Coronavirus: what Canadians need to know

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Nationwide, new cases have dropped slightly from May 17. I know it's too soon, but are we starting to turn the corner?

Unfortunatley the issue is mostly likely that Ontario test results are delayed by 4-6 days right now. When these catch up you will find it a different story. The material for test kits is in short supply, tests are being rationed and results are coming extremely slowly.

No -- we are unfortunately a long way from turnign the corner.

What is happening is that governments of all parties are taking this seriously and governments in Canada seem to be doing mostly a decent job now after delays at the start. I think there is a sense across party lines that the population wants, needs, expects governments to rise to this.

Our system is over-burdened but there is a sense of increased awareness of the need to be careful and to support each other.

Another drastic drop for new cases today nationwide, with no new cases in Manitoba reported at this time.

This post is quite scary, but I still hope that these numbers are actually showing good news.

We are nowhere near the end of this. Trying to get through to a hot line for information on the virus and testing is an accomplishment. When you try in BC you get a automatic message to go a website because it is so busy. If you click a characteristic of the disease, it refers you back to the phone number that just told you to phone. My next door neighbour is an emergency room doctor who that most hospital staff do not only do they not have enough personal protective equipment. Furthermore, they are wondering they are only testing those who are highly likely to test positive because they are quite sick since they are in danger of running out of swabs to do the test. I have heard of similar problems in getting through to provincial  hotlines in Ontario and New Brunswick. 

In other words, the number of people tested every day is nowhere near the number of the number of people who have the virus and using these numbers as an indication of when the virus peaks is foolish.

Governor Newsom of California has he expects 27 million people (out of California's 40 million) to become infected and therefore is ordering the entire state population to stay home in the United States' strictest lockdown.

 Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday ordered California's nearly 40 million residents to stay home, making it the first state to impose that strict mandate on all residents to counteract a looming surge of new infections.

The order takes effect immediately and remains in place "until further notice." Californians are not allowed to leave home except for essential purposes. They are allowed to purchase groceries, prescriptions and health care, as well as commute to jobs deemed essential.

The governor's order comes with misdemeanor penalties for anyone who violates the restrictions, though he said he believes social pressure will keep people home rather than law enforcement.

“There’s a social contract here,” Newsom said. “People, I think, recognize the need to do more and meet his moment.”

https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/03/19/newsom-order...

jerrym wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Nationwide, new cases have dropped slightly from May 17. I know it's too soon, but are we starting to turn the corner?

Unfortunatley the issue is mostly likely that Ontario test results are delayed by 4-6 days right now. When these catch up you will find it a different story. The material for test kits is in short supply, tests are being rationed and results are coming extremely slowly.

No -- we are unfortunately a long way from turnign the corner.

What is happening is that governments of all parties are taking this seriously and governments in Canada seem to be doing mostly a decent job now after delays at the start. I think there is a sense across party lines that the population wants, needs, expects governments to rise to this.

Our system is over-burdened but there is a sense of increased awareness of the need to be careful and to support each other.

Another drastic drop for new cases today nationwide, with no new cases in Manitoba reported at this time.

This post is quite scary, but I still hope that these numbers are actually showing good news.

We are nowhere near the end of this. Trying to get through to a hot line for information on the virus and testing is an accomplishment. When you try in BC you get a automatic message to go a website because it is so busy. If you click a characteristic of the disease, it refers you back to the phone number that just told you to phone. My next door neighbour is an emergency room doctor who that most hospital staff do not only do they not have enough personal protective equipment. Furthermore, they are wondering they are only testing those who are highly likely to test positive because they are quite sick since they are in danger of running out of swabs to do the test. I have heard of similar problems in getting through to provincial  hotlines in Ontario and New Brunswick. 

In other words, the number of people tested every day is nowhere near the number of the number of people who have the virus and using these numbers as an indication of when the virus peaks is foolish.

I'm sorry, but continuing the way things are now over the long term is not in any way realistic. People's lives have been upended, and they're not going to respond well to being told to stay home and not go out for months on end. There are already reports of people disobeying the quarantine in Italy. Also, with people stuck at home, we are very likely to see a spike in problems like depression, domestic violence, and suicide. Surely there must be a way to strike a middle ground where we can identify and stop these threats without shutting everything down every time they come up?

