Accountability Now

? close to 70% of their deaths occurred in 2020. That’s what this article was measuring excess deaths in 2020. When 2021 is over and they do this again, how do you think Sweden’s rank will be with only 5000 COVID deaths versus 10000?

So show those numbers. Don't lie about the rest. (Seriously...do I have to make all your arguments for you???) I'm not overloading shit. I work out 6-7 days per week. I eat healthy and generally avoid things that are bad for me. COVID is a disease that largely affects people with cardiovascular issues. The fact that I have been doing the RIGHT thing my whole life means nothing to you. Instead, you praise the people who take the jab as their easy way out even though they have done shit to enhance their health up to this point. 30 randomized control trials would disagree with you.

For what? Seriously...are you that far behind in the conversation that you don't know what Ivermectin has been used for? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/

Again, you like to cherry pick your data. How about the fact that out of 30 European countries, 21 of them had higher excess mortality than Sweden. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe-mortality-idUSKBN2BG1R9) The ones that were lower were the Nordic countries. Now keep this in mind... Sweden has had 11.3% of its population have COVID compared to 6.5% in Denmark, 3.79% in Norway and 2.8% in Finland. They have incurred more COVID cases per capita and therefore it would make sense that they have a higher death per capita. This is why the other Nordic countries are following Sweden's lead now. People that die from COVID are people that would normally die from other diseases. They are old and have co-morbidities. So to shut down society to protect these people is simply a case of prolonging the agony. Just as a comparison....Canada has about 4% of its population that has had COVID. It will be a long road if we keep locking this down.

Is this honestly the best you have to offer this conversation?

Yup...billions of doses given. Proven safe.

And you think they magically train these people by adding 50k for an ICU. I suggest you spend a little time researching before you comment. Again....all resources they ALREADY HAVE. Hence...no added cost. Do you honestly think they buy new ICU stations every time there is a new person attending??? This equipment has been bought and paid for and is now considered a depreciating asset. It sits there and depreciates whether you use it or not. Stop conflating the issue of overhead versus cost overrun. Canada's health care system has been a mess WAY before COVID hit. You have union doctors, nurses and staff always fighting with the politicians about what they should be paid. I can assure you that here in Alberta, the vast majority of grievances you hear are part of the political fight against the UCP as they cut back their wages by 3% before the pandemic. The unions have used this difficult time to make sure everyone knows they are "under paid". Do you not find it interesting that Alberta was in the state of a melt down as our 250 ICU capacity was at 100% and then magically they added beds and we were down to 80% capacity. No biggie! I had read one time that Alberta's max ICU capacity is 450 beds which would put us at 10 beds per 100k. I also read that Ontario has 2300 beds which would put them at 17 beds per 100k. In the US the beds per 100k are around 30. So you don't get finance or health. Ok....gotcha. I love that you are so brainwashed on what CBC tells you. Don't worry dude....as long as you have the vaccine, you don't have to do anything else. Wow....you do know that Ivermectin has been administered over a billion times and won the 2015 Nobel Prize for uses in....wait for it...wait for it....HUMANS. Of course your comment on pet remedies is very telling about your narrative. Let me ask you this. Do you know anyone that uses insulin? If so, do you tell them they use that on animals too?

Nope. That is still the same sentiment spewing from our leaders. We need to protect the vaccinated. I corrected it for you. Clearly it doesn't mitigate spread but keep telling yourself what you want to hear. The fact is 15 guys, all vaccinated, spread it to each other. No mitigation there at all. Keep in mind too....for most unvaccinated people, the virus is a mild case too. Always has been. Great. More covid spread about to happen. 3/4?? 5% of Ontarians have had COVID and might have natural immunity as long as their infection was within about 14 months. The others that were jabbed will have vaccine immunity for 4-6 months. Come January (if not sooner) most of the people double jabbed will be right back at square one unless they jab themselves with another booster. Your dream of 3/4 immunity is a pipe dream. Notice how your guy left out Sweden? Maybe its because there numbers have flatlined since June without any restrictions. The other Nordic countries are starting to get the idea. This is something we have to live with.

