Just wanted to report on something I've barely tapped in but found. In Canada, it is the NACl and HeaIthCanada that governs whether or not something can be approved or not.

Apparently in Ontario, while there are some pushes to get businesses to bend the knee for the jab, according to Ford, there is nothing that states they technically have to abide by the jabport. Meaning to say businesses are likely liable for dmg's. Likely how the powers @ be think they can get away with it. If someone can verify, that'd be great.

If verified, any business claiming they are following regulation is LYING. Meaning they themselves are more than likely litigable for discrimination.

Now the NACl and HC specifically is a little more difficult to push back on. That being said, withholding information on alternative treatment is likely the way to go imo. There's plenty of documents out there stating the efficacy of zinc and zinc ionophores when it comes to thwarting coronavirus in particular, as per PMC2973827 and PMC6628855 IIRC.

They also govern who gets to be exempt and it's likely Ford's way of putting the blame on anybody else but him, imo. BUT HERE'S THE INTERESTING THING. In order to be considered medically exempt, you have to literally prove you have an allergic reaction to the mRNA specifically. A Catch-22 if I've ever heard of one. ALSO TO NOTE. While clients are technically required to show a jabport to even sit at a R E S T A U R A N T, the people working there themselves don't need one as it was not mandated.

I'm not a genius but I know plenty here are. Help would be nice figuring out how best to hold ppI accountable by court of law. If anybody has a friend versed in Canadian law or can get me in contact with that dude Viva Frei, I would love to very much appreciate it.