COVID-19 THREAD

[Tracker]

Dec 4, 2020 18:37:30 GMT -6 ekjet72 said:

We are just 3-4 weeks behind the US, but in theory at least, the vaccine may end this, while our numbers are ramping up.
Manitoba, if it had the same number of patient deaths 1 in 800 population as North Dakota, there would be 1625 deaths now. Thank God we are not there as bad as the current situation is! But a pan Canadian division may not be a sure thing.

Things are about to get a LOT worse in the US with the pandemic. Not only has the Trump regime stood by and done little or nothing, they have encouraged the deniers and fed the paranoia and militancy. A pan-Canadian division for the season may be the only way we are going to see hockey for a long while.

[wolfmannick]

^ whether the vaccines work or not we cant live like this forever. Gotta bite the bullet eventually

[Tracker]

Dec 4, 2020 19:07:26 GMT -6 wolfmannick said:

^ whether the vaccines work or not we cant live like this forever. Gotta bite the bullet eventually

Even when things return to "normal", the economies of both the US and Canada will have been so damaged that people will likely have less discretionary funds and game attendance will suffer.

[wolfmannick]

^ yeah but what I'm saying is the sooner the government stops oppressing us the sooner our economy's will recover and we will have disposable income again

[shakinallover]

As soon as all people do the intelligent things, wearing a mask, limiting contacts, etc, then infections and deaths will drop. Anyone who chooses to be selfish and ignore this are the "oppressors" and highly likely to contract covid and therefore spread more disease and death to the community and heaven forbid their family. It's time we all acted for the greater good and make the sacrifices to keep family and neighbours safe and healthy. The vaccines are proven to work but they're a ways from being distributed. Once we're safe and not under threat of dying we can resume our lives. Including trival stuff like watching or attending hockey games.

[wolfmannick]

It was supposed to be a two week lockdown its turned into months of oppression and our rights being stripped from us. If this was really about public safety why is smoking still permitted when it kills over 400,000 people a year?

[shakinallover]

No rights have been stripped and nobody is being oppressed. Some rights have been suspended to try and stop the spread of the virus. The protection of the people of this country and what some selfish people view as unreasonable means implemented outweigh the right to ignore the pandemic and cause disease to spread and kill people. No matter the argument put forward against these measures it will never supercede protecting human life and to say otherwise exposes a true lack of intelligence and moral character.
A mask is an IQ test, WEAR ONE.

[shakinallover]

By the way, it's estimated that 45,000 die from smoking annually in Canada. A huge number but a far cry from the exaggerated patently false number of 400,000. (Who is the one spreading fear?) Lying to make your point ruins any credibility someone may be trying to gain.

[wolfmannick]

^ yup just follow the rhetoric. Wash rinse and repeat. Think for yourself

[lovethejets]

Like it or not people's well being is measured in many ways and mental health is no longer joked about and people are not told to "buck up" and "deal with it". Mental health is as real as cancer and anyone that says otherwise is simply uneducated. The lasting effects of these lockdowns on increased suicide rates, lasting depression and rapidly rising incidences of abuse and marital and family breakups due to the number one cause - lack of money - is UNKNOWN at this point buy surely on the rise. Not to mention the fact that people are scared so screening for heart disease and cancer are falling while exercise is falling fast (especially when it hits -40 in a few weeks) so death rates in future will undoubtedly climb.

That is not a statement on maintaining distance, wearing a mask (to be fair though there is some debate and has been one since March on their efficacy) and washing your hands. But ia full lockdown is not a binary call either. There are just too many variables to consider. Can we stay open, be sensible and protect the vulnerable? The risks of not doing that may just be too high and short sighted to consider the longer term ramifications of what we are currently doing. Sadly 90% of the people that are dying are over 70 and any others with underlying conditions. They are not more expendable than the rest, but are they less expendable either? Are the people we are causing long term psychological, physical and monetary damage to more expendable than the aged whose life span was already limited to 2 years or less in any event? That is up to each person to answer but my guess is that someone who has a loved one that suffers from mental illness exacerbated by this, contracts cancer that goes unchecked and dies or goes bankrupt will have a different answer than someone who loses an elderly parent a year earlier than expected to Covid.

