# BC losing control of COVID



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The trend in BC is not good:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-covid-analysis-august-surge-1.5679225

"Young people account for most of the new spike in cases"

It's not a mystery why this is happening and I'm disappointed that public health, and police, aren't stopping this. Let me describe for you what I've been seeing over the last two days, as I walked along water front areas of Vancouver. I saw all of this directly, myself:

First, there are HUGE groups of young people. Yesterday around dusk, I saw an outdoor party kind of gathering. Someone was running a generator to power a sound system. There must have been 50 - 100 people (all in late teens or 20s) hanging out in very close proximity to each other. They're sharing snacks, hugging each other, sharing joints, etc... of course they are spreading it.

Second, a daily occurrence in many beach areas, are people in their 20s hanging out in groups. They are drinking and passing around drinks, passing around vaping and joints, so they're putting their lips all over the same things. Of course they are spreading it!

Then there are the damned bars and nightclubs. These shouldn't even be open IMO, it's ludicrous to have these open.

And I still hardly ever see 20 year olds wearing masks in stores! They just don't do it. Just about everyone else is wearing masks.

COVID fatigue? Big deal. We're coddling the young people too much. Due to their age, they are the one demographic who is *most adaptable* and most flexible to change. We need to put a stop to the partying and insanely large gatherings. There has to be some kind of enforcement, fines, penalties.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Masks in stores are a distraction and irrelevant. It is the parties and gatherings of people to socialize in close quarters. Cases are still low, but it's a good as a time as any to start cracking down. 

Of course this is not specific to BC. It is happening everywhere except in places where there are no young people. Like Atlantic Canada, for example. No COVID problems there.

Everyone could still work, the economy could still run, and everyone could still be fed and be entertained. Just don't gather in groups more than 5 or 6. Why is this so difficult? Why do groups of 20, 30, 50, 100 people still tolerated, especially with drinking? Bring out the no-fun police and start breaking it up.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

doctrine said:


> Everyone could still work, the economy could still run, and everyone could still be fed and be entertained. Just don't gather in groups more than 5 or 6. Why is this so difficult? Why do groups of 20, 30, 50, 100 people still tolerated, especially with drinking? Bring out the no-fun police and start breaking it up.


Exactly. We've already opened the economy, and business as usual is here. But we're in a *global pandemic*. Some sacrifices have to be made, and one of those should be stopping those groups of 20, 50, 100 people (plus drinking).

The young people will still have friends. They can still socialize. They can still talk with friends. This is not an end to entertainment and socializing. It's NOT a big sacrifice, but we've got to stop the big groups and the close proximity partying/drinking.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

doctrine said:


> Of course this is not specific to BC. It is happening everywhere except in places where there are no young people. Like Atlantic Canada, for example. No COVID problems there.


This is fascinating. Are the demographics very different in Atlantic Canada? And is this why there are so few cases ... the place is full of cautious, distance-maintaining older people?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> The trend in BC is not good:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-covid-analysis-august-surge-1.5679225
> 
> "Young people account for most of the new spike in cases"
> ...



Sorry, I'm calling BS, you can blame "young people", people always do, but that's simply not fair.
We've been under lockdown for months, and that's fine, we can all make sacrifices, and in the early days, we ALL did.

But our rates are low, and political leadership decided not to enforce the distancing measures, back in June.
So now, a month or two later everyone is starting to think it's a joke. 








Trudeau defends decision to attend protest despite advice to avoid large crowds during COVID-19


'As best I could, I followed social distancing measures... It is a difficult situation where we are trying to balance very important competing interests'




nationalpost.com





Once the government starts telling people the lockdown and social distancing isn't a matter of life and death, and we shouldn't take it seriously, the whole thing fell apart.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Since these folks (young, old or inbetween) have the time and money to party (heh, beers cost $$$), then they can well afford a pricey fine, just like what Ford suggested here:

Ford Condemns ‘Reckless’ Brampton Party Attended By 200 People



> ...
> *“Throw everything in the kitchen sink at them. $100,000, everything else*. You really gotta question people,” Ford said Monday at his daily news conference.
> 
> “I’ve never seen anything like it. You’d think the cheese slipped off the cracker with these people, *they just don’t get it,*” he said. ...


 ... I'm still waiting to see the issue of the $100K fine ... not up to but at $100K.

If these folks claim that they can't afford the fine, then they should be sent to the Covid19 hospital ward to have a viewing of the ventilating patients there.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

It is not going to be easy. As we gain in the fight against COVID-19, we become less cautious, which leads to new smaller-scale outbreaks. We will have to go through a few such cycles, given it is very difficult to control people's (particularly the youth) behaviour.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Topo said:


> It is not going to be easy. As we gain in the fight against COVID-19, we become less cautious, which leads to new smaller-scale outbreaks. We will have to go through a few such cycles, given it is very difficult to control people's (particularly the youth) behaviour.


Do you see the large number of seniors running around without masks?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

If we charge these young people and then hit them with court fines and penalties, are they expected to pay these fines before or after they pay their student loans?

Young kids are steaming with hormones. They gotta socialize. It is our culture. This desire is stronger than the fear of death .

When I was a kid I used to sneak out of the house to meet friends.
Ane where being grounded when caught was secondary.

Monetary fines is not going to cure this desire within young people.

When the media talks about it being one or two years before there is any hope of "Normal", this is forever in a young person's mind.

Maybe these young people who gather in groups are somewhat like the "Bad Apples" we find elsewhere within our culture?

I'm thinking that a majority of young people are following the rules. The more we tar them all with the same brush, the larger the problem will become.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

The purpose of the lockdown was to flatten the curve so that it was manageable over time and more people didn't die due to the overwhelmed system and pandemonium

It's still a matter of life and death the difference is now the hospitals are prepared with space for you in an ICU and the morgue is ready to handle your extra corpse. It's all risk management and everything else is lip service. I'm protecting myself and others can party if that's their risk assessment.

Our society prides itself on freedom of choice. I see out of state plates everywhere here. Lots of NPCs lined up for ice cream. They think they're smart because you can't eat ice cream with a mask, right? It's business as usual even though we have a strict travel ban, mandatory masks, and fines in place here

Human population growth is not sustainable and nature always seems to find a way to balance things. Maybe corona will save us from the movie "Idiocracy"


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

In AB, the largest increase is the 20-35 year olds. Unfortunately, AB is heading out of control too with the largest # of cases per capita. It seems to be the pubs and restaurants (bars and nightclubs are still closed), private house parties, and gyms. 

I am not condoning it, but it makes sense why it's this age group. This group of people are at a relatively low risk of dying, they are most likely to be less likely settled with their own family at home. It would get lonely for them. I am so thankful that my kids are still young enough that they we can still do things as a family almost nightly, and I can force them to stay home. For the 20 year old, living alone, it is tough to ask them to isolate. That being said, they are being stupid in these mass gatherings.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

What I would like to know is how sick are these young people getting, on average. I know we see a few examples of very sick and sometimes even dead, but what is the average condition? In the graph on the link J4B posted it shows the rise in infections, but it also shows hospitalizations very low and deaths going sideways. Now deaths will lag infections so perhaps that curve will turn up as well. It will be interesting to see.

The reason I query this is I have a sneaky suspicion that young people not only don't get very sick from a covid 19 infection, but may also not be very contagious, as well. If you think about it, a person's health condition will most likely be a result of the viral load that is in their bodies, at the time. I also would imagine that spreading the virus is probably a result of shedding some percentage of that viral load as they breathe, cough, etc. If the young have an immune system that prevents the infection from creating a large enough viral load to make them very sick, would it also hold true they would be shedding a much lower number of viruses, since shedding a percentage of a much smaller viral load must result in a lower shed of virus. Remember, it takes a minimum amount of virus to cause an infection. They call this the infective rate. That amount would vary from person to person but there is a minimum. 2 or 3 viruses in your body will not allow them to grow into more. They require a bigger army then that, upon initial infection, to get that ball rolling.

So with all that said, I suspect that these young people are not getting very sick and are probably not the biggest distributors of the virus in our society. Just a theory of course. When you add to it, the fact that the young would have had the toughest issues with this pandemic (apart from the dying), I tend to give them a little more slack on this one.

All that said, I suspect this will get out of hand and there are a lot of 40 and 50 year olds that like to go to parties with 20 and 30 year olds, and it would be those people (40 and 50 year olds) where I believe our pandemic problems really do exist. Just my opinion, of course.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

m3s said:


> Lots of NPCs lined up for ice cream. They think they're smart because you can't eat ice cream with a mask, right? It's business as usual even though we have a strict travel ban, mandatory masks, and fines in place here


I know the original meaning of NPC, and I've noticed the rise of its use to describe people in the last few years. I am frankly kind of puzzled as to what it means. People without agency?

I got ice cream while camping in Algonquin a few weeks ago. Masks were mandatory in line (outside) and in the shop. Move away from the store when you're actually eating...


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Well it could be much worse.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sturgis-south-dakota-biker-rally-coronavirus-1.5679461



I don't think enough media attention is being given to WHY are people ignoring distancing. Suggesting more enforcement and fines does not address that question. It also doesn't help those doing it as would explaining to them WHY they are feeling the way they do and as a result, they are doing what they are doing.

People act based on emotion even in the face of contrary facts. Continuing to tell them the facts won't change that, you have to speak to their emotions. As the saying goes, 'when emotion comes in the door, logic goes out the window.' That is what we are seeing when 200 people gather for a house party in Mississauga.








CAUGHT ON VIDEO: Police disperse house party of 200 people in Peel | insauga


While many residents are practicing social distancing and hoping the region can move into Stage 3 soon, a recent incident proves that not everyone shares that concern. Police say they were called shortly before 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, July 25 for a busy house party in the area of Countryside...




www.insauga.com





Instead of continuing to say over and over again, 'this is crazy, these people don't get it', we need to be saying, 'Why are they doing this when the facts are clear' and the answer to that is psychological.








The Psychological Reason Why Some People Aren't Following COVID-19 Quarantine Orders


How to handle the people who aren't convinced by facts.




www.forbes.com





That is what needs to be addressed for these people. They aren't all idiots, they are perfectly capable of 'getting it' but they have to come to terms with it psychologically and hard facts do not address that.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Latest iOS update added a new privacy setting to override COVID19 Exposure Logging

I got the apps COVID Alert and SafeTrace. Not sure which ones are best but only COVID Alert seems to show up as active in the iOS privacy settings

Long overdue imo and I don't believe it violates my privacy as long as Apple approves/tests the app


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

andrewf said:


> I know the original meaning of NPC, and I've noticed the rise of its use to describe people in the last few years. I am frankly kind of puzzled as to what it means. People without agency?
> 
> I got ice cream while camping in Algonquin a few weeks ago. Masks were mandatory in line (outside) and in the shop. Move away from the store when you're actually eating...











The NPC meme went viral when the media gave it oxygen


But the paradox of covering the internet today is that sometimes you have to




www.theverge.com





It's a way of saying people are acting like robots with no mind of their own as do all the NPC characters in a video game. Non-Player Characters is the video game term. As opposed to characters whose actions are controlled by the individual game player. 

When used as m3s used it, it is a derogatory term akin to 'sheep'.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't much care about the excuses people are making to not wear masks.

My wife wears a mask all day working at a retirement home, as do health workers in nursing homes, hospital emergency rooms and ICU units.

Too bad if people don't like to wear a mask. Life isn't all about "their" rights.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

MrMatt said:


> Do you see the large number of seniors running around without masks?


I do. They are at fault too. But generally they are less reckless.


----------



## mattw (May 14, 2013)

It's tough when these young people have relatively no risk to tell them to lock down during their prime summer years.
If they could maintain small groups and limit large gatherings would be ideal but I remember being young, dumb and single would not have listened.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The problem is lack of social responsibility. Cultures which take social responsibility seriously have few covid case outbreaks whether there are lock downs or no lock downs. Japan and Sweden for example vs the UK and the USA. Our young people can still have a 'good time' in small groups among those they know well (for contact tracing if necessary) and to minimize 2nd and 3rd generation spreads and rate of spread. There is no need for the large 20+ people gatherings at any age.

BC tightened the rules on all indoor* spaces after the Kelowna area outbreak of complete social irresponsibility over the Canada Day weekend and municipalities have responded puting bylaw officers out on patrol, mostly boardwalks and beaches to educate and persuade break up of large gatherings. In the Okanagan, it appears the tightening is having some affect due to societal pressures calling out those that do not comply. We will have to see within the next week whether the long August weekend has created another surge or not. It is pretty clear most people understand what the consequences of the Canada Day weekend did locally, which included temporary 1-3 day shut downs of popular places as 2nd and 3rd generation covid cases had to be dealt with, and self-isolation of upwards of 1500 people for two weeks. Nothing gets the attention of a 25 year old more than having participated irrresponsibly at a party and then being contact traced and having to self-isolate for 2 weeks thereafter in the height of summer.

The point is: Young people can still have a good time and comply with common sense constraints. It is not very difficult.

* Limitations on people per sq ft, including hotel rooms, pool side, houseboats, bars and restaurants. Business owners have the obligation to enforce, evict, cancel reservations,etc. to ensure compliance and to enlist the assistance of bylaw and police where necessary. No ordering drinks from stand up bars and no nightclubs. IOW, no walking around mingling.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

"The French sociologist Emile Durkheim in his classic book On Suicide found that when social bonds are shattered, when a population no longer feels it has a place or meaning in a society, personal and collective acts of self-destruction proliferate." 








On Suicide (Penguin Classics) - Kindle edition by Durkheim, Emile, Sennett, Richard, Sennett, Richard, Buss, Robin. Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.


On Suicide (Penguin Classics) - Kindle edition by Durkheim, Emile, Sennett, Richard, Sennett, Richard, Buss, Robin. Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.



www.amazon.com


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> Well it could be much worse.
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sturgis-south-dakota-biker-rally-coronavirus-1.5679461
> ...


 ... based on your deduction (or the "evidence/the link posted which is somewhat outdated back in April"), I say those "200" people gathering for the house party in Brampton (not Mississauga) is sure hell of alot of people with a psychological problem.

And if you took the time to actually read the news-piece, those supposedly-psychologically-damaged-by-Covid19-home-owner(s) even took the "efforts (never mind the costs)" to 1. erect barriers, 2. hired security guards, and 3. enforced no cameras-policy (phone & otherwise) inside so as to *"hide"* the party. 

This private-party came to light only when some 100+ vehicles from the party-goers showed up everywhere in the neighbourhood looking for a parking space. It would not surprise me that this so-called private party was a business venue that came with a cover-charge ... and yet the still-do-not-get-it homeowners claimed they thought a private party of "50 people" was allowed ... since when? Stage 3? The $100K fine is appropriate ... our government can use this extra donation.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

We need to let young people socialize/drink/party/riot outdoors....put up tents etc. Close indoor spaces where there's no social distancing. Cold?...put on more clothes and drink hot rums....perhaps loot a ski clothes store etc.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Longtimeago said:


> Well it could be much worse.
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sturgis-south-dakota-biker-rally-coronavirus-1.5679461
> ...


as a Mississauga native...just to clarify, the party was in Brampton.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I live in a rural community (approx 300 Homes). Approx 90% of the residents are over 65.
there have Been approx 10 cases in our township of 10,000. The city next to us has had about 20 cases, population 30,000.

over the past 6 weeks, we’ve played pickle ball, golf, cards and tennis. The bocce ballers are starting soon. We do our best to socially distance and nobody wears a mask outdoors. Does that mean I haven’t sat next to someone while waiting for my turn at tennis....no.

our low incidence rate is the prime motivation. There are a handful who are still very nervous though.

almost everyone I know.....(I live in this community, but I’m in my mid 40s) is breaking the social bubble rules. Sleep overs, bbqs, camping trips etc etc. We’re probably all convinced that it’s sustained indoor time that is the real risk. Even with the sleepovers, we use separate bathrooms, bedrooms on separate floors, separate towels etc.

I’m not saying all this is ”right”..... but it’s clear that the majority can’t handle the official guidelines for more than a couple of months.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Money172375 said:


> I’m not saying all this is ”right”..... but it’s clear that the majority can’t handle the official guidelines for more than a couple of months.


The ongoing joke is this: remember all those disaster movies likes zombies or infectious diseases which decimate the human population? No one would be that stupid in real life. But, reality is, never underestimate the stupidity of humanity.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

If we ever get whack-a-moled with a true Superbug, it will indeed be an apocalypse of biblical proportions. 

YCFS, especially those young and libertarian types. Hopefully we would push them to the front of the line.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

james4beach said:


> This is fascinating. Are the demographics very different in Atlantic Canada? And is this why there are so few cases ... the place is full of cautious, distance-maintaining older people?


Yes, the demographics are much older and also far less population density in urban centers. Also, they took much more stringent protections, put up roadblocks at the borders and airports, and still have 14 day self-isolation requirements for anyone entering the "Atlantic Bubble", including from the rest of Canada.

Really, Altantic Canada deserves a gold star for COVID-19. Very well done. There are pockets of stupidity, as there are everywhere, but they really took their fate into their own hands.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It may NOT be what ancient pathogens are released from the melting northern tundra that are the greatest danger, but the penchant of scientists to try to re-animate them. Personally, I still believe the COVID is related to a top level Chinese lab in Wuhan that obtained samples from the Canadian lab in Winnipeg.

I think this is why Trump continually refers to the COVID as the Chinese virus....not for the reasons most people think. I think he enjoys holding the knowledge over the heads of the Chinese. One can certainly say that US - Chinese relations went downhill pretty quickly after the COVID appeared.

It could have been an accidental release of the pathogen, and the US doesn't want to start a global war over it.

Let's face it. They keep a lot of secrets from the public, as we learning from the recent UFO revelations they allow to slowly dribble out.









Are There Zombie Viruses In The Thawing Permafrost?


