Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Part X

[GQS]

the rapid testing is a game changer. But until then, workers going home and interacting in the community would bring danger to the doors.

protecting the vulnerable required reducing community and close contact spread.

Simply not having people working at multiple LTCs, having enough stocks of PPE available from the beginning of the pandemic and not allowing any non-personal into the homes could've drastically changed the outcomes that we saw during the 1st wave even before implementing anything more advanced.

 

[GQS]

can we be factual? Outside of gyms and ski hills and a few other exceptions, all businesses remain open for delivery, curbside and online shopping.

I fear we play up the “lockdown”

So the entire tourism industry that requires people to be physically present in and around their facilities can totally survive on delivery, curbside and online shopping? Theatres, spas, salons and barbershops and any other business that needs people to be at their business can survive on delivery and curbside? Many restaurants and bars wouldn't be in dire straits or already have gone out of business if they could survive on deliveries and curbside pickups alone.

And for many other small businesses even if they do have an online presence, how many will actually be able to compete with massive corporations like Amazon assuming that people even know that you exist?

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Simply not having people working at multiple LTCs, having enough stocks of PPE available from the beginning of the pandemic and not allowing any non-personal into the homes could've drastically changed the outcomes that we saw during the 1st wave even before implementing anything more advanced.

How much you wanna bet people are still working at multiple LTC centres?

 

[Pookie]

I didn't say shutdown, I said lockdown.

Further to my point, I think it's much safer to have people out occupying their time in environments that have safety protocols enforced than the current state of affairs.

As for the ski hills, Ontario is the only province in Canada to have taken it to such an extreme, and it is absurd.

Right, I asked you to stop using the word lockdown... not shutdown.

Either word creates a false choice supposedly between protection and a complete lockdown of society.

We are not doing either well.

Protection:
The truth is, we have created health guidelines BUT we have clearly not enforced them. ANYONE traveling for recreational purposes, going over household limits, not wearing masks, not distancing... should get maximum fines and all proceeds used to subsidize economic relief efforts.

Lockdown:
On the other side of the coin, to say we are locked down is absurd. Today, I went to Loblaws, the Beer Store, Staples and Starbucks. While I shovel my own driveway, my neighbours have contracted with small businesses to clear theirs. Those folks were working this morning. As was city owned snow removal contractors. Our blue boxes are out as the city's contracted waste management company will pick up our stuff. Boxes full after Christmas spending on retail and Chinese Food take away that we ordered on New Years. We drove by delivery trucks and I plan to order a book from Chapters this afternoon.

It's best to acknowledge where we are without creating the illusion of extremes.

 

[blueberrie]

This chart and these numbers have already been explained when you posted it last, you're missing the forest for the trees

can I get a link to the page number so I can read the discussion?

can’t dig into the numbers until tonight

 

[Pookie]

So the entire tourism industry that requires people to be physically present in and around their facilities can totally survive on delivery, curbside and online shopping? Theatres, spas, salons and barbershops and any other business that needs people to be at their business can survive on delivery and curbside? Many restaurants and bars wouldn't be in dire straits or already have gone out of business if they could survive on deliveries and curbside pickups alone.

And for many other small businesses even if they do have an online presence, how many will actually be able to compete with massive corporations like Amazon assuming that people even know that you exist?

Over half of Amazon's revenue comes from 3rd party sellers, mainly small businesses. Many of whom use Amazon's infrastructure for fulfillment.

80% of these 3rd party sellers are profitable in the first year.

As for tourism dependent industries, yes they will suffer. Because of the pandemic. Not because of any restrictions. Lift restrictions and you'd be willing to take a cruise right now? Their path to prosperity unfortunately has to go through the path of restrictions.

And personal services will suffer too. This is a sad fact of life in a depression. These services are not considered essential and would fall into the the economic category of discretionary/luxury services. We should be doing everything possible to mitigate the economic impact to these businesses.

