Jump to content

Would you Comply to Another Covid-19 Lockdown


Perspektiv

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Boges said:

 I hope it only comes from the fringe. 

My my how the worm has turned.

Meantime my view remains consistent, as it was. The government has an important role to advise the public on best practices, and to provide the resources. We pretty mich know that by doing so, will get 80-90% voluntary compliance. It should not apply enforcement, because that one-size-fits-all approach denies the rightsof individuals who have special needs. In no case should those people feel threatened by some big-mouth politician making disparaging remarks about them. Simply put there are groups of people who should not get the vaccine because it brings its own risk of harm. All these measures bring a risk of harm with them. The government and medical establishment need to be honest about the risks and harms, not upsell their snake-oil like its perfectly harmless. Even ordinary simple folk know its a lie.

As we're seeing now.   ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Boges said:

If one determines that modest social methods like masks and capacity limits can drastically reduce the cost to the healthcare system, what's to stop governments from just making that the status quo? 

Because status quo diseases don’t risk overwhelming hospitals and creating mass casualties when there doesn’t need to be?  It’s called a “state of emergency” for a reason.  
 

You sound like the nuts here who claim Covid was a hoax and the government is out to get you.  You’re not usually one of those posters…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Because status quo diseases don’t risk overwhelming hospitals and creating mass casualties when there doesn’t need to be?  It’s called a “state of emergency” for a reason.  

You sound like the nuts here who claim Covid was a hoax and the government is out to get you.  You’re not usually one of those posters…

And I was one that supported the measures at the time, with those same talking points.

But there were other places that weren't as strict as parts of Canada and were there true incidents of otherwise healthy people dying being of a rush of COVID patients? And a rationing of care? We don't really talk about that much anymore. 

Sweden was the poster child for this. But now, after the pandemic, they fall way down the list for per capita deaths. Many other countries that had more restrictions had more death. 

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

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boges said:

And I was one that supported the measures at the time, with those same talking points.

But there were other places that weren't as strict as parts of Canada and were there true incidents of otherwise healthy people dying being of a rush of COVID patients? And a rationing of care? We don't really talk about that much anymore. 

Sweden was the poster child for this. But now, after the pandemic, they fall way down the list for per capita deaths. Many other countries that had more restrictions had more death. 

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

 

You’re looking for linear relationships where they probably don’t exist.  Were we over cautious?  Maybe, but I’m not convinced of that.  I think the fast restrictions were because of the mystery of the virus itself.  If we were too cautious, does that mean the next pandemic shouldn’t have gathering restrictions?  Of course not.  What if it’s ebola transmitted through the air?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TreeBeard said:

You’re looking for linear relationships where they probably don’t exist.  Were we over cautious?  Maybe, but I’m not convinced of that.  I think the fast restrictions were because of the mystery of the virus itself.  If we were too cautious, does that mean the next pandemic shouldn’t have gathering restrictions?  Of course not.  What if it’s ebola transmitted through the air?  

I think, in hindsight, that was the complication with COVID. Not enough people experienced the dire version of the virus for enough people to actually fear it. 

During the Spring of 2021, when Ontario passed a Stay-at-Home order and there were reports of healthy people in their 40s and 50s dying, I was pretty freaked out by it. But that's about when the vaccine was coming online and uptake was pretty good.

But an analysis of the numbers indicate that young and healthy people, by and large, never should have feared dire consequences from the virus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Boges said:

But an analysis of the numbers indicate that young and healthy people, by and large, never should have feared dire consequences from the virus. 

Except for some of them, right?  
 

But, even granting your premise, is that something we knew at the time?  And, how much more spread to people who had something to fear would there have been had only those 45+ been told to follow restrictions?  
 

I think you’re using a hindsight fallacy (hindsight bias).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Except for some of them, right?  

But, even granting your premise, is that something we knew at the time?  And, how much more spread to people who had something to fear would there have been had only those 45+ been told to follow restrictions?  

I think you’re using a hindsight fallacy (hindsight bias).  

I concede to that.

Then again the premise of the thread is asking "Should we comply to any further restrictions".

I would say NO! with luxury of hindsight, of course. I would say many of the restrictions did more damage than good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Boges said:

I concede to that.

Then again the premise of the thread is asking "Should we comply to any further restrictions".

I would say NO! with luxury of hindsight, of course. I would say many of the restrictions did more damage than good.

But, with the next pandemic, there will be no hindsight unless it is exactly like the last one.  But, it won’t be. Maybe it will be even more transmissible and deadly.  Until we know, precautions will need to be taken.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

But, with the next pandemic, there will be no hindsight unless it is exactly like the last one.  But, it won’t be. Maybe it will be even more transmissible and deadly.  Until we know, precautions will need to be taken.  

We don't know what the next pandemic will be. As I said, I'm sure it will be easier to make people stay in their homes if the disease has a 30% fatality rate. 