[shakinallover]

So the answer is " the elderly, sick, and races most affected are expendable?"
That is beyond sad it's disturbing. Putting the burden of sacrifice on our most vulnerable is in effect a cleansing so only the strong and healthy survive. Are you willing to face these people and tell them that a large percentage of them will have to die so that the rest of us can resume going to hockey games, eating in restaurants, etc?
What would that do to our mental health?

Yes there is more we can do to support those affected by the shut down to aid them financially and support their well being but purposefully letting large numbers of others die is not an answer and never should be.

[wolfmannick]

99.998% survival rate across the board. All the procedures in place are rediculous. If you wanna live in fear stay home and let people resume their lives as they please.

[iceland2018]

Dec 7, 2020 14:17:13 GMT -6 wolfmannick said:

99.998% survival rate across the board. All the procedures in place are rediculous. If you wanna live in fear stay home and let people resume their lives as they please.

You obviously are completely uneducated about COVID.

1. The fatality rate of COVID is estimated at 0.5-1.0% in first world countries, not 00.02%

2. The real issue is LONG COVID, which effects 10-15% of all people who contract COVID. Long COVID lasts over two months, and can damage the body's internal organs. If you want to lift restrictions so that the economy is crippled and our health care system collapses, that just means you are acting like a selfish price. 

The real problem is that the generations today are too soft, and are far too entitled for our own good.  People sure did not act like this during the Spanish influenza.

[iceland2018]

Dec 7, 2020 7:59:19 GMT -6 lovethejets said:

That is not a statement on maintaining distance, wearing a mask (to be fair though there is some debate and has been one since March on their efficacy) and washing your hands. But ia full lockdown is not a binary call either. There are just too many variables to consider. Can we stay open, be sensible and protect the vulnerable? The risks of not doing that may just be too high and short sighted to consider the longer term ramifications of what we are currently doing. Sadly 90% of the people that are dying are over 70 and any others with underlying conditions. They are not more expendable than the rest, but are they less expendable either? Are the people we are causing long term psychological, physical and monetary damage to more expendable than the aged whose life span was already limited to 2 years or less in any event? That is up to each person to answer but my guess is that someone who has a loved one that suffers from mental illness exacerbated by this, contracts cancer that goes unchecked and dies or goes bankrupt will have a different answer than someone who loses an elderly parent a year earlier than expected to Covid.

I find it just incredible that people are prepared to comment, without bothering to do research about the consequences of lifting restrictions, with large COVID outbreaks.

1. The countries with the lowest numbers of COVID are performing better economically than countries with high rates of COVID.  Australia, New Zealand, and Taiwan are three countries than have gotten their economies back on track, due to their aggressive health measures.  If you want people to starve, overrun our health care system, and watch at least 10% of the workforce go on permanent disability, since Long COVID will prevent them from doing their job.

2. Mental health will be more adversely affected by higher rates of COVID.  Some of the main symptoms of Long COVID are depression, anxiety, memory loss.  It's a no-win situation with mental health, but we can reduce the incidence of mental health issues, by decreasing our COVID rates. However, we must be prepared to stick with restrictions that are in place, most likely until the end of February when COVID rates are below 30 cases per day.  

www.statnews.com/2020/08/12/after-covid19-mental-neurological-effects-smolder/

[lovethejets]

Dec 7, 2020 13:51:23 GMT -6 shakinallover said:

So the answer is " the elderly, sick, and races most affected are expendable?"
That is beyond sad it's disturbing. Putting the burden of sacrifice on our most vulnerable is in effect a cleansing so only the strong and healthy survive. Are you willing to face these people and tell them that a large percentage of them will have to die so that the rest of us can resume going to hockey games, eating in restaurants, etc?
What would that do to our mental health?

Yes there is more we can do to support those affected by the shut down to aid them financially and support their well being but purposefully letting large numbers of others die is not an answer and never should be.

WHAT? oh man your reading is so selective. I said the dilemma is not cut and dried. Seriously? Just going to hockey games and restaurants? That is what you took out of that? What about social interaction? Proper kids and university education? II think you understand mental illness and its debiliatting implications for people who suffer from it. That about the lack of screening and exercise? No-one is saying to not protect the vulnerable. But can you sacrifice others for them? I think I see what side of the fence you are on and that's fine but others who are suffering and may for years to come will likely take the other view.