Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Part VIII - The Long Winter is Here

[kb]

I agree with this.

I see a lot of people walking around with horrible masks, many of them already proven not to prevent anything.

And yes, you can use a surgical mask for up to 8 hours, which is a lot of time.

Problem is this.....it's only use is for fluids, and does little to nothing for airborne particles.

 

[Clark4Ever]

Private gatherings have been and continue to be the primary source of community spread.

The targeted lockdowns throughout the province are not going to have the desired effect. People need to be responsible in their own homes.

 

[kb]

Private gatherings have been and continue to be the primary source of community spread.

The targeted lockdowns throughout the province are not going to have the desired effect. People need to be responsible in their own homes.

Or don't force lockdowns that are scientifically proven to be the main cause of spread?

 

[stealth1]

Private gatherings have been and continue to be the primary source of community spread.

The targeted lockdowns throughout the province are not going to have the desired effect. People need to be responsible in their own homes.

They need to start coming down hard on these people for not being responsible.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Private gatherings have been and continue to be the primary source of community spread.

The targeted lockdowns throughout the province are not going to have the desired effect. People need to be responsible in their own homes.

This is next to impossible to achieve. If you have 5 people in your house you are reliant on 4 other people making responsible decisions all day all da time. All it takes is one going to rink to skate, one going to gym to work out or one talking to popeye's driver for takeout and boom your house mates have it. Think about it there are many interactions each of us has every day. You have to stop talking, wear masks all da time and avoid people like da plague to be totally secure. I don't think it is at all realistic. Like I said it comes down to bad luck and just talking to someone who is asymptomatic. People who look sick well that one is easy you avoid avoid avoid.

 

[Gabriel426]

This is next to impossible to achieve. If you have 5 people in your house you are reliant on 4 other people making responsible decisions all day all da time. All it takes is one going to rink to skate, one going to gym to work out or one talking to popeye's driver for takeout and boom your house mates have it. Think about it there are many interactions each of us has every day. You have to stop talking, wear masks all da time and avoid people like da plague to be totally secure. I don't think it is at all realistic. Like I said it comes down to bad luck and just talking to someone who is asymptomatic. People who look sick well that one is easy you avoid avoid avoid.

I think there is a misconception out there about private gathering, as COVID don't go, hey, there's a private party of 15 people, I am going to join in....At least one person at the gathering is a carrier of COVID and it is like you said down to bad luck.
This is something I have been pushing my kids school to do even before COVID, which is to have temp., check before the kids entering the school, as if they have fever, they need to send the kids home. They are certainly doing that now.

 

[kb]

I think there is a misconception out there about private gathering, as COVID don't go, hey, there's a private party of 15 people, I am going to join in....At least one person at the gathering is a carrier of COVID and it is like you said down to bad luck.
This is something I have been pushing my kids school to do even before COVID, which is to have temp., check before the kids entering the school, as if they have fever, they need to send the kids home. They are certainly doing that now.

The real science is saying that it likely takes as much as 10 to 30 minutes of direct exposure to someone exhibiting symptoms for one to become infected. Studies have shown 80% of transmission occurs at home, and the most of the rest happens in very confined spaces with significant exposure time - like on public transportation. The safest place to be is outdoors.

So what is the true purpose of a lockdown?

 

[PromisedLand]

 

[Sens]

I just took my wife to the mall

If not for masks I would not believe we are in a pandemic

 

[DopeyFish]

Problem is this.....it's only use is for fluids, and does little to nothing for airborne particles.

View attachment 377889

right and wrong

the mask isn't really for your protection, it's for protection of others so even if you might be an asymptomatic carrier, something like 97% of viral particles will be caught in a regular surgical mask.

regular surgical masks are almost as good as N95 for protection.

the reason why masks aren't really good for self protection is because the virus can enter through your eyes. Masks are less personal protection and more community protection. it's a combined effort of mitigation.

