Alberta surgeon to Jason Kenney： Advice on a balanced approach to COVID-19
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
140.24422
Summary
Dr. Dennis Modry says there has always been a way for the Alberta government to handle the coronavirus pandemic and protect civil liberties. But will the government finally listen to him? Dr. Modry joins me in an interview with me in front of the Crown and Anchor Pub in Edmonton.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Oh, hello, Rebels. You're listening to a free audio-only recording of my weekly Wednesday
00:00:04.300
night show, The Gun Show. Tonight, my guest is Dr. Dennis Modry. He's an Edmonton-based
00:00:12.480
doctor who has been very outspoken about the lockdown and how the government continues to
00:00:20.000
handle the lockdown. Now, if you like listening to the show, then I promise you're going to love
00:00:23.880
watching it. But in order to watch, you need to be a subscriber to Rebel News Plus. That's what
00:00:28.620
we call our long-form TV-style shows here on Rebel News. Subscribers get access to my show as well
00:00:35.080
as Ezra's nightly Ezra Levant show, David Menzies' fun Friday night show Rebel Roundup, and Andrew
00:00:41.180
Chapados' brand new show. Andrew says it's only eight bucks a month to subscribe. And just for my
00:00:47.200
podcast listeners, you can save an extra 10% on a new Rebel News Plus subscription by using the
00:00:52.760
coupon code podcast when you subscribe. Just go to rebelnewsplus.com to become a member. Now,
00:00:59.820
please enjoy this free audio-only version of my show.
00:01:09.320
Alberta, Dr. Dennis Modry says there has always been another way for the Alberta government
00:01:22.080
to handle the coronavirus pandemic and protect hospital capacity. But will the government
00:01:27.800
finally listen? I'm not optimistic. I'm Sheila Gunn-Reed, and you're watching The Gunn Show.
00:01:39.320
Oh, hey everybody. Thank you so much for joining me. I'm not in my home studio today, as you can
00:01:55.140
obviously tell, because my work has taken me out on the road to tell the story of small business
00:01:59.960
owners who are fighting the lockdown by defying it. Today, I'm actually in front of the Crown and
00:02:05.980
Anchor Pub in Edmonton. They are great people, freedom fighters. Please go out and support them.
00:02:11.180
Anyway, a few days ago, on Monday actually, at the Alberta legislature, I met a doctor
00:02:15.820
who says that the Alberta government could have protected hospital capacity while simultaneously
00:02:21.900
protecting the civil liberties of Albertans during the coronavirus pandemic. Now, this doctor's name
00:02:27.300
is Dr. Dennis Modry, and back in December, he wrote an open letter to Premier Jason Kenney.
00:02:32.880
After all of his attempts to reach Jason Kenney through normal channels were completely rebuffed.
00:02:39.220
Now, Modry's not some fly-by-night crockpot. In fact, in our interview, he will go through all of
00:02:47.260
his medical and educational background. So you can see he's not at all some kook. And up until very
00:02:55.080
recently, I think he counted Jason Kenney as a friend or at least a friendly. Now, Jason Kenney
00:03:03.820
called people who attended a massive protest at the Alberta legislature on Monday, that's where I met
00:03:09.960
Dr. Modry, a protest of 2,000 people. In fact, Jason Kenney called them unhinged conspiracy theorists.
00:03:16.460
But unlike Jason Kenney, I actually spoke to those people, including Dr. Modry, who was a keynote
00:03:23.800
speaker at the event. So joining me now in an interview we recorded yesterday morning when I
00:03:29.500
was back at home in my home studio just for a few minutes, is Dr. Dennis Modry. Take a listen.
00:03:34.640
Dr. Modry, thank you so much for joining me. Why don't you give us a synopsis of your background and
00:03:57.640
who and what you are? Because I've seen a lot of people who are trying to discredit you. And I think
00:04:03.360
it's because you are so outspoken against the lockdown. You know, and they're trying to just
00:04:08.420
say that you're a conspiracy theorist crank, but that's not the sense that I get at all.