There's a new fear from climate change: bacteria and viruses buried in frozen ground coming back to life as the Arctic warms up. We went digging in permafrost to find out how worried we should be.




www.npr.org





We don't know what we don't know, and maybe sometimes it should stay that way. Maybe we can't handle the truth.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> Personally, I still believe the COVID is related to a top level Chinese lab in Wuhan that obtained samples from the Canadian lab in Winnipeg.
> 
> I think this is why Trump continually refers to the COVID as the Chinese virus....not for the reasons most people think. I think he enjoys holding the knowledge over the heads of the Chinese. One can certainly say that US - Chinese relations went downhill pretty quickly after the COVID appeared.


Well, it's possible, but I try to stick with Occam's Razor unless evidence of something more convoluted emerges.

It is true, however, that samples from the Winnipeg lab were repeatedly sent (secretly) to the Wuhan lab. It is not known who sent the shipments. However, a Chinese scientist and her students (also from China) were kicked out of the lab around the same time. RCMP is investigating and I don't believe we have any confirmation (at least publicly) of who sent the shipments.

There does not appear to be a link to COVID-19. The virus samples that were stolen were Ebola (filovirus) and Henipa (paramyxovirus), not any kind of coronavirus. Since there was no coronavirus shipped to Wuhan, there is not any reason to believe that COVID-19 originated from the Winnipeg lab theft.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/china-coronavirus-online-chatter-conspiracy-1.5442376


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

There seems to be some chance it was released from a lab. At this point it is mostly water under the bridge. It would be good to know the origin of the outbreak for future prevention. It might be a similar situation to the UK hoof and mouth disease outbreak coming from an accidental lab leak.


----------



## librahall (Apr 11, 2020)

This is not good at all! https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-covid-analysis-august-surge-1.5679225


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I just wish they would start an ad campaign that highlights the fact that this particular virus does not care how annoyed you are. How bored you are. How brave you are or how free you are. It only cares about how stupid you are.


----------



## hboy54 (Sep 16, 2016)

I am 58 so not in the camp of being young and getting economically destroyed, nor old enough such that I am at extreme health risk. I think both groups are behaving rationally, and both groups think the other stupid.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> If we ever get whack-a-moled with a true Superbug, it will indeed be an apocalypse of biblical proportions.
> 
> YCFS, especially those young and libertarian types. Hopefully we would push them to the front of the line.


 ... not a matter of "if" but "when" :

Previously Unknown Viruses Discovered in Melting Glacier | The Weather Channel

Hopefully not in my lifetime. 

But then a big-enough asteroid (if the nukes don't get us first) might precede this event, enough to push mankind to extinction. The majority of us then have nothing to worry about ... only those coming out from the bunkers.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> as a Mississauga native...just to clarify, the party was in Brampton.


 .. how about that. The emphasizing clarification, cool.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

librahall said:


> This is not good at all! https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-covid-analysis-august-surge-1.5679225


It is not, but the good news is the Kelowna area outbreak of the Canada Day weekend is under control. Only 2 new covid cases in the entire Interior region over the Fri-Sun period and only one of those cases is in hospital. Only 9 active cases remain associated with the Kelowna cluster of 158 original cases. The extraordinary effort undertaken by health and municipal officials appears to have paid off. Hopefully, young people now behaving more appropriately after the utter stupidity exhibited on the Canada Day weekend. We need another week or so to determine whether the Aug long weekend spawned an outbreak but it does not appear to be the case.

The current outbreaks appear to be Lower Mainland based where it is appearing harder for officials to effectively exhibit social/peer pressure on the younger demographic.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> I live in a rural community (approx 300 Homes). Approx 90% of the residents are over 65.
> there have Been approx 10 cases in our township of 10,000. The city next to us has had about 20 cases, population 30,000.
> 
> over the past 6 weeks, we’ve played pickle ball, golf, cards and tennis. The bocce ballers are starting soon. We do our best to socially distance and nobody wears a mask outdoors. Does that mean I haven’t sat next to someone while waiting for my turn at tennis....no.
> ...


You do realize that your 10 cases in 10,000 is a higher RATE of cases than the 20 cases in 30,000 next to you right? So you are not doing as well as your 'neighbours'. 

I do agree some people can't handle the guidelines over a longer period of time but while that may explain their and YOUR behaviour it doesn't change the fact it results in more cases. I also agree with OptsyEagle's comment that, "_I just wish they would start an ad campaign that highlights the fact that this particular virus does not care how annoyed you are. How bored you are. How brave you are or how free you are. It only cares about how stupid you are."_

People cannot excuse their behaviour by saying, 'I can't handle it'. They need to realize the fact that if they don't, they are part of the problem, not part of the solution and they need to find a way to 'handle it' for everyone's sake.


----------



## :) lonewolf (Feb 9, 2020)

People are losing their minds over a cold LOL The herd has totally lost it


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> as a Mississauga native...just to clarify, the party was in Brampton.


Brampton...where the mayor banned all ice rentals but rented the ice behind everyone's back for his hockey playing friends. No word yet as to if it was taxpayer money used to break the law.


----------



## :) lonewolf (Feb 9, 2020)

Longtimeago said:


> .
> 
> I do agree some people can't handle the guidelines over a longer period of time but while that may explain their and YOUR behaviour it doesn't change the fact it results in more cases. I also agree with OptsyEagle's comment that, "_I just wish they would start an ad campaign that highlights the fact that this particular virus does not care how annoyed you are. How bored you are. How brave you are or how free you are. It only cares about how stupid you are."_
> 
> People cannot excuse their behaviour by saying, 'I can't handle it'. They need to realize the fact that if they don't, they are part of the problem, not part of the solution and they need to find a way to 'handle it' for everyone's sake.


Longtimeago look in the mirror if you want to see who is part of the problem instead of cutting down those that do their own thinking & do not believe in the BS. Here is my view of you the sheep


The government is more dangerous then any virus. The sheep that cant hold themselves up & do their own thinking are very dangerous. They are killing 10,000 children every month by the food supply chains being shut down. The sheep are no better then those that hailed Hitler or marched to Stalin. They have destroyed the world economy & the lives of millions. Their so called cure does nothing to safe lives instead it results in suicides, domestic violence & will lead to war. When people loss everything they lose it.

What kind of evil lives in minds of people that lock down the healthy to weaken immune systems instead of letting people get outside get fresh air exercise & live a healthy social life?

The so called scientists that have a paid agenda tell us to wear Gates under wear that lowers oxygen levels the complete opposite of oxygen therapy which increases oxygen levels to strengthen the immune system. The moister inside the masks makes for a breeding ground for the virus. The virus the size of a molecule a mask will not stop. The herd that cant think for themselves are sending the message they believe the BS. Next step after the economy has been further destroyed which threatens our national security will the sheep be forced to be vaccinated? With who knows what ? Our rights are being taken away. The sheep need to wake up & stop wearing Gates under wear laden in BS.

People that give up their freedom for a bit of safety deserve neither freedom or safety. The true hero's are the independent thinkers that will eventually save the sheep. The sheep think the independent thinkers are the problem yet they fail to look in the mirror.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

I don't think we will be getting over COVID-19 anytime soon, even if a vaccine becomes available. We will be going through a lot of ebbs and flows. Social distancing and other preventive measures could help, but will not completely solve the problem.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Topo said:


> I don't think we will be getting over COVID-19 anytime soon, even if a vaccine becomes available. We will be going through a lot of ebbs and flows. Social distancing and other preventive measures could help, but will not completely solve the problem.


A vaccine (more likely vaccines plural), even when available, will take a long time to trickle down to enough people to make a difference. Even then, no one knows how long the anti-bodies will last either. One year? Two years? Maybe it will have to be an annual activity like the flu shot. Handwashing, masking and physical distancing will be with us for some time to come.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

AltaRed said:


> A vaccine (more likely vaccines plural), even when available, will take a long time to trickle down to enough people to make a difference. Even then, no one knows how long the anti-bodies will last either. One year? Two years? Maybe it will have to be an annual activity like the flu shot. Handwashing, masking and physical distancing will be with us for some time to come.


Agree. I think it's going to be a roller coaster. Cases go down then people get distracted and let their guards down. That causes cases to rise and with more attention, people become more cautious driving down cases, and it goes on...


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Those that contracted SARS are immune 14 yeas later...no reason to suspect Covid will be an outlier.


----------



## :) lonewolf (Feb 9, 2020)

Topo said:


> I don't think we will be getting over COVID-19 anytime soon, even if a vaccine becomes available. We will be going through a lot of ebbs and flows. Social distancing and other preventive measures could help, but will not completely solve the problem.


Some of the market players that put money on the line & study cycles have a better understanding of the cycles concerning COVID then the paid agenda scientists. Erik Hadick has done some research on the subject. some of the info regarding the cycles can be found on interviews on Howe street, Harry Dent bell curve was spot on as well as one of the Astro guys nailed the cycle.

The 90 year panic cycle ends in late summer 2022 so people wont be as scared after the cycle passes. Plus the virus will pretty much be done by then even without a vaccine. A vaccine will just make matters worse. Remember this virus is way over blown over 99.9% of us will not die from it. The death numbers can not be trusted


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

Eder said:


> Those that contracted SARS are immune 14 yeas later...no reason to suspect Covid will be an outlier.


There are some viruses that mutate so much, the immunity they cause is relatively temporary. The flu virus and common cold are like that. I believe the common cold could be caused by some coronavirus strains too.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

:) lonewolf said:


> Some of the market players that put money on the line & study cycles have a better understanding of the cycles concerning COVID then the paid agenda scientists. Erik Hadick has done some research on the subject. some of the info regarding the cycles can be found on interviews on Howe street, Harry Dent has bell curve was spot on as well as on of the Astro guys nailed the cycle.
> 
> The 90 panic cycle ends in late summer 2022 so people wont be as scared after. Plus the virus will pretty much be done by then even without a vaccine a vaccine will just make matters worse.


I have the feeling that the market has moved past the COVID-19 situation. There will be volatility ahead, but I doubt we will have 30% drawdowns on the COVID-19 issue, barring some catastrophic events. Of course, other yet unknown factors could negatively affect the market.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The common cold IS a coronavirus. We won't know anything about anti-body longevity until we have experienced it.


----------



## junior minor (Jun 5, 2019)

A shame. The forecast for the months ahead is indeed a grim one ( I pray for best yet fear the worse) even if we are far from places like Australia ( They can only leave their apartments and homes a few hours per day for ''exercise'' as if they were in jail ) so it's neither neat not enjoyable.
B.C. students won’t return to class as originally planned on Sept. 8 


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/parents-worried-back-to-school-measures-1.5681163I


Although I'm no parent,I raise my hat to all the people that live with their families in those difficult times.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eder said:


> Those that contracted SARS are immune 14 yeas later...no reason to suspect Covid will be an outlier.


Please support this claim.

Also current data suggests COVID19 has short immunity. Therefore there is a reason to expect COVID to behave more like other coronaviruses that have short immunities.








Swiftly waning COVID-19 immunity poses vaccination challenge


Emerging evidence that the body's immune defence against COVID-19 may be short-lived makes it even harder for vaccine developers to come up with shots fully able to protect people in future waves of infection, scientists said on Tuesday.




www.reuters.com





Going back I've posted a number of other articles on this, including multiple papers.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

What’s the local news or ”talk in the town” within B.C. Saying?

here in Ontario, B.C was held up as the model. I’m hearing less about B.C. in general now.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> What’s the local news or ”talk in the town” within B.C. Saying?
> 
> here in Ontario, B.C was held up as the model. I’m hearing less about B.C. in general now.


The people promoting B.C. as a model were just anti-Ford lefties.
Right at the beginning the expert opinion was that BC got lucky, and Quebec was really unlucky.

All that is happening now is BC (and Alberta) luck has run out.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

BC actually did amazingly well for most of this covid-19 period and it was not just luck. Dr Bonnie Henry and the politicians did an admirable job getting the population's attention. This despite a very porous border for way too long a period between us and WA state where Seattle et al had large early covid issues AND the amount of Asian traffic in and out of YVR. Tracking started early despite the a-holes in Ottawa not shutting the border down until well into March. I suppose we were lucky we didn't have more imported travel exposure than we did until border closure. BC also had the wherewithal to quarantine incoming TFW for 2 weeks at gov't expense before turning them loose in the agricultural industry, something Ford et al never did do.

BC and AB are having a harder time of it now due to community exposure primarily from the tourist trade. BC Interior outbreaks have been entirely due to imported exposures from the Lower Mainland and AB. The latest one in the Okanagan is now essentially over due to rigorous contact tracing, self-isolation and quick temporary shutdowns of establishments with potential exposures, and public announcements of potential active spots. Just yesterday, it was announced that those who were at the downtown Cactus Club restaurant on Aug 8th between 5pm and midnight need to monitor for symptoms due to a possible active case there at that time.

The new regulations imposed after the Canada Day weekend outbreak seem to be keeping active cases at bay. The number of active cases in the BC Interior has gone way down again. Bigger issues on the coast with partying groups but the data is not nearly as dire as Mr Matt makes out. Too many sensationalist postings without context.

Added: The BC Interior region can be seen by going to BC Covid Dashboard and clicking on the Interior at top right and looking at the lower right graphic with orange bars. The Canada Day outbreak is obvious by the spike and yet the August daily new case data has dropped way off. Also the upper left bar graph shows the cases are primarily 20-29 year olds, precisely the group responsible for BC Interior outbreaks.

It is also obvious clicking on Vancouver Coastal and Fraser at the upper right in turn to see where BC's current active case load surge is coming from. The Lower Mainland community (politicians) needs to get more focused and aligned with health officials. We, in the Interior, don't want anyone coming up from the Lower Mainland these days.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Please support this claim.


Why would I claim anything? I'm just regurgitating common knowledge about SARS. I won't post a series of links that no one reads in the hope of appearing intelligent lol.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eder said:


> Why would I claim anything? I'm just regurgitating common knowledge about SARS. I won't post a series of links that no one reads in the hope of appearing intelligent lol.


Good point.
If everyone is going to play evidence free game, might as well play along.

Plus we know that COVID19 is really just a political plot to implement leftist authoritarian rule over the people.

COVID19 is just the emergency to justify infringing on our human rights.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Hint...search for t cell immunity...should provide a years worth of links. Posting links with Covid & climate change is silly since neither has settled science and links can be found to support any argument. No idea why you didn't just go a quick search to see where I might have got my statement from.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder, residual T cell antigen presence from a SARS infection simply helps the body resist the severity of a coronavirus infection by helping the body recognize the pathogens early and help against an immune system over-reaction, potentially saving someone from hospitalization or ICU severity. That is not the same thing as immunity. 

Both European Union and US federal health organizations say SARS anti-bodies are really only 'immunity' for 2-3 years. Many shades of grey thereafter trailing off to non-immunity. It is irresponsible to say SARS survivors are immune 14 years later. There is no evidence that is true.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> Eder, residual T cell antigen presence from a SARS infection simply helps the body resist the severity of a coronavirus infection by helping the body recognize the pathogens early and help against an immune system over-reaction, potentially saving someone from hospitalization or ICU severity. That is not the same thing as immunity.
> 
> Both European Union and US federal health organizations say SARS anti-bodies are really only 'immunity' for 2-3 years. Many shades of grey thereafter trailing off to non-immunity. It is irresponsible to say SARS survivors are immune 14 years later. There is no evidence that is true.


That is true but in my opinion T-cell presence should get very close to immunity for most lower dose initial infections. Basically these t-cells are improving ones ability to fight the virus. They kind of make a 70 year old's immune system work more like a 20 year old's immune system. In my opinion, if the initial dose one receives does not end up allowing the virus to grow to a large enough viral load to cause health issues, that is still pretty good immunity for that person. Maybe not as good as anti-body immunity but a heck of a lot better then nothing.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Sure. I agree, but it is an exaggeration, or mis-statement, to say it is multi-year immunity and that is my objection to grandiose declarations.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

_Next, we showed that patients (n = 23) who recovered from SARS (the disease associated with SARS-CoV infection) possess long-lasting memory T cells that are reactive to the N protein of SARS-CoV 17 years after the outbreak of SARS in 2003; these T cells displayed robust cross-reactivity to the N protein of SARS-CoV-2. _

Not grandiose but science based unlike the panacea of non medical mask use popular around here. Like I said I'm just regurgitating what smarter than us guys like Daniel M. Altmann & Rosemary J. Boyton have published papers on.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> Good point.
> If everyone is going to play evidence free game, might as well play along.
> 
> Plus we know that COVID19 is really just a political plot to implement leftist authoritarian rule over the people.
> ...


I won't go as far to say it's a political plot, but I know for sure (and the evidence shows) that left leaning governments use every single crisis as a way to try to give themselves more power. Trudeau already tried that, we were just lucky he had a minority government or he would have gotten away with it.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

None of the peer reviewed literature claims immunity 14 years later, only the presence of SARS-CoV infection alerting T cells. Which is all your quote above says.

Masking is not a panacea, any more than hand washing hygiene is, or physical distancing. It is all about viral load which you are also very aware of. Dr Bonnie Henry herself says masks are lower on the list of preventative measures. Hand washing hygiene, physical distancing and small groups to keep community transmission down are the most effective. 

We spent a good part of the afternoon yesterday at a local winery, tasting wines, and having lunch on the outdoor patio with a bottle of white watching the people stroll by on the grounds, kids playing on the beach and the watercraft passing by. For the most part, everyone was keeping their 2m distancing...as it should be. We plan to do it again next week when we are hosting some family from Calgary.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Not to belabour the point but....

*T-cell* *immunity* is a *reaction* in the body's immune system by which the immune system recognizes a foreign invader, called an antigen, and responds by *destroying* it. There are two types of white blood *cells*: B-cells and *T-cells*. *T-cell* *immunity* uses white blood *cells*, or lymphocytes, called *T-cells*, or T-lymphocytes, to _*destroy*_ antigens.

Further in the peer reviewed paper...

