Everyone Deserves Choice


Shawn Buckley’s October 20, 2017 Lecture on the Current Health Canada Proposals

Citizens for Choice in Health Care (CCHC) is based in Alberta. Like NHPPA, they have been an active force in freedom of choice in healthcare. Shawn Buckley was invited to present at a recent CCHC event in Edmonton on October 20, 2017.

In his hour long talk, “The Coming Health Canada NHP Proposals…Your Right to Know“, Shawn discusses that the belief supporting the existing NHP Regulations and current Health Canada proposals is that the individual does not have the right to make personal health decisions. Any reaction to the current Health Canada proposals should be based on an understanding that the real problem is the prevailing belief.

Belief, censorship and the propagation of fear are covered in this introductory analysis of the proposed regulation changes. Watch for Shawn’s latest Discussion Paper being released from NHPPA next week, “Health Canada’s Proposed Changes to the Regulation of Natural Health Products Confirms that the War Was Lost in 2004: We are Now Re-Negotiating the Terms of Our Surrender”


“Health Canada Knew of Massive Gaps in First Nations Child Health Care, Documents Show”, CBC

This October 25, 2017 CBC article (7 minute read), “Health Canada knew of massive gaps in First Nations child health care, documents show”, reveals a January 2016 Human Rights Tribunal ruling which found that Health Canada knowingly discriminated against the health care needs of First Nations children despite a unanimous 2007 decision of Parliament to place their needs above jurisdictional disputes between governments. This became Jordan’s Principle.

NDP MP Charlie Angus is quoted in the article, stating, “It is chilling to learn that Health Canada officials didn’t have a clue what Jordan’s Principle is or how their department had legal obligations to ensure services to children”. He further commented, “Senior officials didn’t even seem to know what medical services were being offered or denied.”

Health Canada continues to be irresponsible by throwing money at “a problem” with NHP regulations that does not even exist. They would better serve our country with focused attention on meaningful priorities, like health and wellness, within our First Nation’s communities.


Investigative Fact or Bias? | A User’s Guide to Cheating Death

On October 12, 2017 VisionTV published an interview (4 minute read), with Canadian lawyer, health law professor, writer and “debunker-extraordinaire” Timothy Caulfield about his new 6-part documentary series titled “A User’s Guide to Cheating Death”. The interview titled Tim Talks Natural Remedies and Foods, touches on why Mr. Caulfield chose to address natural foods and NHPs as part of the series, what he has gleaned from his research and the blowback he has received from supporters.

NHPPA watched Episode #5 of the series, The Natural Way. The episode focuses on natural nutrition, holistic health practices and NHPs. Initially, it seems that Caulfield is impartial in his approach to cover the issues surrounding natural health vs conventional medicine. It doesn’t take long for it to become clear that the intent is to discredit. Featured experts are cherry-picked to cast doubt and mock the natural health industry and those who support it. On cue, and as expected, positions include “there is no science to support natural treatments and products”.

Choose any one of many persistent hardline statements seemingly meant to provoke a controversy-for-ratings thread and discuss.

Read more on NHPPA’s review of, and commentary on, Episode 5 of “The Natural Way”


“More Canadians Petitioning the Government About Fear of Cell Phone Radiation”

In this October 4, 2017 National Post article (3.5 minute read), More Canadians petitioning the government about fear of cell phone radiation, political journalist Maura Forrest doubts the growing concerns of Canadians about exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs).

Ms. Forrest begins, “If petitions are any indication, a growing number of Canadians are very concerned about being zapped by radiation from their cellphones, baby monitors and wireless internet routers”. Her piece perpetuates confusion and misinformation about a threat to human health that has been acknowledged for more than 40 years.

Those entrenched in researching the biological effects of EMFs on human health find this piece lacking in qualified content. NHPPA contacted Andrew Michrowski Ph.D, an expert in the study of EMFs, to distill his response sent to Ms. Forrest’s attempt at unpacking a complex subject.

Dr. Michrowski, who has addressed the UN on the subject, authored numerous publications as well as acted as scientific advisor on the NOVA series and award-winning documentaries stated, “What is remarkable about Ms. Forrest’s account is that it assumes a void behind “assumed” claims about the safety of electromagnetic fields, when in fact worldwide government agencies, medical experts and academics have been amassing evidence about the specifics of effects for each spectrum band of electromagnetic fields. Actually this research domain is among the most articulated and published worldwide, since the 1970s. Even the Clinton Administration, through its EMF RAPID programme supported $50 million for its advancement, leading to strong decisions about carcinogenicity of EMF by WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer.”

Read Dr. Michrowski’s full response to Ms. Forrest

The April 1973 Government of Canada report titled, Environmental Pollution by Microwave Radiation – A Potential Threat to Human Health that warns of dangerous levels of microwave radiation from industry, military and personal use. And this was before cell-phones, Wifi, Smart Meters, etc.:

Shawn Buckley vocal about the impact that cell phones, Wifi and other sources have on people’s health. In October 2011, he took part in a public forum in Kamloops regarding the health risks of smart meters. “I really think there is enough information out there that reasonable, educated adults would opt out,” Buckley said.”