00:04:14.700
Well, Sheila, yeah, thank you very much for having me on the show. And I'm happy to provide,
00:04:23.460
you know, my credentials, if you will. You know, one of the things before I start,
00:04:30.420
those people who would disparage my education, my knowledge, or my views about these things
00:04:39.100
really don't know very much about me at all. And a lot of those individuals ideologically
00:04:47.560
may think differently, both politically or with respect to their view of what the knowledge is
00:04:57.620
that has been presented to us regarding how this pandemic has been managed. So with that,
00:05:08.420
I respect people's views who are different than mine. And I respect listening to people whose views
00:05:18.580
are different than mine, particularly when they can provide evidence-based arguments to support their
00:05:25.640
position. It would be wonderful if all of us, in terms of communicating with each other, could listen
00:05:36.440
to different perspectives based on evidence. That doesn't seem to be happening. And we have a tremendous
00:05:43.780
amount of polarization in this world. And that is not at all my intent. My intent really has been to
00:05:51.600
help government through my relationship, my previous relationship with Jason Kenney, who I've known for
00:06:00.800
many, many years. We had many lunches together at the Mayfair in Edmonton when he was the president of
00:06:08.300
the Canadian Taxpayers Association. And he contacted me prior to and subsequent to his election win
00:06:15.240
for certain advice. And so it's been disappointing for me to recognize that the evidence that has occurred
00:06:29.400
and evolved over time has been ignored. And so much of the mainstream media and governments are still
00:06:41.500
embracing the concerns that were present last year when COVID-19 broke out the way it did.
00:06:49.500
So my background is that I trained in medicine at the University of Alberta. I did my BSc in science and I
00:07:05.900
trained in medicine, did my MD there. Then I went to McGill. I spent eight years at McGill training in general
00:07:11.660
surgery, cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, critical care. And I did a master's degree in
00:07:17.180
experimental surgery. And then after that, I went to Stanford University, where I spent three years
00:07:24.300
doing postgraduate work in immunology, as well as high risk cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. And I was the
00:07:33.900
chief resident on the heart and lung transplantation program, as well as the chief resident of the
00:07:41.980
cardiac surgery program as well. So with that background, and actually there's one other
00:07:49.500
interesting feature. Prior to being in medical school, when I was doing my BSc, my interest in
00:07:55.100
transplantation arose because of a fellow by the name of Cease Coobs. It was a cardiac surgeon who
00:08:01.020
seemed to think I had some degree of intelligence. And he put me in his research lab. So at the end of
00:08:07.820
that, I was doing lung preservation and transplantation experiments in dogs prior to even being in medicine.
00:08:18.060
So that was probably how my interest in transplantation came up. Now, when I came back from Stanford University in
00:08:24.700
1984. At that time, I already had that was kind of an interesting time because I was supposed to go back to
00:08:35.500
McGill. And because I had numerous traveling fellowships, etc, etc. But the University of Alberta made me such a
00:08:43.260
strong pitch and the chiefs of cardiac surgery and general surgery came to Stanford and really wanted me
00:08:49.900
to come back to Alberta. And I actually did want to come back to Alberta. And one of the interesting
00:08:53.900
things that happened is when I did that, that McGill sued the University of Alberta. And, and I guess
00:09:01.180
somehow that thing got settled and I wound up here. So during my 30 years of practice here in Edmonton,
00:09:10.380
I founded and directed Western Canada's first heart and lung transplantation program.
00:09:15.580
And I was the director of the cardiovascular intensive care unit. And my focus was on high risk cardiac
00:09:25.020
surgery, transplantation and critical care medicine. So in that time period, particularly dealing with
00:09:33.900
patients who were immunocompromised, so that they wouldn't reject their organs. There was a tremendous
00:09:40.540
amount of effort that was required by a team of which I was involved with to prevent infection and also
00:09:48.860
to prevent rejection. So we were dealing with, you know, controlling viruses, bacteria, rickettsia,
00:09:56.860
protozole, mycobacteria, etc. I mean, all kinds of infectious diseases. So, so that was, that was really my,
00:10:05.420
my, my, my background. And so I've had a tremendous experience in, like I say, critical care and,
00:10:14.220
and dealing with infection as well. So, so what happened after I retired, I was kind of enjoying
00:10:22.620
life and, you know, doing some other things. And then this COVID-19 thing broke out. And like
00:10:30.540
everybody, last, last, last January, February, March, I was concerned, like everybody was, and we always
00:10:39.180
look to the evidence, when we are going to discern what it is we should do individually, what is public
00:10:46.860
policy going to be, etc. And so, when the World Health Organization came out with the suggestion that the,
00:10:53.420
the mortality rate would be 3.4%. Wow, that, that meant that there was going to be a massive number
00:11:04.860
of deaths in relation to COVID-19. So quite correctly, everybody was alarmed, there wasn't a vaccine
00:11:14.220
available, people didn't know what to do. And so, the issue of the risk, the, the lockdowns,
00:11:24.220
masks, social distancing, all seemed to make sense, except there were some things that weren't quite
00:11:29.260
right. For example, in the beginning, as you all know, there was no issue, no, no recommendation early
00:11:38.300
on with respect to social distancing, and then masks were unnecessary. Then over time, it became evident
00:11:46.220
that, not so much evident, but recommendations coming from the World Health Organization,
00:11:53.500
and elsewhere, were such that, well, now we need to wear masks. And there was a need for social
00:12:00.540
distancing, except the funny thing about social distancing, is that there was no evidence for that,
00:12:06.780
just as there was no evidence supporting the use of masks. And it's funny that the, the, if you go back
00:12:16.140
in time, the only, the only reference to social, the six foot social distancing was from a fellow by the
00:12:27.180
name of Carl Flug, and that was just a recommendation, and he made that recommendation over 100 years ago.
