Jump to content

Coronavirus_2020.01.28


Jaydee
 Share

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, seeker said:

I would say I agree with the idea of quarantining everyone over 65, all nursing and care homes and anyone under 65 with a pre-existing medical condition.

Agreed, and in the process of relaxing restrictions, maybe that one should be one of the last removed. Or at least it should remain if force until new data points are established by the relaxation itself. 

 

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, seeker said:

  I would say I agree with the idea of quarantining everyone over 65,

Great in theory but impossible to enforce. Also, one size fits all rulings are prejudicial to those that don’t fit the stereotype 

Believe it or not, not everyone over 65 are basket cases. A blanket quarantine just because you are over a random age brings back memories of the mandatory retirement fiasco. I have an acquaintance in his mid 70’s who still drives a “crotch rocket” . Should he be grouped in with those with pre-existing conditions? I’m getting up there too but I could still pass an MOT medical. Should I be shuttered away to rot in quarantine hell when I am as healthy now as I was 20 years ago?

Unfortunately there is no easy answer, just common sense choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

Great in theory but impossible to enforce. Also, one size fits all rulings are prejudicial to those that don’t fit the stereotype 

Believe it or not, not everyone over 65 are basket cases. A blanket quarantine just because you are over a random age brings back memories of the mandatory retirement fiasco. I have an acquaintance in his mid 70’s who still drives a “crotch rocket” . Should he be grouped in with those with pre-existing conditions? I’m getting up there too but I could still pass an MOT medical. Should I be shuttered away to rot in quarantine hell when I am as healthy now as I was 20 years ago?

Unfortunately there is no easy answer, just common sense choices.

Well, what we have now is a one size fits all ruling.  Everyone is quarantined - relaxing it to only those over 65 is less restrictive, you see that right? 

Sure your buddy is mentally alert and in good health and so are you - great, but that does not mean that if you got infected either of you would do better at fighting of the infection than someone in their 40s.  Maybe yes, maybe no but statistically you wouldn't do as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, seeker said:

You need to re-read the article: 

The reality is that the vast majority of people under 65, and virtually everyone under 50, will be no more inconvenienced by COVID-19 than by a cold.

It's doesn't say "for everyone it's no more than a cold" it says for the "vast majority".  Do you disagree with this fact/conclusion?  I would say I agree with the idea of quarantining everyone over 65, all nursing and care homes and anyone under 65 with a pre-existing medical condition.

And the facts say:The author of the article has absolutely no medical or scientific credentials. 

Quick facts on all Ontario COVID-19 patients:

  •  41.9 per cent of all patients in the province are male and 57.3 per cent are female.
  •  2.6 per cent of all patients are 19 years of age or younger.
  •  23.5 per cent of all patients are between the ages of 20 and 39.
  •  30.5 per cent of all patients are between the ages of 40 and 59.
  •  21.7 per cent of all patients are between the ages of 60 and 79.
  •  21.7 per cent of all patients are 80 years of age or older.
  •  Public health units in the Greater Toronto Area account for 61.3 per cent of all cases.
  •  7.3 per cent of all patients had travelled history prior to becoming ill.
  •  22.0 per cent of all patients had contact with a previously confirmed case.
  •  36.3 per cent of all patients had community exposure.
  •  34.3 per cent of all patients had exposure information listed as pending
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but you're missing what percentage of those people need serious medical interventions - it's not just whether you get it or not it's about what effect it has on you.  The article argues that it's more serious for older people and hence more likely to result in hospital-type medical needs.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, seeker said:

Yeah but you're missing what percentage of those people need serious medical interventions - it's not just whether you get it or not it's about what effect it has on you.  The article argues that it's more serious for older people and hence more likely to result in hospital-type medical needs.

Isolation apparently does not work as the majority of the deaths of seniors are of those in longterm care facilities which in themselves are a form of isolation.

https://www.ontario.ca/page/how-ontario-is-responding-covid-19#section-0  This is a fact when you look at the reports from all countries covering the deaths of seniors in long term care facilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Marshall said:

Isolation apparently does not work as the majority of the deaths of seniors are of those in longterm care facilities which in themselves are a form of isolation.

 

Perhaps if these same people were out-and-about the numbers would be higher?  We have only run the "experiment" one way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, seeker said:

Perhaps if these same people were out-and-about the numbers would be higher?  We have only run the "experiment" one way.

