Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

my take on covid 19 response


oops

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, dialamah said:

And then complains about not getting enough information.

That's assuming that sources of information are limited, based on experience?

P.S. enough honest information

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears they don't know what the hell they are talking about at Federal level. While procurement minister is saying that 853 thousands of Moderna vaccines are on their way to Canada and will arrive on Tuesday and Trudeau, the prime minister says Tuesday afternoon that a batch of Moderna vaccines has landed in Canada Tuesday morning but today being two days later after supposedly these vaccines landed in Canada, there is news that Moderna delivery has been delayed again and municipalities complaining that they may have to cancel already made appointments, Total incompetency at the Federal level by the highest in authority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2021 at 3:22 PM, myata said:

Hear, hear! While the US just south HAS offered it to everybody (as of April 19th, next week), with 20 times the population. Oh the splendeurs et generosite of eternal bureaucracy unconstrained by any notions of reality! What can be added here, curtains please.

The US has 8.7 times the population, not 20. It is also the largest producer of vaccines and one of only two which refuses to export them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two important news today. Ontario expects third wave of Covid to worsen with models predicting up to 18,000 cases daily by end of May. So a good idea to record it here now because 1) any new measures however strict they could / would be cannot make much difference and if implemented would have mostly show effect as pretty much everything that could be closed already is; 2) the time is four to six weeks away and at that time we will have a pretty good idea how accurate the models were (are).

No avoiding this simple logic. We only need to wait a bit, and see, with our own eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The second news is that a booster vaccination for Phizer/Moderna Covid vaccine may be needed six to nine months later (Guardian).

"Initial data has shown that vaccines ... retain most of their effectiveness for at least six months though for how much longer has not been determined". That analysis did not take into account new variants.

Vaccinations began in Canada in December 2020, and it means that the six months most effective period will begin expiring in June 2021. In the current Ontario plan vaccination of general population 18 - 60 is not planned to begin before July. It means that if the rate of vaccination were to be sustained, it would need to be increased significantly to allow for booster vaccinations concurrently with the first dose ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ontario science advisory table says today they don't know how the list of preferential postal codes (114 in total) with general, 18+ vaccination was created.

It could have been a scandal, but who cared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took over a year of the pandemic and another spike in infections for the public health experts" and managers to finally admit publicly that main sources of transmission are workplaces and schools. At this rate and at some (unknown yet) point in the future they could actually begin doing something about it. Wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, myata said:

It took over a year of the pandemic and another spike in infections for the public health experts" and managers to finally admit publicly that main sources of transmission are workplaces and schools. 

That is flat out untrue. The main source is a wild mixture of what we currently call "other" which translates to "we have no idea".  After that comes "personal contacts" then "community spread". Way down from there are 'outbreak settings" which include schools, health care, work places, group living (ie, LTC and retirement residents, prisons and group homes, etc), and recreation. To put things into perspective on a particular day, close contacts and community spread make up about 2700 cases while education might make up 28 and all of outrbreak settings combined might be 280.

Likely source of infection | COVID-19 (coronavirus) in Ontario

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Argus said:

That is flat out untrue. The main source is a wild mixture of what we currently call "other" which translates to "we have no idea".  After that comes "personal contacts" then "community spread".

Not so fast, so "no idea" and "close contacts" (please check your spelling) could not happen at workplaces and schools?

And by the way, "outbreak setting" is not only workplaces, and not all workplace infections are outbreaks. For example the number may not be high enough to be reported as an outbreak but still contribute to transmission.

And this leaves "community spread" (definition): A case is considered “community spread” when someone tests positive but we cannot trace the source because the person...

Now it should be easy to understand where the infections are coming from! Two types of "we don't know", outbreaks and all have to be close contacts.

 

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, myata said:

Now it should be easy to understand where the infections are coming from! Three types of "we don't know", outbreaks and all have to be close contacts.

A pathetic and sadly laughable result for a year of effort of unknown number of overpaid bureaucrats. And we take it as acceptable and normal. And that means only that the next time around it won't be any better.