At the same time, the government should be investing in alternatives such as vaccine production, transportation, storage and the like to provide alternatives to people who want to work and who can provide services that would be in much more demand than a hot stone massage.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

Ah, so lockdown for the elderly and vulnerable but not for you because it's too damaging for you. How selfish

I don’t understand how this is “selfish”. The elderly and vulnerable were going to be protected regardless. No one is going to take grams to a restaurant for her 85th birthday, nor will she be out doing groceries during this time. Lockdown or no lockdown.

 

[Pookie]

Are there any stats that show how many healthcare workers at LTC homes bring the virus home to their families? Of course in the cases where they do, it will be their and their families own fault for not wearing masks and social distancing while at home.

I'm not aware of any stats for that. I'm sure that it would exist through contract tracing but I haven't seen any. Sorry dude.

 

[Confucius]

How much you wanna bet people are still working at multiple LTC centres?

Not only at other LTCH's but at businesses that have nothing to do with healthcare. Just because a part-time worker can get full-time hours now, it doesn't mean they are going to quit another job where they may have been employed for years. Maybe their real desire is to gain full-time work in their other type of work. If they had to choose maybe LTC homes would have even less workers.

 

[Pookie]

Simply not having people working at multiple LTCs, having enough stocks of PPE available from the beginning of the pandemic and not allowing any non-personal into the homes could've drastically changed the outcomes that we saw during the 1st wave even before implementing anything more advanced.

We had a global PPE shortage.

You also had a US President that was fighting with 3M to not ship mask out of the USA.

And a little known issue was that there was a directive from the White House that would have shut down ALL PPE (gloves, masks, gowns, face shields, etc) to shipping outside the USA.

But executives from health care manufacturers, distributors, Provincial leaders like Ford and national leaders like Trudeau stepped up and lobbied HARD to avert that. That directive came on a Thursday. And by Saturday, Mexico and Canada were granted exemptions.

I've got a copy of a Press Release we were ready to send to explain to Canadians that the PPE situation was going to get worse as a result of US Protectionism.

 

[Pookie]

How much you wanna bet people are still working at multiple LTC centres?

I wouldn't take that bet.

I can tell you that in places like Quebec, it's even worse. On some shifts, they only have 2 nurses showing up to work with 20+ residents. They will take help wherever they can get it.

People laying in bed, not being moved and developing pressure injuries (bed sores). Laying in their own urine and feces. It's absolutely horrible.

 

[Pink Mist]

can I get a link to the page number so I can read the discussion?

can’t dig into the numbers until tonight

It was in the previous thread. But the quick summary is that patient days in ICU are up drastically (which means your average patient is staying in the ICU longer), and the occupancy rate is only lower because we've made more beds available. Depending on the ICU to maintain these levels is not a long-term solution since ICU patients require more intensive care (1 to 1 patient to nurse ratio) and the nurses require months of specialized training and can't be simply rotated in from other units in the hospital. And COVID patients require additional attention and isolation as they are infectious disease patients. So while the ICU occupancy level may be the same as in other years (due to increased bed availability, for now) we need mitigation measures outside of the hospital to ensure we reduce the number of COVID patients so that we don't increase the strain on our ICU and hospital system. This is something you want to do preemptively, you don't wait for the ICU numbers to raise to a concerning place before you take action

 

[Confucius]

I wouldn't take that bet.

I can tell you that in places like Quebec, it's even worse. On some shifts, they only have 2 nurses showing up to work with 20+ residents. They will take help wherever they can get it.

People laying in bed, not being moved and developing pressure injuries (bed sores). Laying in their own urine and feces. It's absolutely horrible.

Similar to jury duty, I wonder what public reaction would be to a government directive. It's your turn to do two weeks service.

 

[Pookie]

Similar to jury duty, I wonder what public reaction would be to a government directive. It's your turn to do two weeks service.

I'd be fine with that. Especially with the number of unemployed we have. A few anti-maskers might have a change of opinion when they see the suffering.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

On the subject of masks:

Were the Chinese/Korean/Japanese people better prepared for something that we didn't know/didn't care about this entire time?

Or are they paranoid people?

Western Culture used to insult these people for wearing these things on their face.

Their economies and public health are in good to great shape...

Ours is on the brink of bankruptcy.

Were they right and were we wrong, and with malice?