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

 

Missing in the above is the number tested as the number of cases is a function of the number tested. So percentage of cases of the number tested gives a better idea of the outbreak than comparing cases by pop between countries with different depths of testing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_testing

Manitoba is now under a State of Emergency, no new covid cases reported as of 11:30.

bekayne wrote:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/norway/

Norway has tested at a higher rate than even South Korea.

And in spite of a mini-spike today, they look to have already flattened their curve, with their first reported case apparently happening relatively later than many other countries.

NDPP wrote:

Asleep At The Wheel: Why Didn't Western Politicians Act Quicker On COVID-19

https://t.co/GwgMdghOpU?amp=1

"The question we should all be asking: Why were flights from China and then Italy, not shut down as soon as they began mass quarantine?"

 

False Claims About The Coronavirus And How To Debunk Them

https://t.co/6oy8GFqz4F?amp=1

"Here are some of the false claims that are made about the pandemic and the facts needed to debunk this."

 

Toronto Drop-In Network

https://tdin.ca/announcement.php?id=2127

COVID-19 guidance and resources

 

I think the reason is in part the desire to act moderately. Problem is the virus is moving too quickly. Each action the governments wait for it to be justified (not an over reaction) only to find that justification comes with it being already too late. The is where they should have been using a safety first principle risking an over reaction to get ahead of the virus. Very, very few governments have responded in this way.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I'm sorry, but continuing the way things are now over the long term is not in any way realistic. People's lives have been upended, and they're not going to respond well to being told to stay home and not go out for months on end. There are already reports of people disobeying the quarantine in Italy. Also, with people stuck at home, we are very likely to see a spike in problems like depression, domestic violence, and suicide. Surely there must be a way to strike a middle ground where we can identify and stop these threats without shutting everything down every time they come up?

Unfortunately there is no middle ground -- despite the truth of much of what you are saying here. 

what we are doing now is not sustainable but nor is a return to the way things were before. Middle ground compromise would only prolong the agony and increase the deaths.

One thing we do not know is if this will have seasonal mutation. In other words can it infect next year despite an immune response to the present infection. This would be very bad news.

However, if not there is the possibility that with social distancing that we can have enough people imune and enough apart that the disease runs out of hosts. This is why they make estimates of 30-70% of populations getting infected.

I do not know what things will be devised to mitigate this. Some people will opt to stay home with some supports or with minimal trips out for supplies - if they witness people dying. Humans have a great capacity to survive once reality sets in.

The problems of depression, domestic violence and suicide are very real threats. I think this will be a very serious problem even if it has not emerged. Abandoning safety could even come from the mental distress -- that people may knowingly give up their safety because they cannot stand it.

I have been speaking about my other fear -- as this goes on the other untreated conditions will threaten more and more lives as healthcare is rationed.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I'm sorry, but continuing the way things are now over the long term is not in any way realistic. People's lives have been upended, and they're not going to respond well to being told to stay home and not go out for months on end. There are already reports of people disobeying the quarantine in Italy. Also, with people stuck at home, we are very likely to see a spike in problems like depression, domestic violence, and suicide. Surely there must be a way to strike a middle ground where we can identify and stop these threats without shutting everything down every time they come up?

Unfortunately there is no middle ground -- despite the truth of much of what you are saying here. 

what we are doing now is not sustainable but nor is a return to the way things were before. Middle ground compromise would only prolong the agony and increase the deaths.

One thing we do not know is if this will have seasonal mutation. In other words can it infect next year despite an immune response to the present infection. This would be very bad news.

However, if not there is the possibility that with social distancing that we can have enough people imune and enough apart that the disease runs out of hosts. This is why they make estimates of 30-70% of populations getting infected.

I do not know what things will be devised to mitigate this. Some people will opt to stay home with some supports or with minimal trips out for supplies - if they witness people dying. Humans have a great capacity to survive once reality sets in.

The problems of depression, domestic violence and suicide are very real threats. I think this will be a very serious problem even if it has not emerged. Abandoning safety could even come from the mental distress -- that people may knowingly give up their safety because they cannot stand it.

I have been speaking about my other fear -- as this goes on the other untreated conditions will threaten more and more lives as healthcare is rationed.

What happens if what we're seeing in Italy triggers a more coercive response from the state, and then people continue to rebel, and this thing escalates?

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

One thing we do not know is if this will have seasonal mutation. In other words can it infect next year despite an immune response to the present infection. This would be very bad news.