Anything is possible but I don't recall any stats re the deaths of seniors outside long care facilities.  Maybe was not newsworthy or perhaps the numbers were few. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Marshall said:

Isolation apparently does not work as the majority of the deaths of seniors are of those in longterm care facilities which in themselves are a form of isolation.

https://www.ontario.ca/page/how-ontario-is-responding-covid-19#section-0  This is a fact when you look at the reports from all countries covering the deaths of seniors in long term care facilities.

If you drop a bomb in a field where people are spread out you may only get a few.  drop in on a building where people are confined you get everyone.

In the case of the long term care facilities, as soon as one person passed the infection to a patient unknowingly, the rest were done for.  Isolation from the infection is good, group isolation WITH the infection is bad.

Why do you think Hospitals are the worst place to spend any time?  you are couped up with all kinds of germs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well a very good friend of mine down in Ohio.  Good Health 50 years old was infected.  It was not even close to a cold.

He was bedridden for 3 weeks and was still sleeping 11 hours a day for a week after.  He was able to mow the lawn but just barely after that.

His comment was that it was the worst thing he has ever felt in his life and any that says "it's just a flu or a cold"  can get stuffed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, boestar said:

Well a very good friend of mine down in Ohio.  Good Health 50 years old was infected.  It was not even close to a cold.

He was bedridden for 3 weeks and was still sleeping 11 hours a day for a week after.  He was able to mow the lawn but just barely after that.

His comment was that it was the worst thing he has ever felt in his life and any that says "it's just a flu or a cold"  can get stuffed.

 

Well, not to be insulting but you understand what anecdotal evidence is, right?  I'm sympathetic to your friend and yet many others say, in their experience, it was no big deal.  Statistically, there are a lot of people, apparently, who barely even knew they had it or maybe didn't now they had it.  How do we reconcile these different experiences?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

by catering to the lowest common denominator.  We all isolate to keep the infection rate low.  We will ALL get this at some point.  The issue is that we do not get it all at once.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/truth-tracker-plandemic-video-full-of-false-conspiracy-theories-about-covid-19-1.4935399

TORONTO -- A documentary-style video called 'Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind COVID-19' has been removed by social media platforms after peddling potentially dangerous conspiracy theories about the coronavirus pandemic.

The 26-minute video has reportedly been viewed millions of times across Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and other websites despite its misleading claims, according to data from social media tracking tool BuzzSumo.

The video is said to be the first part of an upcoming documentary, according to California production company Elevate Films, which did not respond to CTVNews.ca's request for comment. It consists of an interview between filmmaker Mikki Willis, whose other videos highlight conspiracy theories, and Dr. Judy Mikovits, a former scientist at the National Cancer Institute in the U.S.

 

CTV News COVID-19 Coverage

Full coverage at CTVNews.ca/Coronavirus

Tracking every case of COVID-19 in Canada

When and how will the COVID-19 pandemic end?

Seniors being sent one-time payment of up to $500: PM

Who is eligible for the Canadian government's new COVID-19 aid for seniors?

COVID-19 conspiracy theories 'more convenient' than reality, experts say

'No excuse': Bryan Adams apologizes for coronavirus rant slammed as racist

COVID-19 vaccine used in clinical trials in China may be tested in Canada

PM Trudeau says feds will be 'very, very careful' about reopening international travel

Canada surpasses 5,000 deaths connected to COVID-19

COVID-19 hits poorer Montreal boroughs hardest, data reveals, with Montreal North bearing the brunt

Truth Tracker: 'Plandemic' video full of false conspiracy theories about COVID-19

Fauci warns of 'suffering and death' if U.S. reopens too soon

Border nurses forced to choose between Canada, U.S.

Beach bummer: novel coronavirus can live in water, but is it infectious?

The documentary is about Mikovits' theories that the coronavirus pandemic was planned. In the video, she claims that the virus was created in a laboratory, that wearing masks actually makes people sick, and that flu vaccines increase people’s odds of contracting COVID-19. She also makes repeated accusations against Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the lead members of the Trump administration's White House Coronavirus Task Force.

No medical or scientific evidence exists to support these or any of Mikovits' claims in the video.