_"supporting the notion that patients with COVID-19 will develop long-term T cell immunity."_


Anyway I'm a virus moron like every one else here...was just trying to help.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Fair enough. We should all be a bit more careful of precisely what we write. Perhaps billions of dollars are being spent by thousands, or tens of thousands, of educated bums to try and make sense of what they know, what they are projecting from what they know, and making educated guesses of what might be. There simply is not enough data history yet to make any 'eureka' statements and insufficient test results to know who is blowing smoke. People generally hate so much uncertainty but there is no alternative at the moment than to just be patient and tolerant. Muddle through best we can.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

BC is experiencing the surge that many areas have experienced. It is being driven by primarily young people who foolishly interact in ways quite against anything resembling reasonable behaviour. Much the same as in other areas. Very low initial hospitalization rates and death rates are followed by eventual hospitalizations and deaths as it spreads to more vulnerable in those households. 

BC will probably get a grip in it. It might require some strong messages and new regulations and laws. Young people are killing their own job prospects as entry level positions dry up and opportunities in tourism and hospitality vapourize.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

doctrine said:


> It is being driven by primarily young people who foolishly interact in ways quite against anything resembling reasonable behaviour.


Is it any wonder? The original information emphasized the fact that the elderly were the most vulnerable, so you have the young people thinking that it isn't an issue. Even though there are cases where young people getting sick and if not dying, they now have long term health issues. Parents say children can be COVID-19 'long-haulers' too after months of symptoms


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ I hope your premier's call for help from DeadPool (aka Mr. R. Reynolds) to get the message out that the virus is not age or GEN-discriminatory will be successful.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

More on Covid immunity ...as expected









Scientists See Signs of Lasting Immunity to Covid-19, Even After Mild Infections (Published 2020)


New research indicates that human immune system cells are storing information about the coronavirus so they can fight it off again.




www.nytimes.com





_*“Things are really working as they’re supposed to,” said Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunologist at the University of Arizona *_


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I am also curious about this. Let's say a person had an immunity to a virus that was only around 3 months in duration. How would that person's longer term immunity unfold IF they were continuously exposed to that same virus within the first 3 months and of course every month thereafter.

The way I see it. If exposure to the virus could give a person immunity and immunity could allow a person to be exposed to the virus, could we not come up with something that used that idea to provide long term protection. It is so simple, I imagine someone has thought of that before me. That is usually the case.

As for Eder's linked article above. Thanks for that. I believe what sometimes confuses people is that anti-bodies can give the body virus immunity and t-cells can improve ones immune response to a virus. They both work well at keeping us healthy but the world seems to be completely fixated on anti-body immunity and miss the benefits that are provided by things like t-cells. As I mentioned up thread, I like to think of t-cell protection like taking the immune system of a 70 year old and turning it into the immune system of a 20 year old.

I can assure you that if we all had immune systems like the average 20 year old, we would not be in a pandemic right now. It would be completely a non-event. So with that said, the persistence of these t-cells, after even a low dose exposure to covid-19, is a seriously positive observation. Thanks Eder.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Community spread outbreaks in BC are involving thousands of people who now must quarantine themselves for two weeks.

2 of the people in quarantine have developed the virus. Their contacts are now being tracked down, so more quarantines are inevitable.

Those quarantined will miss a couple weeks of work, have to stay away from family, and wonder if they will come down with the virus.

All this because a few people are too stupid to not attend big gatherings. Maybe we should start arresting them and giving them a criminal record.

Let them deal with that when they are applying for certain University courses, jobs or trying to visit the US.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

OptsyEagle said:


> I am also curious about this. Let's say a person had an immunity to a virus that was only around 3 months in duration. How would that person's longer term immunity unfold IF they were continuously exposed to that same virus within the first 3 months and of course every month thereafter.


Well, there are booster shots that would do that sort of thing for certain vaccines that we have. Another example would be the Hep B vaccine which is a treatment of 2 or 3 shots over a specified period to confirm lifetime immunity. It remains to be seen if something similar can be done for COVID. Given that it has been around less than a year, any long-term immunity is speculative at best.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

doctrine said:


> BC is experiencing the surge that many areas have experienced. It is being driven by primarily young people who foolishly interact in ways quite against anything resembling reasonable behaviour. Much the same as in other areas.


I phoned into a radio show that had a public health expert. I said that it's crazy that we have bars, nightclubs, and party venues open and I said we have to come down hard on this - because young people won't do it themselves. They have to make sacrifices and that's something we have failed to push them to do.

The expert responded that if we outlaw all this excessive socializing, the young people will just go and do it secretly (and have drinking parties at private homes). And yeah, that does sound like a problem.

In any case, masks should become mandatory everywhere. Today I was at Ikea and saw nearly perfect mask compliance... just about everyone, family & kids wearing masks. What a beautiful sight. This should be *mandatory* in all stores. It's amazing to me that BC public transit is only requiring masks starting Aug 24. A little late aren't we??

I think of a lot of what's going on today as a trial run, building habits. The main event is in the winter and we've got to be prepared.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Massachusetts made face covering in public mandatory in May. Everyone had to get a mask if they wanted to buy groceries. There was grumbling at the time but people got used to it. Stores enforced it.

The hardest part for some people is just making that first step. The stats look pretty good Massachusetts is on a very short list of "low risk" states now after being one of the worst back in April. Government leadership does make a difference.

Reminds me of seat-belts in the '90s. I remember old rural folks balking. I remember us kids piling in the back of pickups and station wagons. People would scrambled for belts or hide when they saw a cop.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

m3s said:


> Reminds me of seat-belts in the '90s. I remember old rural folks balking. I remember us kids piling in the back of pickups and station wagons. People would scrambled for belts or hide when they saw a cop.


And reminds me of drinking & driving. When I was a kid, we used to drink and drive all the time... just about everyone did it.

Everyone was getting smashed and driving. Normal. Then they started saying we should not drink and drive. Apparently the authorities knew what was good for us better than we did. The outrage!! How dare they tell me not to drink when I feel like it?

How dare they inconvenience me! I've got parties to go to!

Oh... wait, turns out the people studying the statistics were on to something. Drinking and driving really is dangerous, and it's not a huge inconvenience to just take a taxi or get a friend to drive us instead.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

james4beach said:


> And reminds me of drinking & driving. When I was a kid, we used to drink and drive all the time... just about everyone did it.
> 
> Everyone was getting smashed and driving. Normal. Then they started saying we should not drink and drive. Apparently the authorities knew what was good for us better than we did. The outrage!! How dare they tell me not to drink when I feel like it?
> 
> ...


The difference is we don't have time for young people to come around to the realization that gathering is not a good thing when we are in the midst of a pandemic. A drunk driver did not result in 82 accidents per day in BC but that is what they now have with Covid. 

The speed of the response needs to match the speed of the negative outcome.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

A voice of reason during a fear driven pandemic.


*“Good hand washing prior to touching food or one’s face and avoidance of close contact with others whenever practical are strategies that are likely to be effective; it is exceedingly rare and maybe not even possible to acquire the virus simply by being in the same room as an infected person”

The Edmonton Journal column by Dr. Joan Robinson, a pediatric infectious diseases physician at the Stollery Children’s Hospital, stated that “Alberta parents shouldn’t feel guilty about sending their kids back to school *


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> And reminds me of drinking & driving. When I was a kid, we used to drink and drive all the time... just about everyone did it.
> 
> Everyone was getting smashed and driving. Normal. Then they started saying we should not drink and drive. Apparently the authorities knew what was good for us better than we did. The outrage!! How dare they tell me not to drink when I feel like it?


But wouldn't them doing the right thing lower their approval rating?
OMG, they might have to sacrifice some political capital in the name of saving lives.... oh my!#[email protected]#


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Actually the D&D laws were the result of MADD lobbying for years. It takes more than good sense to get a politician to act. Look at our stupid gun laws.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

And it goes on.








Victoria party host fined $2,300 under new coronavirus enforcement rules | Globalnews.ca


"The room was densely populated, hot, and moisture had built up in the windows," said Victoria police.




globalnews.ca


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Sad it has come to this, but there was no choice but to get more aggressive in persuasion and enforcement. Hopefully, this social irresponsibility will decrease in intensity once the summer months are over.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

A whole 18 people in hospital due to Covid...don't mean to belittle the panic theme but thats very few.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> Sad it has come to this, but there was no choice but to get more aggressive in persuasion and enforcement. Hopefully, this social irresponsibility will decrease in intensity once the summer months are over.


I welcome the stronger enforcement.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Eder said:


> A whole 18 people in hospital due to Covid...don't mean to belittle the panic theme but thats very few.


 ... that whole 18 people or very few has family, friends, colleagues, etc. that they can pass on the virus. Otherwise known as the "exponential" factor ... or in BC terms "wildfire".


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

True, but the goal was to flatten the curve so as not to overwhelm the ICU....I'd say BC won that battle...theres no eradicating Covid.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> True, but the goal was to flatten the curve so as not to overwhelm the ICU....I'd say BC won that battle...theres no eradicating Covid.


Not just the ICU but hospital beds in general which have to be resourced and not available for elective and non-elective surgeries and ongoing major illnesses in general. There is lots of capacity in the system right now but that could change when all those socially irresponsible younger set infect their elders...or not. We will have to watch for the trend in hospitalizations vs active cases.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

The goals are two fold: one is to keep the health system from breaking. The second goal is to delay infections until there is either some kind of effective treatment or a vaccine that can protect individuals. Eradication would be next to impossible, given how virulent the virus is. Clusters are popping up even in places like New Zealand, which had some very promising results initially.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

As a high risk individual myself I think us old people should take some responsibility & look out for ourselves. Handcuffing young people is silly ...will never work. Any one at risk should ensure he distances & isolates, not expect kids to do the heavy lifting. If you have millennial's still at home do them a favour & boot them out.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> As a high risk individual myself I think us old people should take some responsibility & look out for ourselves. Handcuffing young people is silly ...will never work. Any one at risk should ensure he distances & isolates, not expect kids to do the heavy lifting. If you have millennial's still at home do them a favour & boot them out.


But Eder, buying time on this really has its advantages. The medical system was very bad at responding to COVID in the early days. They have been improving their procedures, including how (not) to use ventilators, plus through trial & error finding other drugs that help with treatment. Procedures for patient care are improving. Procedures for keeping health workers safe are improving too.

So buying time -- by slowing the spread -- will ultimately save lives. Yes people will eventually get COVID, perhaps we'll all catch it eventually, but the ability of our system to deal with it is improving with every passing week. Humans need time to organize and adapt.

Handcuffing young people is absolutely justified. Slowing the rate of infection through society is a huge win... it saves lives, and protects health care workers.

I continue to say that this is like a wartime situation. We all have to make sacrifices, and they are not forever. Already the situation is improving, but we're not out of the woods yet. Partying a bit less is a SMALL sacrifice to make. Frankly I think anyone who can't restrain themselves from reckless socializing, during a global pandemic, has to smarten up.


----------



## junior minor (Jun 5, 2019)

We should indeed be careful, I think. My province was where it got hit at its worst. After removing ''directors'' to cut back funds, a few years back ( sounds like a recipe for disaster, right? The same happened when the PM decided to remove money from the cleaning crews, and instead, use the machines to do it, literally ''cutting corners''; that's no joke, I'm holding this information from the man they call when they need to quarantine an entire level in a hospital. Anyways, the minister in question ended up having flesh-eating bacteria in his leg, said limb was amputated) well they're bringing them back, of course.

That said, Here is what I read today, to paraphrase James4beach https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/covid19-update-august-24-1.5698223 Not that many people are sick. Of course, there is the possibility of asymptomatic carriers. That's not for me to say. up to you to do the math 😜


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I think we have had a long enough time with our younger generation going back to socializing to know that it is not really the big threat we deem it to be. I have a sneaky suspicion that these young people not only have an immune system that for the vast majority of them, keeps them from getting overly ill from C-19, but also do not shed a lot of virus to others. At least not deathly amounts, for the majority of them.

The way I see it is a persons symptoms will most likely be a result of the size of viral load within their bodies at any given time. Contagion would also be a function of the concentration of C-19 moving from the infected person to the healthy one (known as the infective rate). This shedding of virus to others would most likely be done as a percentage of that viral load being shed within each cough or breath of the infected person. Since younger people's immune systems obviously keep that viral load down to manageable sizes, it probably also ensures that they shed a lot less of the virus as well.

The concern we have had was what happens when a person with a less healthy immune system (older person) comes in contact with an infected young asymptomatic person. I suspect we are starting to see the results. Sure a few will acquire a dose large enough to make them fairly sick but most will simply receive a very small dose from these younger individuals, probably not large enough to even get past the "infective rate" required to cause an actual covid 19 infection.

Obviously we have no concrete data on the above. It is all just coming from common sense construction by me, but the evidence that I am seeing, with respect to how many people have gone back to almost the way they use to live compared to the number of infections and more importantly, hospitalizations and ICUs and deaths, we are seeing.

That said, could we get a second wave from all this. Of course. Right now we are at least aware of the issue, we are using masks for indoor establishments, washing hands and sterilizing touchables regularly and quite a few of us, including some of them are practicing some social distancing. More importantly a lot of these gatherings are outside, where the wind dilutes the virus and the sun sterilizes it. Come fall and winter, things could change quickly, but with all that said, this is how I see things today. I am giving the younger group a little slack. The C-19 problem seems to be centered around the 40-50 year olds as deathly transmitters and 60-90 year olds as the dyers. It is us that still need to be very careful.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Eder said:


> A whole 18 people in hospital due to Covid...don't mean to belittle the panic theme but thats very few.


There is no 'panic theme' that I am aware of. This kind of using of extreme adjectives is what people like those attending these large gatherings, use to excuse their actions.

We know how the virus spreads. We know how to limit that spread as much as possible. We know how we should behave. There is no 'panic' in behaving responsibly.

We aren't talking about children behaving irresponsibly, we are talking about young ADULTS behaving irresponsibly. When all our public health experts are telling them to to avoid large gatherings and maintain distancing, there is no ACCEPTABLE EXCUSE for not doing so. Either someone acts like a responsible adult or not. If someone acts contrary to the common good then they should expect to be treated accordingly and that means they should expect to be punished.

Adults do not have a right to be 'cut some slack'.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Getting back to the world we actually live in, instead of the one LTA thinks we should live in, we find that most people will not take what the government tells us as gospel. If it becomes law, that is different and perhaps we may need to go there but recommendations are a completely different thing.

Remember it was not long ago that our same governments told us to donate all our masks since they provided no benefit to the non-frontline Canadian. I certainly did not follow that recommendation because you could see through it as garbage as soon as they said it. If masks provided no protection, why did our healthcare workers want them so badly. As we found out later, that was indeed a very biased recommendation that was certainly not in our best interest and was best to have disregarded it completely, and wore a mask when one must go indoors with other people.

We have many examples of our governments asking us to behave a certain way that is in their interest alone and not necessarily ours. If they are serious about these young people's behavior then make the social distancing law and enforce it. I suspect they are seeing what I stated in my post above and since they don't have concrete data yet, they must continue to tote the line with previous recommendations, but are probably finding that this behavior of the young is not where our problem lies. Remember the real problem is not infections. You and I are being infected with viruses all the time. The real problem is severe illness, chronic disability and death. That does not happen with all infections. So even though these younger people are getting infected we have yet to see if that is becoming a problem big enough to incarcerate them inside they houses.

Just my opinion, of course.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> As a high risk individual myself I think us old people should take some responsibility & look out for ourselves. Handcuffing young people is silly ...will never work. Any one at risk should ensure he distances & isolates, not expect kids to do the heavy lifting. If you have millennial's still at home do them a favour & boot them out.


We old people ARE looking out for ourselves as best we can...without unnecessarily punting our grandkids and Gen-X/millenial children from family visits due to their risky exposures. Many grandparents are sustitute, or part time, babysitters/day home hosts out of necessity (us as an example when our grandchild is sick and cannot go to daycare, or daycare is shut down temporarily). What we don't need is pre-school and school facilities being petri dishes just because of some snotty nosed 22-30 year old wanting to party on Friday night in a socially irresponsible way has community infected our young teachers. 

What is needed is to clamp down on irresponsible social behaviour that has no place in current times. Yes, young people need to socialize but for crying out loud, be responsible about it. 60 young folk packed into a vacation rental or private house party in Victoria is clearly highly irresponsible.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

One young guy in Victoria received a fine for several thousands of dollars after hosting a party (he calls a 'hang out') in a small apartment with dozens of people. He had hand sanitizer he says, some were wearing masks, but apparently there were so many people that the walls were wet with condensation. He sounded like the neighbour from hell anyway, as he regularly had parties, and had guests vomit in the hallway. He's getting evicted at any rate.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OptsyEagle said:


> Getting back to the world we actually live in, instead of the one LTA thinks we should live in, we find that most people will not take what the government tells us as gospel. If it becomes law, that is different and perhaps we may need to go there but recommendations are a completely different thing.
> 
> Remember it was not long ago that our same governments told us to donate all our masks since they provided no benefit to the non-frontline Canadian. I certainly did not follow that recommendation because you could see through it as garbage as soon as they said it. If masks provided no protection, why did our healthcare workers want them so badly. As we found out later, that was indeed a very biased recommendation that was certainly not in our best interest and was best to have disregarded it completely, and wore a mask when one must go indoors with other people.
> 
> ...


So you are ignoring that distancing and large gatherings are in fact the LAW and that fines and imprisonment CAN be applied for those who do not comply OptsyEagle? 

The law is there, it is the enforcement that is not being done. Instead, we keep hearing, 'our policy is to educate rather than enforce'.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> So even though these younger people are getting infected we have yet to see if that is becoming a problem big enough *to incarcerate them inside they houses.*


You used similar wording to the same (misinformed) opinions I've been hearing for months. Adhering to the guidelines does not trap anyone inside their houses. Everyone can go out, everyone can even socialize. They can talk with friends, have a good time. They just can't have large gatherings and be closely packed in with others.

In other words, there is NOT a big sacrifice being asked here. Nobody is being told to stop all social contact, or to stay at home and do nothing. You can in fact go out and do just about anything you want. A young adult can go meet up with a couple of friends. Nobody is saying they can't do this.