Would that necessarily be the case? Viral mutations in many cases tend to be less lethal over time simply because it's not in the virus' best interest to kill its host if it wants to continue reproducing. It might change into something like the flu, which we've all learned to live with. With a few small exceptions, we don't shut things down during flu season. Even the H1N1 pandemic of 2009, which reached the highest level declared by the WHO, didn't cause nearly this much disruption. Neither did SARS, which incidentally is part of the same viral family as covid 19.

This gets into a philosophical situation. I get that in the moment, extreme measures need to be taken. Should they become the norm, especially if there might be a way to head off the infection so it doesn't become so bad, as happened with H1N1? If you don't get to do anything, or if your moves are very restricted, is it worth anything even if you are safe? Take the example of a store or a gas station. People often rob those places with weapons. If you mandated that anyone entering had to submit to a full strip and body cavity search, that would virtually guarantee that there were no store robberies at all. I think few, if any, of us would be willing to defend that level of intrusive security. I know that's an extreme example, but that gets to an important philosophical conversation that I feel is very important to discuss at some point, if not right now.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

One thing we do not know is if this will have seasonal mutation. In other words can it infect next year despite an immune response to the present infection. This would be very bad news.

Would that necessarily be the case? Viral mutations in many cases tend to be less lethal over time simply because it's not in the virus' best interest to kill its host if it wants to continue reproducing. It might change into something like the flu, which we've all learned to live with. With a few small exceptions, we don't shut things down during flu season. Even the H1N1 pandemic of 2009, which reached the highest level declared by the WHO, didn't cause nearly this much disruption. Neither did SARS, which incidentally is part of the same viral family as covid 19.

This gets into a philosophical situation. I get that in the moment, extreme measures need to be taken. Should they become the norm, especially if there might be a way to head off the infection so it doesn't become so bad, as happened with H1N1? If you don't get to do anything, or if your moves are very restricted, is it worth anything even if you are safe? Take the example of a store or a gas station. People often rob those places with weapons. If you mandated that anyone entering had to submit to a full strip and body cavity search, that would virtually guarantee that there were no store robberies at all. I think few, if any, of us would be willing to defend that level of intrusive security. I know that's an extreme example, but that gets to an important philosophical conversation that I feel is very important to discuss at some point, if not right now.

I understand your point. I do not know if anyone could answer your question. We do not know if it will come back and we do not know if it will come back mutated to get around immunity or if it does if it will be as lethal or less.

I also understand your second point -- although I think the answer is that we would adapt to have other ways of doing things. Like having toothpics to press elevator buttons or whatever. At the moment we have to take extreme measures until either the thing goes or we develop safe adaptations.

One of the most important ones is around testing. Once testing becomes quick easy and routine we may be able to secure spaces and quarantine only those with the virus until it cannot get at healthy hosts. 

How many months before we adapt or it goes away is unclear -- and how much damage it does as well.

This is why flattening the curve makes a difference as a delay all things being equal is not a prevention but if things change in terms of adaptation or if the virus ends then a delay could be preventative.

Interesting article here on the source but also the prognosis of this virus:

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-lab.html

Imagine if China didn't work so hard the first few months to suppress information about this and down play it like it wasn't a big deal?

And imagine if the WHO, the "experts", seen through China's BS and took this hyper seriously from the start?

Imagine if Canada and the US reacted more agressively to contain this?

It's nice to see to see the government getting serious about this including arresting positive citizens for ignoring orders to remain inside. One year ago the suggestion of the government doing that would have made people scream and loose their minds. Police state. Now we're worried about food, toilet paper and paying rent.

China's helping people and that's great. Their shitty behavior when this started hurt the world. No point in "going after them" as you say but maybe in the future countries first reaction won't be to deny and hide and waste valuable time. There's some really great lessons to be learned here.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I for one am glad that the Chinese people, through the actions of their government, have been so generous with shipping supplies to the hardest hit, unprepared countries in Europe.

I think many others feel this way.

Italians have been shocked after appealing to the EU to get borders slammed in their faces and needed supplies banned from export to another EU country. The fact that China responded at least one report form Italy I saw was that they will remember who their friends really are.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I for one am glad that the Chinese people, through the actions of their government, have been so generous with shipping supplies to the hardest hit, unprepared countries in Europe.

I think many others feel this way.

Italians have been shocked after appealing to the EU to get borders slammed in their faces and needed supplies banned from export to another EU country. The fact that China responded at least one report form Italy I saw was that they will remember who their friends really are.

You can still have large scale travel bans and border closures while making exceptions for things like medical equpiment and allowing medical personnel to move around between global hotspots.

Absolutely