00:12:34.780
So you got to ask yourself the question, as, as we're looking at things over time, you have to
00:12:42.780
ask yourself the question, does this make sense? Where's, where's the evidence for that? And to this
00:12:48.220
very day, there, there is no evidence for six foot distancing. And as you know, recently, the NIH came out
00:12:57.820
with the recommendation, or maybe it was the CDC, that social distancing really didn't need to be six
00:13:04.780
feet, it looked like it could be three feet. But what, what they haven't done is they haven't looked at,
00:13:10.380
well, what about if it's an inch or two inches social distancing? In other words, no, no, no distancing at all.
00:13:16.700
They haven't studied that. So these recommendations that have come forward, lack evidence. So, so as,
00:13:26.380
as I was watching things, and I was reading the literature, because my interest was piqued,
00:13:31.580
and I had the background and the education to understand what the studies were, were telling us.
00:13:37.420
And I was quite impressed when I believe it was on October the seventh, when the Great Barrington
00:13:43.660
Declaration came out, and indicated that, that, here's the, here's the evidence, so far, that we
00:13:52.940
have that suggests that masks are unnecessary, social distancing is unnecessary, and lockdowns are
00:14:00.220
unnecessary, but what is necessary is to target the elderly, and those who are immune, immune compromised,
00:14:09.260
particularly individuals who have multiple comorbid conditions. So, so with that, with, with, with that
00:14:17.660
evidence, then I started looking at more data, and it became, it became even clearer to me that, golly,
00:14:30.540
the, the, the lockdowns are actually causing more harm, more deaths, more economic destruction, more
00:14:40.460
educational destruction, more inability for kids to pursue sports and other social activities. This was
00:14:52.700
really stopping society in its tracks, killing businesses, etc. And so, the way
00:15:00.060
of evidence started to shift in, in my mind, as I saw this evidence, indicating that lockdowns were far
00:15:08.780
more harmful than COVID-19, including deaths, more deaths as a result of people exposed to drug abuse.
00:15:21.740
And particularly, the thing that was most galling to me was that so many people became unable to access
00:15:32.780
the healthcare system. And because it's being blocked by saving beds for potential admissions of patients
00:15:42.300
with COVID-19. So, for me, as a cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, dealing with waiting lists,
00:15:48.220
and people having died on waiting lists throughout my entire career, I was looking at this and saying,
00:15:54.460
my goodness, I'm talking to my colleagues at the hospital, and I'm finding out, yeah, they've
00:15:58.780
been cut back by 30%. Well, I know what that, I know what that outcome is. It's more people dying on
00:16:05.740
the waiting list, but it's not just cardiac surgery. It's all kinds of other things. Because in-hospital
00:16:10.860
diagnostic and therapeutic procedures are now restricted as well. So, we know what the outcome
00:16:19.020
is going to be. There are going to be far more deaths, even now there are more deaths from the
00:16:26.700
lockdowns than COVID-19, but there are going to be more in the future because of people unable to
00:16:33.100
access diagnostic studies. Wherein, had they accessed them in a timely fashion, they very likely would
00:16:41.180
have had an opportunity to be cured of their underlying problem. So, looking at all of this
00:16:47.900
material, and I'm thinking, gee, you know, there's no evidence to support lockdowns in particular.