Why are you interpreting this as "incarcerated inside their homes"? I'm actually very curious, because it's possible the public health message isn't going out properly. Or maybe a very incorrect message is circulating on social media. Is there something that makes you think people are being told to stay at home, or not have any social contact?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Everybody can select their own bubble of non-Covid friends and have house parties or go to outdoor restaurants. Shopping or transit, everyone is masked.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

james4beach said:


> In other words, there is NOT a big sacrifice being asked here. Nobody is being told to stop all social contact, or to stay at home and do nothing. You can in fact go out and do just about anything you want. A young adult can go meet up with a couple of friends. Nobody is saying they can't do this.
> 
> Why are you interpreting this as "incarcerated inside their homes"? I'm actually very curious, because it's possible the public health message isn't going out properly. Or maybe a very incorrect message is circulating on social media. Is there something that makes you think people are being told to stay at home, or not have any social contact?


In my opinion, the requirements to not gather are extraordinarily more difficult to our younger citizens then they are to our older ones, with a few exceptions.

I like to walk a mile in someones shoes before I condemn their behavior and I know that if I was 20 and single, I am going to start going back to meet people again. I am not going to wait till there is a vaccine to start dating again. I didn't wait until AIDs was cured (thankfully), which was the virus dejour in my youth, so I doubt I would wait until Covid-19 is cured. 

Add to that, little evidence to show me that these infections, from our younger citizens, are creating anything more of a problem to our society, then an increase in the number of infections announced each morning and you have my opinion, on the matter. Should they be allowed to have a party with 200 people in a 400 square foot room. No, but if you were there when there was only 10 people, are you going to leave when more show up, especially if those new arrivals are pretty girls? Some will. Most will not. I doubt I would of. This is the world we live in. My main point is although there is no evidence that these infections are not a problem there is also no evidence that they are a big problem either, and common sense tells me an infected 50 year old is an exponentially bigger problem to us, then an infected 20 year old, with the same initial dose of C-19.

So for those reasons I give them a little slack. Don't worry, I am a lonely voice and I have no problem if they want to stay indoors or keep their gatherings smaller. I just doubt they will.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

kcowan said:


> Everybody can select their own bubble of non-Covid friends and have house parties or go to outdoor restaurants. Shopping or transit, everyone is masked.


Is going to outdoor restaurants with people outside your bubble technically allowed? ie. Me and my 6 friends go to an outdoor restaurant. My bubble is my family, parents, and brothers Family. Distancing amongst My friends is not obviously happening at the restaurant. Seems offside to me. My understanding was that you Need to social distance with anyone outside your bubble. indoors or out. And if you can’t, then wear a mask....which you can’t/won’t do at a restaurant.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It may depend on province but in BC, the protocol is any 6 people as a 'group'. No further clarification required. We have been to half a dozen restaurants recently, all outdoor patios, and all they need is a contact name and number from one of the group.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> It may depend on province but in BC, the protocol is any 6 people as a 'group'. No further clarification required. We have been to half a dozen restaurants recently, all outdoor patios, and all they need is a contact name and number from one of the group.


We’re in Ontario and while I think it’s technically not allowed, people have formed multiple bubbles when only one is allowed.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> In my opinion, the requirements to not gather are extraordinarily more difficult to our younger citizens then they are to our older ones, with a few exceptions.
> 
> I like to walk a mile in someones shoes before I condemn their behavior and I know that if I was 20 and single, I am going to start going back to meet people again.


I disagree... it's _not_ extraordinarily difficult for them. I know this because I'm pretty close to the demographic, now in my mid 30s but it wasn't long ago that I was in my 20s. And I am single.

When I was in my 20s, I met up with friends in small circles. Yes sometimes there were giant parties but this was not necessary.

I'm single, and dating is still possible. I went on a date a couple weeks ago, and might meet a woman this weekend for a date. Am I trapped at home? Am I unable to date? Of course not! We can go outside, grab coffee, walk around together. We can get ice cream, sit outside, talk outside. You don't need a crowd of 10 or 50 people to go on dates.

I also regularly socialize with a neighbour in my building, a nice guy. We hang out in front of the building, he's usually smoking, and we talk about stuff, maybe have a drink together outdoors. Again... socializing is possible.

So I completely disagree that this is very difficult for young people. *Some of them are being spoiled brats*. They don't need parties of 10, or 50, to have fun. A guy or girl can have lots of fun socializing with a handful of close friends, people they see regularly. This is still allowed.

And I say this not as a 60 year old, but as a guy who's only about 8 years removed from this scene, who's single. Yes, I still am meeting people. I even met a fellow CMF'er recently for a drink... again, we met on an outdoor patio. Only two people, not a crowd of 50.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Whatever works for you does not always work for everyone. Obviously a lot of those younger people are disagreeing with you or they would be behaving more like you do.

Anyway, as I said, it would be better if they spent more time thinking about social distancing but I doubt that is going to happen. It also does not seem to be that big of problem to our society, right now, but perhaps it will become one. I don't know. Right now all it is causing are a few infections. As I have been saying, illness, long term disability and death is the actual problem, not necessarily infections. It is those other numbers I try to keep on top of but our society seems to just want to focus on infections, as if one infection is the same as another. It is not.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

james4beach said:


> ... You don't need a crowd of 10 or 50 people to go on dates.
> ....
> So I completely disagree that this is very difficult for young people. *Some of them are being spoiled brats*. They don't need parties of 10, or 50, to have fun. A guy or girl can have lots of fun socializing with a handful of close friends, people they see regularly. This is still allowed.
> ...


 ... yes they do for these arrogants. And when they end up at the C19 ward, they'll be crying for their mamas too.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/victoria-party-host-fine-1.5699920



> ...
> *Victoria party host calls $2,300 fine for breaching COVID-19 rules 'a bunch of BS'*
> 
> *'He’s welcome to his opinion but he will be paying that fine,' police say*
> ...


Just their attitude says it all. And I think his landlord will be super-relieved when he's out of there.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> So I completely disagree that this is very difficult for young people. *Some of them are being spoiled brats*. They don't need parties of 10, or 50, to have fun. A guy or girl can have lots of fun socializing with a handful of close friends, people they see regularly. This is still allowed.


Good thing they released guidelines.

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-sex-guidance.pdf


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Good thing they released guidelines.
> 
> https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-sex-guidance.pdf


That is a pretty funny read. For example:

_"Have sex only with people close to you". _ 

I have always found it hard not to do that. It just seems that the further away she is the harder it is to have sex with her. 6 feet social distance is just another method of birth control, if you ask me. lol


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> We’re in Ontario and while I think it’s technically not allowed, people have formed multiple bubbles when only one is allowed.


I consider 'bubbles' to be pretty much pointless. They would only really be a 'bubble' if each person in that bubble had no contact outside of that bubble. I have an appointment for a haircut today and that will mean interacting with someone outside my bubble obviously. So IF that person turned out to be infected, I will then potentially bring the virus into my 'bubble'. Everyone who goes to work is exposing their bubble to outside interactions.

All a so called bubble does is increase the chance of infection.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

"All a so called bubble does is increase the chance of infection. "
Agreed, Each new addition to the bubble increases the odds of infection!
These people are playing the odds to improve their quality of life. Life is about taking chances.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

kcowan said:


> "All a so called bubble does is increase the chance of infection. "
> Agreed, Each new addition to the bubble increases the odds of infection!
> These people are playing the odds to improve their quality of life. Life is about taking chances.


I agree, it's fine if people are willing to accept the risks as they increase them. However, I don't think everyone actually figures out that their bubble is increasing their risk. The only safe bubble is one with no one in it but yourself. I think some people think, 'I am in a bubble with 5 others and none of us are infected, therefore I am as safe as I would be without the bubble.'


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> That is a pretty funny read. For example:
> 
> _"Have sex only with people close to you". _
> 
> I have always found it hard not to do that. It just seems that the further away she is the harder it is to have sex with her. 6 feet social distance is just another method of birth control, if you ask me. lol


I think NYC public health was suggesting g**** holes as a potential social distancing measure.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I think NYC public health was suggesting g**** holes as a potential social distancing measure.


I thought it was B.C.: COVID-19 and Sex


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Longtimeago said:


> I consider 'bubbles' to be pretty much pointless. They would only really be a 'bubble' if each person in that bubble had no contact outside of that bubble. I have an appointment for a haircut today and that will mean interacting with someone outside my bubble obviously. So IF that person turned out to be infected, I will then potentially bring the virus into my 'bubble'. Everyone who goes to work is exposing their bubble to outside interactions.
> 
> All a so called bubble does is increase the chance of infection.


To me, a bubble Allows close contact and no masks. Ex. Grandparent visits and brother visits.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Good thing they released guidelines.
> 
> https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-sex-guidance.pdf


I almost cried reading that. I was laughing so hard.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Money172375 said:


> To me, a bubble Allows close contact and no masks. Ex. Grandparent visits and brother visits.


Obviously nobody uses bubbles the way they probably should. Now looking at what people actually do, who say they use bubbles, is really just trying to keep the crowd they are in, at any given time, down to 5 or 6 people.

Now I have not done the math, but if 6 people get together one day. Then those six people all go home to a house with 4 people, who all got together with 6 different people that same day. Then those people all get together with 3 or 4 people at work the next day. Then everyone does this again with different people in the bubble 4 times a month. Now even if the family and work people don't change, how many close contacts actually happened in a month...while these people practiced so-called good behavior. It seems almost equivalent to a spring break party to me.

Now comparing the above to a party that happened that month where 50 people all came into close contact with each other, one time during the month, and I wonder which situation caused more people to come into contact with more people?

From what I see, the only difference in the party situation is those people probably also participated in the bubbles above and went to work as well, but in any event the bubble system is obviously not what is saving us today. It's actually a reason why we should question why we have done so well with the relatively good control we seem to have on C-19 right now.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> Since these folks (young, old or inbetween) have the time and money to party (heh, beers cost $$$), then they can well afford a pricey fine, just like what Ford suggested here:
> 
> Ford Condemns ‘Reckless’ Brampton Party Attended By 200 People
> 
> ...


 ...update ... not sure what the JOP over there at Brampton is waiting for considering "13" individuals used "short-term rentals" (surpising? NOT!) that breached "two" bylaws.

Brampton house party hosts now face fines of up to $100,000 for breaking COVID-19 rules

The link is behind a paywall but here is the full article:

*



Brampton house-party hosts face $100,000 fines: Judge to decide if people who threw gatherings will have to pay full amount

Click to expand...

*


> * TORONTO STAR* *; *28 Aug 2020 by Jason Miller, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
> 
> _The hosts of a series of Brampton house parties in July that attracted dozens of people now face fines of up to $100,000 for violating COVID-19 distancing and gathering size bylaws.
> 
> ...


And as if Brampton isn't making a contribution to the covid stats.  

I think the "houseowners" also should be charged as well, considering they were participants of the rentals leading to the illegal parties. AirBnB is a real $$$ maker ... LOL.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

BC really does seem to be losing control and it is primarily in the younger age groups.



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-records-124-more-cases-of-covid-19-setting-a-new-single-day-record-1.5704499


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Still, only 23 people in the hospital against 974 active cases in total. It just seems to me that these infections are a little less dangerous then the others we use to see, when our older generation was the problem. The infected youth are not getting very sick and the people they infect don't seem to be getting as sick, as we use to see. Just saying.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The danger is the young cohort can be more asymptomatic and unknowningly pass on the virus to more vulnerable populations. That could be a cause of the 2nd wave. The same thing could happen with schools as petri dishes but we cannot keep schools closed 'forever'. It is time for selfish, self-centered 20somethings and 30somethings to do their part in social responsibility to NOT be the petri dishes for the 2nd wave when it may be hard enough to manage the upcoming flu season AND schools as petri dishes.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OptsyEagle said:


> Still, only 23 people in the hospital against 974 active cases in total. It just seems to me that these infections are a little less dangerous then the others we use to see, when our older generation was the problem. The infected youth are not getting very sick and the people they infect don't seem to be getting as sick, as we use to see. Just saying.


Look at the curve in new cases OptsyEagle. Since mid-July it is not just going up gradually, it is shooting up. As more cases occur, more of those who are at high risk will inevitably become infected. The one leads to the other.

There is no ACCEPTABLE reason for having cases rise. The current cause of the rise is a known, the 20-somethings ignoring distancing. Which 20-something do you think will be willing to accept responsibility for s/he infected me and I died. This is not about them and how sick they might or might not get. It is about ONE of them infecting someone who does DIE. Try asking one of them how they know they will not do that to someone. They are not thinking beyond themselves, they are being totally irresponsible. That is not deniable.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> Look at the curve in new cases OptsyEagle. Since mid-July it is not just going up gradually, it is shooting up. As more cases occur, more of those who are at high risk will inevitably become infected. The one leads to the other.
> 
> There is no ACCEPTABLE reason for having cases rise. The current cause of the rise is a known, the 20-somethings ignoring distancing. Which 20-something do you think will be willing to accept responsibility for s/he infected me and I died. This is not about them and how sick they might or might not get. It is about ONE of them infecting someone who does DIE. Try asking one of them how they know they will not do that to someone. They are not thinking beyond themselves, they are being totally irresponsible. That is not deniable.


But the more cases do not seem to be creating more high risk infections. I am not saying people at high risk are not being infected. I am saying that the infections they seem to be getting today do not seem to be as severe. Perhaps the young people do not shed as deadly of infection as someone 40 to 90 does. That is my point. Not all infections are the same. They never have been for this virus or any others.

As I have been saying, it is not the number of infections that is our problem, it is the severe illness, long term disability and death that is the problem. People are being infected with benign viruses all the time. We don't keep everyone indoors because of it.

As for what 20 something kid would be willing to take responsibility for your death. I imagine they all are willing to take that risk or they would be acting differently. That is not the point, at least not for them. It is only the point for you. Hence why I suggest instead of complaining on a message board like this about other peoples behavior, that won't change anything, you try to look closer at the situation and see where the larger risks lie for yourself and the people close to you. People cannot stay away from each other and most that could are not going to. So how do we deal with that? That is what we should be discussing. Who can we get closer to and who should we avoid like the plague? Excuse the pun.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> But the more cases do not seem to be creating more high risk infections. I am not saying people at high risk are not being infected. I am saying that the infections they seem to be getting today do not seem to be as severe. Perhaps the young people do not shed as deadly of infection as someone 40 to 90 does. That is my point. Not all infections are the same. They never have been for this virus or any others.
> 
> As I have been saying, it is not the number of infections that is our problem, it is the severe illness, long term disability and death that is the problem. People are being infected with benign viruses all the time. We don't keep everyone indoors because of it.
> 
> As for what 20 something kid would be willing to take responsibility for your death. I imagine they all are willing to take that risk or they would be acting differently. That is not the point, at least not for them. It is only the point for you. Hence why I suggest instead of complaining on a message board like this about other peoples behavior, that won't change anything, you try to look closer at the situation and see where the larger risks lie for yourself and the people close to you. People cannot stay away from each other and most that could are not going to. So how do we deal with that? That is what we should be discussing. Who can we get closer to and who should we avoid like the plague? Excuse the pun.


Let me preface this post by stating we live in historic, difficult and unusual times. My sympathies go out to anyone who has been impacted by Covid-19 whether it be loss of a loved one, personal illness or financial difficulty.

I concur that people in general have had enough and as a result are increasing their risk to exposure. Everybody has a different comfort level and different reasons for that level of comfort. Mental health must be given consideration as well. Many are isolated and lonely and miss social interaction. Even introverts I know are starting to miss the "old normal". As a society, we have seen an abundance of unnecessary suicides and drug overdoses the past while in which the current world circumstances have been a factor.

IMO irresponsible actions such as the large gatherings and parties linked above are unacceptable and hard to justify. 

We all would like people to be responsible in regard to limiting the chance of exposure. It is somewhat arbitrary and subjective what that entails. Should we all wear masks? Should we not socialize outside our immediate family? Should we take public transit? What about air travel? restaurants? These decisions are guided by our comfort level and circumstance.

Everybody has a threshold that they are willing to cross when it comes to the pandemic. Two important factors in crossing that threshold are past experience, and time. As a society we have gotten "comfortable" living with the virus. Exposure rates our higher in many places than they once were. 

Like most, the first few months my family and I limited our contact to work, home, and grocery store. Over time, we added food delivery. I was quite adverse to my first experience going to a restaurant (outdoor patio) as well as my first flight both of which were (work related). 

Each of us must make a personal decision on what we can and cannot live with as reasonable measures. This decision should factor public safety and not be reckless. Unfortunately, not everyone does or will do so. 

Perhaps a comparison can be made to help put it in perspective.

Many people are injured or killed in motor vehicle accidents each year. Do I refuse to travel in a car as a result? 

Do I speed recklessly? refuse to wear a seatbelt? Travel with someone who does not know how to drive? Of course not.

Instead I limit my risk by following the speed limit, avoid my cell phone when driving, and stay off the road when impaired drivers are most likely to be out and about. Does this guarantee I or a loved one will not be in an accident. Absolutely not; but it helps. 

Unfortunately, we live in a society where our social contract is supposed to balance our liberty and freedom with the wellbeing of the collective. Some people have little regard for others but most try to do the right thing.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I already said.... Stay away from snotty nosed, self-centered, selfish 20somethings and 30 somethings.who may not show symptoms. Teens too for that matter. 

As an example, I go to Superstore and Walmart early when there are fewer shoppers and the demographic is older because I trust a 60 year old without a mask walking by a lot more than I do a 25 year old without a mask. IOW, I avoid the younger demographic, especially unmasked, when that is practical. No bars and no bar/grills. No places where the younger demographic congregates. 

We are careful about where we go wine tasting and who is present, and who is wearing a mask. So far we have gone to only patio (outdoor) restaurant dining which will work another month or two and then we are hooped. We will most likely then go to 'higher end' restaurants to avoid the younger demographic. Lifestyle changes but doable.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> But the more cases do not seem to be creating more high risk infections.


I think it's way too early to judge that. There's a time delay for all of this. Rapid increases of infections seem to have started in Canada in mid August. Currently the infections are spreading around young adults but I would imagine that the next step is for the infections to spread beyond them, more into their households and extended families. Perhaps that's another few weeks delay before older adults start being infected.

And then once older adults are infected, they don't show up the stats right away. A person who has a bad case of COVID might remain sick for a week before they decide to seek medical help. Perhaps then they end up in hospital or ICU.

