard for established scientific consensus.
A Report Under Fire
The report, commissioned by Premier Danielle Smith in 2022,was authored by a panel tasked with reviewing how data was collected and used during the pandemic. However, Dr.Shelley Duggan, Director of the Alberta Medical Association, described it as “anti-scope and anti-prescriptions,” warning that its recommendations could cause harm.
“It promotes disinformation. it goes against collaboration and the widest and most diligent international scientific consensus in history,” Duggan stated. She also lamented the $2 million spent on the report, suggesting the funds could have been better used for hospital beds or medical treatments.
Controversial Recommendations
Among the report’s most contentious proposals is the call to suspend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and adolescents unless full risk disclosures are provided. It also advocates for legislative changes to allow doctors greater freedom to prescribe alternative therapies, including drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which are not approved for COVID-19 treatment by Health Canada.
The report further questions Alberta’s public screening methods during the pandemic, suggesting they may have led to “inconsistent determinations concerning the real level of infection.” It argues that measures like business closures and school shutdowns had a “low relative effect on the growth of infections” and recommends future responses focus on minimizing serious illness and mortality rather than widespread case detection.
Medical community Reacts
Dr. Paul Parks, Duggan’s predecessor at the Alberta medical Association, called the report “a real slap” for healthcare workers who battled the pandemic. health policy expert Lorian Hardcastle echoed these sentiments, stating that the report fuels vaccine skepticism and could worsen public health outcomes if its recommendations are adopted.
“The government tends to try to give credit to its ideological opinions by creating these so-called expert groups to wriet reports that give legitimacy to their ideologies,” Hardcastle said.
Government Response
In a statement,the office of Health Minister Adriana LaGrange emphasized that no political decisions have been made based on the report. The government described the panel as including “health professionals in various areas of practice” and said their recommendations offer a outlook on improving future pandemic responses.A History of Controversy
This report follows a previous $2 million review led by Preston Manning in 2023, which urged the government to consider “alternative scientific accounts” during health emergencies. Alberta NDP leader Naheed Nenshi dismissed the latest report as “authoritarian” and “charlatanism,” urging the government to discard it entirely.
The Science Debate
Dr. Gary Davidson, who led the review, defended the report, stating, “Science consists in questioning everything, experimenting, and proving whether it is true or not.” He expressed pride in the government’s willingness to examine pandemic data and decisions, asserting that the recommendations will better protect Albertans in future health emergencies.
Key Takeaways
| Issue | Report’s Stance | Medical Community’s Response |
|——————————–|————————————————————————————-|————————————————————————————————–|
| COVID-19 vaccines | Suspend for healthy children and adolescents | Vaccines are safe and have saved lives |
| Alternative Therapies | Advocate for greater use of unapproved drugs like ivermectin | Such drugs lack evidence and could harm public health |
| Pandemic Measures | Business closures and school shutdowns had minimal impact | Measures were necessary to curb infections and save lives |
| Future Pandemic Response | Focus on minimizing serious illness rather than widespread case detection | Comprehensive testing and prevention remain critical |
The Road Ahead
As Alberta grapples with the fallout from this report, the debate underscores the tension between political ideologies and scientific evidence. With another pandemic inevitable, the stakes are high. As Dr. Duggan aptly put it,“When we have another pandemic,we will need the public to be able to trust the science that we present to them.”
For now, the report remains a lightning rod for controversy, raising questions about the future of public health policy in Alberta.