 

[PromisedLand]

is this report from March?

this report was posted on Dec 1st as a new whistle blower from China

 

[kb]

right and wrong

the mask isn't really for your protection, it's for protection of others so even if you might be an asymptomatic carrier, something like 97% of viral particles will be caught in a regular surgical mask.

regular surgical masks are almost as good as N95 for protection.

the reason why masks aren't really good for self protection is because the virus can enter through your eyes. Masks are less personal protection and more community protection. it's a combined effort of mitigation.

That's if you believe that this isn't airborne. Basically, if it is airborne, it does relatively little in either direction because of leakage and the fact it can't filter small particles. That's from the manufacturer themselves. It's meant to protect against fluids.

 

[Jojalu]

The real science is saying that it likely takes as much as 10 to 30 minutes of direct exposure to someone exhibiting symptoms for one to become infected. Studies have shown 80% of transmission occurs at home, and the most of the rest happens in very confined spaces with significant exposure time - like on public transportation. The safest place to be is outdoors.

So what is the true purpose of a lockdown?

Where are you getting your numbers from?

The latest numbers they have showed 8% cqme from restaurants/ bars/ gyms ( which is pretty low and makes zero sense why we shut them down)

25% from hospitals and LTC, 23% from industrial workplaces, 21% from schools and daycares.

Outdoors is 100% the safeat place to be, but almost everything we do is indoors

 

[kb]

Where are you getting your numbers from?

The latest numbers they have showed 8% cqme from restaurants/ bars/ gyms ( which is pretty low and makes zero sense why we shut them down)

25% from hospitals and LTC, 23% from industrial workplaces, 21% from schools and daycares.

Outdoors is 100% the safeat place to be, but almost everything we do is indoors

I believe those are numbers are fundamentally correct - but those numbers are with regards to pinpointing the 'point of origin'.

This is talking about where the majority of spread occurs. Absolutely, outdoors is the safest place to be. But we have lockdown rules and curfews that basically are creating (or at least exascerbating) most of the issues.

And as we can see, these are also the things we never shut down (except restaurants/ bars/ gyms). So lockdowns really are targeting one sector, the small businesses for the most part, and really what they are doing flies directly in the face of science. Forcing people indoors in very close proximity is just asking for more issues.

 

[Mickey Marner]

I believe those are numbers are fundamentally correct - but those numbers are with regards to pinpointing the 'point of origin'.

This is talking about where the majority of spread occurs. Absolutely, outdoors is the safest place to be. But we have lockdown rules and curfews that basically are creating (or at least exascerbating) most of the issues.

And as we can see, these are also the things we never shut down (except restaurants/ bars/ gyms). So lockdowns really are targeting one sector, the small businesses for the most part, and really what they are doing flies directly in the face of science. Forcing people indoors in very close proximity is just asking for more issues.

Indeed. A lot of the mandates/restrictions were selected conclusions. Subsequently the attempt has been to work backwards from those conclusions to prove that they work, rather than working towards the conclusion progressively. Working backwards inhibits discovering whether the selected conclusions were true/false or positive/negative factors. Ironically, this highly unscientific methodology, features continual appeals to authority from the selected members of the scientific community.

 

[Gabriel426]

The real science is saying that it likely takes as much as 10 to 30 minutes of direct exposure to someone exhibiting symptoms for one to become infected. Studies have shown 80% of transmission occurs at home, and the most of the rest happens in very confined spaces with significant exposure time - like on public transportation. The safest place to be is outdoors.

So what is the true purpose of a lockdown?

1. COVID don’t organically infect when there are more than a certain numbers of people inside a home or indoor space. If that’s the case, there would have been no NHL Bubble.
2. Someone contracted the virus some where and brought it home and it spreads. At the same time, another person could have contracted the virus at the same place and brought it to their homes.
3. Would a lockdown help, I would have to say yes, bc it limits people visiting public places. Even if people have private gatherings at their home, as long as they are not roaming around town, it will probably be safe like players and staff in the NHL bubble.

Having said all that, I really don’t want to go into lockdown as personally, my business is barely surviving. What I want to see is a better and more effective way of contact tracing.

