Jump to content

deicer

Donating Member
  • Posts

    10,291
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    115

Everything posted by deicer

  1. One only has to remember that O'toole was part of the government that tried to disassemble the Canadian framework. Taking from the poor to give to the rich... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/true-north/2015/oct/14/canadas-real-barbarism-stephen-harpers-dismembering-of-the-country Canada's real barbarism? Stephen Harper’s dismembering of the country The Conservative government is wiping away everything vital about Canada’s society and environment. They must be voted out The threat of barbarism is grave, insidious and far-reaching. Those responsible are a small group nurturing a foreign-inspired ideology on Canadian soil. They pore over rigid doctrines in cloistered rooms. They scheme to impose their values, attractive only to a minority, on the majority of Canadian people. They have carefully veiled their true selves but their agenda is unmistakable: to erase the country’s achievements in security and fairness. This threat comes not from a handful of niqab-wearing Muslim women. It has always come from Canada’s Conservative party. Their imported neoconservative ideology, baked into homegrown resentment toward the federal state, has never been palatable to a country with progressive ambitions. They have risen to power through other means: money and economic clout; a deep network of right-wing media and think tanks that have shaped policy options; and an unreformed electoral system that has allowed a party with only a quarter of the electorate’s support to rule unhindered. They have not been one for grand gestures. Their approach has been a steady accumulation of small, methodical steps, animated by a long-term vision. That vision is to extinguish Stephen Harper’s perception of Canada: “a northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term,” as he once described the country. That those Scandinavian governments are the world’s best in providing free healthcare and education, redistributing wealth, and guaranteeing political expression: this to Harper is cause for loathing. Small gestures, yet an inexorable dismantling of the finest part of Canada’s governing tradition: the collective project to improve people’s lives and protect our environment. Budgets rammed through parliament, directives slipped in through the bureaucracy, cuts applied carefully, widely, incisively. It has amounted to an unprecedented assault on all that is most distinct and valuable about this country: universal healthcare, a natural world of varied beauty, our public broadcaster, the culture and land protection of Indigenous peoples, and a spirit of openness and tolerance unmatched in the world. Harper’s greatest success in hampering the state from serving Canadians has been to strip it of its most important resource: taxes. Continuing a Liberal legacy, Harper’s cuts to taxes – GST, corporate and personal – have enriched corporations and denied the state a stunning $45 billion a year in revenue. This has deliberately starved the ability of this government – and of future ones – to pay for public services and address inequality or climate change. Such policies have reduced the country to depression-era divisions: Canada’s wealthiest 86 people now own as much as the 11.4 million poorest. What welfare Harper has denied Canadians he has not spared the tar sands barons. His great fixation has been to elevate them to unparalleled influence, turning the state into a servant of their industry: granting them billions in handouts, the chance to write legislation, and the use of state officials as spies, spin-masters and overseas salesmen. This new character of the state has disfigured the environment beyond just the climate-torching tar sands: from the razing of the boreal forest to the opening of our water systems to privatization, from the extension of oil prospecting in the Arctic to the refusal to list our most endangered species. Applying the state to the most destructive ends, Harper has also ensured it will vacate the most essential. The Conservatives’ predecessor – the Reform party – once made the mistake of announcing their desire to privatize healthcare, the social program most valued by Canadians. Though his aim is the same, Harper has been wiser. No announcements, but cuts to healthcare have still been set in motion: a crippling $36 billion dollars over the next decade. The effect is obvious: as public medicare crumbles and complaints grow, profit-gouging companies will be waiting in the wings. The strangling of the state has had many victims, but none more than women. In Harper’s Canada, half of the population is now treated like a special-interest group. He has shuttered women’s centres that aimed to advance economic equality and eliminate gender violence. Deployed parliamentarians to try to reintroduce a debate over the right to abortion. And used tax policies to encourage one-income families – all the better to keep women tethered to the home. Adding a final insult to injury, Harper has sought to win re-election by stoking fears about Muslim women who choose to wear head-scarves at citizenship ceremonies, supposedly out of concern for their liberation. Racist pandering has scarcely been more shameless. Certain other images of the Harper era are impossible to forget. A mountain of irreplaceable books from a scientific library discarded in a dumpster. Harper pantomiming empathy for a Syrian child washed onto Turkey’s shores, followed by news that he personally blocked the processing of the most desperate refugees. Or when Manitoba First Nations, stricken by the swine flu, appealed for medicine: Ottawa instead sent body bags. Images capturing the quality of a dark decade, the sneering state-backed contempt for our highest aspirations to grasp our ecological limits, to assist those abroad, and to protect the most vulnerable among us. Stephen Harper may have changed the character of the Canadian state. He has not changed the character of its people. Stifled and suffering under his policies, an overwhelming majority clearly want a new direction. While reversing the damage he has inflicted will require time, a reformed electoral system and the growth of popular movements, it must start by the removal of his government. Vote strategically and above all with your conscience, but vote Harper out. On 19 October, Canadians will have their chance to combat a home-grown threat – a threat posed not by veiled women, but by the dismembering of their country. When a regime so utterly ransacks its own lands and people, can we stop describing it as the governing of a nation? It is more akin to a barbarian invasion.