IMO this is a time to be extremely cautious, with the numbers rising so sharply in many parts of Canada. But I do agree with you @OptsyEagle , if perhaps in 1-2 months it seems that this surge in cases does not result in worse outcomes or hospitalizations, then I won't be as worried.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> We will most likely then go to 'higher end' restaurants to avoid the younger demographic. Lifestyle changes but doable.


This is a really good idea. Going to expensive restaurants, where there are fewer young people is an excellent plan.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

In BC they currently have 23 C-19 infected people in the hospital. Not 23 people in Vancouver but in all of BC. I imagine that is less then 1 person per hospital. I am finding it hard to see that as out of control. Will it get worse. I certainly don't know, all I can do is report what I am seeing.

I disagree about whether it is safer to be with a 50 year old as opposed to a 20 year old, but again, no concrete data to back it up, but of course less data to refute it. Obviously staying away from both of them is the safer approach but if I am at a retail store and two cashes open up and one is operated by a 50 year old and the other a 20 year old, I will pick the 20 year old. My reasoning is if the virus can grow to such abundant amounts to make 50 year olds so sick that many will actually die, they probably also have more virus within them when they are asymptomatic as well. Has that been proven? No. Can we wait until it is proven? If you want, but here is the neat thing. It makes little difference. The safety factor is 50:50 without doing much thought at all. Picking mine over the other only has an effect if I am dead wrong. Although there is partying evidence and a lot of anger that I might be wrong, there is very little other evidence then a bunch of asymptomatic infections that these people are creating a problem. So, in my opinion, the younger are not only safer for them, but for all of us. The older people do not seem to get nearly as many benign infections, so I will throw my lot in with the benign ones, until I can see a reason not to. 

Anyway, if you want to wait until a PhD answers the question definitively you will either be dead by then or this pandemic will most likely be over and no one will care then anyway. So do what you want. I will keep observing what I observe and posting it here and I expect and hope you guys will call me out on it so I can formulate my plans and actions even better. Good luck to everyone. Thanks for your help.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Well the CDC commented today
*
Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. *

Wow is all I can say.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Haven't researched the above and not going to start looking for the link ... was "asphyxiation" (brought on from whatever condition/illness, Covid19 or not) included as a cause of death in those stats from CDC? If so, I can say wow too.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Canada's active COVID-19 case number is rising shortly before most schools reopen


In the past two weeks, British Columbia, Alberta and Manitoba have all set or come close to new daily records for the highest number of new COVID-19 cases reported in each province.




www.ctvnews.ca





BC and Manitoba have more active cases right now than at any time previously. Anyone who doesn't think that translates to more risk to EVERYONE than ever before in those provinces is an idiot. It seems there are a lot of 20-something idiots.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Haven't researched the above and not going to start looking for the link ... was "asphyxiation" (brought on from whatever condition/illness, Covid19 or not) included as a cause of death in those stats from CDC? If so, I can say wow too.


It's much ado about nothing, and people are being deliberately misleading. 

Here's the link: COVID-19 Provisional Counts - Weekly Updates by Select Demographic and Geographic Characteristics

It's not new that people with pre-existing conditions like Diabetes, Obesity and Circulatory issues are more susceptible to COVID related health issues. For example, how many people die of obesity alone? Usually it is accompanied by heart failure or other circulatory problems.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

It implies that most American Covid deaths should be attributed to other conditions.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Eder said:


> It implies that most American Covid deaths should be attributed to other conditions.


That's not the correct interpretation. The implication is that other conditions with COVID will increase the chance of mortality, not that COVID has no affect. In other words, if these people didn't get COVID, there's a good chance that they wouldn't have died within that timeframe. It's like saying someone who had the flu which leads to pneumonia died of pneumonia. Partially true, but the fact that the flu is what started the chain of events to death, I'd say that would be a significant cause of the death.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> It implies that most American Covid deaths should be attributed to other conditions.


Covid -19 was the cause of death exacerbated by other pre-existing conditions. That has always been known to be the case. While I know you have dismissed much of the covid issue as not being worthy of disproportionate concern for months, I will continue to have the opposite opinion. OTOH, it ultimately has one positive effect. It kills those who would be a burden on the health system anyway.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

bgc_fan said:


> That's not the correct interpretation. The implication is that other conditions with COVID will increase the chance of mortality, not that COVID has no affect. In other words, if these people didn't get COVID, there's a good chance that they wouldn't have died within that timeframe. It's like saying someone who had the flu which leads to pneumonia died of pneumonia. Partially true, but the fact that the flu is what started the chain of events to death, I'd say that would be a significant cause of the death.


Agreed, the guy with the comb over to the south of us would like people to believe everyone dies of heart failure, no one dies because of Covid. Given the average literacy level of the population even in Canada is 48% at a level of 2 or less (basically what you would expect a grade 6-8 student to be able to understand), it isn't hard to see how so many people can be led to believe things that they do believe.

Trying to differentiate between 'cause and effect' is beyond the ability of many to understand.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> OTOH, it ultimately has one positive effect. It kills those who would be a burden on the health system anyway.


I take it that you consider your parents to be a burden on the health system and it would be a good thing if they died.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I would be curious what the Canadian stats actually are as a comparison.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> I would be curious what the Canadian stats actually are as a comparison.


Think some of that does exist, but don't think the data set anywhere is 'pure'. I suspect it would be similar, i.e. pre-existing conditions, including lower immunity in old age, being the key factors in both hospitalization and death rates. That has been well known all along.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

londoncalling said:


> IMO irresponsible actions such as the large gatherings and parties linked above are unacceptable and hard to justify.
> 
> We all would like people to be responsible in regard to limiting the chance of exposure. It is somewhat arbitrary and subjective what that entails. Should we all wear masks? Should we not socialize outside our immediate family? Should we take public transit? What about air travel? restaurants? These decisions are guided by our comfort level and circumstance.


In my city, the rate of current active infections is 0.02%, that's like 1 person in 5k.
The risk is very low.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> I take it that you consider your parents to be a burden on the health system and it would be a good thing if they died.


I don't think Alta's parents are with us anymore. He himself is over 70.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> In my city, the rate of current active infections is 0.02%, that's like 1 person in 5k.
> The risk is very low.


The tested active infection rate is X%. No one knows the actual infection rate from those with mild symptoms that have never been tested or are asymptomatic. These latter folk obviously provide lower risk of infecting others if they are not coughing, sneezing and hacking and wiping their noses on their sleeves or back of their hand, but they still leave a virii load at some level on surfaces like door handles and the like.


Spudd said:


> I don't think Alta's parents are with us anymore. He himself is over 70.


True. Siblings, spouse and I are now rapidly becoming (are) the higher risk group >70. We all take some calculated risks but presumably we will not take any that is not warranted on a risk/reward basis. No public transit for me, no airports or air travel or cruise ships. We have taken calculated risks hosting a revolving door of family (incuding grandkids) this summer and we adhoc babysit our 2.5 yr old granddaughter when daycare is down or logistics prevent parents from picking her up on time. We do go to outdoor patio based restaurants and wine tasting at wineries, but do not yet dine indoors. Nor have we hosted or been within physical distancing requirements with friends. We meet outdoors 2 metres apart. IOW, depending on risk/reward.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> I already said.... Stay away from snotty nosed, self-centered, selfish 20somethings and 30 somethings.who may not show symptoms. Teens too for that matter.
> ...


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Maybe the increase in cases amongst younger people is because many of them work in retail and restaurants......areas that we “couldn’t” live without. Notwithstanding the stories about large parties in the media, WE are assuming that these young people are getting covid irresponsibly. It might just be because they are going to work and doing some of the “necessary” work that older people won’t/can’t do.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Money172375 said:


> Maybe the increase in cases amongst younger people is because many of them work in retail and restaurants......areas that we “couldn’t” live without. Notwithstanding the stories about large parties in the media, WE are assuming that these young people are getting covid irresponsibly. It might just be because they are going to work and doing some of the “necessary” work that older people won’t/can’t do.


Statistics on contact tracing have not been suggesting that albeit any front line worker is at some increased risk and it would be logical to assume some elevated infection rate because of that. Community transmission seems to be primarily via gatherings and parties at least in or region, if not BC in general. There have also been a few hot spots in correctional institutions and construction work camps. Hospitality and retail workers are actually relatively well protected via masking and plexiglass barriers.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Money172375 said:


> Maybe the increase in cases amongst younger people is because many of them work in retail and restaurants......areas that we “couldn’t” live without. Notwithstanding the stories about large parties in the media, WE are assuming that these young people are getting covid irresponsibly. It might just be because they are going to work and doing some of the “necessary” work that older people won’t/can’t do.


Very good point! Imagine a server at a restaurant or someone taking orders at the front. These are often young women.

You could be right. This spike in cases among 20 year olds could simply be due to the jobs they have.

Older people with professional jobs are all working at home and minimizing contact. But people in their 20s and 30s have jobs in service industries, also in grocery stores, dealing with lots of people, stocking shelves, etc. Yes I might have been all wrong about this... it really could be due to their jobs.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Lol ...they are all on CERB and now EI...fantasy land & free money.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> Lol ...they are all on CERB and now EI...fantasy land & free money.


Every day, I go to stores, and there are young people working the front lines.

They work more than you do, Eder.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> That's not the correct interpretation. The implication is that other conditions with COVID will increase the chance of mortality, not that COVID has no affect. In other words, if these people didn't get COVID, there's a good chance that they wouldn't have died within that timeframe. It's like saying someone who had the flu which leads to pneumonia died of pneumonia. Partially true, but the fact that the flu is what started the chain of events to death, I'd say that would be a significant cause of the death.




Well a colleague put it to me this way...

*“When someone dies of the common cold after fighting the AIDS virus for decades does that mean they died of the common cold?” *


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Eder said:


> Well a colleague put it to me this way...
> 
> *“When someone dies of the common cold after fighting the AIDS virus for decades does that mean they died of the common cold?” *


Pretty much. No one dies of AIDS itself, it suppresses the immune system so that another illness actually is the cause of death, but AIDS is obviously a contributor. There's a reason why most literature talk about people dying of AIDS-related illnesses and not AIDS itself. Just like AIDS is an underlying factor to dying of other diseases, pre-existing cardiovascular condition is one of the underlying factors to COVID related deaths. Let's put it straight-forward, if the patients who died didn't get COVID, it's likely they would have continued to live for many more years.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Precisely the point.....


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Everyone likes to point fingers at the younger generation and the big parties they throw. No doubt, it is quite a rude statement to how they feel about others, but to be honest, from what I have been seeing, older people are not acting all that much better.

I have a cottage and I have had zero guest this season, for obvious reasons, but my neighbors, who range from around age 50 on one side and little over 60 on the other seem to have one new bubble of guests and family (between 2 to 6 people) at least once a week. Just like the years before, in my opinion. Very little has changed. I see this multi-bubbling, by a lot of people, on facebook and many other places.

I mentioned previously that if you go visit a bubble of 5 or 6 friends and then go home to your house of 4 people who also just visited 5 or 6 friends and then everyone goes to work with 2 or 3 people, who are probably doing the same thing. Even if the home family and the work people do not change, if the bubble visits are 3 to 4 times per month, you will probably obtain the virus shedding of more people then if you went to a party of 50, once per month, instead.

My main point here is that all of it is poor behaviour and my overriding point is that the older generations just pretend they are acting more responsibly. I am sure there are exceptions in both age groups but it seems to be the poor behavers that we tend to see more visibly.

A more important observation is with all this pathetic behavior WHY are the hospitalizations, ICUs and deaths so low? It seems like just being aware of the existence of the virus perhaps is enough to reduce the dosage size of the infection a person gets, and this lower dose initial infection allows their bodies to keep them from getting severly sick, compared to previous infections we saw in the early days. I predicted a little bit of this a long time ago but I wonder if that is what is helping us along these days. I use to say if you want to protect yourself do this:
Job #1. Don't get infected.
Job #2. If you do get infected, make sure it is a lower dose infection.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> Maybe the increase in cases amongst younger people is because many of them work in retail and restaurants......areas that we “couldn’t” live without. Notwithstanding the stories about large parties in the media, WE are assuming that these young people are getting covid irresponsibly. It might just be because they are going to work and doing some of the “necessary” work that older people won’t/can’t do.


Nice try but that is not the case. If it were, we would have been seeing cases being traced to supermarkets, etc. from the beginning. Contact tracing would have shown us that long before now. As AltaRed says, retail workers are relatively well protected just like other front line workers and as a result, they are not contracting or spreading it at work.

Trying to find EXCUSES for the obvious irresponsible behaviour that is going on with large gatherings, is just that, trying to find an excuse.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The problem with the larger groups are that : 1) usually no one has a complete contact trace list, and 2) the multiplier of infections is immediate among a lot of mostly single people who have then gone home to contaminate their own bubbles. The multiplier is an explosion rather than a series of firecrackers. It is simple math. The Kelowna incident over the Canada Day weekend resulted in 171 infections and over 1500 in isolation. It ruined a good portion of the summer for a lot of people. It was just declared over yesterday after having gone 2 full weeks without a new infection.

Folks who have a family of 2-5 over each weekend at the cottage have a very low multiplier of 2, one family one weekend and another family the following weekend. Only 2 of those bubbles might be infected. Over the course of 8 weeks this summer, we have had 4 Gen-X families stay with us for 3-8 days each. None of those families crossed paths and none of them knew anyone with a potential infection for the 2 weeks prior to visiting and they did not show symptoms for the 2 weeks following. It could have been possible a member of one of those families could have been infected coming here, shortly before arriving but we would have become ill by the time the next family arrived (spacing them accordingly). At most, 2 families could have become infected. Our last family bubble group is coming here for the Labour Day weekend. There will be a telephone check the night before travelling. During all this, we were careful to use our own utensils, towels and the like, albeit in close quarters for a number of days, we are touching the same door hardware, etc.without necessarily wiping them down. We took some risk obviously, but on a measured basis. Quite unlike a rowdy party of 50 at one event.

I think the point is, is one has to logically go through the math regarding risk and probability before making comments about equivalence. FWIW, I have been quite vocal here about the social irresponsibility of 20somethings and 30somethings in big party groups. Obviously, it is not the ones who show responsible behaviour, maintain small family type bubbles, and use proper hygiene. I will continue to denigrate the irresponsible big parties of hordes of people jammed into small spaces. It simply is not necessary to create one's own petri dish to have a good time.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OptsyEagle said:


> Everyone likes to point fingers at the younger generation and the big parties they throw. No doubt, it is quite a rude statement to how they feel about others, but to be honest, from what I have been seeing, older people are not acting all that much better.
> 
> I have a cottage and I have had zero guest this season, for obvious reasons, but my neighbors, who range from around age 50 on one side and little over 60 on the other seem to have one new bubble of guests and family (between 2 to 6 people) at least once a week. Just like the years before, in my opinion. Very little has changed. I see this multi-bubbling, by a lot of people, on facebook and many other places.
> 
> ...


I don't point the finger at the 'younger generation' unless I am talking about the younger generation and their behaviour. If it were 50-60 year olds who were gathering on beaches and having house parties with 200 attending, I would be pointing the finger at them. It's not a prejudice against younger people OptsyEagle, it is about the behaviour of a group who just happen to be the younger generation. I think your cottage neighbour is equally as stupid and have no problem calling them out equally as such.

What makes you think hospitalizations, ICUs and deaths are low? Have you tried looking at the per capita rates for them? As far as I know, those have not changed. If you have 1 death in 100 new cases, that is the same as 10 deaths in 1000 past cases. 








Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center


How does mortality differ across countries? Examining the number of deaths per confirmed case and per 100,000 population. A global comparison.




coronavirus.jhu.edu





You would need to see that the deaths per 100k population were decreasing over time to say that deaths were 'low' or 'lower'. I can't find any such evidence.








Is Covid-19 growing less lethal? The infection fatality rate says 'no'


The infection fatality rate in Arizona this summer is similar to that of the U.S. in the spring, and the ratio of deaths to hospitalizations in Arizona is very close to that in New York City this spring.




www.statnews.com


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Who you point the finger at is up to you but what I am saying is a 40 to 70 year old "multi-bubbling" is no better behavior then what we are seeing in the few reported cases of the kids partying. I can't imagine others have not seen what I have seen. This multi-bubbling is everywhere I look. It seems to me that the older generation is acting responsible right up until they don't want to or some relative wants to have a graduation party for their teen or someone has a birthday or it's mother's day or whatever. They are being responsible right up until they are not.

Look, you can go arrest and lock up everyone between the ages of 18 and 40 for all I care. I am just pointing out that what you are upset about is not just happening with the younger generation. It is happening all around us. People at work may wear a mask for the customers and then they take it right off once they are with each other, as if the virus differs between a customer and a co-worker. This is everywhere.

As for my other point. Perhaps the rate of hospitalizations to infections has not changed much, but the overall numbers are pretty low, even with all this bad behavior going on. In the article you linked, a few posts up, there were a total of 23 people in the hospital in the entire province of BC. Are we really going to make a federal case about people's behaviour when we are seeing severe illnesses at this low level?

I am not sure who's behavior needs to be adjusted. The people acting irresponsibly or the people pointing the figure! I was a finger pointer, in the past, as well, but that was when things were much scarier then what I am seeing today. So I will hold my finger pointing until I start to see a real problem again. Don't worry. I keep a close eye on things and I keep my pointing finger ready at all times.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> Pretty much. No one dies of AIDS itself, it suppresses the immune system so that another illness actually is the cause of death, but AIDS is obviously a contributor. There's a reason why most literature talk about people dying of AIDS-related illnesses and not AIDS itself. Just like AIDS is an underlying factor to dying of other diseases, pre-existing cardiovascular condition is one of the underlying factors to COVID related deaths. Let's put it straight-forward, if the patients who died didn't get COVID, it's likely they would have continued to live for many more years.