00:16:56.220
So, I thought, well, gee, on December the 11th, as you know, I drafted a letter to the Premier who,
00:17:01.580
like I said earlier, I know quite well. And so, I was hoping that I could have, I called him actually
00:17:09.580
on his private cell, and I emailed him on his private email account. No response. So, I thought,
00:17:18.140
gee, you know, I can't get his attention. So, maybe if I send an open letter and the media picks it up,
00:17:26.700
maybe that will get his attention. And in so doing, I wanted to give him an off ramp
00:17:33.980
against these lockdowns. Well, he didn't take the bait at that time. And of course,
00:17:39.820
and it wasn't the bait, it was really, it was really to have a private discussion with him. Now,
00:17:46.460
it's become an open discussion with all of the public. And I really just simply wanted to
00:17:51.740
talk to him about an alternative approach. So, here it is, you know, we're locked down number one
00:18:01.180
through, or number two, through Christmas. And that brings me back to what he said in the spring last
00:18:08.780
year, early summer, when he said, when he apologized for lockdown number one, because he recognized the
00:18:14.700
harm. So, I thought, well, for sure, he recognized the harm, he would never do this again. So, prior to
00:18:22.780
lockdown number two, he got my letter, it was the open letter, but he did it anyhow. And his rationale
00:18:30.060
was the question of overwhelming the healthcare system. So, as I pointed out to him, there was,
00:18:35.900
it never happened, it didn't even come close. And the lockdown, there's no evidence that that lockdown
00:18:44.220
changed anything. Because the virus is out there, it's been out there, and it's going to spread, it's
00:18:48.860
going to do its thing, there's not a darn thing that you can do about it. That's what viruses do.
00:18:53.100
So, we go through this period, and to my surprise, on March the 11th, I get a response to my first letter.
00:19:01.180
And the response was kind of comical, as far as I was concerned, because, again, it lacked evidence
00:19:10.940
from him. So, I had to send, you know, I'm the sort of person that I will respond if I'm challenged,
00:19:19.100
and I will respond only with evidence. So, I did respond, and I sent him my second open letter on March
00:19:27.260
the 31st. And, of course, I didn't get a response. Now we have lockdown at number three. And again,
00:19:36.620
it's the same narrative that the premier has used, that we cannot overwhelm our healthcare system.
00:19:43.580
I get that. I get that. But as of yesterday, and today, there's roughly 376 people
00:19:52.700
in the hospital in 8500 beds. That's like 4% or 4.3% of the beds. Does that sound like the
00:20:01.980
hospital system is overwhelmed? Of course not. And then if we look at the ICU, that's a little
00:20:06.860
bit different. There's 90 people in the ICU, but there's 272 ICU beds. And the premier said that we
00:20:13.420
could ramp up to 1,081 beds. Well, he certainly could have done that without shutting down society,
00:20:22.060
as he's done again. Now, one of the things, when you talk about leadership,
00:20:29.660
and you recognize that there is a concern, and let's just give him the benefit of the doubt for a
00:20:36.140
moment and say that it wasn't the hospital system that was at risk of being overwhelmed,
00:20:43.340
but the ICUs potentially had the opportunity of being overwhelmed. Let's just use that argument
00:20:49.420
for a moment and think about it. If he was concerned about that in the spring, then if he was forward
00:20:57.580
thinking enough, he would have realized two things. Number one, if there was a second wave,
00:21:03.820
and that had been predicted, why then did he not plan to actually build, construct another couple
00:21:15.260
of hundred ICU beds in the province, particularly in the major cities, Calgary, Edmonton, you know,
00:21:21.980
Grand Prairie, Lethbridge, Red Deer, etc. Some of the medicine had some of the major areas.
00:21:27.340
Why did he not do that? That would have served not just to accommodate additional ICU requirements,
00:21:34.380
but it would have also served to do something brilliant, which no government in this province
00:21:41.020
has ever done before. He could have had a major win, and that would have been to reduce or almost
00:21:48.860
eliminate the waiting lists for patients who require ICU care after surgery, or they come in with
00:21:58.700
with some other type of illness. We could have been the first jurisdiction in Canada
00:22:03.580
to not have this ongoing failure of our public health care system that is reflected by these long
00:22:11.980
waiting lists. The waiting lists are worse now. People are dying on these waiting lists.
00:22:16.940
So that would have been something that, you know, I mean, and I'm not advocating being the premier,
00:22:23.980
but if I was the premier, I would have said to myself, gee, we have a neat opportunity here. Let's
00:22:29.340
spend a few hundred million dollars, and build these 200 more ICU beds. But he didn't do that. So,
00:22:38.060
so here we are, here we are now. And, um, he still has it within his, his capacity
00:22:45.900
capacity to say, look, here we are. I've imposed this lockdown. Um, we're, we're going to lift it
00:22:56.140
because the evidence doesn't support that the lockdowns would have made any difference. In other
00:23:00.220
words, what I'm saying is the lockdown has resulted in 376 bed people in the hospital, 19 in the ICU. If
00:23:09.340
there was no lockdown, it is, there's no evidence to say that there would be a higher number of
00:23:15.420
admissions to the ICU or, or to the hospital system. There is no evidence. This is why,
00:23:20.780
you know, this litigation that has been started, um, through the justice center for constitutional
00:23:26.860
freedom, they're very likely going to win those because there's no evidence to support the lockdowns.