“Why Don’t People Revolt”, a Short Film by Theory and Practice

This short film (5:21 minute watch), “Why Don’t People Revolt”, by Theory and Practice, a UK-based independent political awareness project, breaks down the three core reasons why people accept their “lot in life” and don’t revolt; incentives and disincentives, a lack of real alternatives and false consciousness.

Three (of many) powerful quotes from the video will resonate with advocates and activists. We want to see change that aligns with our world view. But often society has difficultly taking action against even known corrupt authorities. It is not without good reason.

“A lack of real alternatives – this may be objective or it may be subjective. Objectively, an absence of effective platforms for dissent, such as social movements, trade unions, political organizations, etc., rendered near powerless those who seek to resist. Subjectively, people may simply be unaware that there are alternatives outside of the way things are at present. They grow accustomed to their way of life and their social position. Submissions and lack of willful change become ingrained through force of habit. Over the generations patterns of behaviour become naturalized and knowledge of alternative fades”.

“For the exploited to effectively kick back against the exploiters, it is a question of building organizations that can be used as vehicles for dissent and of questioning the assumptions behind the ideas that support the interests of the powerful against the powerless”.

“Many are mistaken or misled about where their true interests lie. An individual’s values, what they think is valid, realistic or fair, will be shaped to a lesser or greater degree by the values that are dominant in their society.”

The right to treat your health naturally and maintain sovereignty over your own body is under threat through Health Canada’s latest proposed regulations on NHPs. NHPPA has developed an alternative called the Charter of Health Freedom that works to support and enable Canadians to dissent against and question the government’s exertion of power when it comes to choice in healthcare.

NHPPA only exists through the generosity of our supporters. If you like our work, support us by donating today.

Learn more about the Charter of Health Freedom with interactive video explanations of each section by Shawn Buckley.

The Charter of Health Freedom petition is almost at its goal of 100,000 signatures. Help us get there by downloading a copy of the petition, collecting signatures, and mailing your completed petition to us.


Disrupting a Child’s Education | Obstacles to Parents’ Constitutional Rights to Refuse Vaccination

This September 28, 2017 CBC News article (3 minute read), 659 elementary school students in Windsor area suspended for incomplete immunization records, reports on the Ontario mandate to temporarily suspend students if their immunization records are not up to set standards.

For those who are concerned with the safety of current vaccination programs in Canada, this information will not be new but it will be an important confirmation.

For, or against, NHPPA advocates that vaccination is a personal choice.

Under the Canadian Constitution, vaccination cannot be made mandatory. That is to say, federally, immunization is not mandatory according to Health Canada.

Two provinces, Ontario and New Brunswick, have passed legislation governing the vaccination of school-aged children. As of September 1, 2017, Ontario residents who want an exemption from vaccination for their children will not be able to file the necessary exemption form with their local Public Health office until they have attended a mandatory vaccine education session, failing which they face a fine of up to $1000 and the suspension of their unvaccinated child from school. In New Brunswick, the filing of the appropriate exemption form is sufficient for those who do not wish for their children to receive the mandated vaccinations.

Read full posting


MedEffect e-Notice from Health Canada | Cardiovascular Events vs Amputation

A recent Health Canada MedEffect Notice, dated September 6, 2017, “INVOKANA® (canagliflozin) and INVOKAMET® (canagliflozin and metformin) – Risk of Lower Limb Amputation” reveals the results of a long-term study. It shows that individuals being treated for Type 2 Diabetes by either drug face a doubled risk of lower limb amputation compared to those who were given a placebo medication. Risks are even higher in patients with existing cardiovascular disease or at least two predisposing factors for cardiovascular disease.

Read the full Health Canada MedEffect Notice

The two drugs, manufactured by Janssen Inc. (a division of Johnson & Johnson), are designed to lower blood glucose levels in individuals diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). Two clinical studies were conducted, collectively called ‘CANVAS’ (CANagliflozin CardioVascular Assessment Study) to assess the efficacy, safety, and durability of canagliflozin in more than 10,000 patients with T2DM, who had either a prior history of Cardiovascular disease, or at least two risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The purpose of the study was to ascertain the effectiveness of the drugs at reducing the risk of major cardiovascular events in patients being treated for T2DM.

Patients benefited from a reduced risk of major cardiovascular events but faced an increased risk of lower limb amputation. Amputations of the toe and middle of the foot were the most common; however, amputations involving the leg, below and above the knee, also occurred. Some patients had more than one amputation, some involving both limbs.

Read the Johnson & Johnson press release on the results of the study

Read the full FDA Drug Safety Communication