  2. Harper the fraud was voted out. Now we are left to live with his debacle.
  3. Welcome back WOXOF/ALKAID/JDUNKIN! Didn't take you long. I didn't make this up. If you think that the deal was 37 years ago, you are only showing how misinformed you really are. It's in the article, and as well, you only have to google FIPA to confirm that Harper ratified the deal in 2014 while O'toole was part of his government. I'm not making this up, you just aren't believing facts.
  4. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-erin-otooles-anti-trade-anti-business-stand-is-at-odds-with-his-own/ Erin O’Toole’s anti-trade, anti-business stand is at odds with his own party’s history Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole pitches his position on free trade as a stand against the failed policies of the Liberal government. In reality, his battle is with the ghosts of his own party. In a short video posted to Twitter last week, Mr. O’Toole railed against a government “that chases bad trade deals with countries like China,” and the greed of the corporate “power brokers” who support those trade pursuits at the expense of workers at home. “I believe that the goal of economic policy should be more than just wealth creation,” he said. His position would make more sense if the current Liberal government had signed, or was pursuing, a trade deal with China. It’s not. It formally abandoned that idea last year, as Canada has grown increasingly critical of Chinese human-rights abuses, and the diplomatic and trade relationships between the two countries have deteriorated. It would make more sense if the Liberals stood accused of being too cozy with big corporate interests. They’re not. They are frequently viewed as having an anti-business bent, and not without some cause. No, the last government that was unapologetically pro-business, that placed the expansion of trade agreements at the core of its economic and foreign policy, was the last Conservative government. Mr. O’Toole is bashing away at the foundations of an economic strategy designed and built by Stephen Harper, the most revered figure in his own party. It was during Mr. Harper’s tenure as prime minister (2006-15) that Canada reached trade agreements with 39 countries – the busiest era for international trade deals in Canadian history. Two of the most important pacts concluded by Mr. Trudeau’s government – with the European Union and the Trans-Pacific Partnership – were initiatives launched and to a great extent negotiated under Mr. Harper’s watch. “To the trade agreements this government has signed, we’re going to have in the future access to over half of global GDP,” Mr. Harper boasted in the leaders’ debate on the economy during the 2015 election campaign. By 2013, Mr. Harper had explicitly redefined his government’s foreign policy in terms of pursuing increased trade access to markets in the aid of private-sector business objectives – what the government termed “economic diplomacy.” That included China, which marked an about-face for Mr. Harper himself. At least early in his tenure as prime minister, Mr. Harper talked tough to China on diplomatic matters while pursuing a pro-business stand on the trade and investment front – only to find that China was not only unwilling to separate the two, but could also harbour very public grudges (its own form of economic diplomacy). Eventually, he backed away from the rhetoric, while increasingly seeking to cultivate the huge Chinese trade opportunities on behalf of Canada’s business community. Now listen to what Mr. O’Toole has to say about trade with China, and the private-sector interests who would covet it: “These corporate power brokers care more about their shareholders than their employees. They love trade deals with China that allow them to access cheap labour, and they turn a blind eye to the conduct of the Communist Party,” he said in the video. Mr. O’Toole’s China stand sounds like a return to early-term Mr. Harper, who, in his first year as prime minister, said he wouldn’t “sell out important Canadian values” regarding China in pursuit of “the almighty dollar.” We have certainly learned over the past several years that China can be a bully in the international arena, and a petulant one at that. Mr. Harper’s attempts to thaw relations with China didn’t get Canada very far, and things have become much, much worse under Mr. Trudeau. It’s hard to see how Mr. O’Toole’s apparent position – to stand on principle, and accept the economic consequences of disengaging with the world’s most important economy – could do much worse. One question is how Mr. O’Toole’s willingness to single out China might be viewed by Canada’s large Sino-Canadian community, which makes up roughly 5 per cent of the population – but a much bigger share in key urban and suburban centres that could prove pivotal in the next election. There are a lot of first-generation Chinese Canadians who still have close ties to mainland China, including important business ties. More generally, Mr. O’Toole’s message – challenging the benefits of trade agreements, rebuking big business for pursuing profits – positions the Conservatives in some very strange and unfamiliar territory. This has long been the party in the corner of private enterprise. In its golden era under Mr. Harper, free trade was the cornerstone of its economic strategy. Now, the party prepares to fight an election with a leader who is openly expressing suspicion of both. For long-standing party faithful, this is a major break from how they define Canadian Conservative philosophy. If this is the direction Mr. O’Toole is taking the party’s economic platform, he’ll have to climb over the legend of Stephen Harper to get there.