00:23:33.020
And that's been, that's been proven again by an international study, uh, reported in the European
00:23:39.020
Journal of Clinical Investigation, uh, on an evaluation of 10 countries that, that it once
00:23:45.900
again proved that the lockdowns didn't make, didn't make any difference. So I think it's going to be,
00:23:50.300
it's going to be an interesting time, um, you know, you know, moving forward, uh, with respect to
00:23:56.940
handling all of this, but I'm going to give, I'm going to give the premier, um, this opportunity
00:24:03.020
to think about this. We know that the viruses mutate all the time.
00:24:10.780
And if there is a concern that a mutant virus is going to have greater transmissibility or greater
00:24:19.500
lethality, um, in the future, and that's going to cause the fourth lockdown, he has an opportunity
00:24:27.420
right now. He has an opportunity right now to ramp up and build, construct a whole bunch of, uh, new
00:24:35.740
intensive care unit beds. And I think that is something that he should do because if you don't
00:24:42.140
have, uh, a thriving economy, you can't control these kinds of things very well. And we don't have a
00:24:49.980
thriving economy right now, but this is probably the single most important thing that he could do
00:24:56.300
would be to build two or 300 more ICU beds right now, double the capacity so that we never have
00:25:02.220
to shut down again. Now, let me just say a word about the, the mutant viruses, because I think this
00:25:08.540
is quite important to understand as well. Um, there is no evidence, hard evidence yet that the
00:25:15.420
transmission, transmissibility is greater or the lethality is greater of these mutants. It's, it,
00:25:21.340
it's not, there's suggestions that it could be less or it could be more, but let's
00:25:26.140
say the transmissibility is greater. Even if the transmissibility is greater,
00:25:32.380
this is the way herd immunity occurs, um, with all viruses. Um, and, and so, um, increased
00:25:41.900
transmissibility just speeds up, uh, herd immunity doesn't increase, uh, deaths or anything like that.
00:25:49.340
It just increases transmissibility, um, or increases the, uh, rapidity with which, uh,
00:25:56.460
with which herd immunity occurs. Now let's look at lethality. So let's say, uh, lethality was increased
00:26:04.220
double what it is right now. Um, and right now, uh, the, when, when, if we take all comers and we're
00:26:14.540
looking at a 99.7% survival rate, that means, um, basically a 0.03% mortality risk, um, of COVID-19.
00:26:26.860
Well, so let's say the mutant is quite, is, is twice as, um, lethal. Well, that would increase it
00:26:32.700
from 0.03 to 0.06%, meaning that you have a 99, uh, instead of a 99.77%, uh, maybe I haven't got the
00:26:40.540
numbers right there. Yeah. It's 0.13. So it'd be up to 0.26. So you would still have, um, a 99 point,
00:26:47.580
um, 99.2% probability, fundamentally a 90, greater than a 99% probability of surviving anyhow.
00:26:56.300
And the other thing that's happening that's really exciting as well is that, um, there are,
00:27:03.100
there are newer treatments that are being developed. Um, as you may or may not know, um,
00:27:10.460
the NIH has approved and the CDC has approved, I guess it's the FDA come to think of it,
00:27:15.100
has approved the use of, uh, remdesivir as a treatment. It hasn't been brilliantly effective
00:27:21.980
to treat COVID-19. Um, but one of the things that's really interesting is that, um, vitamin D is quite
00:27:30.300
effective and for the, for the public out there who don't know why vitamin D is effective is because,
00:27:36.860
um, it stimulates your immune system and it's important. It's a very important component
00:27:44.220
to ramping up the effectiveness of your immune system. And people in Northern latitudes, uh,
00:27:50.940
tend to not get as much vitamin D, uh, particularly in the winter. And this is why the elderly are most
00:27:58.540
at risk is because their immune systems are compromised. So taking vitamin D it's now
00:28:05.020
recommended is actually recommended, um, by many governments, uh, now, and you know,
00:28:11.900
a thousand international units per day is what's recommended. If you want to take two,
00:28:16.780
do that. Don't take too much because it can increase, um, the formation, uh, it, it, it helps
00:28:23.980
to absorb calcium so it can cause kidney stones if you take too much. So, but a thousand to two
00:28:29.020
thousand a day is, is, is, is, is very effective. And then one of the things I also found that was
00:28:34.300
very interesting is that, um, when you look at the way the pharmaceutical companies operate, um,
00:28:41.180
um, they operate to make a profit. And so, um, hence the, the pharmaceutical industrial complex,
00:28:51.100
um, has developed these vaccines and, uh, the government narrative is you gotta have,
00:28:58.380
you have to have a vaccine. Um, and well, that's well and good. Um, what the pharmaceutical companies
00:29:06.700
won't do is they won't fund the prospective randomized trials to use other agents that are off patent
00:29:16.220
because an agent that's off patent, there's little money to be made. So that's why it's been so difficult
00:29:22.140
with respect to studying hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. Um, because the, you need, you need
00:29:31.100
somebody like the NIH to come up with the funds, uh, to, to pay for those, for, to pay for those studies.