As you say, China is among the east Asian countries that mask up during any hint of a pandemic. And that's what happened in Wuhan. When Covid was but a mere rumor on wechat, the people became terrified, and they masked up. Everyone. Two months later things were so bad they literally forced everyone under house arrest. So clearly mask wearing didn't accomplish much, if anything.

Japan, Taiwan, etc... well, they were MUCH better at border control. They closed borders very very early, and were much more efficient at quarantining/testing citizens who were returning. So there's no real evidence that masks helped at those locations. We know as a fact they didn't help (in the slightest) in wuhan though.

Other anecdotal evidence would be the lock-downs in NA. In March/April, masks weren't common place yet. Very few people were wearing them. The cdc was advising common people to not wear them. Yet cases in most of NA remained very VERY low.

Compare that to similar lock-downs starting in October/November. Literally EVERYONE is masked up. Other than a few viral videos on the internet, I quite literally NEVER see anyone maskless. Ever. Yet most places are at peak high's of covid cases. How does that make any sense?

And as I keep saying, this isn't "science vs anti-science". The scientific community is much more divided than the media makes it out to be. They're all in consensus that masks help (at least a little) regarding droplets. But masks don't help in the slightest against aerosols. The debate (which is far from consensus right now) is how much covid spreads via droplets/aerosols.

 

[Pookie]

As you say, China is among the east Asian countries that mask up during any hint of a pandemic. And that's what happened in Wuhan. When Covid was but a mere rumor on wechat, the people became terrified, and they masked up. Everyone. Two months later things were so bad they literally forced everyone under house arrest. So clearly mask wearing didn't accomplish much, if anything.

Japan, Taiwan, etc... well, they were MUCH better at border control. They closed borders very very early, and were much more efficient at quarantining/testing citizens who were returning. So there's no real evidence that masks helped at those locations. We know as a fact they didn't help (in the slightest) in wuhan though.

Other anecdotal evidence would be the lock-downs in NA. In March/April, masks weren't common place yet. Very few people were wearing them. The cdc was advising common people to not wear them. Yet cases in most of NA remained very VERY low.

Compare that to similar lock-downs starting in October/November. Literally EVERYONE is masked up. Other than a few viral videos on the internet, I quite literally NEVER see anyone maskless. Ever. Yet most places are at peak high's of covid cases. How does that make any sense?

And as I keep saying, this isn't "science vs anti-science". The scientific community is much more divided than the media makes it out to be. They're all in consensus that masks help (at least a little) regarding droplets. But masks don't help in the slightest against aerosols. The debate (which is far from consensus right now) is how much covid spreads via droplets/aerosols.

Check out that link to the study that I referenced above.... you'll find evidence that masks are effective against aerosols.

Effectiveness of Face Masks in Preventing Airborne Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

 

[Confucius]

I'd be fine with that. Especially with the number of unemployed we have. A few anti-maskers might have a change of opinion when they see the suffering.

Something has to be done, rather than just talk. Unless society is ok with torture. Changing adult diapers is not remotely the same as changing baby diapers. The stench in old people's stool can be truly stomach churning.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

I don’t think we need to take this discussion into a debate on Osterholm’s stance on cloth masks.... that he recently wrote he supported and wears.

There have been multiple peer reviewed studies published in reputable academic journals since CIDRAP put out early policy advice in April. Science evolves.

For example:

American Society for Microbiology (Oct 2020)
Abstract
... we developed an airborne transmission simulator of infectious SARS-CoV-2-containing droplets/aerosols produced by human respiration and coughs and assessed the transmissibility of the infectious droplets/aerosols and the ability of various types of face masks to block the transmission. We found that cotton masks, surgical masks, and N95 masks all have a protective effect with respect to the transmission of infective droplets/aerosols of SARS-CoV-2 and that the protective efficiency was higher when masks were worn by a virus spreader. Importantly, medical masks (surgical masks and even N95 masks) were not able to completely block the transmission of virus droplets/aerosols even when completely sealed. Our data will help medical workers understand the proper use and performance of masks and determine whether they need additional equipment to protect themselves from infected patients.