  5. When you go to the polls, also remember that O'toole was part of the government that sold out Canada to China for 31 years. https://canucklaw.ca/a-look-back-at-fipa-and-selling-sovereignty-to-china/ A Look Back At FIPA, And Selling Sovereignty To China Erin O’Toole was a Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Trade in 2014. It’s clear from these quotes that he doesn’t see a problem selling out Canada’s sovereignty to China with the Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA). In fact, he glosses over just how bad this arrangement really is. All of the Conservatives did. https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/9/22/erin-otoole-1/ 1. Offshoring, Globalization, Free Trade The other posts on outsourcing/offshoring are available here. It focuses on the hidden costs and trade offs society as a whole has to make. Contrary to what many politicians and figures in the media claim, there are always costs to these kinds of agreement. These include: (a) job losses; (b) wages being driven down; (c) undercutting of local companies; (d) legal action by foreign entities; (e) industries being outsourced; (f) losses to communities when major employers leave; and (g) loss of sovereignty to foreign corporations and governments. Don’t believe the lies that these agreements are overwhelmingly beneficial to all. 2. Important Links (1) https://openparliament.ca/debates/ (2) https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/9/22/erin-otoole-1/ (3) https://archive.is/p2fkV (4) WayBack Machine Archive (5) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/fipa-agreement-with-china-what-s-really-in-it-for-canada-1.2770159 (6) https://archive.is/C6Xvi (7) https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/china-chine/fipa-apie/index.aspx?lang=eng&_ga=2.159712829.1468063288.1601709213-445290716.1601709213 (8) https://archive.is/wC5ed (9) WayBack Machine Archive 3. Other “Conservatives” Support FIPA https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/ron-cannan-3/ https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/rob-merrifield-3/ https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/6/4/lois-brown-7/ https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/james-moore-3/ https://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/4/18/michael-chong-1/ 4. Quotes From FIPA Agreement Article 5 Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment 1. Each Contracting Party shall accord to investors of the other Contracting Party treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to investors of a non-Contracting Party with respect to the establishment, acquisition, expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory. 2. Each Contracting Party shall accord to covered investments treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to investments of investors of a non-Contracting Party with respect to the establishment, acquisition, expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory. 3. For greater certainty, the “treatment” referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article does not encompass the dispute resolution mechanisms, such as those in Part C, in other international investment treaties and other trade agreements. Article 6 National Treatment 1. Each Contracting Party shall accord to investors of the other Contracting Party treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to its own investors with respect to the expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory. 2. Each Contracting Party shall accord to covered investments treatment no less favourable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to investments of its own investors with respect to the expansion, management, conduct, operation and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory. 3. The concept of “expansion” in this Article applies only with respect to sectors not subject to a prior approval process under the relevant sectoral guidelines and applicable laws, regulations and rules in force at the time of expansion. The expansion may be subject to prescribed formalities and other information requirements. Article 11 Compensation for Losses Investors of one Contracting Party who suffer losses in respect of covered investments owing to war, a state of national emergency, insurrection, riot or other similar events, shall be accorded treatment by the other Contracting Party, in respect of restitution, indemnification, compensation or other settlement, no less favourable than it accords in like circumstances, to its own investors or to investors of any third State. Local laws — environmental protection, for example — which are seen as harmful and detrimental to business interests will be considered grounds to submit a claim for compensation. Article 23 Consent to Arbitration Each Contracting Party consents to the submission of a claim to arbitration in accordance with the procedures set out in this Agreement. Failure to meet any of the conditions precedent provided for in Article 21 shall nullify that consent. Disputes won’t be heard in any open or transparent way. Instead arbitration that is largely secret will be resolving disputes. Article 35 Entry into Force and Termination 1. The Contracting Parties shall notify each other through diplomatic channels that they have completed the internal legal procedures for the entry into force of this Agreement. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the following month after the second notification is received, and shall remain in force for a period of at least fifteen years. 2. After the expiration of the initial fifteen-year period, this Agreement shall continue to be in force. Either Contracting Party may at any time thereafter terminate this Agreement. The termination will be effective one year after notice of termination has been received by the other Contracting Party. 3. With respect to investments made prior to the date of termination of this Agreement, Articles 1 to 34, as well as paragraph 4 of this Article, shall continue to be effective for an additional fifteen-year period from the date of termination. 4. The Annexes and footnotes to this Agreement constitute integral parts of this Agreement. So the agreement itself lasts for at least 15 years. Then, we are required to give a 1 year notice, at which time, Articles 1 to 34 will lapse in another 15 years. All in all, this agreement will then last a minimum of 31 years. This is an entire generation away from being able to really terminate. 5. What Is Canada Getting With FIPA? The secrecy shrouding the much-delayed Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) with China makes it hard for experts, let alone average Canadians, to figure out what benefits this country will see from the deal. -Canadian governments are locked in for a generation. If Canada finds the deal unsatisfactory, it cannot be cancelled completely for 31 years. -China benefits much more than Canada, because of a clause allowing existing restrictions in each country to stay in place. Chinese companies get to play on a relatively level field in Canada, while maintaining wildly arbitrary practices and rules for Canadian companies in China. -Chinese companies will be able to seek redress against any laws passed by any level of government in Canada which threaten their profits. Australia has decided not to enter FIPA agreements specifically because they allow powerful corporations to challenge legislation on social, environmental and economic issues. —-Chinese companies investing heavily in Canadian energy will be able seek billions in compensation if their projects are hampered by provincial laws on issues such as environmental concerns or First Nations rights, for example. -Cases will be decided by a panel of professional arbitrators, and may be kept secret at the discretion of the sued party. This extraordinary provision reflects an aversion to transparency and public debate common to the Harper cabinet and the Chinese politburo. –Differences between FIPA and the North American Free Trade Agreement may offer intriguing loopholes for American lawyers to argue for equal treatment under the principle of Most Favoured Nation. The CBC covered the story and raised several legitimate concerns over this deal. Secrecy aside, it’s difficult to see what (if any) real benefits Canada gets from it. 6. China Buying Up Assets Across Canada This is too long to do justice here, but Canadian laws make it easy for foreigners to buy property in Canada. This applies regardless of whether they live here, or even intend to. The Chinese in particular are taking full advantage of that. 7. Putting China Over Canadians This isn’t really related to FIPA, but still good to point out: even so-called “populists” can be globalist shills. Here is no different. How does making it easier to import cheap Chinese products keep industries and jobs in Canada? However, China has more freedom and less government in recent decades. 8. CANZUK To Counter Chinese Influence? Video Player 00:00 00:46 Video Player 00:00 00:55 CPC Policy Declaration August 2018 Have to love the mental gymnastics here. CPC Leader Erin O’Toole spoke in support of CANZUK in the 2018 Policy Convention. He explicitly stated he wanted to “let more and more countries” into the agreement. Fast forward 2 years, and he wants to accelerate CANZUK to stop the growing Chinese influence ….. that he supported in 2014. Way to be consistent. 9. Can O’Toole/CPC Actually Be Trusted? How can anyone trust Erin O’Toole? (a) He has no qualms about selling sovereignty to China. (b) He supports CANZUK — and expanding the zone. (c) CANZUK is now just a way to counter China, who is still here. (d) Heenan Blaikie was Trudeau Sr.’s and Chretien’s old law firm. (e) He is an ex-Facebook lobbyist. (f) He openly shills for foreign powers like Israel. (g) He supports even more draconian measures than Trudeau. (h) His Chief of Staff is a Director at Sick Kids Hospital. (i) CPC supports the temp-to-PR pipeline. 