00:29:39.820
Now there's one other thing, of course, is new technology. And, um, I was kind of excited to see
00:29:46.700
it's completed its phase two trials, but there's a drug called aplodin. That's the trade name. The
00:29:52.620
generic name is pletidespin and it's used to treat multiple myeloma. And, um, it's been found to be
00:30:00.860
30 times more effective than remdesivir. So is that a cure? I don't know if it's a cure or it's not a
00:30:07.820
cure. Um, the phase three trials are randomized prospective trials. It's, um, it's, um, it's owned,
00:30:16.460
the patent is owned by a company in Spain and we'll see what the results of those studies show. But we are
00:30:25.900
in a time period where, as you know, knowledge, um, if you take a graph like this, um, and this is
00:30:35.340
time and this is knowledge, uh, it's exponential. So this is why, you know, uh, it's taken previously
00:30:43.580
four or five, eight years to develop a vaccine. Now we have vaccines developed in less than a year.
00:30:50.060
So in some of these vaccines, you know, may have some problems, but I think overall are going to
00:30:55.580
at the end of the day, after we see another two or three years, I think overall, they're probably
00:30:59.660
going to be reasonably safe. Um, and we will understand better in the next few years if,
00:31:06.860
if certain people have genetic predispositions, what other underlying conditions may put them in a,
00:31:12.620
in a higher risk to develop a complication from these back from some of these vaccines as well.
00:31:17.660
So knowledge is, is, is growing, and I'm just delighted that I'm, my brain still works, uh,
00:31:24.380
sufficiently that I can evaluate this, be excited about it, and I'm happy to share it with anybody
00:31:32.780
who feels like, uh, chatting with me about it. So that's, that's pretty much, um, what I have to say
00:31:39.740
about COVID-19, but I could talk about a whole bunch of other things if you want as well.
00:31:44.300
Well, but, uh, doctor, for example, is Alberta independence the right thing?
00:31:53.820
You know, Dr. Modri, this is probably the easiest interview that I've ever done because I asked you
00:31:58.620
one question and you answered the 10 that I had on my list of things to ask you. Um, and it's wonderful.
00:32:06.060
Thank you so much. Um, I wanted to ask you now, you and I met yesterday. So Monday at the Alberta
00:32:13.500
legislature for the first time, I've been paying attention to you for quite some time. And I think
00:32:25.980
No, after what happened at the legislature, I think it was great. There was, you know,
00:32:31.740
I would guess probably 2000 people there. Um, but then the premier decided that he needed to
00:32:39.180
denounce everybody there. Um, basically called everybody there a bunch of unhinged conspiracy
00:32:45.900
theorists. And that wasn't my experience. I saw people who are not anti-vaccine, but rather
00:32:54.060
anti-coercion, uh, with regard to taking vaccines and anti-tying the reopening of the economy to
00:33:02.940
taking experimental vaccines. Um, and I found it interesting that premier Kenny was outraged.
00:33:11.820
And I guess the government officially apologized because the crowd at one point chanted about
00:33:17.900
Dr. Dina Hinshaw lock her up. Now I don't think they really need locker up. I feel like these are a
00:33:22.780
bunch of disgruntled people who feel their civil liberties are being trumped on. A lot of them
00:33:28.460
are unemployed because of the lockdown. And I think they're letting off steam, but I thought it was
00:33:33.100
pretty interesting how, um, the pro let's lock up a pastor for saying religious services side of the
00:33:41.260
argument is outraged that a bunch of people were blowing off steam, chanting locker up, excuse me,
00:33:47.740
about an unelected, very well-paid public health bureaucrat.
