They might as well throw a rope around their neck and jump off a bridge. ThereвЂ™s no politician in this country that is going to disagree with their chief medical officer. Yet, that is where we are in Ontario thanks to a system deeply in need of reform In a democracy such as ours, there is no way that unelected doctors should wield so much power and authority, enough to force us to close schools, businesses, change our entire way of life. вЂ¦ Thanks to politicians wanting to ensure that every decision they make has cover, they, and we in the media, have elevated the position of public health doctors to that of omnipotent god instead of what they really are, medical advisors. This is not unexpected as politicians understand that physicians and scientists are considered more trustworthy sources of information versus politicians.Д«ut the public may overestimate the power of their public health leaders as was suggested by a Toronto Sun front page headline вЂ“ вЂњDoctatorshipвЂќ (March 18, 2021). The risk is that governments will oversimplify their final decision as вЂњwe are following the advice of our medical expertsвЂќ who cannot verify if this is the case or not. Final policy decisions are a mГ©lange of multiple considerations that are rarely fully communicated to the public. Governments shape policy decisions using many other lenses such as economics, legal, ethics, public opinion, etc. In part, this is because public health is just one source of information that governments consider when making health-policy decisions. The downside is that the CMOH cannot publicly disclose what advice has been given to the government without the ministerвЂ™s permission. Now, due to constant media attention, most Canadians instantly recognize their CMOH and could identify the CMOHs of other provinces or territories.Д¬MOHs, including the Federal Chief Public Health Officer (Theresa Tam), serve as senior civil servants and at вЂњthe pleasure of the Minister.вЂќ The advice they give government is protected under the umbrella of вЂњcabinet secrecy.вЂќ Cabinet secrecy allows governments to receive candid advice in confidence from various sources to assist them in making policy decisions. Prior to the pandemic, many would have been hard-pressed to name or identify their Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH). I offer an alternate definition: вЂњThe domination of scientists, clinicians and other content specialists by their political masters.вЂќД¬linicians and scientists must avoid becoming the scapegoats for the consequences of government decisions.ДЄnd it is this political capture that clinicians and scientists, when advising government and especially when functioning as senior civil servants, must avoid or become the scapegoats for the consequences of government decisions.

The result is that an agency, charged with acting in the public interest, instead acts in ways that benefit incumbent firms in the industry it is supposed to be regulating. This is similar to the concept of вЂњ regulatory capture ,вЂќ defined as вЂњвЂ¦ an economic theory that says regulatory agencies may come to be dominated by the industries or interests they are charged with regulating. вЂњPolitical captureвЂќ, also called вЂњ state capture вЂќ, is вЂњ the domination of policy making by private, often corporate, power. We rely on these individuals to communicate to the public, at times on a daily basis, pandemic information, and evolving emergency measures.

The вЂњFreedom ConvoyвЂќ protests and occupations speak to a growing divide in Canada between scientific and political dialogue and what defines вЂњtruth.вЂќДЄnother trend that the pandemic has uncovered is increasing вЂњpolitical captureвЂќ of clinicians and scientists, especially public health physicians. COVID-19 has resulted in polarization and politicization of pandemic related issues, especially related to scientifically promoted mitigation measures. The influence of politics on scientific endeavours, including funding, prioritization and public messaging, is not new.

Failure to capture