Effectiveness of Face Masks in Preventing Airborne Transmission of SARS-CoV-2​

It’s totally fair to raise questions. And it’s totally fair to offer hypothesis. And I would agree with Osterholm that distancing is key. I would also say that masks give the wearer a false sense of security which is why I have tried to highlight the data around the fact that masks are much better at protecting others from you than vice versa. And that there are differing degrees of effectiveness.

but yes, data does suggest that masks offer protection against aerosols especially when worn by the infected person.

Osterholm is not some rogue scientist speaking for himself. He's the leader of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy and is speaking based on their research. These people are among the foremost experts on infectious disease on the planet.

And masks aren't some brand new invention. Saying cidrap articles from (lol) June 2020 are "too old" is insane. And they have not changed their stance. Covid spreads primarily via aerosols, cloth masks don't prevent aerosols at all, and there should be a much bigger focus on n-95 masks. Now, they do acknowledge that cloth masks prevent droplets so they help... very slightly... but they help. So they're not anti-maskers saying don't wear them at all. But, as they say " we may very well be putting people in harm’s way to this virus by not giving them clear messaging about what cloth masks can and can’t do to reduce one’s risk of infection."
This transcript discusses the issue at length. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/sites/default/files/public/downloads/special_episode_masks_6.2.20_0.pdf

The article you quoted above lumps droplets/aerosols together for some reason. Look at the wording they use. You may ask yourself why they chose to do that.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Check out that link to the study that I referenced above.... you'll find evidence that masks are effective against aerosols.

Effectiveness of Face Masks in Preventing Airborne Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

As I asked on the other post, why don't they separate droplets from aerosols? For example, when they say that a cloth mask reduces 20-40% of covid droplets/aerosols... do they mean MOST of the droplets but NONE of the aerosols? When they say n-95 masks reduce 80-90% of covid droplets/aerosols, is that because they actually reduce aerosols, and cloth masks don't?

That's a VERY important question, because (as foremost experts at the cidrap has shown) covid spreads largely via aerosols.

 

[Mickey Marner]

Growing list of Canadian politicians caught travelling abroad despite pandemic

Rules for thee but not for me!

 

[Pookie]

Osterholm is not some rogue scientist speaking for himself. He's the leader of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy and is speaking based on their research. These people are among the foremost experts on infectious disease on the planet.

And masks aren't some brand new invention. Saying cidrap articles from (lol) June 2020 are "too old" is insane. And they have not changed their stance. Covid spreads primarily via aerosols, cloth masks don't prevent aerosols at all, and there should be a much bigger focus on n-95 masks. Now, they do acknowledge that cloth masks prevent droplets so they help... very slightly... but they help. So they're not anti-maskers saying don't wear them at all. But, as they say " we may very well be putting people in harm’s way to this virus by not giving them clear messaging about what cloth masks can and can’t do to reduce one’s risk of infection."
This transcript discusses the issue at length. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/sites/default/files/public/downloads/special_episode_masks_6.2.20_0.pdf

The article you quoted above lumps droplets/aerosols together for some reason. Look at the wording they use. You may ask yourself why they chose to do that.

I would highlight there are differences between and article and a peer reviewed academic study published in a medical journal.

and yes, science does evolve as more research is done.

initially Covid was not thought to be transmissible between humans.

 

[Pookie]

Growing list of Canadian politicians caught travelling abroad despite pandemic

Rules for thee but not for me!

fines and job losses should be on the menu

 

[Nineteen67]

fines and job losses should be on the menu

Why? Did he break a law?

 

[Pookie]

Why? Did he break a law?

job loss is a given. You need to exemplify behaviour that reflects the common good.

fines would be applicable if they travelled with people outside their household or fail to stay home for 14 days upon arrival. Including for groceries.

hopefully they have eyes on them.

 

[Future]

Anyone see that video out of Gatineau where police officers were sent to break up a family gathering of 6 people after a neighbour called it in? They arrived and started assaulting the family by the looks of it while tearing them out of their home. Pretty crazy stuff, gave me chills.

Really going down a scary path here.



*couldn't find the original source but this looks to be the same video