Again related to the OP, we'll no doubt see a spike of COVID and other respiratory illness as we enter the Cold season. We should reject all attempts to force people to mask or reduce access to public spaces. COVID is a known quantity now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Boges said:

We don't know what the next pandemic will be. As I said, I'm sure it will be easier to make people stay in their homes if the disease has a 30% fatality rate. 

Again related to the OP, we'll no doubt see a spike of COVID and other respiratory illness as we enter the Cold season. We should reject all attempts to force people to mask or reduce access to public spaces. COVID is a known quantity now. 

I’ve seen zero evidence that any health authority or provincial government is pursuing any sort of COVID restrictions or mask mandate.  
 

However, if a health authority deems it necessary, then that’s what should happen.  Public opinion should play no part in health advisories or restrictions.  If it does, then it’s just about people’s feelings and lacks scientific rigour.  Why bother with health authorities at all then?  Let’s just take a poll.  

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

I’ve seen zero evidence that any health authority or provincial government is pursuing any sort of COVID restrictions or mask mandate.  
 

However, if a health authority deems it necessary, then that’s what should happen.  Public opinion should play no part in health advisories or restrictions.  If it does, then it’s just about people’s feelings and lacks scientific rigour.  Why bother with health authorities at all then?  Let’s just take a poll.  

I'm sure it won't happen, but did you see Teresa Tam yesterday? 

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2263051331790

She wore a mask while being alone on stage. She basically said she wants people to normalize mask wearing for the respiratory illness season, not just for COVID. This is what I'm somewhat concerned about. 

Edited by Boges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boges said:

I'm sure it won't happen, but did you see Teresa Tam yesterday? 

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2263051331790

She wore a mask while being alone on stage. She basically said she wants people to normalize mask wearing for the respiratory illness season, not just for COVID. This is what I'm somewhat concerned about. 

I have zero issues with people wearing masks.  It’s not scary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

What would be wrong if it were normalized here?

People don't want to use them. It's natural to cover your face. 

I get this sentiment from Maskers that it's a form of public service to protect the weak and immunocompromised. So this has moved beyond a COVID measure. 

If a Hospital or a Healthcare clinic mandates their use, fine. But it should never be mandated again, unless we see some sort of pandemic of a novel disease. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boges said:

People don't want to use them. It's natural to cover your face. 

I get this sentiment from Maskers that it's a form of public service to protect the weak and immunocompromised. So this has moved beyond a COVID measure. 

If a Hospital or a Healthcare clinic mandates their use, fine. But it should never be mandated again, unless we see some sort of pandemic of a novel disease. 

We were just talking about normalizing and you jump to mandates again, which aren’t even an issue any longer.  
 

What’s wrong with a large portion of the population (normalizing) choosing to wear masks in a crowded situation?  I know YOU personally don’t like it….   But that’s not much of an argument against it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before covid my wife and myself were members of a breakfast club, about 16 people. Twice a week we would meet at a restaurant picked by one of the members. Then covid hit. Some members refused to get vaccinated and could not go into an eatery because of the passport nonsense. We decided to have our meetings at someone's house and took it in turns to be hosts, no masks allowed. Three caught covid the rest did not. So no, screw the mandates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

We were just talking about normalizing and you jump to mandates again, which aren’t even an issue any longer.  

Yes because the OP of the thread asks if we will comply with further COVID restrictions.

There's a faction out there that would love to see Masks mandated in crowded indoor settings again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

 I know YOU personally don’t like it

Its only effective if either all do it or those that do in the minority, are sporting N95 styled masks, and continue to socially distance, to minimize risk.

When I was in Hong Kong or Japan, you noticed not a single soul was not wearing a mask outside.

This worked, in that the incredibly densely populated city of over 7 million, was able to keep their infection rates insanely low. 

They took extreme testing measures, and in choosing to travel there during the outbreak, was subjected to so many nasal swabs, my nose became tender (as some nurses were about the depth of their swabs when it really was about the technique).

You're just not going to get all to buy into it in a free society.

Even less, after having lived it for years.

Most including myself will be covid fatigued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 9/12/2023 at 11:56 AM, Boges said:

But an analysis of the numbers indicate that young and healthy people, by and large, never should have feared dire consequences from the virus. 

Yet the government pushed hysteria on all, removing the objectivity of the deaths, and simply posting them daily, to provide the fear needed to control the masses while they evade the rules that they set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2023 at 8:36 AM, Perspektiv said:

Yet the government pushed hysteria on all, removing the objectivity of the deaths, and simply posting them daily, to provide the fear needed to control the masses while they evade the rules that they set.

So you're objecting to the transparency? 

In Canada, the deaths were less the concern than the taxing of Hospitals so that COVID patients would overwhelm Healthcare's ability to treat other ailments. 

In hindsight we could see this as an overreaction. But at the time, would people have felt comfortable not having measures in place to reduce COVID infections, while the virus was clearly killing people? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,741
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    timwilson
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • User earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • User went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Videospirit went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...