The more nuanced approach is to talk about disability adjusted life years or quality adjusted life years as a result a disease. That is, how many years of life are lost vs what would have otherwise been expected absent COVID. A lot of skeptics are saying "these are all people who were going to die in a matter of years anyway". That may be true. Of course, people are also underplaying the amount of disability and reduced life span for survivors. We just say "they recovered" as if they are back to full function and it was just a mild inconvenience. Many people have severe long-lasting complications wrt kidney, liver, lung function. Some people will be permanently disabled from the ICU delirium and associated PTSD. These costs/impacts are being downplayed by the skeptics/'Rightists' (or more to the point, they are totally ignorant of these impacts).


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I realize hospitalizations are too low, but I don't think we should become overconfident that everything is OK just because people are generally in good shape.

It's summer, the weather is good and people are healthy. People are getting good physical activity and fresh air, sunshine, and warm temperatures. I am assuming that this means people are generally more resilient to any infectious disease.

What happens if the current surge in Canadian cases continues, with the infection continuing to spread widely, and then we get hit with the cold weather, darkness, depressive indoor time? I hope this doesn't happen but the danger is that the COVID infections hit people much harder, more people fall very sick, they get hospitalized, and die.

So it's possible that the surge in COVID that's happening right now (BC, AB, MB) could become deadly in winter, even though it doesn't seem too bad right now.

I don't know about the rest of you but when I catch a cold in the summer, it's usually a non event. I don't know why exactly but I'm more resilient in the summer and quickly recover. But when I catch a cold in the winter, it just hits me harder and I seem weaker.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

BC has record new cases so I don't think there is anything to cheer about. The fact there are fewer hospitalizations and deaths simply speaks to the demographics who are testing positive. If they want to be ill and cause potentially record numbers of folks who then have to self-isolate is on them, not me.

I have no doubt some demographics of all ages are behaving irresponsibly. That will show up in media reporting and statistics. I do not know of anyone who is creating groups of any significance for family events of any kind and we don't have friends or family who have graduating students for example. Perhaps you do and if so, shame on them for being petri dishes. I can't speak to behaviours in the workplace out of sight because I am not a fly on the wall in working establishments. It is apparent from my perspective that the ones visible to the public are mostly wearing masks. Until the statistics show otherwise, I will continue to finger point at the demographic groups where the active cases show up in statistics.

The update for Aug 31, 4:30pm Experience showing distribution by age is self-evident, and that is only the ones who have been tested and declared positive. Not the ones who have just stayed home because they are not feeling well, or are asymptomatic.
1252 for 20-29
1119 for 30-39
805 for 40-49
805 for 50-59
510 for 60-69 and so on......


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> The problem with the larger groups are that : 1) usually no one has a complete contact trace list, and 2) the multiplier of infections is immediate among a lot of mostly single people who have then gone home to contaminate their own bubbles. The multiplier is an explosion rather than a series of firecrackers. It is simple math. The Kelowna incident over the Canada Day weekend resulted in 171 infections and over 1500 in isolation. It ruined a good portion of the summer for a lot of people. It was just declared over yesterday after having gone 2 full weeks without a new infection.
> 
> Folks who have a family of 2-5 over each weekend at the cottage have a very low multiplier of 2, one family one weekend and another family the following weekend. Only 2 of those bubbles might be infected. Over the course of 8 weeks this summer, we have had 4 Gen-X families stay with us for 3-8 days each. None of those families crossed paths and none of them knew anyone with a potential infection for the 2 weeks prior to visiting and they did not show symptoms for the 2 weeks following. It could have been possible a member of one of those families could have been infected coming here, shortly before arriving but we would have become ill by the time the next family arrived (spacing them accordingly). At most, 2 families could have become infected. Our last family bubble group is coming here for the Labour Day weekend. There will be a telephone check the night before travelling. During all this, we were careful to use our own utensils, towels and the like, albeit in close quarters for a number of days, we are touching the same door hardware, etc.without necessarily wiping them down. We took some risk obviously, but on a measured basis. Quite unlike a rowdy party of 50 at one event.
> 
> I think the point is, is one has to logically go through the math regarding risk and probability before making comments about equivalence. FWIW, I have been quite vocal here about the social irresponsibility of 20somethings and 30somethings in big party groups. Obviously, it is not the ones who show responsible behaviour, maintain small family type bubbles, and use proper hygiene. I will continue to denigrate the irresponsible big parties of hordes of people jammed into small spaces. It simply is not necessary to create one's own petri dish to have a good time.


My 70 year old uncle (in law) just had a 4 day birthday extravaganza, with a party at his house 4 days in a row for his immediate family and the grandkids, his siblings on another day, his wife's siblings on another day and his friends on the fourth day. What an idiot. You can celebrate your birthday but there is no need to have 300 people at your house over a 4 day period, even if it is outdoors (people still going inside to use the washroom).


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

james4beach said:


> I realize hospitalizations are too low, but I don't think we should become overconfident that everything is OK just because people are generally in good shape.
> 
> It's summer, the weather is good and people are healthy. People are getting good physical activity and fresh air, sunshine, and warm temperatures. I am assuming that this means people are generally more resilient to any infectious disease.
> 
> ...


No argument except the future you say may happen is speculation and the present is fact. Obviously it is going to be much more difficult to get people to hunker down now then it was in March/April, so without facts and more importantly death and disaster, it is unlikely to happen. The only reason these people are acting irresponsibly is because they don't see anyone they know, getting sick and/or dying. They are not going to make a major change to their lifestyle so that someone they don't know does not get sick or die. I wish people were not this way but they are. I have come to accept this and that has nothing to do with whether I like it or not, because I don't.

Sooooo, I suggest we do two things. First, with the problem of other people's behavior in mind, figure out how you will protect yourself and your family and secondly, keep a close eye on the data.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

andrewf said:


> My 70 year old uncle (in law) just had a 4 day birthday extravaganza, with a party at his house 4 days in a row for his immediate family and the grandkids, his siblings on another day, his wife's siblings on another day and his friends on the fourth day. What an idiot. You can celebrate your birthday but there is no need to have 300 people at your house over a 4 day period, even if it is outdoors (people still going inside to use the washroom).


A good example of him being an irresponsible a-hole. Hopefully someone told him that... I would have done so (not attended either). I am not suggesting there are not idiots of all ages because there are anedotes everywhere, but I have to rely on actual data for the broader picture.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> The more nuanced approach is to talk about disability adjusted life years or quality adjusted life years as a result a disease. That is, how many years of life are lost vs what would have otherwise been expected absent COVID. A lot of skeptics are saying "these are all people who were going to die in a matter of years anyway". That may be true. Of course, people are also underplaying the amount of disability and reduced life span for survivors. We just say "they recovered" as if they are back to full function and it was just a mild inconvenience. Many people have severe long-lasting complications wrt kidney, liver, lung function. Some people will be permanently disabled from the ICU delirium and associated PTSD. These costs/impacts are being downplayed by the skeptics/'Rightists' (or more to the point, they are totally ignorant of these impacts).


Let's be clear, there's no point in trying to discuss nuance with certain people. Many are a black or white type thinking: people live or people die. The whole idea of quality of life is not even in the conversation because it makes their head explode, "Why are they complaining that they have aches and pains? They're alive aren't they?" As discussed on the other threads, the conversation pretty much needs to be kept at a basic level for engagement.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> The only reason these people are acting irresponsibly is because they don't see anyone they know, getting sick and/or dying.


If you wait for people you know to drop dead from it, it's going to be too late. We are still at the very early stages of understanding this disease. To me it's obvious that when dealing with a new threat like this that one has to take the cautious, conservative interpretation.

Also remember, BC has been a popular travel destination for a few months now. I've asked a few random people on the street (Vancouver) if they live around here and most say "no". Everyone has been coming here for fun. They're visiting from Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, etc. It seems that everyone has flocked here for fun. And now we have rapid infection spread in BC, so what does this mean? Those travellers are going to take it back with them to the other provinces.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

OptsyEagle said:


> The only reason these people are acting irresponsibly is because they don't see anyone they know, getting sick and/or dying.


Unfortunately that's what it takes, even just to acknowledge that COVID exists: He thought the coronavirus was 'a fake crisis.' Then he contracted it.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

bgc_fan said:


> Unfortunately that's what it takes, even just to acknowledge that COVID exists: He thought the coronavirus was 'a fake crisis.' Then he contracted it.


Absolutely. That type of article works well for me. For others I am afraid, that guy is still just another stranger. I think for our adult community It is a little like trying to lose weight. Most who try will fall into the problem of saying "well today is a special occasion so I will eat irresponsibly today, but I promise to be better tomorrow". As I said, most older people, I believe, probably think they are doing a pretty good job with C-19 protection, with perhaps a few slips. I kind of had to go to Dad's birthday party since I did not want to be the one to ruin his special day. The only way I can stop Joe at work from coming close to me, without a mask on, is if I make a federal case and I don't want to offend him or look like a coward. I can't go on forever not seeing my grown up children and grandchildren so I am going to make an exception with them, like the virus could care less about those issues.

When it is all added up it is pretty much the same as a no holds barred, spring break vacation, raw dogging it all the way, if you ask me.

That said, we do not seem to be suffering in a large way except for some infections that get recorded on a daily report, that most people are probably starting to ignore by now. As usual, we will need to be severely whacked before we respond to the threat. I wish it was not the case, but I am afraid it is. So in the mean time, look out for yourself and be aware of these threats to your health, is all I can say, at this time.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Looks like Health Canada caved to people that have a clue...quick self testing will most likely be the end of large Covid outbreaks.









Health Canada changes its mind, will consider approving home tests for COVID-19


The health ministry had previously said it was concerned that people might misuse home tests or misinterpret the results




nationalpost.com


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

New story about cases in restaurants.









Coronavirus: New COVID-19 cases reported at some businesses in Toronto malls - Toronto | Globalnews.ca


COVID-19 cases have been reported at two restaurants at Sherway Gardens: Joey and The Keg.




globalnews.ca


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

I'm waiting for cases to be reported from going back to school ... from all across Canada.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Some people seem to be missing the FACT that BC is now having more cases than at any time since this all began.








B.C. reports 124 new COVID-19 cases, highest-ever single day jump | Globalnews.ca


The province's COVID-19 death toll remained unchanged at 204.




globalnews.ca





Back in March etc. would anyone have been saying, 'oh, it's not that many serious cases'. The virus spreads EXPONENTIALLY. It does not go 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, it goes 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32. 

BC is losing control and THAT is what matters.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> Back in March etc. would anyone have been saying, 'oh, it's not that many serious cases'. The virus spreads EXPONENTIALLY. It does not go 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, it goes 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32.


Trump? But yes, contagion does spread exponentially unless the virus hits roadblocks, i.e. people who isolate and don't pass along the virus, or death.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

The first results showing whether a vaccine can stop people from getting the virus could come by mid-September from AstraZeneca Plc

Big orange guy might be right?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Stop as in 100% effective?


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Just reporting what many felt was impossible. Putting political spin to impede a vaccine release is pretty cold. Of course in Canada we'll get our vaccine after other 1st world nations are finished but things are looking up.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

This is what I understand:

There are 9 vaccines in research around the world.

2 are American.
1 vaccine requires minus 70F storage.
The one which U.S. schools are supposed to get prepared for in October.
The schools don't have the freezers required.
1 vaccine requires a 2nd Booster shot within 2 weeks.
---------
Here in Canada ...... I think it is an Impossible Dream to open schools.
There is just no way that the ventilation systems in schools are equipped to at least triple the amount of room air changes per hour,

Parents need to know what the air change per minute is in the classroom. (Each classroom will be different.)





Air changes per hour - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





I would imagine that a classroom should have the same air changes that a hospital surgery room would have.
(No recirculation)
Minimum total air change per hour is 15
No Recirculated Air - All air exhausted directly to outdoors




__





Air | Appendix | Environmental Guidelines | Guidelines Library | Infection Control | CDC


Appendices in the Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities (2008)




www.cdc.gov


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Eder said:


> Just reporting what many felt was impossible. Putting political spin to impede a vaccine release is pretty cold. Of course in Canada we'll get our vaccine after other 1st world nations are finished but things are looking up.


Developed, proven to be safe, proven to be effective and scaled for manufacturing are different than claims to have a vaccine. Lots of candidate vaccines out there. It's a touch early to be declaring victory.

I don't think anyone claimed that it was impossible to develop a vaccine on this timeline, just that is was unlikely given previous experience with vaccine development. And the fact that a coronavirus vaccine has never made it to market despite previous epidemics.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Various government officials (worldwide) are sounding the alarm about complacency about COVID-19 resulting in runaway cases. The latest is Boris Johnson, talking about a surge in UK cases. Remember, he also caught COVID and ended up in hospital himself.

Ford in Ontario is also warning people.

Here's my guess. Summer has resulted in very widespread complacency and lack of fear (Americas & Europe). I think we'll probably see a major spike everywhere in cases. We'll probably see government officials come to their senses and start doing what they should have done months ago: shut down bars and pubs, pass laws for mandatory mask usage.

Possibly another economic shutdown and continuation of depression, as well. The 30% to 40% crash in GDP is not something you can shrug off.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Astro Zeneca vaccine trials have been halted due to a patient with severe adverse effects. This is the second time the clinical trials have been halted.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

james4beach said:


> Here's my guess. Summer has resulted in very widespread complacency and lack of fear (Americas & Europe). I think we'll probably see a major spike everywhere in cases. We'll probably see government officials come to their senses and start doing what they should have done months ago: shut down bars and pubs, pass laws for mandatory mask usage.


Within an hour of posting this, BC announced they are closing night clubs and banquet halls. Bars must close at 11 pm.

Great to see government doing smart things.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Cases in Ontario are pretty limited to 3 regions. Half of the health units in the province are typically reporting 5 cases or less a day. Cases are definitely on the rise though. Let’s hope it’s the “smaller” 2Nd wave variety vs. The larger second wave variety. 

I‘d hate to see another lockdown during the winter months. Probably good for ski hills though - a pretty good activity to socially distance.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Eder said:


> Just reporting what many felt was impossible. Putting political spin to impede a vaccine release is pretty cold ...


Not sure who what politicians say is going to slow down or impede a vaccine release.

As for "impossible", the comments I can recall getting were more that it was unlikely so that current plans shouldn't hinge on it.

I can recall pointing out that there's been previous work that was almost carried to the finish line as well as similarities to SARs to help speed up the process.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

calm said:


> This is what I understand:
> 
> There are 9 vaccines in research around the world ...


Not sure why your numbers are so low.

Thirty seven are reported to be in human trials, with another ninety one in pre-clinical ones being investigated in animals.

Of those in human trials - twenty four are in phase one, fourteen are in phase two, nine are in phase three, three are in the limited phase and zero are approved for full use.

You seem to need a scorecard though as some vaccines are following the progression while others are combining phase one and two trials (aka hybrid trial).

The Astra-Zenica / University of Oxford candidate seems to have done the hybrid phase one and two then gone on to a hybrid phase two and three with select countries having a stand alone phase three. Or maybe I am misreading the info. 


Cheers


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Money172375 said:


> I‘d hate to see another lockdown during the winter months. Probably good for ski hills though - a pretty good activity to socially distance.


Somehow I think all provinces will try and avoid a Spring style lock down if they can avoid it. They will do what they can with contact tracing and do selective shutdowns just like BC has today in limiting bar hours and shutting down alcohol sales after certain times and mandating sound system volumes so people don't have to yell at each other or get into close contact. It is stupid of bars to do that sort of thing when they are supposed to be using physical distance protocols. The outliers ruin it for everyone.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Well, in theory, we have had 6 months to build up contact tracing, testing capacity, ICU capacity, etc. so we are much better placed to manage a second wave. I can see certain types of business closing, but I don't think we'll return to the same degree of lockdown. I can see restaurants being severely limited in capacity and so on. I worry about places of worship. 20% capacity is probably fine, but how does one enforce that?


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Heres an interesting graph from the USA regarding Covid deaths...looks like doctors down there are doing a stellar job. Below is Canada's death chart. Amazing how few deaths but all we hear about is rising case numbers.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

No wonder BC's Lower Mainland has rapidly rising cases of Covid-19 Police break up house party of over 200

Maybe a citizen's complaint hot line needs to be more heavily advertised with a stronger and responsive police presence to nip these things quickly.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Eder said:


> View attachment 20615
> 
> 
> Heres an interesting graph from the USA regarding Covid deaths...looks like doctors down there are doing a stellar job. Below is Canada's death chart. Amazing how few deaths but all we hear about is rising case numbers.
> View attachment 20616


I mentioned on another thread that just being aware of the virus AND the use of masks indoors should at least reduce the number of high initial dose infections. It may not stop infections but if the initial dose is low enough it would drop the death rate dramatically. Much lower then the flu in my opinion.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Here in BC, I'm still surprised that masks are not mandatory. I was just at the grocery store, and it looked like only about half the people were wearing masks.

That is despite a significant increase in cases in recent days. Apparently, nobody is worried. I talked to the manager of the store and asked if masks can be made mandatory. He said that he'd like to (and his staff wishes that customers wore masks), but the decision is not up to him.

I texted a cousin who lives in Europe about this. He was shocked that people here aren't wearing masks. Where he lives, masks are mandatory -- everywhere -- and if you are caught without one, you are required to stay home for X days. There's enforcement, too.

If the BC infections keep rising at the current pace, my guess is that masks will become mandatory.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Here in BC, I'm still surprised that masks are not mandatory. I was just at the grocery store, and it looked like only about half the people were wearing masks.
> 
> That is despite a significant increase in cases in recent days. Apparently, nobody is worried. I talked to the manager of the store and asked if masks can be made mandatory. He said that he'd like to (and his staff wishes that customers wore masks), but the decision is not up to him.
> 
> ...


Here in Ontario, the decision to make masks mandatory was left up to the municipalities. I don't know if all have done so but certainly that is the case in all major cities/towns. You cannot enter a store without a mask on.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

The problem is the authorities still hold to the idea that a mask only protects other people and not the person wearing them. It is nonsense. That comes from some Microbiologist comparing the size of opening between the cotton threads of a mask, to the rediculous smaller size of the virus. Without thinking one might assume that confirms that a virus will just go right through the mask. They forget that stopping 80% or more of the virus is not just better then nothing but a seriously high level of protection. If you could reduce everyone's initial dose of the virus received when they were first infected you could easily reduce the death rates recorded, in my estimate, by dividing the current numbers by 100. 

