top of page

"Health Canada authorizes first bivalent COVID-19 booster for adults 18 years and older"

Sent: September 1, 2022 11:03 AM To: '' <> Cc: '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; '' <>; 'Gray, Tracy - M.P.' <>; '' <>; '' <> Subject: "Health Canada authorizes first bivalent COVID-19 booster for adults 18 years and older"

Good morning Dr. Tam,

I just read this article:, as well as the linked ModernaTX Inc. (“Moderna”) vaccine product pages, and would like to express a few concerns, if you don’t mind? And first off, let me commend Moderna for its accurate product moniker of “Spikevax” – at least there is no confusion about what one is accepting into his or her body when jabbed!!

As you are no doubt aware, since your office is responsible for the press release from one of Canada’s finest Pravda news sources, the referenced article states that “[a]fter a thorough and independent scientific review of the evidence, Health Canada has determined that the bivalent Moderna Spikevax booster is safe and effective.” So great! Huzzah! This is definitely the vaccine that is well and truly going to end COVID-19, right?? In my excitement, I hopped right over to Health Canada’s Regulatory Decision Summary page (located here:, and prepared myself to be awed by “The Science”!

Upon arriving at Health Canada’s site, I had assumed (erroneously) that the Spikevax was independently tested by a governmental agency, although it appears from the authorization page (found here: that Moderna prepared and conducted the study, and was responsible for providing all results to Health Canada. I guess the Government of Canada’s definition of “independently reviewed” is a bit different than mine?! On a completely unrelated note, Moderna’s revenue is up 227% year over year ($23B from July 2021 to June 2022)!

Moving on, we discover that the Spikevax Bivalent study compared a total of 437 bivalently-spiked individuals to 377 individuals who received a booster dose of the Original Spikevax (to quote Coca-Cola, “you can’t beat the real thing”). (One wonders why some leper-colony unvaccinated people weren’t involved in the study so the jibbity-jabbed results look even better!! I jest of course; no one wonders why unspiked, un-clotted un-SADed folk have been omitted from a study that compares the relative likelihood of adverse events!) I note also that the study shows that only 22% of subjects receiving the Spikevax Bivalent had evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection; were they discovered in a bubble?

While Health Canada’s site reports that the new Spikevax Bivalent vaccine induces “significantly higher responses to the Omicron BA.1 virus when compared to the Spikevax Original approved vaccine”, and “[o]verall, the findings indicate that the Spikevax Bivalent provides better immune response to the Omicron BA.1”, one is left feeling a little deflated at the lack of – what do we call those science number thingies that you doctors reference for justification of experimental medications again?? – oh yeah – data. Presumably you didn’t want to confuse us simple-minded plebes with trying to understand tricky concepts like relative and absolute risk when we can rely on the lulling mantra of “safe and effective”? After much hunting, I found Moderna’s information sheet, which provides data (which, to my unscientific mind, doesn’t seem impressive in showing a 1.5 times increase in seroresponse – did I miss something?) and also advises that the “Spikevax has not been evaluated for carcinogenity in animals, as carcinogenity studies were not considered relevant to this vaccine” (, page 31). I guess you can’t find what you’re not looking for! I do note that in this same section of the document, the authors acknowledge that repeated doses of mRNA vaccines cause a “generalized systemic inflammatory response” – let’s disregard the elephant in the room (ie., the fact that people with bodily inflammation are more likely to contract cancer).

And speaking of safety, I do have a few teeny concerns about the data your office actually provided. First off, thanks for publishing the relative adverse events between the two groups of thrice (quadruple? quintuple?) jabbed: It appears that adverse events were quite similar between the two groups with common symptoms being pain at the injection site, axillary swelling (eek), fatigue, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, chills, nausea and vomiting. I note, too, that Health Canada states that “[n]o new safety concerns have been identified in studies when compared to the currently approved Spikevax mRNA vaccine [and no] deaths or Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) including cases of myocarditis or pericarditis occurred.” I feel safer already, especially when the team did an exhaustive and comprehensive data dive into the results for a grand total of – what’s that??? six weeks post-jab (in actuality, 29 days according to the attached tables)??