LABORATORY THEORY

One of Mikovits' main claims is that the coronavirus was created and manipulated in laboratories in China and the U.S.

Despite previous reports that U.S. officials were investigating the possibility that the virus was secretly manufactured in a Chinese lab, there is no scientific evidence to support those theories.

A study by researchers from several public health organizations published March 17 in the journal Nature Medicine found that the virus, when tested by computer simulations, does not appear to bind well to human cells. The researchers determined that if someone wanted to create a dangerous virus capable of spreading among humans, their own simulations would show that this virus simply wouldn’t work.

"Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus," researchers wrote in the article.

Scientists who have studied the virus point to bats as the likeliest source of transmission to humans, suggesting that COVID-19 was created by nature, not humans. The earliest reported cases of COVID-19 were linked to a live animal market in Wuhan that sold exotic species, bolstering this research.

Mikovits also claims that COVID-19 was derived from the SARS virus. While the novel coronavirus is similar to SARS -- both originated from bats, cause respiratory illness, and spread through coughs and sneezes -- SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is a new disease, according to a study published in The Lancet.

According to several independent studies, the virus's genetic structure closely resembles one that already exists in horseshoe bats in China's Hunan province.

Bats have an unusually high capacity to harbour viruses, and scientists believe the virus may have spread from bats to an intermediary animal -- possibly stray dogs, snakes or pangolins -- before infecting humans.

MASKS DO NOT 'ACTIVATE' THE VIRUS

In the video, Mikovits alleges that wearing a face mask can "activate" the coronavirus. She says that people who wear masks are becoming sick from their own "reactivated coronavirus expressions." There is no evidence to support this.

According to health professionals, wearing a non-medical face mask may prevent the spread of the coronavirus; it does not make people more susceptible to it. Public health officials have recommended that people wear homemade face masks when they’re out in public, especially when physical distancing may be difficult, such as in grocery stores or on public transit. This is to protect others around the wearer because there is evidence the virus can be spread among asymptomatic individuals, or those who don't have any symptoms of COVID-19.

HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE DEBATE

Hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug dubbed a "game changer" by U.S. President Donald Trump for its potential ability to fight the new coronavirus, was found to be no more effective than standard treatment in a small Chinese study.

However, in 'Plandemic,' Mikovits repeatedly pushes it as "effective against these families of viruses."

While some studies have found that hydroxychloroquine could mitigate some symptoms of COVID-19, other research has found no such evidence.

Health Canada issued a warning in April of the possible side effects of the drug. In the health advisory, Health Canada said it is concerned people may be purchasing chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to treat or prevent COVID-19 and that the drugs should not be taken unless prescribed and under supervision of a physician.

Health Canada said that the drugs can lead to dizziness, fainting, seizures, liver or kidney problems, and a potentially fatal irregular heart rate.

There are more than 50 studies in the works on hydroxychloroquine, including in Canada, but health officials say it is too soon to known whether the drug is a viable treatment.

There is currently no accepted cure or vaccine for COVID-19.

ANTI-VACCINATION ANGLE

Mikovits claims that "the flu vaccines increase the odds by 36 per cent of getting COVID-19." She backs up this claim by citing a study published in January in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccine. The study looked at personnel in the U.S. Defense Department between 2017 and 2018 and found that the odds of getting coronaviruses were greater for vaccinated officials than unvaccinated officials.

However, scientists have since noted flaws in the study's experimental design. For example, the number of vaccinated individuals studied was more than twice as large as the number of those who were not vaccinated. In addition, the study tested for an unspecified "coronavirus," not SARS-CoV-2.

Nowhere in the study does it say flu vaccines increase the chance of contracting the coronavirus by 36 per cent.

Influenza and COVID-19 come from two different families of viruses and have no cross-effect, according to infectious disease specialist Dr. Isaac Bogoch.

Bogoch told CTV's Your Morning in March that a regular flu shot will not protect nor increase one's risk against COVID-19. However, he said individuals can "optimize" the immune system by getting vaccinated for everything that they are eligible to be vaccinated for, such as influenza or bacterial pneumonias.

While it is still unclear if someone can contract COVID-19 more than once, it is possible to have more than one different virus at the same time, such as the new coronavirus and a strain of the flu.