10. Objection To FIPA Pushed, No Real Debate Video Player 00:00 02:33 Video Player 00:00 01:22 Video Player 00:00 03:37 See here, here and here for original source material. There were people who opposed the sellout by the Conservatives. 11. Conservative Politicians Are Globalists One would think that “conserving” in the sense of trade meant protecting local industries, and protecting communities from having major employers shipped overseas. However, that is not the case. What passes for conservatism is really just “corporatism”, putting those interests over that of the local population. There are far more important things than stock prices and overall profits. Ask them to “conserve” the makeup, culture, language, traditions, or heritage of a country, and that’s being racist. After all, Canada is make up of abstract values (that few can agree on), not any sort of identity.
  6. Toronto is in second place! https://safecities.economist.com/
  7. Loved the 8's too! The whistle that they made when the valve was opened that transitioned into a low hum was fun to watch. As well, the chances of spectacular wet starts in the dark were great as well. One of the funniest starts I used to do was on the single aircraft of an outfit called 'Crownair'. We called it a 'bang start'. When they were ready to start #2, we would give a thumbs up to the mechanic who would be standing next to the engine with a chock, and he would 'bang' the cowling to free the start valve which was sticky....
  8. I loved doing early morning dispatches in the winter when it was really cold. The rumble that would go on for minutes was something to experience!
  9. Either way you play, it is the herd that pick it's leadership, hence the way things go.
  10. I don't believe that alternative energy has anything to do with it. There is an overabundance of oil and gas in this planet. The problem is that three major players, who have the majority of reserves, are controlling the flow and pricing. This is all led by the U.S. The U.S. has the largest reserves of oil and gas on the planet. https://money.cnn.com/2016/07/05/investing/us-untapped-oil/index.html The U.S. was also a net exporter of oil and gas not long ago. So who is controlling the taps? The pandemic drove down the price of oil due to lack of demand, and it is my opinion that they will manipulate the flow and pricing until they make back the profit that was lost. Adding to the problem is that a lot of oil is in contango. Therefore the price has to rise before it will be released. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-prices-graphic-idUSKBN2BN1QA One only has to look at the number of oil tankers that are sitting off the port of Singapore as storage. https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:104.2/centery:1.4/zoom:10 We're only along for the ride.
  11. Progress being made... https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/16/all-electric-aircraft-from-rolls-royce-completes-maiden-flight.html All-electric aircraft from Rolls-Royce completes maiden flight in Britain KEY POINTS The last few years have seen a number of firms develop plans and concepts related to low and zero-emission aviation. Rolls-Royce’s aircraft is the result of a program called ACCEL, or Accelerating the Electrification of Flight.
  12. It is interesting how globally the energy market is so manipulated to artificially keep prices high.
  13. It is herd mentality that drags us down. One only has to look to the provinces who have done the worse through the pandemic, and it's mainly because of their duly elected leadership. https://www.680news.com/2021/09/15/ford-government-spending-fao/ The Financial Accountability Office (FAO) released its latest report on Wednesday, revealing the Ford government spent $2.6 billion less than planned in the fiscal first quarter (April 1, 2021 to June 30, 2021). The independent report says, “In the health sector, the province did not spend any of the $2.7 billion COVID-19 Response transfer payment.” First announced on March 25, 2021, the Government of Canada is providing $4 billion through a one-time top-up to the Canada Health Transfer to help address the pressures that COVID-19 has put on the health care systems. The FAO detailed that the province spent $36.9 billion in the first quarter, which was $2.6 billion (6.6 per cent) less than planned. Most sectors spent less, led by “other programs” ($1.0 billion or 16.6 per cent under the plan), health ($1.0 billion or 5.4 per cent under the plan) and children’s and social services ($0.5 billion or 11.6 per cent under the plan). https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/live-at-6-p-m-kenney-and-officials-to-give-alberta-covid-19-update The comments come despite Kenney’s government making decisions this summer to leave the pandemic behind itself by treating it as endemic and attempting to live with the virus. The province first removed almost all public health measures July 1 — a move chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw acknowledged this week led to the fourth wave — and then planned to remove all virus containment measures in August before walking back that plan.