You don't understand finance, do you? Those are operating costs. It will cost the hospital that much if they are full or if they are empty. When they "add beds", all they are doing is moving around resources from non-ICU to ICU. I will agree there may be some extra costs right now for OT or extra training however its not the values you are suggesting. That's why I said its the only argument. Are you having troubles with comprehension? Do you also care about the willingly neglectful people who don't take care of their health and have made them targets for this virus? That's cool. You are allowed to believe what you want. But here you have a drug that is readily available, highly safe and has been touted by numerous doctors for its use with COVID. Why wouldn't you use it? If if doesn't work then you are no further behind.

Sure I do. In Alberta 80% of the ICU trips made and 97% of deaths are people with co-morbidities. I have seen similar numbers in other areas too. I have proclaimed numerous times that people with co-morbidities or elderly people should absolutely get the shot but a certain number will not. There are also a small number of people who are young and without comorbidities that may end up in the ICU too. For all those people, offer ivermectin as it has shown enough promise 10 times over to reduce severity. Even if you remove half of these people from going to the ICU then you wouldn't be cancelling shit. If you truly did care about reducing ICU congestion then you'd do anything you could to reduce severity. But you don't and that's very indicative of your mind set. Those costs aren't 50k like you like to puff out your chest and proclaim. Staff are being redirected and beds are being moved around. That's what ICUs do all the time, this is no different. If the vaccine works then the unvaccinated don't have to protect the vaccinated. The only argument you have is about hospital and ICU levels being filled up by unvaccinated. I already made my point above about the realistic way of reducing that. Instead you choose to take the polarizing route which immediately makes it an us versus them approach. Of course, just give it a few more months when this vaccine wears off and you start to see the percentages switch.

If we assume your number is correct then you are forgetting one thing. Your 50k is a cost we pay regardless whether it gets used or not. Its overhead that covers the cost of infrastructure, salaries, etc. The vaccinations are extra costs and should be examined on a cost benefit nature. Getting rid of ICU is not an option. Of course, you continue to deflect from the point that the main feature of ivermectin is an outpatient treatment that is cheap. Even if it only works half the time then that is half of the ICU beds being used. Doesn't mean you have to stop vaccinations but rather use it in conjunction with vaccination. The other two approved and super expensive medications are in patient treatments only used once you are in a severe state in the hospital.

Sure they did. Remember it was get the shot to protect gramma and grampa! Do it for others they would say, or else you are selfish. Hospital numbers never got high in Ontario and they were still pushing the shot for the reasons I suggest. And that number keeps shrinking while the vaccinated numbers keep growing. Just wait until you're looking down your nose at those with only two shots And what did the vaccine passport do to protect these 15 guys from getting it? That is the point. The answer...is nothing. I find ironic that you one one hand smack Alberta for dropping safety measures and then with the other hand you applaud Ontario for dropping them. I have no problem for timely and effective safety measures that you ramp up when needed. If you don't agree with that then you should be arguing that Ontario should never drop the measures. At some point this becomes an endemic and you treat it as such, good or bad. Until then its pandemic and you can't have mercurial views on how it should be handled. Citation please.

So let's recap, we put in these mandates to protect the vulnerable even though that is the job of the vaccine. And when even that doesn't work, you still think the passports are worthwhile? The virus largely affects elderly and those with pre-existing conditions with or without vaccine. Numbers were down to next to nothing in Alberta in July. So what's your point? They're called waves meaning they will come and go. Ontario has had 600k cases of COVID in a population of 14.5M. That works out to 4% of the population....you don't think there will be more waves?

@Boges How is that vaccine passport idea working out? Keeping everyone safe from those heathen, unclean antivaxxers? https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/fully-vaccinated-ontario-man-dies-after-covid-19-sweeps-through-his-hockey-league-1.5642770 The vaccine passport's only job was to incentivize people in getting the jab. It is clear that once vaccine uptake plateaus, these draconian measures are no longer needed.

But....you said a vaccine makes treatment unnecessary. If treatments are required then its not a vaccine. Which is it? Also appreciate your BC numbers. In case you haven't been following I have always said the vaccine works to reduce hospitalization for about 4-6 months. Wait till December or January when your vaccine runs out and you will see numbers similar to what Israel and the UK have where the vaccine is a non factor. That's when you get to jab yourself again....and then again 6 months later...and again!

So this isn’t a vaccine then…since even vaccinated people are in the ICU and dying and treatments are still needed. Is that what you’re saying?