The interesting question here is though, "why". Why, if you take a random person on the street and ask them how to break down data by source of infection, they'll tell you, ok, there are workplaces, schools, gyms, restaurants, personal services, personal contacts (that includes those horror-superspreader parties), cases of infection while exercising in the open air in the park and so on. Why if you ask a first year intern to break down cases by sources that would be the table they would come up with in 99 cases out of 100. And then why did it end up looking as it looks?

How many top-paid bureaucrats had how many multi-hour meetings to produce this result with 3 types of "unknown" out of five and nothing else? What was the logic and rationale behind this "solution"? And what would the public see if the data was presented in a normal, common sense, conventional, meaningful and etc. form?

Was the intent of this exercise (at what cost to the public?) to explain and inform, or dumbfound, obfuscate and confuse? I would really like to know was there some important rationale (better news) or it's just the way things are ("travel from Wuhan") and will be (good luck to us). And good luck finding that out.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, from "travel from Wuhan" the bureaucracy appears to consistently choose methods of misleading and confusion in place of an open, transparent and honest dialogue with the society.

Lockdowns slowed down Covid

1. What are those models that never seem to produce correct results? (actually nowhere near, astronomically different from actual: for Ontario predicted up to 18,000; actual: 4,500). Where can one examine what they are, how they work and what do they do (and don't)?

2. How could a "lockdown" that is different only in the appearance from the status quo make a noticeable change?

3. Ontario has stricter lockdown than Quebec but the latter reporting significantly fewer cases (just over a thousand versus 4,500).

A reasonable if not more likely in the second year of the pandemics possibility is that waves go in cycles, and experts" have little clue how to to control them (and we have yet to see serious efforts to understand and control them). That would take smarts; serious effort; and efficiency. While for writing obscure orders a bureaucrat needs only a keyboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2021 at 7:02 AM, dialamah said:

And then complains about not getting enough information.

If you get covid "information" on TV then you must have a channel that I don't have. I just have CBC, CTV, Global and Chek where I live.

It's a mix of fear mongering, bullshit, hysteria, hyperbole, disinformation along with some Trudeau protectionism/propaganda.

I had to get my covid information from statistics on the web, stats which weren't shared by our Canadian broadcasters.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears that the daily number of Covid cases in Ontario, and likely other provinces that introduced increased restrictions around three weeks ago, are starting to plateau.  However, the death rate lags by a couple of weeks, so we may see a continued rise in the death rate for a little while.

Once the case and death rates substantially decline, hopefully by mid-May,  we should start to see the vaccination rate outpace the rate of viral transmission.  For example, if half of Ontarians are vaccinated by the end of May, then even if restrictions are lifted at that time, we should have an added 3 million people in Ontario vaccinated in June alone, bringing the province to herd immunity levels.  I'd hope that by July most restrictions are lifted and pandemic policing ends.  I can see indoor masks being required in public for unvaccinated people, but not enforced.  A similar pattern should play out nationally, and hopefully, the border reopens by late July.  Yes there will be some risk of illness after that, especially for the remaining unvaccinated, but at that point not getting a vaccine will be due to personal choice rather than insufficient supply.

The risk of complete reopening is an acceptable one at that point.  Quite simply, normal life must resume.  The costs to businesses and individual well-being at that point will outweigh the risk of Covid-related illness.  We just have to get through this third wave then ignore the fear-mongering when the time is right to reopen.  It has to happen this summer.  It will.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

It appears that the daily number of Covid cases in Ontario, and likely other provinces that introduced increased restrictions around three weeks ago, are starting to plateau.  However, the death rate lags by a couple of weeks, so we may see a continued rise in the death rate for a little while.

I would like someone to explain how the number 18,000 of projected cases documented here was arrived at. In pretty much any line of work one cannot just say this, because something tells me so. An explanation, justification and defending the arguments in critical questioning is required for any serious matter in any line of work. In most, but not all. No one yet has yet explained the rationale behind "travel from Wuhan, no problem!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, myata said:

I would like someone to explain how the number 18,000 of projected cases documented here was arrived at. In pretty much any line of work one cannot just say this, because something tells me so. An explanation, justification and defending the arguments in critical questioning is required for any serious matter in any line of work. In most, but not all. No one yet has yet explained the rationale behind "travel from Wuhan, no problem!".