00:33:53.820
Well, you know, I, um, I respect, um, the, the premier, uh, I respect, uh, Dina Hinshaw. Um,
00:34:03.660
they have their views. I think it would be, uh, as you know, um, I and Dr. Ari Jaffe, who's an infectious
00:34:12.540
specialist, uh, pediatrician and infectious disease specialist at the university hospital, um, and
00:34:18.540
Colonel Redmond, who had drafted, um, policy with respect to how pandemic should be, uh, handled, um,
00:34:28.940
which has been embraced by, you know, other countries around the world. Uh, and of course,
00:34:34.380
Dr. Hutkinson as well. I thought that it would have had, would have been of benefit, uh, to, uh, caucus
00:34:43.100
if, um, if the four of us, uh, could have met, uh, with Dr. Hinshaw and Mr. Shandro in any other
00:34:52.780
physicians that, um, Dr. Hinshaw would have liked to have brought to a discussion and had a healthy
00:35:00.860
debate, not an hour, but spend an entire morning or maybe even spend an entire day with caucus and,
00:35:08.140
and, and, and let's, and let's go over things. Um, and I think at the end of that, uh, you know,
00:35:16.460
the vitriol, um, that has been expressed by maybe both sides of the equation, uh, would not have
00:35:23.900
occurred. I, I, I don't know. I just, but as you know, um, when, when people actually do communicate,
00:35:31.580
uh, you can, you can, and they're, and they're open-minded to hear a different, uh, perspective,
00:35:37.180
uh, you, you can oftentimes come to a meeting of the minds. Our goal was not to disparage, uh, the
00:35:44.620
government and, and what they were doing. Our goal was to, um, have a discussion to try and compel a
00:35:52.380
different, um, um, um, path forward. And it's like I said, you know, if, uh, if it were the case that,
00:36:01.020
um, that Dr. Hinshaw and the premier and minister Chandra were going to dig their feet in with respect
00:36:09.500
to a lockdown, they could have at least, um, registered their view about ramping up, um, the,
00:36:19.580
the number of ICU beds actually do something that would not only be good in the short term,
00:36:26.060
but in the long term. And that would have prevented any further lockdowns from occurring in the future.
00:36:31.740
So when, when premier Kenny rages about, uh, conspiracy theories, nobody said anything that
00:36:39.580
was a conspiracy of a conspiracy yesterday. Um, certainly the press conferences that Roger and I
00:36:47.900
gave, there was nothing conspiratorial about anything that we, that we said, um, at all.
00:36:54.220
I think the premier is frustrated and his comment, um, was political. Uh, I don't think it was directed,
00:37:02.540
um, with malicious intent at any of the speakers. Um, I tend to believe that because I think he's,
00:37:09.580
uh, he's a genuine person and he has his, and he has his views that about these lockdowns, um, which
00:37:18.220
I disagree with for the reasons that, that, um, that I stated, but here's where we could come to a
00:37:24.540
meeting of the minds. And that's on what I said earlier, a couple of times now, and that is build
00:37:31.340
out two or 300 more ICU beds. That gives him another off ramp to get away from these lockdowns.
00:37:39.420
It's a, it's a simple solution. Yeah. It doesn't cost a few hundred million dollars. And yeah,
00:37:43.340
you got to educate the nursing staff, but that's leadership and that's leadership that doesn't
00:37:50.940
exist in many centers around the world right now. So he could prove himself as a real leader if he
00:37:55.820
would do something like that. So, as you can see, my focus is not to disparage the premier or Dina
00:38:02.700
Hinshaw, but I do disparage the rationale for the lockdowns, particularly when they're not thinking,
00:38:10.220
uh, ahead. So if you think we've been locked down for the third time and it's not going to happen
00:38:15.820
again, if the premier doesn't do something, as I've suggested, we're going to be facing another
00:38:22.060
lockdown because as soon as he gets to 60 or 70 beds in the ICU that are purportedly COVID-19,
00:38:30.460
then we're going to be locked down again. But here's something that I want to mention as well.
00:38:34.940
I just want to make a point about PCR testing. The PCR testing looks at, um, the cycle thresholds
00:38:43.660
of the genetic material that is in a virus and it cycles it, it amplifies it to a point
00:38:50.860
where it can be identified. Here's the problem is that, um, coronaviruses, uh, about 79 to 80 percent
00:38:59.900
of them have common genetic material within them. So, so that's one thing, including the common cold.
00:39:07.660
So if you've got a fragment of a virus and you amplify it, you're never really 100
00:39:13.500
percent sure. Uh, if you're at cycle thresholds over 33, as Dr. Fauci says, that are unreliable,
00:39:21.580
that you're really dealing with, with the COVID-19 virus, um, the SARS-CoV-2 virus. So, so what does
00:39:30.940
that mean? Why that is so important to understand is that many of these people who are admitted to
00:39:38.460
hospital have underlying diseases. In fact, um, 80 to 90 percent of them have underlying diseases.