OPPOSITION TO CDC GUIDELINES

In 'Plandemic', a number of unidentified individuals described only as doctors are seen questioning the guidelines put out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on physical distancing, or suggesting the preventative measures have been issued for profit.

Mikovits alleges that doctors and hospitals have been "incentivized" to count deaths unrelated to COVID-19 as having been caused by the virus to get greater payouts from the American federal health insurance program Medicare. Medicare pays hospitals a set amount of money for the treatment of certain diagnoses, regardless of what the treatment actually costs.

Medicare has determined that a hospital gets US$13,000 if a COVID-19 patient on Medicare is admitted, and $39,000 if the patient goes on a ventilator. The CARES Act -- one of three federal stimulus laws enacted in the U.S. in response to the pandemic -- has included an add-on of 20 per cent that Medicare will pay hospitals for COVID-19 patients in a move to help with their lost revenue from the halting of elective surgeries. However, Congress has included strict policies for reporting this.

While the U.S. government is giving more money to hospitals that treat coronavirus patients, there is no proof that hospitals are over-identifying patients as having COVID-19.

ACCUSATIONS AGAINST FAUCI

Many of Mikovits' claims concern various high-profile individuals who have become more prominent amid the pandemic. Most notable is Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984 and one of the lead members of the Trump administration's White House Coronavirus Task Force.

While Mikovits repeatedly drops Fauci's name, she never actually connects him in any material way to her theory that this pandemic was planned.

Mikovits alleges that Fauci orchestrated a cover-up, but of what is unclear. She says that people were "paid off big time," suggesting Fauci may have engaged in some sort of improper activity. However, Mikovits later clarifies that she means researchers' labs got funding from NIAID, which is how science research is typically funded in the U.S.

In an article originally published in December 2018, fact-checking website Snopes reported on a claim by Mikovits that Fauci sent an email that "threatened her with arrest if she visited the National Institutes of Health to participate in a study to validate her chronic fatigue research."

Fauci told Snopes he had "no idea what she was talking about."

"I can categorically state that I have never sent such an e-mail," Fauci said. "I would never make such a statement in an e-mail that anyone 'would be immediately arrested' if they stepped foot on NIH property."

Mikovits also said Fauci profited from patents from research done at NIAID.

The Associated Press reported in 2005 that scientists at NIAID "have collected millions of dollars in royalties for experimental treatments without having to tell patients testing the treatments that the researchers' had a financial connection."

Fauci later told peer-reviewed medical journal The BMJ that as a government employee, he was required by law to put his name on certain patents. However, he said he felt it was inappropriate to receive payment and donated the money to charity.

MIKOVITS' BACKGROUND

Presented in the video as a medical expert, Judy Mikovits is one of 13 researchers who, in 2009, claimed to have found a link between a mouse retrovirus and chronic fatigue syndrome -- a disorder with no proven explanation and no cure. The findings were published in prestigious peer-reviewed journal Science.

In the video, filmmaker Willis says the paper "sent shockwaves through the scientific community, as it revealed the common use of animal and human fetal tissues were unleashing devastating plagues of chronic diseases."

However, the paper was retracted two years after its publication. Science said at the time that "multiple laboratories, including those of the original authors, have failed to reliably detect" the mouse retrovirus in chronic fatigue syndrome patients. The journal also cited "evidence of poor quality control in a number of specific experiments" in the report.

Mikovits has not published anything in scientific literature since 2012, but she has co-authored two bestselling books with Kent Heckenlively, a noted anti-vaxxer.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Whittemore Peterson Institute at the University of Nevada fired Mikovits in September 2011 from her job as research director at the facility after her study was retracted. In November 2011, a criminal complaint was filed against Mikovits for allegedly stealing computer data, notebooks and other property from the institute.

Mikovits says in 'Plandemic' that the notebooks were "planted" in her house and that she was "held in jail with no charges." As she is speaking, footage of what appears to be a police SWAT team executing a nighttime raid is shown.

The Chicago Tribune said Mikovits was arrested in California as a fugitive on a warrant issued by Reno police in relation to the November 2011 complaint. She was held in a California jail for five days before being released after an arraignment hearing.

The criminal charges were later dropped, although the Whittemore Peterson Institute subsequently won a default judgment in a civil suit against her seeking the return of the items. A colleague at the institute admitted in an affidavit for the criminal case that he had taken items from the lab on behalf of Mikovits.