And why doesn't the media even ASK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, myata said:

I would like someone to explain how the number 18,000 of projected cases documented here was arrived at. In pretty much any line of work one cannot just say this, because something tells me so. An explanation, justification and defending the arguments in critical questioning is required for any serious matter in any line of work. In most, but not all. No one yet has yet explained the rationale behind "travel from Wuhan, no problem!".

It’s was blatant propaganda and media malpractice.  It’s no wonder people start to distrust and tune out the media.  There was absolutely no scientific basis for claiming Ontario could see 18,000+ cases per day after initial restrictions were already put into place.  It’s nothing more than click bait and panic porn.  Covid is good business for cable, online and even print media.  It drives ratings.

Edited by Shady
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

And why doesn't the media even ASK?

Maybe too busy with the business of blatant propaganda, could not be distracted? Covid propaganda in, critical thinking and common sense out or so it seems.

Edited by myata
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As heard personally on CBC today, the story about prohibition of outdoor group exercise. In the words of an expert" sorry didn't catch the name, literally or very close "any gathering especially without masks can be dangerous".

Here we go again. Something is proclaimed by an expert (quote). Something is said publicly. But how true, how justified and how supported by evidence is the statement? Do experts (quote) have any responsibility to the public for the statements they make on public channels?

If so, I'd like to see the evidence that group exercise, outdoors, with sufficient spacing, with masks or otherwise, carries any noticeable increase in the risk of infection. Otherwise I'd like the experts (quote) to withdraw the blank statement(s) or qualify them with correct and meaningful conditions.

That's enough. There is common sense, there's responsibility and people aren't dumb and silent herd to drop on just about anything that may jump to the expert" mind. No, you cannot just say something, in public, and expect it to become an instant and unquestionable truth. This is not what the word means.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, myata said:

As heard personally on CBC today, the story about prohibition of outdoor group exercise. In the words of an expert" sorry didn't catch the name, literally or very close "any gathering especially without masks can be dangerous".

Here we go again. Something is proclaimed by an expert (quote). Something is said publicly. But how true, how justified and how supported by evidence is the statement? Do experts (quote) have any responsibility to the public for the statements they make on public channels?

If so, I'd like to see the evidence that group exercise, outdoors, with sufficient spacing, with masks or otherwise, carries any noticeable increase in the risk of infection. Otherwise I'd like the experts (quote) to withdraw the blank statement(s) or qualify them with correct and meaningful conditions.

 

This took me about 120 seconds to find:. https://www.utsa.edu/today/2020/09/story/covid-spread-outdoor-conditions.html

I don't know if that study has been replicated or repudiated, and have no opinion on its accuracy.  There's probably more to be found, for or against.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, myata said:

As heard personally on CBC today, the story about prohibition of outdoor group exercise. In the words of an expert" sorry didn't catch the name, literally or very close "any gathering especially without masks can be dangerous".

The Texas Rangers had 40K+ to a ball game over two weeks ago and Texas isn't blowing up right now, but that game was out in the sunlight where viruses don't spread well. 

There was a UFC event in doors in Florida, and if any event could be a super-spreader it's that one. We'll know soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The Texas Rangers had 40K+ to a ball game over two weeks ago and Texas isn't blowing up right now, but that game was out in the sunlight where viruses don't spread well. 

There was a UFC event in doors in Florida, and if any event could be a super-spreader it's that one. We'll know soon.

Didnt hear about any March-break big bumps in covid cases. We shoulda herd by now.;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, dialamah said:

This took me about 120 seconds to find:. https://www.utsa.edu/today/2020/09/story/covid-spread-outdoor-conditions.html

I don't know if that study has been replicated or repudiated, and have no opinion on its accuracy.  There's probably more to be found, for or against.  

The worth of all models is in how well they describe the reality. We had models" that predicted us 18,000 cases and in reality it was 3,500 thankfully. No another model is not the evidence just another finger in the sky, until and unless confirmed in reality. Probably millions of us were outdoors daily or almost in the last two months and how many cases could be confidently traced to being outdoors with reasonable distancing? I'm really tired of creative bullet shipping by so called experts it has to stop or the credibility of PH measures could drop below zero and it couldn't be good for anybody.

Edited by myata
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.

×
×
  • Create New...