  14. Even if you get sick, then recover, a big number of people suffer 'long covid'. Do you want to risk it? The first link is the actual Science Table report, the second a news summary of it. https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/sciencebrief/understanding-the-post-covid-19-condition-long-covid-and-the-expected-burden-for-ontario/ https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/this-is-going-to-have-widespread-effects-more-than-57k-ontarians-experience-a-post-covid-19-condition-1.5584776 'This is going to have widespread effects:' More than 57K Ontarians experience a post-COVID-19 condition TORONTO -- A newly released report by Ontario’s COVID-19 Science Advisory Table has found that at least 57,000 to 78,000 people in the province had, or are currently experiencing, one of 200 post-COVID-19 conditions following their initial diagnosis. The 18-page brief finds that while the majority of people with COVID-19 will fully recover, it may take others weeks or even months to return to their pre-illness health level. “It can affect anybody who is infected,” Fahad Razak, internal medicine physician at St. Michael’s Hospital and a member of the COVID-19 Science advisory table, told CTV News Toronto. “And unlike the infection itself, where we clearly saw that it was more severe and we were worried most about older individuals or individuals who had a lot of health conditions, the post-COVID condition, or long COVID can affect anybody.” The science table identified more than 200 different symptoms impacting 10 body organs that can be associated with the post-COVID condition. A post-COVID-19 condition, or long COVID-19, generally occurs when an individual experiences symptoms or related health conditions that persist beyond the initial infection. The table says the most prevalent symptoms include fatigue, shortness of breath, general pain or discomfort, anxiety and depression. In more serious cases, the report says that individuals may have impaired cognitive and physical functional status, including “limitations in the ability to perform activities of daily living.” The World Health Organization has reported that about one in four people infected with COVID-19 has experienced a post-COVID-19 condition for at least one month. One in 10 people experience symptoms lasting beyond 12 weeks. “Patients with the most severe illness during initial infection, and especially those who require intensive care unit (ICU) admission, are expected to have significant long-term health consequences,” the report reads. The report also cites a systematic review coordinated by the Public Health Agency of Canada, whose initial findings showed that about 83 per cent of patients with a lab-confirmed case of the novel coronavirus experienced one or more post-COVID-19 symptoms within four to 12 weeks, while 56 per cent reported symptoms 12 weeks after diagnosis. In Ontario alone, the science table says that at least 57,000 to 78,000 people have experienced a post-COVID-19 condition—although they warn those numbers are a “conservative estimate.” “That number honestly was bigger than I expected and that is the low end,” Razak said. “So to me, that was surprising. That's an incredible number of people just in this province who we’ll have to really think through how to care for in the months to come.” “I'm very convinced, as are my co-authors, that this is an important entity that is part of the long term, public health and societal picture of what will be the legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic.” The brief also touches on how getting the COVID-19 vaccine reduces the probability of developing a post-COVID-19 condition simply by reducing the chance of becoming infected in the first place. The science table also cites emerging evidence that the vaccine reduces the risk in the event of a breakthrough case. Razak warns that the long-term consequences of contracting COVID-19 has not been well studied but that it could have a significant impact on health-care systems, as well as the insurance industry, businesses, families, and social supports. “I think a lot of the attention has focused on the acute infection, people ending up in hospital. The long-term consequences are a lot harder to quantify, and they've been less studied than what happens in those early days of the infection. And so I don't think that there's been enough attention on it,” he said. “It's really an important area for all of us to focus on, because it's not just about the medical system or medical care anymore, this is going to have widespread effects
×
×
  • Create New...