00:39:45.340
I think it's 90 percent actually. And what that means is that if they are admitted to hospital,
00:39:52.940
um, and is it their underlying disease that has got them into trouble? Uh, or is it truly, um,
00:40:01.100
a COVID-19 illness? And this is, this is again the problem because when patients die,
00:40:08.460
and they have a, uh, PCR cycle threshold, uh, that is, uh, greater than 33 or 35 or 40, even,
00:40:20.060
um, then did they really die of COVID-19? And the evidence would suggest, in fact, they didn't,
00:40:26.860
they died of their underlying disease. And part of the problem that we're facing when we look at the data
00:40:33.260
is that what Alberta Health Services does not do is they do not, uh, determine the cycle threshold.
00:40:41.180
They don't, they do not record the cycle threshold with every patient who is diagnosed with COVID-19
00:40:48.380
at the, uh, and, and at the time of death. So we don't, we, we, we don't have that evidence.
00:40:52.940
And, and that would be extremely helpful. Uh, but here we are. And, um, many of these deaths
00:41:01.820
and admissions, in fact, cannot be COVID-19, uh, um, that it's coincidental and it's, it's not cause and
00:41:11.580
effect. So I think that's an important, uh, a point, an important point to make. And if we were having
00:41:18.460
this discussion with Dr. Hinshaw, I'm quite certain that we could, we could from that point forward,
00:41:26.940
say, uh, any diagnosis of COVID-19 going forward, we will record the cycle threshold and we will be
00:41:35.820
absolutely sure. And if you want to, and, and, and, and as Dr. Hodkinson is so eloquently stated and
00:41:42.620
many others, it doesn't help, uh, to, to, um, to, to, to, to do a COVID-19 test on people who are
00:41:53.900
asymptomatic. It's a waste of time. It's a waste of money. Um, and they should really just be focusing
00:41:59.260
on people who come into hospital with, um, respiratory symptoms in particular. And, and the,
00:42:07.660
the, there's a more accurate test than the PCR test is the Sanger test. Uh, it's a
00:42:12.460
little more expensive. It takes a little longer to do, but if you're only testing the people who
00:42:16.460
come into hospital overall, it becomes less costly, uh, but far more accurate. So again,
00:42:22.460
that's another thing, uh, that, that could have been discussed if we had had an opportunity to
00:42:27.580
have this discussion, uh, together with caucus because caucuses does compel the premier. And I,
00:42:33.740
I imagine the premier is pretty upset about, uh, 17 caucus members who are, who are objecting to this,
00:42:42.620
to this lockdown. And, um, yeah, well, he brought it on himself.
00:42:49.340
He definitely did. Dr. Modry, we're approaching 40 minutes and I only asked you for 20. So I want
00:42:55.500
to thank you for being so generous with your time. I want to have you back on the show very soon because
00:43:00.780
I, I want to ask you about, um, what happened to the flu, but I'm also kind of curious to hear what
00:43:07.660
you have to say about Western separation. So I want to thank you for your time and hopefully,
00:43:12.220
uh, you'll agree to come back on the show very soon. One comment. Sure. One comment. Um,
00:43:19.260
if you really want to know the, um, rationale for independence, the merits of independence,
00:43:28.300
how it can come about and how to assuage the concerns of those who are, would be concerned
00:43:35.500
about independence, I will be glad to tell you. Thank you so much. I, I just, I want to save it
00:43:41.820
for another show because this is a full packed show. So we'll have you on again very, very soon.
00:43:54.940
Okay. So what do you guys think? Does Dr. Dennis Modry sound like a conspiracy theorist and
00:44:01.420
unhinged conspiracy theorist, or is he an educated guy with a different opinion than the government?
00:44:07.420
makes me wonder why is the government so unwilling to listen to experienced medical doctors who think
00:44:14.860
there was a different way and who also maintain that, that different way, the off ramp from this
00:44:20.620
pandemic is still available for the government to take. It's very strange, isn't it? Well,
00:44:27.660
everybody, that's the show for tonight. Thank you so much for tuning in. I'll see everybody next week.
00:44:32.300
And I really could actually be physically anywhere, but I'll still be making sure that I'm creating the
00:44:37.100
content. Our subscribers are paying for wherever I may be at. And remember friends, don't let the
00:44:44.620
government tell you that you've had too much to think.