A typical viewer of 'Plandemic' may not know these details about Mikovits' background.

Jonathan Jarry, a biologist and science communication expert at McGill University, said it is also the way that Mikovits speaks that can make her seem convincing.

"Her tone is just right. She sounds cool-headed. She is portraying herself as a victim of a cruel system so we can empathize with her," Jarry said in an email to CTVNews.ca on Monday. He added that Mikovits uses a Gish gallop, a common debating technique in which the speaker runs through a long list of arguments that appear convincing just by their sheer number and "would take four times as long to refute."

Jarry says the video's documentary-like style also plays a role in making its misleading conspiracy theories seem legitimate.

"With a little bit of money, anyone can now produce a serious-looking documentary. These images look professional, so they are more convincing to us," Jarry said. "The video also taps into our collective anxiety during this pandemic, of looking for someone to blame, some clear answer to the questions we are asking."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, boestar said:

We will ALL get this at some point.  The issue is that we do not get it all at once.

That's exactly the threat model in play here IMO. No one really knows how the virus will mutate over time or if it will come back with a mutated vengeance in the fall. 

I can't imagine a worse place to be than a ship or long term care facility. As that seems to be the worst case scenario, perhaps those statistics (as horrid as they are) need to be taken with a grain of salt when weighing the overall threat assessment of open vs closed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, boestar said:

We will ALL get this at some point.  The issue is that we do not get it all at once.

 

It worked - almost too well.  In my mother's little city the hospital is empty.  They didn't have a single Covid patient.  So it appears that we successfully averted the massive wave but are now being told it's just gonna come back in the fall.  IDK, I guess you can always try to second-guess.  I'm not complaining about a lack of Covid patients, believe me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, boestar said:

Isolation apparently does not work as the majority of the deaths of seniors are of those in longterm care facilities which in themselves are a form of isolation.

My daughter-in-law WAS a Licenced Practical Nurse and worked mostly in long-term care facilities in Calgary.

She now works in a large grocery in Calgary because the hours of work are better for a working mom.

I told her this past weekend that I am glad she gave up nursing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trudeau promises ‘stronger measures’

 

  • Calgary Herald
  • 13 May 2020
  • JAMES MCCARTEN
img?regionKey=psukvKvP0oBDcBBHh72Jbg%3d%3dRYAN REMIORZ / THE CANADIAN PRESS The U.S. border crossing in Lacolle, Que., south of Montreal. A ban on non-essential cross-border travel is set to expire May 21, but it’s not known if the ban will be extended.

WASHINGTON • The federal government is planning stronger measures to deal with a looming influx of people arriving from the United States, a clear sign Canada is bracing for the realities of life after lockdown while living next door to the world’s largest COVID-19 hot spot.

The gradual reopening of businesses and easing of mobility restrictions in both countries will likely mean an increase in cross-border traffic, and with it the need for additional steps to ensure new arrivals are adhering to self-isolation protocols, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Tuesday.

“We are looking at stronger measures to make sure that we’re following up appropriately on people who come over,” Trudeau said during his daily briefing outside his Rideau Cottage residence. “As economic activity starts to ramp up, as restrictions get loosened across countries, it is likely that we see either a few more people returning home or a few more people trying to cross the border, and we need to make sure that the measures we bring forward are going to keep Canadians safe.”

The mutual bilateral ban on non-essential travel, an agreement that initially went into effect in March and was extended by an additional 30 days last month, is now scheduled to expire May 21. Trudeau would not say whether he expects the restrictions to be extended a second time.

Provincial leaders, in particular Ontario’s Doug Ford, have made it clear they don’t want visitors from the U.S., home to more than a million active cases of COVID-19. The disease has killed more than 82,000 Americans, the highest death toll in any single country.

President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has been aggressively lobbying states to get residents back to work and ignite the country’s economic engines.

The government’s recent rhetoric on the border, combined with a rare public acknowledgment Tuesday from the U.S. State Department of the continuing co-operation across North America, suggests the ongoing talks may have moved into a new phase.

“The United States appreciates Canada’s close and constant co-operation regarding the management of the border during this unprecedented crisis,” acting U.S. ambassador to Canada Richard Mills said in an unsolicited statement Tuesday.