Divide Canada's death rate, and correspondingly hospitalizations, by that number and tell me if you think we have a problem.

Knowing human beings are inherently selfish, this false information about masks is really killing us. Protect yourself and wear a mask.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It also depends some on where in BC one is. There now seems to be more compliance in the Okanagan than in the Lower Mainland. That is self-evident based on daily new cases. Superstore and WalMart have made masks mandatory recently and I now see almost 100% compliance. I also see more people masking up going into some other establishments* BUT there is almost zero masking when walking the sidewalks outside. That is okay with me due to virus dispersal outdoors, The odds of a high viral load is pretty small outdoors. 

* We need more big box names in particular making masking mandatory. That would set the example for people going into smaller businesses.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> We need more big box names in particular making masking mandatory. That would set the example for people going into smaller businesses.


That raises the question as to why provincial (or RHA) regulations are not making them mandatory. Do they not see them as effective in terms of big box store environments?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> The problem is the authorities still hold to the idea that a mask only protects other people and not the person wearing them. It is nonsense.


Right, very good point. I don't understand why the "official" position still says this -- it's wrong, and they've been saying this from the initial outbreak.

Masks DO protect the person wearing them. And pretty significantly!



OptsyEagle said:


> Knowing human beings are inherently selfish, this false information about masks is really killing us. Protect yourself and wear a mask.


That's a good point and I think you're right, this false information has been resulting in deaths.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

cainvest said:


> That raises the question as to why provincial (or RHA) regulations are not making them mandatory. Do they not see them as effective in terms of big box store environments?


I think the primary issue (from what I have read) is provincial authorities are reluctant to slice and dice among their regions unless they have to do so. Quebec seems to be a key exception. Vancouver is a vastly different environment than Fort St. John for example.... as is Kelowna from Castlegar or Invermere within the same health region. And yet, I think they are going to have to go that route when better contact tracing makes that logic way more effective, i.e. control the problem spot but don't impact the economy where one does not have to do so.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> I think the primary issue (from what I have read) is provincial authorities are reluctant to slice and dice among their regions unless they have to do so. Quebec seems to be a key exception. Vancouver is a vastly different environment than Fort St. John for example.... as is Kelowna from Castlegar or Invermere within the same health region. And yet, I think they are going to have to go that route when better contact tracing makes that logic way more effective, i.e. control the problem spot but don't impact the economy where one does not have to do so.


It does appear to make sense to set regulations via RHA's or even smaller areas. With regards to the mandatory masks, that doesn't seem to really impact the economy so why not make it a regulation?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

cainvest said:


> It does appear to make sense to set regulations via RHA's or even smaller areas. With regards to the mandatory masks, that doesn't seem to really impact the economy so why not make it a regulation?


Because unless people see rational reasons for doing so, they will flout the law/regulation en masse. IOW, a non-sensical/non-logical approach meets widespread resistance destroying the credibility of the issuing agency when something really important needs to be done. It's human nature no different than a manager who works hard for 3 years to establish trust and respect and then blows it in one bad move....thereafter tainted, possibly forever.

It is thus a delicate matter. There would be no adherence for the most part in my part of the world if people were required to wear masks outdoors on sidewalks and paths. There are too many open spaces. That would be seen as an utterly paranoid irresponsible incompetent health agency going overboard. But when BC just very recently (this week) put the brakes on serving liquor past 10pm unless there is food service, which is then required to close by 11pm, and the requirement to keep media volumes down to conversation level, there has been very little public backlash. Some businesses have complained but others have not, and have welcomed some official support to businesses trying to do the right thing. When something appears logical, if not appealing, people will mostly grudgingly accept it.

I think the BC health regions will have to break down their protocols to smaller entities. I am sure it is coming once they are confident of their contact tracing protocols.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think the reluctance to say that masks protect the wearer is that they don't want to give people a false sense of confidence regarding distancing, etc.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I think the reluctance to say that masks protect the wearer is that they don't want to give people a false sense of confidence regarding distancing, etc.


Agree. That has been stated from time to time. It is pretty easy for a mask wearer to think they are 'protected' and not be as diligent about distancing. It is an effect I have experienced long ago in vehicle rallies (specifically dune buggy in the Baja). Strap oneself into a roll cage with a 5 point harness, helmet, kidney belt, Parker air hose and a neck doughnut and one tends to feel almost completely invincible in a multi-roll situation.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I think the reluctance to say that masks protect the wearer is that they don't want to give people a false sense of confidence regarding distancing, etc.


No doubt and the fact that the virus can get through the mask is real as well. So one should not stay in close proximity of others no matter whether they are wearing a mask or not. That said, it is still false to say that a mask provides no benefit to the wearer. They can significantly reduce high dose, high problem infections dramatically.

So with that in mind, they need to start an education campaign. It does not need to be overly technical. Even the idea that they can stop 80% or more of the virus coming at you is only partially correct. They stop it, but it is still on the darn mask. The mask you are breathing through. So:

1) Keep that contamination as low as possible by keeping away from others as much as possible. A lower contamination can lead to a significantly lower set of health issues and for that reason you want to keep the amount of virus, in your vicinity, as low as possible.
2) Wear a mask properly and be careful where and how you are touching it. If you do, wash your hands, etc.
3) Change the mask frequently. If you have 30 of the cheap surgical type masks. Instead of using 1 per day for the next month, during an 8 hour shift at work, use 6 per day. Let those six sit for the week and reuse them next week. After 4 uses, discard them and open a new box. If you are going into 3 stores today. Use 3 different cotton masks and wash them all when you get home to sterilize them for the next time. Much safer.

This is not difficult stuff, but just saying they provide no benefit so you won't get overconfident and get too close to others is not working well and it is wrong.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I think many believe masks are a placebo and their mandated use is to keep us calm. Put a mask on in places like Midway or Rock Creek & people tend to roll their eyes and whisper to their friends. The absence of any Covid cases there does little to change their opinions.

I saw several people in Costco yesterday in Calgary openly flaunting required mask usage by wearing none...about 20% were wearing their mask incorrectly either under their chin etc. Stupid law...should have been voluntary as those who buy into mask usage actually use them properly,those that don't might as well not wear one.

I won't judge either camp.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> I think many believe masks are a placebo and their mandated use is to keep us calm. Put a mask on in places like Midway or Rock Creek & people tend to roll their eyes and whisper to their friends. The absence of any Covid cases there does little to change their opinions.
> 
> I saw several people in Costco yesterday in Calgary openly flaunting required mask usage by wearing none...about 20% were wearing their mask incorrectly either under their chin etc. Stupid law...should have been voluntary as those who buy into mask usage actually use them properly,those that don't might as well not wear one.
> 
> I won't judge either camp.


Honestly I think people in these areas (notably Alberta) are just imitating American behaviour. If it wasn't for the right wing media coming from the USA, they wouldn't have these opinions.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I think we know how your political views slant your take on Canadians. Alberta has done a better job than most with Covid.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> I think many believe masks are a placebo and their mandated use is to keep us calm. Put a mask on in places like Midway or Rock Creek & people tend to roll their eyes and whisper to their friends. The absence of any Covid cases there does little to change their opinions.


Hence why mask usage and where it should be used, and not used, is an important regionalized/localized issue. FWIW, the CBC National interview with Dr Bonnie Henry yesterday was a good one. If people took some time to watch or read what she actually said, it would be recognized that mask use is "situational".

It won't change the outliers, i.e. the anti-maskers who exhibit IQs of 50 much of the time, or those wearing their masks in their vehicles, but it is a reasonable voice for the masses in between.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> I think we know how your political views slant your take on Canadians. Alberta has done a better job than most with Covid.


You think AB has done better than most? That's debatable. The per capita number of cases is higher than the Canadian average and also higher than the world average. Data source for all of this

Within Canada, the highest per capita infection rates are
Quebec 7,877 cases per million people
Alberta 3,718 ... the second highest infection rate
Ontario 3,258
and all provinces lower

Yes, AB is doing better than Quebec, but Alberta is doing worse than all neighbouring provinces. And I suspect that the anti-mask and "it's a hoax" sentiment, influenced by Americans, is a part of it.

^ those are on infection rates, so that looks at amount of infection spread. *Alberta is doing poorly on the spread of infection.*

I also calculated per capita rates of death. This might have more to do with age demographic differences between provinces and quality of healthcare. Alberta has the youngest population of the major provinces, so I wouldn't read too much into these stats.

Canada: 244 deaths per 1M pop
Quebec: 681
Ontario: 605
Alberta: 58
BC: 42


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Active cases has a lot to do with the rate of testing per capita as well. Alberta has a much larger testing per capita than does many provinces. Well ahead of BC for example. So active cases is not a good measure either unless it is correlated to testing rate as well. No need to jump to unsubstantiated conclusions with rhetoric and obvious bias against AB yet again. You are better than that. Perhaps post a revision to your post with correlation to testing rate?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> Active cases has a lot to do with the rate of testing per capita as well. Alberta has a much larger testing per capita than does many provinces. Well ahead of BC for example. So active cases is not a good measure either unless it is correlated to testing rate as well. No need to jump to unsubstantiated conclusions with rhetoric and obvious bias against AB yet again. You are better than that. Perhaps redeem yourself with a revision to your post with correlation to testing rate?


I posted both infection rates and death rates. It's true that the rate of testing is a consideration as well. Alberta is the youngest of the major provinces and age demographics also have to be considered. All of this makes it hard to compare statistics.

Edit: looking at testing rates as well, with AB, ON, QC having the highest rates of testing, it seems like these are the only provinces one can (somewhat directly) compare. Based on the per capita infection rate, this put Alberta in the middle of the pack.

Alberta certainly seems to be doing OK compared to ON & QC


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Infection rates do not take into account frequency of testing. It is simply a measure of actual positive tests per million. If one doubled the frequency of testing per capita, the infection rate may be double per capita (probably not quite), but doubling the testing rate would capture a whole additional group of people with mild symptoms, or asymptomatic.

Added: Old data but here is an example BC has the lowest COVID-19 testing rate of any province in Canada

Better source is here Epidemiological summary of COVID-19 cases in Canada - Canada.ca Click on "Rate" in Figure 1. AB has almost the highest RATE of testing per capita of any province, almost 3 times that of BC.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Eder said:


> I think many believe masks are a placebo and their mandated use is to keep us calm. Put a mask on in places like Midway or Rock Creek & people tend to roll their eyes and whisper to their friends. The absence of any Covid cases there does little to change their opinions.
> 
> I saw several people in Costco yesterday in Calgary openly flaunting required mask usage by wearing none...about 20% were wearing their mask incorrectly either under their chin etc. Stupid law...should have been voluntary as those who buy into mask usage actually use them properly,those that don't might as well not wear one.
> 
> I won't judge either camp.


While there are some people, I'll call them a$$holes, who thumb their nose at the rule and wear the mask over their chin or not where it at all, I think you have a much broader swathe of the population who wouldn't wear a mask unless it was required, but go along with it to avoid sticking out and because they don't actually care that much. This is demonstrated by the impact of making masks mandatory here in the GTA. It went from maybe 10-20% mask wearing pre-mandate, to near 100%, with only a small percentage wearing them improperly. That delta are the 'indifferent middle' that needed the nudge to adopt the behaviour. It's kind of like littering. In a world where 50% of people litter, there is trash everywhere and you feel like you might as well litter as well. When the government strictly enforces anti-littering laws, the rate drops significantly, and most people don't want to be the a$$hole that puts the first piece of trash in the park. But there are inevitably still some selfish people out there, or people who rebel for its own sake.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

My advice. Protect yourself. The world is the way the world is. I have lived with moronic people all my life and managed to figure out a way to keep them from hurting me or getting in my way. I can't see why I should not be able to pull off the same feet with Covid-19.

The best thing I can say about stupid people is they are stupid. They should not be that big of obstacle to overcome.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

As @andrewf says, it's like littering laws. Or, laws that require seatbelts, and that prohibit driving under the influence.

Many people do these things without laws that prevent the behaviours. You simply can't rely on people to do the sensible thing on their own. Without laws against drinking and driving, a lot more people would get behind the wheel when drunk.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> Infection rates do not take into account frequency of testing. It is simply a measure of actual positive tests per million.


You're right that this is a factor. Not sure if you saw my edit, but upon looking at the data again, I see that Alberta is more or less in the middle of the pack and doing OK compared to Ontario and Quebec


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I suspect BC is likely at least double the numbers given its testing rate is almost as low as 1/3rd that of AB, in which case, about 3000+ cases per million. Not that much different.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> Hence why mask usage and where it should be used, and not used, is an important regionalized/localized issue. FWIW, the CBC National interview with Dr Bonnie Henry yesterday was a good one. If people took some time to watch or read what she actually said, it would be recognized that mask use is "situational".


Thanks for mentioning this. I had not seen that interview, but located it here. I'm pasting it below.

It's a good interview. She's optimistic that we'll be in a much better place next summer, but we have to be patient. She says that mask usage is situational. Outside, or with lots of air or space in between people, you don't need a mask. But indoors, close contact, among people you don't know, where you can't maintain distance (e.g. shopping at a store) then you need a mask.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Yesterday Canada celebrated the first day in 6 months with zero deaths due to Covid...not sure what that means but its a tribute to our health care system and perhaps us cemetery fodder being more careful.









Canada Reports Zero Covid Deaths for First Time in Six Months


Canada reported no new deaths from Covid-19 for the first time in six months, according to the latest data from its public health agency.




www.bloomberg.com


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> Yesterday Canada celebrated the first day in 6 months with zero deaths due to Covid...not sure what that means but its a tribute to our health care system and perhaps us cemetery fodder being more careful.


It's very good news. I'm also more optimistic about all of this after watching that Bonnie Henry interview.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Honestly I think people in these areas (notably Alberta) are just imitating American behaviour. If it wasn't for the right wing media coming from the USA, they wouldn't have these opinions.


Stop already with the non-stop whining about right wing media. You fall for every single left wing media lie so you certainly lack the ability to judge the media.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Looks like more than 1 vaccine available before year end...contrary to popular commentary

US drugmaker Pfizer's chief Albert Bourla on Sunday said it is ''likely'' the coronavirus vaccine will be deployed to all Americans by the end of this year.









Americans can get COVID-19 vaccine before year-end, says Pfizer CEO


US drugmaker Pfizer's chief Albert Bourla on Sunday said it is ''likely'' the coronavirus vaccine will be deployed to all Americans by the end of this year. Pfizer and its partner BioNTech hope to wrap up final-stage Phase III trials of their Covid-19 vaccine candidate as early as next month...




www.wionews.com





Of course Canadians will wait till Ethiopia, Angola & us get our turn sometime in who knows.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Eder said:


> Looks like more than 1 vaccine available before year end...contrary to popular commentary
> 
> US drugmaker Pfizer's chief Albert Bourla on Sunday said it is ''likely'' the coronavirus vaccine will be deployed to all Americans by the end of this year.
> 
> ...


Trudeau is more concerned about censoring unflattering internet speech than taking care of Canadians.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

OptsyEagle said:


> ...
> 
> The best thing I can say about stupid people is they are stupid. They should not be that big of obstacle to overcome.


----------



## kevin11mz (Sep 28, 2020)

> Trudeau is more concerned about censoring unflattering internet speech than taking care of Canadians.


It seems for me that it was always like that. But a lot of people didn't see it before. British Columbia's businesses should get an immediate financial help from government, I think. I would like to visit such restaurants like restaurant in New Westminster called Hub. It's a great place, which I found by simple recommendation from my friend. We all should care about businesses in our area.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Hang on everyone ... just stay healthy for a few more months (critical period!!)

BC now expects to start vaccinating high risk people in January.



> *"We are planning to put vaccine into arms in the first week of January," Henry said.*
> 
> She said she'll provide a detailed plan next week for the rollout, but priority will go to the most vulnerable British Columbians, including residents of long-term care homes.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

james4beach said:


> Hang on everyone ... just stay healthy for a few more months (critical period!!)


Likely be more than a few months unless you're in their high risk group. Really depends on the quanities they get as well .. might take 3-6 months just for the all the high-risk people to get it.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

cainvest said:


> Likely be more than a few months unless you're in their high risk group. Really depends on the quanities they get as well .. might take 3-6 months just for the all the high-risk people to get it.


No question the high risk people get it first.

I'm not high risk, and understand it will be a long time before I get it. I am preparing to be cautious for a very long time, and that's fair. I'm entirely in favour of vaccinating the high risk people first.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I was just walking around near a park. There is a Woodstock-like crowd over there, extremely packed. Everyone is outdoors but there are large groups playing volleyball, drinking in public, smoking weed. The density of the people is amazing and with this many people, there is not enough distance between individuals. I saw the police arrive (just 2 officers) and had this conversation:

_Me_: Seems like a really big crowd. Is that allowed?

_Officer_: Probably not... What do you think we should do about it?

_Me_: I really don't know. I'm not sure you can do much.

_Officer_: We'll walk through it and hopefully it scatters some people.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

If we ban public outdoor spaces - where there is lots of natural ventilation and UV rays - then people will just congregate indoors where there is less space and far less ventilation

People need to get out. It should be encouraged. If you are at risk then self-isolate, self-distance and try to get a vaccine


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

james4beach said:


> No question the high risk people get it first.
> 
> I'm not high risk, and understand it will be a long time before I get it. I am preparing to be cautious for a very long time, and that's fair. I'm entirely in favour of vaccinating the high risk people first.


They are moving pretty fast in MB now, mid-50's age group are getting scheduled for shots now. So it does look like by June 1st all the high risk (that want the shot) will be done.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

m3s said:


> If we ban public outdoor spaces - where there is lots of natural ventilation and UV rays - then people will just congregate indoors where there is less space and far less ventilation
> 
> People need to get out. It should be encouraged. If you are at risk then self-isolate, self-distance and try to get a vaccine


That's easy to say when you're not in the position to have to make decisions about withholding lifesaving medical treatment. Some of these people may get infected and need care, dumping that responsibility on medical staff. And someone else may pay the price.

