As the dust begins to settle from the global upheaval of COVID-19, Alberta’s Pandemic Data Review Task Force has delivered a comprehensive critique of that province’s handling of the crisis.
The 269-page report dissects key decisions and the data that informed them, calling into question the efficacy of many measures while offering a roadmap for future improvement.
This work follows a different November 2023 report, also commissioned by Premier Danielle Smith, which already provided numerous detailed recommendations for improving the governance of future public health emergencies.
One of the more controversial areas covered in the new report is the treatment of dissenting medical professionals. Regulatory bodies, the Task Force argues, often stifled valuable dialogue by sanctioning physicians who raised legitimate concerns about public health measures but were instead labelled as spreaders of misinformation.
Pointing to lack of transparency and consultation in developing treatment standards and public health communications, the authors explain how a false sense of scientific consensus can emerge. Furthermore, they examine undue external influences on the province’s public health institutions, a concern also known as “regulatory capture.”
The Task Force also identifies significant missteps in Alberta’s emergency management. Rather than adhering to its well-established pandemic response plan, the province adopted ad hoc strategies heavily influenced by the unforgettable media images from New York City and Northern Italy. Abandoning a tailored approach and instead copying the response strategies of international jurisdictions, the authors argue, resulted in policies ill-suited to the local demographic and geographic realities.
The reliance on worst-case scenario modelling further compounded these errors. By emphasizing dire projections, decision-makers implemented overly restrictive measures that often caused more harm than the virus itself, particularly to mental health, education, and small businesses. Somewhat surprisingly, the Task Force acknowledges that the epidemiological modelling did improve over the course of 2020 and concedes “that it is easier to criticize a model than to build one.”
A key recommendation in the report — and one likely to provoke debate — is the call to discontinue the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. The Task Force raises concerns about the long-term safety and efficacy of these vaccines, citing authoritative sources such as Health Canada, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization, and the manufacturers’ protocols and results. The lacking scientific evidence for the efficacy of face masks and vaccines in preventing the transmission of the virus is clearly laid out.
These chapters of the report underscore the authors’ broader critique of Alberta’s pandemic response, which they argue overly prioritized restrictions and mandates while neglecting natural immunity and alternative treatment options.
Despite its critiques, the report acknowledges the immense challenges decision-makers faced in the early days of the pandemic. Initial reliance on restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as lockdowns and school closures, is viewed as understandable given the limited information available. However, the authors argue that these measures were prolonged far beyond what the evidence supported, causing disproportionate societal harms. To explain this mismanagement, the report identifies decision-maker biases in process, sources consulted, and improper weighting of evidence.
The Alberta report adds to a growing body of evidence for incompetence and outright manipulation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Australian government’s 900-page “COVID-19 Response Inquiry Report” describes a lack of transparency in decision-making, disproportionate restrictions, and loss of public trust in government and the medical profession. Florida’s grand jury identified serious issues with masking and lockdowns, and the National Citizens Inquiry heard devastating testimony about Canadians’ experience of the pandemic response.
Alberta’s COVID-19 response, like the measures taken around the globe, was fraught with challenges and missteps. Ottawa and our other provinces would be well advised to follow Smith’s leadership and establish their own critical reviews. Different jurisdictions might focus on additional challenges such as the devastation in long-term care in Ontario and Quebec, the unforgiving treatment of non-compliant health care workers in BC, or the trampling of civil rights by the feds, with the cellphone tracking scandal and the unjustified use of the Emergencies Act as prime exhibits.
This report’s candid assessment serves not only as a critique but as a guide for navigating future crises — real or imagined. Its call for a renewed commitment to fostering open dialogue promises a more effective and fair response.
By addressing past mistakes and embracing the lessons learned, we can build a more resilient and adaptive public health framework based on respect for individual autonomy of citizens and health care workers alike.
— Dr. Claus Rinner is professor of geography at Toronto Metropolitan (formerly Ryerson) University, geospatial data analytics and decision support expert, principal investigator of the RECOVER19.org post-pandemic recovery research project, and among the world’s top 2% scientists in the field of geomatics engineering.