That’s an interesting Math question. What is the cost of vaccinating the bulk of the population at $20 a shot or just treating the less than 1% of the people who end up in ICU? Of course treating them with ivermectin would be pennies and would most likely prevent them from seeing the ICU. Not me saying it…just 30 randomized controlled trials

No, not really. The World Heath Organization actually recommended against using Remdemsvir as did many other studies that showed it didn't work. I know there are a couple studies showing ivermectin doesn't work however there are way more studies showing it does work or at least its worth trying. The fact that the FDA was willing to overlook ivermectin and the amount of promise it showed over something that showed weak support at best is a clear sign there are politics in play. If you are over 60 or have a pre-existing condition, then you should get the vaccine. I have said that all along. Of course, don't fool yourself into thinking that those two (or three, or four, or more) jabs you are taking don't have risk.

Both of those drugs are also Emergency Use Authorization. From what I know, the only way you get that is by only allowing it at hospitals. Ivermectin is already an approved drug for parasites. If they gave it EUA then people could just get it at the pharmacy.

They have been through trials...just not in Canada. https://c19ivermectin.com/ Keep in mind, the emergency use authorization for the vaccines was not possible if there was ANY other treatment available. If they showed people were allowed to show that ivermectin worked then by law, the FDA would have to pull the emergency authorization for the vaccines. Hence the war on ivermectin and previous HCQ.

Interestingly enough, the technical briefings for PHE that I got this data from started breaking out the numbers based on Over 50 and Under 50. 92% of the deaths since Feb 1, 2021 were over 50. Relative to the numbers above which were for the period from Aug 29 to Sep 12, the cases among vaxxed, partially and unvaxxed in over 50 were 84.03%, 8.5%, 7.46%. The hospitalizations were 78.72%, 3.22%, and 18.06%. The deaths were 73.84%, 4.05%, and 22.11%. Even in the 8% of deaths for under 50, it would be interesting to see how many deaths were with pre-existing conditions. Take Alberta for example, 75% of hospital visits were people with pre-existing conditions. This grouping also had 77% of ICU numbers. Last but certainly not least, people with pre-existing conditions had 96.1% of the deaths. Even more interesting, 73.6% of the total deaths were with people who had THREE or MORE pre-existing conditions. I mean seriously, if government wanted to truly solve this then educate people on this aspect and let those people know they NEED to get vaccinated because of this but don't force it down other people's throats. Now they are looking to vaccinate 5 year old kids....absolutely disgusting. https://www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#pre-existing-conditions

Yes that is correct. So basically the vaccine has waned. You don't just see this in deaths but also cases and hospitalization. In the period from June 14 to June 21, the hospitalization rate for vaxxed, partially vaxxed and unvaxxed were 10.34%, 27.03% and 62.63%, respectively. The cases were 10.02%, 31.70% and 58.27%, respectively. Those percentage points for the vaxxed started to go up with time and the numbers for the unvaxxed went down. The last data I could find was Aug 29 to Sep 12 where the cases were 43.13%, 19.62% and 37.25%. Hospitalizations were 44.38%, 13.87% and 41.74%. Deaths were 70.16%, 4.84% and 25%. The whole time cases were hovering around 30,000 to 40,000 per day. If we just took an average of 30,000 cases per day and took the low range unvaxxed cases percentage of 37.25%, then that would mean there were 11,175 cases per day of unvaccinated people. To put that in perspective, Canada has never topped 10,000 cases per day. So the reality is we should expect of the 11,175 unvaccinated people that a large number a similar number of hospitalizations and deaths but they aren't showing up. Ultimately the only reason is that the people who are vaccinated and unvaccinated come from different age demographics, meaning its mostly young, healthy people who are not vaccinated and older people who are. Assuming this is true then it just hammers home the point I have been saying all along...push the vaccines for the elderly and ones with pre-existing conditions. After that let people choose if they want it and lets get back to regular living.

What do you mean when you say Covid deaths? Do you mean covid deaths in people who are vaccinated?

They don't care because of apathy and ignorance not because of willful hate. Most people rolled up their sleeves, took their two shots and carried on with life in spite of what was going on around them. Canadians may be kind but we certainly aren't activists until it affects us.

Keep in mind, England just started vaccinating 12-15 year olds a few months back....and there still isn't a huge uptick in that demographic for those taking the shot. Don't know for sure but there are certainly those who feel strongly enough to say they would support that rationale. I would say most vaxxed people don't care either way as it doesn't affect them. There is a percentage of vaxxed people that are against the mandates though but again I don't know what any of these percentages are.