 

[kb]

Indeed. A lot of the mandates/restrictions were selected conclusions. Subsequently the attempt has been to work backwards from those conclusions to prove that they work, rather than working towards the conclusion progressively. Working backwards inhibits discovering whether the selected conclusions were true/false or positive/negative factors. Ironically, this highly unscientific methodology, features continual appeals to authority from the selected members of the scientific community.

This is very well said. Unfortunately, the proliferation of this to the point where it is very difficult to separate fact from fiction. Add in the ongoing hard line censorship, real studies/data/information is much harder to find than ever.

 

[Gabriel426]

Indeed. A lot of the mandates/restrictions were selected conclusions. Subsequently the attempt has been to work backwards from those conclusions to prove that they work, rather than working towards the conclusion progressively. Working backwards inhibits discovering whether the selected conclusions were true/false or positive/negative factors. Ironically, this highly unscientific methodology, features continual appeals to authority from the selected members of the scientific community.

That’s a really good point. I really think the govt are just throwing mud to the wall and hope it sticks

 

[kb]

1. COVID don’t organically infect when there are more than a certain numbers of people inside a home or indoor space. If that’s the case, there would have been no NHL Bubble.
2. Someone contracted the virus some where and brought it home and it spreads. At the same time, another person could have contracted the virus at the same place and brought it to their homes.
3. Would a lockdown help, I would have to say yes, bc it limits people visiting public places. Even if people have private gatherings at their home, as long as they are not roaming around town, it will probably be safe like players and staff in the NHL bubble.

Having said all that, I really don’t want to go into lockdown as personally, my business is barely surviving. What I want to see is a better and more effective way of contact tracing.

Lockdowns only work in bubbles where there is no infection and no one able to move freely.

Look at what lockdowns do. They force greater numbers of people into far fewer areas, making it far more likely to get it than to prevent it. Probably the dumbest thing anyone could advise the public to do. Now couple that with ineffective masks and no real ability to stay far enough away from each (6' had no scientific basis other than for droplets...but relatively useless against airborne particles), and we get what we are seeing today. The long term extension of a pandemic that (curiously enough) has not led to any excess mortality above any other recent years.

 

[GQS]

Outside of Toronto and Peel everything is open. No it's not like it was before Covid but there has to be limits on how many people are allowed to go into a business. IMO as soon as the numbers started rising the whole province should have been locked down again. This regional approach doesn't work. I'm in Niagara and the amount of GTA people I see here is bad. The point of a lockdown is that if you live in a lockdown area you don't travel out of it.

When will people learn that lockdowns DON'T WORK unless you have ideal conditions in most cases? When you have a few hundred thousand or a few million people to manage and your nation is relatively isolated? Sure a lockdown could be effective in keeping the spread low. But when you have to manage tens of millions of people in a large country, with a diverse population and especially when its connected to other countries? Yeah goodluck with that.

The goal that our government and medical experts should've set from the beginning should have been to protect the most sick and vulnerable. Here's an example of one of a few dozen long term care homes that took very early action BEFORE the government told them to do anything and as a result they're STILL covid and virus death free during the whole pandemic and CTV just did an update on this specific LTC home today.

Residents, staff and families of a Richmond Hill, Ont. nursing home are crediting the facility's ability to stay COVID-19 free with the CEO's early adoption of many safety measures.

While many seniors’ homes have grappled with outbreaks of the novel coronavirus over the past few months, those connected to Mariann Home are singing the praises of Bernard Boreland.

How this Ontario long-term care home managed to stay COVID-19 free

THIS is what the Ontario government and the rest of Canada should've done from the VERY BEGINNING once it was clear which groups of people were most affected. Instead they kept going insane over rising cases instead of focusing on the people who needed help the most and as a result they suffered the worse. Heck they're still doing it now even after having months to prepare for spikes in cases like we're seeing now.

A lockdown wasn't necessary and if everyone had followed the lead of those LTC homes that took early measures to protect their patients, we could've saved thousands of lives without screwing our entire country over this virus, but nope all our leaders and experts were and still are MORONS who prefer to simply nuke the whole country rather than taking a targeted approach.

 

[GQS]

I think it's closer to 700 with 200 in ICU which is pretty close to March/ April but I agree with what you are saying.