Okay, well maybe Health Canada previously determined that 29 days worth of data prior to authorizing a new and improved experimental drug is sufficient? Hmmmmm – well, not according to the provided authorization that states on page one that “immunogenicity at Day 91 was the pre-specified primary objective in Study mRNA-1273-P205 Part F. .. and Part G”. No worries though, it’s not worth waiting the extra 62 days to actually collect the data intended by the study, we’ll just go ahead and ask Moderna to “provide these data when they become available”. While we’re at it, let’s also require day 181 immunogenicity and safety data and the “full Clinical Study Report (CSR) (interim and final analysis) . . . as soon as they become available”. Oh yeah, and let’s not forget the “Drug Substance (DS) . . . stability updates”, “final validation report related to the mRNA ratio method”, “final validation to support extrapolation of RNA ratio results”, “adverse reactions . . . reports”, “Monthly Safety Summary Reports (unless Health Canada determines they aren’t necessary)” and some other safety data – when available, of course!!! And of course, the “safety and efficacy of SPIKEVAX Bivalent in pregnant women have not yet been established [and] [w]omen who are vaccinated with the [New Jab Juice] during pregnancy are encouraged to enroll” in a safety registry to track their progress! We also aren’t sure if the New and Improved Spikevax is excreted in human milk, so a risk to newborns “cannot be excluded”. Science!

No matter though, I totally understand that in the midst of a pandemic, the Government of Canada doesn’t have time to thoroughly assess the relative risks and benefits of an experimental treatment; its priority is saving lives! And just to refresh our memories, what was the fatality rate of the Omicron variant that this vaccine targets? Well, as you know, health officials in the UK estimate the infection fatality rate (“IFR”) of this latest variant to be as low as 0.0025% (1/40,000). Just a reminder that seasonal flu, of course, has an IFR of 0.07% (1/1,430). Thank God the Government of Canada is here to protect us from this deathly disease, is all I can say.

I apologize for the sarcastic tone in this email; unfortunately, I can’t take your department, or its blatant disregard of common sense, the scientific method or ethics seriously. The fox is most assuredly in with the hens, and has an agenda to slowly depopulate us, one trusting vaxxer at a time.

I’m crossing fingers that the Spikevax Bivalent doesn’t kill everyone on Day 91!


From: PHAC Correspondence / Correspondance ASPC (PHAC/ASPC) <> Sent: October 13, 2022 11:19 AM Subject: Response from the Public Health Agency of Canada

On behalf of Dr. Theresa Tam, Chief Public Health Officer of Canada, we acknowledge receipt of your correspondence of September 1, 2022. We sincerely regret the delay in responding.

The federal government understands that individuals like you are concerned about your health and safety and are seeking reliable information about the current COVID-19 pandemic.

The matter you raise falls within the purview of Dr. Stephen Lucas, Deputy Minister of Health Canada. We have taken the liberty of forwarding your correspondence to the Deputy Minister for information and consideration.

Thank you for writing.


Executive Correspondence Unit

Public Health Agency of Canada


Sent: October 13, 2022 11:28 AM To: PHAC Correspondence / Correspondance ASPC (PHAC/ASPC) <> Subject: RE: Response from the Public Health Agency of Canada

Wonderful, thank you so much. Perhaps you would be so kind as to direct Dr. Lucas to this video, wherein Pfizer Inc. admits that their “vaccines” were never tested for the prevention of viral transmission? ( – embedded.)

Thanks so much for your help!


Date: November 18, 2022 at 6:33:28 AM PST Subject: Health Canada's response regarding the safety and efficacy of the Moderna Bivalent COVID-19 vaccine.

Response letter-bivalent COVID-19 booster for adults 18 years and older 22-075356-991
Download PDF • 140KB

Please find attach a response letter to your correspondence of September 1, 2022, in which you expressed your concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of the Moderna Bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. Your letter was forwarded to the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD) of Health Canada for response.

Thank you again for writing to Health Canada



143 views2 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page