People should take care of themselves, including staying active and getting outdoors. Socializing by drinking with friends/using drugs is probably not necessary and has a non-zero chance of leading to someone else's death. If they were only taking their own lives into their hands, I would be okay with it. Reality is more complicated.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> That's easy to say when you're not in the position to have to make decisions about withholding lifesaving medical treatment. Some of these people may get infected and need care, dumping that responsibility on medical staff. And someone else may pay the price.


Sure.. but I'm saying if you don't let them gather in public they will gather in more confined non-public places where infection rates are much higher due to ventilation, space etc

We know much more today than we did last spring. I've spent the year in a much more populated state that had ICU'd maxed and mandatory masks long before Canada.

That data shows it doesn't spread as much outdoors thanks to the natural wind and UV. So banning people from public parks who have nowhere else to get outside is illogical


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> People should take care of themselves, including staying active and getting outdoors. Socializing by drinking with friends/using drugs is probably not necessary and has a non-zero chance of leading to someone else's death. If they were only taking their own lives into their hands, I would be okay with it. Reality is more complicated.


Exactly. Nobody is saying people shouldn't go outdoors. It's obviously healthy to go outside for a walk and bike ride, or recreation, and even seeing friends within reason.

But I would draw the line at the party atmosphere that I saw today, especially when drinking is involved. The 'party mood' puts people in a behavioural mode where they are out & about and interacting with lots of people, and being reckless. Everyone was incredibly loud (with lots of shouting), which also elevates the risk of contagion.

Then, people take that 'party mood' back into their homes. *I don't think* outdoor parties happen in isolation.

It also puts the lives of paramedics and police at risk. Related to this party mood of the last 2 days I've seen, I've seen ambulances respond to various calls in that area, and police respond to the occasional drunk troublemaker.

That nonsense has to stop.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Exactly. Nobody is saying people shouldn't go outdoors. It's obviously healthy to go outside for a walk and bike ride, or recreation, and even seeing friends within reason.


The problem is the gatherings, and when the weather was in the 20's there were a LOT of outdoor gatherings. At least indoor gatherings are likley to be "known" bubbles.

Fortunately easter is over, "March Break" is over, and the weather is cold. Hopefully that slows the gatherings enough to get over this peak.

What we really need to do is stop the gatherings. Indoor, outdoor doesn't really matter IMO. The new variants assume a 2 minute exposure is enough, that's pretty fast for a social situation.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

m3s said:


> Sure.. but I'm saying if you don't let them gather in public they will gather in more confined non-public places where infection rates are much higher due to ventilation, space etc
> 
> We know much more today than we did last spring. I've spent the year in a much more populated state that had ICU'd maxed and mandatory masks long before Canada.
> 
> That data shows it doesn't spread as much outdoors thanks to the natural wind and UV. So banning people from public parks who have nowhere else to get outside is illogical


I suspect with the more contagious variants, outdoor transmission is substantially easier (as in, possible). I see no problem with people seeing each other outdoors if they are maintaining distance. But drinking or playing volleyball is not too conducive to distancing.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Here in london, new cases are dropping.
I think this is due to a few things.
Easter is over, those gatherings caused a spike.

Western University kicked everyone out of residence, a good 1/3 of our cases were residence outbreaks.

I think the school closures had a negligible effect. Since schools don't spread much COVID19, and the cold weather we had during this week will likley start showing it's impact over the next few days.
I didn't see as many obvious gatherings over the last week, hopefully we can keep this up.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

You can see photos and videos here of the kind of things I saw this weekend that I descibed in post #227

Keep in mind, these people are clustering (and having massive parties) at a time that BC has record high COVID numbers.









Vancouver police ‘reassessing’ approach after large beach parties: Mayor | Globalnews.ca


Footage from the scene shows a crowd of people drinking, dancing and hugging to loud music -- most of them without masks -- on Beach Avenue.




globalnews.ca


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> You can see photos and videos here of the kind of things I saw this weekend that I descibed in post #227
> 
> Keep in mind, these people are clustering (and having massive parties) at a time that BC has record high COVID numbers.
> 
> ...


Police are not willing to confront those groups.

Those aren't government leadership failures.

That's not the Premiers fault, it's a larger social issue.
In Ontario there was a big carding controversey, with police forces basically insisting they needed the right to (almost) randomly check people. Then when they get offered it here in Ontario, the police refuse it.

Quite simply we need the restrictions, but some people don't want to follow them, and the police aren't enforcing them.


Now they're shifting vaccines to "hard hit" areas. The same areas throwing parties are getting vaccines taken away from well behaving areas.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Now they're shifting vaccines to "hard hit" areas. The same areas throwing parties are getting vaccines taken away from well behaving areas.


Unbelievable, isn't it!!


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I have family who are lawyers and they have been Traditionally ardent rule followers. Not with covid restrictions And guidelines. They travelled during the 2nd lockdown, and continue to move around the province looking for loopholes that allow them to travel. They have no concern with fines. They argue that if you request a trial, the charges will be dropped. The restrictions are very weak constitutionally.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Money172375 said:


> I have family who are lawyers and they have been Traditionally ardent rule followers. Not with covid restrictions And guidelines. They travelled during the 2nd lockdown, and continue to move around the province looking for loopholes that allow them to travel.


You should stay away from these people for your own safety. We don't know much about the variants yet, and these people may be spreading the virus (whether they are vaccinated or not).

Vaccinated people can still get sick. All of these things are layers of protection. Masks, vaccines, distance are all layers of protections. No single measure gives 100% safety.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Comments this afternoon from Bonnie Henry, which sound very sensible to me:


We are concerned that even outside, you can spread COVID (especially B117 variant). But, overall, being outside is far lower risk than being inside. Keep your distance.

Walking or running by someone is *not* going to transmit it.

But if you're sitting, singing and dancing with people, we do see transmission. That's pushing it too far.

Activities that are OK: picnics with friends, going for walks, going for runs


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

picnics with friends are not allowed in Ontario. Benches in parks are allowed, but not picnic tables. Go figure. There is no socializing with people beyond your household, inside or outside. Some of the rules in Ontario are a little silly and the ban on outdoor recreation is upsetting people. Problem is, people take advantage of the rules. Should golf be allowed for a family or household....I think so. Problem is, golfers like to socialize and you end up mixing with each other. Same for tennis or boating or fishing. All activities I would love to do right now with my family but inevitably people would take these allowances and start having social gatherings. So they ban them outright. 

I guess it’s horseshoes and badminton in the backyard


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

BC is now requiring that everyone stays within their own health authority. They are apparently going to place signs near the AB border to remind drivers that they can't enter BC unless it's for essential reasons.

Here are provincial maps of the health authority bondaries

From now on, we should be staying within our region and not travelling beyond it


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Comments this afternoon from Bonnie Henry, which sound very sensible to me:
> 
> 
> We are concerned that even outside, you can spread COVID (especially B117 variant). But, overall, being outside is far lower risk than being inside. Keep your distance.
> ...


Really Ontario and BC are trying similar things right now.
I don't understand all the love for Henry and hate for Ford, but I think it's politics.

For example Ontario parks were NEVER closed to through traffic, just the points of interest where people dwell and congregate. But it gets spun differently.

Also they've been telling people in Ontario to not move between health units all along.

Very interesting to watch.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I'm digging into the BC numbers (using the detailed reports that are published Wednesdays) because I'm curious about which ages are getting hit the hardest, and how that's changed versus a few weeks ago. So I'm looking at the current, most recent 2 weeks versus a reference period for comparison back from the end of February, also a 2 week period.

I'm looking at serious cases, which I counted as hospitalizations + ICU + deaths.

What I found surprising is how serious cases are up very consistently across all age ranges. It seems that at EVERY age, there's roughly the same % increase in serious cases recently.

The one exception appears to be age 50-59 which might be getting hit a bit harder than the rest, but the data is noisy, so this may not be noteworthy.

People age 20-30 have just as large an increase in "serious cases" as any other age. People in their 20s may think that the virus doesn't affect them much, but the statistics show that their increase in hospitalization is on par with much older people.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

The variants have aged everyone about 10 years when compared to where a person stood with respect to the severity of the original virus.

So if you look at the outcome chart for covid-19 infections you now need to look at the age group just above your own to see how your age group fairs.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> picnics with friends are not allowed in Ontario. Benches in parks are allowed, but not picnic tables. Go figure. There is no socializing with people beyond your household, inside or outside. Some of the rules in Ontario are a little silly and the ban on outdoor recreation is upsetting people. Problem is, people take advantage of the rules. Should golf be allowed for a family or household....I think so. Problem is, golfers like to socialize and you end up mixing with each other. Same for tennis or boating or fishing. All activities I would love to do right now with my family but inevitably people would take these allowances and start having social gatherings. So they ban them outright.
> 
> *I guess it’s horseshoes and badminton in the backyard*


 ... and what's wrong with that? At least there's a backyard to conveniently go out to unlike for some (plenty of) folks who are stucked (somewhat) in their apartments/units, only to be able to "dream" about golfing, boating, etc.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> The variants have aged everyone about 10 years when compared to where a person stood with respect to the severity of the original virus.
> 
> So if you look at the outcome chart for covid-19 infections you now need to look at the age group just above your own to see how your age group fairs.


The BC reports that James mentioned look nice. Very easy to read.




__





BC COVID-19 Data


Here you will find the latest data on COVID-19 in British Columbia.




www.bccdc.ca





If you consider hospitalizations bad, they're at
20's - 1% of cases
30s - 2.5%
40's 3%
50's 5%
60s -11%
70s - 20%

I think the other data might take a while to catch up (ie deaths might take a few weeks from when the cases are found)

The numbers don't look too bad, until you consider how quickly this can fill up hospital capacity. 
Also this weeks cases are next weeks hospitals, so those numbers are likely a bit below the actual situation.

Full hospitals means people who would have survived with proper care will die.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Sure, but if a virus is 60% more infectious, then you can assume you will get 60% more cases, and maybe more, and therefore the probability that you will get a trip to the hospital, ICU or the grave will correspondingly be increased by 60%, or more, for all ages.

That was incorporated into my observations that we all aged about 10 years when it comes to these new variants. So, for example, that 11% chance above for age 60 is equivalent to about 1.6 x 11 = 17.6% with these new variants. That comes very close to the odds for a 70 year old, 6 months ago. The numbers above only take into account the increased virulence of the virus and one must also incorporate its increased transmission rate to get a true understanding of each person's increased individual risk.

So, I am talking purely now about the risk a person now has of getting covid-19 and then getting a trip to the hospital, ICU or the grave.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> Sure, but if a virus is 60% more infectious, then you can assume you will get 60% more cases, and maybe more, and therefore the probability that you will get a trip to the hospital, ICU or the grave will correspondingly be increased by 60%, or more, for all ages.
> 
> That was incorporated into my observations that we all aged about 10 years when it comes to these new variants.


Until the hospitals and ICUs are full, then the increases will be even higher.
ICU with proper treatment results in death very often (I've heard 50%), but if you need ICU and proper treatment isn't available, that will increase.
From here a 60% increase in cases will result in more than a 60% increase in deaths. 

They're doing everything they can to provide that care, and then you get people complaining about delays to non essential procedures. Over the next few weeks people will die, if you won't die, you can wait, that's the way triage works.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Hence why I said "or more" after my risk estimate. There are other factors that go into the risk of bad outcomes and none of them seem to be getting any better these days.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

If the virus is 60% more infectious, it means we have to do even more in terms of distancing to keep the R number below 1 and cases from growing exponentially. Our only way of fighting this impact is to vaccinate, which can be used over time to substitute for tighter distancing measures.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> If the virus is 60% more infectious, it means we have to do even more in terms of distancing to keep the R number below 1 and cases from growing exponentially. Our only way of fighting this impact is to vaccinate, which can be used over time to substitute for tighter distancing measures.


Unfortunately the vaccines are less effective against some of these variants.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Unfortunately the vaccines are less effective against some of these variants.


Well, not vaccinating is certainly not going to work.

These variants are magnitudes less dangerous to the vaccinated person then they are to the non-vaccinated. Your table of hospitalizations would be incorporating virtually no vaccinated people. Hospitals are where the non-vaccinated will be going. If any of those people were eligible to get vaccinated and did not...that will go down as their BIGGEST MISTAKE they ever made in their entire life and it is now very possible that they may not get another chance to make a bigger one, ever again.

I explained this to my friend, just yesterday. This decision is not a decision on whether you want to vaccinate or not or whether you should vaccinate or not. This decision is whether you would prefer to expose your body to covid-19 safely through vaccination or very dangerously by way of infection. There are no other choices.

Your body will get exposed to this virus. You just need to decide if you want to do it safely or dangerously. I highly recommend doing it safely through vaccination.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrMatt said:


> Unfortunately the vaccines are less effective against some of these variants.


But still very effective non the less.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

cainvest said:


> But still very effective non the less.


So far the vaccines remain very effective, but there are isolated reports that some of the variants more infectious. If we let COVID continue to spread it is almost certain we'll come up with new strains that are worse.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> The BC reports that James mentioned look nice. Very easy to read.


They are doing a very nice job with these.



MrMatt said:


> I think the other data might take a while to catch up (ie deaths might take a few weeks from when the cases are found)
> 
> The numbers don't look too bad, until you consider how quickly this can fill up hospital capacity.


I'm glad you mentioned this because yes, this is all about the load on the hospitals.

To start with, the nurses and doctors are barely keeping it together. They are traumatized, reaching the limits of what a human can do, and we haven't even started to hear about PTSD and mental health effects.

And once the hospitals are full, everything changes. A treatable case of COVID suddenly becomes fatal and many other diseases become fatal too, even ones that would have normally been treatable.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The curve in BC does not appear to be stabilizing, might still be trending higher.

BC is now postponing 1,750 surgeries due to excessive load on hospitals. Not good.

Hopefully things will improve with new travel restrictions coming into effect Friday. I wish that people who say "COVID isn't a big deal" understood the stress all of this puts on our hospitals.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Ontario at least seems to be leveling off. That just means we need to sustain for another month or so before considering easing restrictions.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Ontario at least seems to be leveling off. That just means we need to sustain for another month or so before considering easing restrictions.


I think it is as well, but the data isn't showing a clear peak yet.
It's also wishful thinking that we'd push right to the breaking point and stop...

We're really at the breaking point this time, as others have commented, they've been reassigning staff to in hospital care, even if that wasn't their previous role. The staff shortages are very concerning.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Ontario’s current lockdown is set to end on the Thursday before the long weekend. What will cause greater outcry.....letting it expire on Thursday May 20th or extending it to the 25th, after the long weekend?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Money172375 said:


> Ontario’s current lockdown is set to end on the Thursday before the long weekend. What will cause greater outcry.....letting it expire on Thursday May 20th or extending it to the 25th, after the long weekend?


The government should at least make the call well before the long weekend. They keep on playing Lucy with the football with holidays. They say that lockdowns will end by the holiday, then shortly before change their mind and extend/impose lockdowns, after people made plans to do something. People hate to lose out on things, so it is easier to get compliance if people don't make the plans in the first place than asking them to cancel, after they started to look forward to a gathering or preparing for it.

I can assure you, the 400 will be jammed that weekend, regardless of what they end up doing.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Isn't anyone else concerned that all these nurses and maybe even some doctors will just quit their jobs in disgust?

We seem to be treating them like robots, thinking it's OK to push these systems to the brink each time. People can only take so much of this extreme stress, and watching people die every day. There's going to be PTSD and there are going to be mental breakdowns, and I'm sure it's already happening.

I know a guy who was hospitalized with COVID, and while in the ward he watched people die around him. It must have been traumatic, and it probably changed his life. He was only in there for a couple days. What about the nurses and doctors who see this every damned day? ALL DAY.

What happens if the nurses just quit or go on stress leave and say, sorry but I can't work any more. Yes they are healthcare workers and this is part of the job, but everyone has their limits. Keeping businesses and borders open offloads the consequences to these workers.



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-overwhelmed-nurse-pandemic-1.5995856


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Isn't anyone else concerned that all these nurses and maybe even some doctors will just quit their jobs in disgust?
> 
> ...


 ... I think alot of us (aka the mortal humans) are so that's why we (the mortal humans) are doing our part to stay out of the hospital by following the guidelines, rules/laws (masks, social distancing), getting (or trying to) vaccinated asap, etc.!!! From Day 1.

However, I think the "Heads" of the Nurses Association, and Doctors' College & Surgeon should step up and speak out on what is happening to their colleagues out in the battlefield, instead of hiding in their administrative offices. And what is going to be done ... before the entire health system collapses. In which case, everyone will be screwed.

As for the non-believers of Covid or those not following the outlined protocols, until these humanoids land in ICU or actually see a death (never mind a few), nothing can help or save them I say.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... I think alot of us (aka the mortal humans) are so that's why we (the mortal humans) are doing our part to stay out of the hospital by following the guidelines, rules/laws (masks, social distancing), getting (or trying to) vaccinated asap, etc.!!! From Day 1.
> 
> However, I think the "Heads" of the Nurses Association, and Doctors' College & Surgeon should step up and speak out on what is happening to their colleagues out in the battlefield, instead of hiding in their administrative offices. And what is going to be done ... before the entire health system collapses. In which case, everyone will be screwed.
> 
> As for the non-believers of Covid or those not following the outlined protocols, until these humanoids land in ICU or actually see a death (never mind a few), nothing can help or save them I say.


You mean like the Nurses association that fought for the right to go to work unvaccinated and unmasked?
The nurse and doctors "associations" are just as bad as the teachers unions. No doubt most individuals want the best, but the associations know their job is to squeeze out more for their members.

The news is full of reports of the overload, it's front page everywhere, crying desperate staff, cold clinical staff, it's out there, people just aren't listening. Right now they're pushing "young and healthy" in the ICU, nice article on people with COVID19 giving birth in ICU's, it's a disaster.


Then look at the backlash Ford got for "going to far". BC is getting similar feedback.


----------