Out of curiousity, what is your take on why hopsitalizions hav,t risen to first wave levels?

I think it mainly has to do with the fact that many of new cases recently are happening among healthier people and being that they're more capable of handling the virus, that's keeping hospital cases lower than the first wave as well as the number of deaths. Back in March, April, May etc. the virus was killing the absolute least healthy people and with fewer of those people for the virus to take this time around as well as better measures being taken, I don't think we're going to ever see thousands of hospital cases as our supposed 'medical experts' neverendingly predicted would happen, but NEVER EVER DID.

How many more times do our leaders and experts have to be wrong with their predictions and constant daily fearmongering before people finally lose trust in them?? Its crazy how many times they've been wrong and yet people still take their word as being gospel. Must be nice to constantly predict how bad things are going to get and when it doesn't come even remotely close to true you can just reset and say 'it hasn't happened yet, but its going to in the next few weeks if we don't take all these precautions' over and over again.

Contrast this to the entire continent of Africa who's only just now gone past 52,000 virus deaths out of their 1.2+ BILLION population. Does anyone seriously believe African nations are handling the pandemic so much better than western countries have? Does anyone seriously believe African countries have even a fraction of resources to throw at this virus that western countries do? Of course not and yet even without doing probably even half of what we're doing, their number of deaths are still so low for such a massive population.

Again I'll say that's because of how young and largely healthy most of Africa's population is that covid doesn't have a really old and sick population to feast now like it does in the west. It just boggles my mind that with all this data out there that our leaders and experts STILL can't get it right after all this time.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

When will people learn that lockdowns DON'T WORK unless you have ideal conditions in most cases? When you have a few hundred thousand or a few million people to manage and your nation is relatively isolated? Sure a lockdown could be effective in keeping the spread low. But when you have to manage tens of millions of people in a large country, with a diverse population and especially when its connected to other countries? Yeah goodluck with that.

The goal that our government and medical experts should've set from the beginning should have been to protect the most sick and vulnerable. Here's an example of one of a few dozen long term care homes that took very early action BEFORE the government told them to do anything and as a result they're STILL covid and virus death free during the whole pandemic and CTV just did an update on this specific LTC home today.



How this Ontario long-term care home managed to stay COVID-19 free

THIS is what the Ontario government and the rest of Canada should've done from the VERY BEGINNING once it was clear which groups of people were most affected. Instead they kept going insane over rising cases instead of focusing on the people who needed help the most and as a result they suffered the worse. Heck they're still doing it now even after having months to prepare for spikes in cases like we're seeing now.

A lockdown wasn't necessary and if everyone had followed the lead of those LTC homes that took early measures to protect their patients, we could've saved thousands of lives without screwing our entire country over this virus, but nope all our leaders and experts were and still are MORONS who prefer to simply nuke the whole country rather than taking a targeted approach.

Been saying this for many months now. Protect the vulnerable.

 

[Pink Mist]

Lockdowns only work in bubbles where there is no infection and no one able to move freely.

Look at what lockdowns do. They force greater numbers of people into far fewer areas, making it far more likely to get it than to prevent it. Probably the dumbest thing anyone could advise the public to do. Now couple that with ineffective masks and no real ability to stay far enough away from each (6' had no scientific basis other than for droplets...but relatively useless against airborne particles), and we get what we are seeing today. The long term extension of a pandemic that (curiously enough) has not led to any excess mortality above any other recent years.

You keep making this claim, but I don't really see how you come to the conclusion that lockdowns increase the spread.

 

[kb]

You keep making this claim, but I don't really see how you come to the conclusion that lockdowns increase the spread.

Logic is a cool thing. I like to use it.

Lockdowns cause sick people to infect those they live with or come into close proximity to, especially if they have minimal symptoms like 99+% of cases do.

And lockdowns limit where people can go, via restrictions and closings, so everyone goes to the very same places and it spreads there.

I mean, it's not hard to grasp.

 

[Nineteen67]

this report was posted on Dec 1st as a new whistle blower from China

We heard a lot of this stuff way back when.