Ongoing talks between Canada and the U.S., on the border and other matters of mutual interest, have been positive and constructive, Trudeau said. But whatever the outcome, it will be governed in Canada by an abundance of caution, he added.

“Preventing transmission from outside of Canada into Canada, once we have controlled the spread within Canada, will be an essential part of ensuring that we don’t fall back into a second wave that could be as serious as this wave we’re going through, or even more so,” Trudeau said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don Martin: Sealing off provinces from each other borders on pandemic paranoia

Don

 

 
 

OTTAWA -- There’s something rather big being overlooked in the move to reopen Canada.

Specifically, four provinces.

While the European Union is set to reopen most of its borders next month and Americans remain free to drive across state lines, Canadians will likely confront a "closed for the summer" sign on Atlantic Canada.

Fortress New Brunswick has police 24/7 on its boundaries guarding against the health care hazard posed by fellow Canadian travellers. None shall pass without an essential reason to enter with no sign of that edict easing.

Nova Scotia is aggressively "managing" its boundaries against potential COVID-carrying visitors while Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland have both raised the drawbridges against island arrivals from the rest of Canada.

The once-welcoming Rock went so far as to twice deny a former resident permission to be the family representative at her mother’s funeral, only to relent once it became a news story.

While not to downplay the importance and effectiveness of the Stay Home messaging, it’s troubling to see this country fracturing along COVID-19 containment lines.

After all, there’s no consistency in visitor paranoia being shown by premiers or public health officials across the country.

B.C. is a major success story in battling the coronavirus, but it hasn’t barricaded itself from higher-infection Albertans.

Nor has low-infection Manitoba vetoed visitors from the second-highest coronavirus case jurisdiction of Ontario which, in turn, has no problem welcoming visitors from viral epicentre Quebec.

Besides, there’s no established connection fresh outbreaks and interprovincial travelling, with the exception of some oilsands workers reportedly taking the virus home.

This suggests Atlantic premiers are having a pandemic panic attack which exceeds necessary, prudent and proven health care precautions like social distancing and hand hygiene.

Besides, there’s a strong case that provinces erecting a police force fence to keep out fellow Canadians is unconstitutional.

The Constitution’s Section 6 guarantees free mobility between provinces, although one court ruled restrictions could be allowed “conceivably, in temporary circumstances, for some local reason as, for example, health”.

What ‘temporary’ means in that waffled ruling is not defined. Six months? A year? Until there’s a vaccine?

If the Atlantic provinces want to cut off their tourism lifeblood in the peak of summer and beyond, that’s their loss.

But visitors are not, as New Brunswick suggests, storming that province to escape the virus.

They’re looking get away from big city crowds and socially isolate in spectacular Maritime scenery. That pegs them as a low risk of creating new coronavirus clusters.

“A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian,” a campaigning future prime minister once declared.

Well, Justin Trudeau, start defending the concept.

The divide between provinces are called boundaries, not borders, and they shouldn’t be grounds for interprovincial interrogations, blockades or evictions.

Summer is coming and the distressed tourism base of have-not Atlantic Canada will need visitor dollars to reduce their dependence on equalization support from the rest of Canada.

We are supposedly one country, not 10, bound together in good times and bad.

Prolonged self-isolation by select provinces from the rest of the country isn’t just economically unsound and most likely unconstitutional, it’s un-Canadian.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Marshall said:

while living next door to the world’s largest COVID-19 hot spot.

The USA is also the third largest country by population.

The two countries that are larger are not known for their accuracy in reports (China and India)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Fido said:

The USA is also the third largest country by population.

The two countries that are larger are not known for their accuracy in reports (China and India)

'the only real count is the number of dead as a percentage of the population.  We may never know the "real" facts for any country due to the inaccuracy of the death reports. If someone with terminal cancer tests positive for the virus is their subsequent death due to the virus or to the cancer?  etc etc etc. The only thing that matters as far as I am concerned is if the death rate is continuing to climb for an country and ours has stabilized, why would we want to open our borders to that country?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Marshall said:

If someone with terminal cancer tests positive for the virus is their subsequent death due to the virus or to the cancer?

This has been going on for years.

If someone died of anything but they had once been a smoker then it was smoking that caused their death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...