The COVID-19 pandemic

[danbrotherston]

I heard of a lady in BC who has some sort of illness that prevents her from getting a shot, and she's out of luck at doing anything with her family due to passport requirements.

This is not cool.

I don’t know exactly how it should work, but it seems pretty clear to me that in many settings it’s fine for a few unvaccinated people with bona fide medical exemptions to be present. As such they should be granted a passport through some appropriate approval process.

At the same time, it seems like there are probably settings (ICU?) where nobody at all should be present for any reason if they are unvaccinated. So the passport system needs to support at least 2 levels of restriction: restriction to people who are vaccinated or have an exemption; and restriction to vaccinated people only.

Of course, this implies that if the setting in question is a medical one, there has to be a separate one for unvaccinated patients. It would be absurd to suggest that a nurse with an exemption can’t come in to do their job, but an unvaccinated patient is A-OK.

Anyway, depending on how the numbers go, it might be necessary to de-prioritize treatment of unvaccinated Covid patients. Somebody with a severe condition that they didn’t mostly cause themselves needs to have precedence.

As much as I am frankly angry at unvaxxinated people right now, I see this as a problematic slippery slope (much more IMO than vaccine passports). I really WANT to like this idea, but at the same time, do we also depriorize smokers? Overweight individuals? Drunk drivers who are in collisions? All these individuals have...to varying extents (please don't @ me with exceptions as I recognize that it is to varying extents)....made choices which impacted their need for care. Medicine should...unfortunately, probably be focused on outcomes. And again, I really hate this, because I am angry at the people who are not getting vaccinated, I want to support this policy, but, like I said, I see it as much more dangerous than vaccine passports.

[Acitta]

Some people around the Region were refusing the Moderna vaccine in favour of Pfizer.
Moderna Makes Twice as Many Antibodies as Pfizer, Study Says

[tomh009]

TUESDAY 2021-08-31

Waterloo Region reported 20 new cases for today (12.7% of the active cases) and one additional for yesterday for 15; 148 new cases for the week (+6 from yesterday and +25 from last week), averaging 12.7% of active cases. 158 active cases, +15 in the last seven days.

An average of 822 tests/day for the past 7 days for a positivity rate of 2.57%, up from last week's 2.06%, albeit on a slightly lower test volume.

2,305 doses of vaccine administered, with a seven-day average at 1,324 (previous week was 1,561). 73.76% of total regional population vaccinated (+0.08% from yesterday, +0.52% over the past week), 67.74% fully vaccinated (+0.16% from yesterday, +1.07% over the past week).

Ontario reported 525 new cases today with a seven-day average of 702 (+6), compared to 600 a week ago. 680 recoveries and zero deaths translated to a decrease of 155 active cases and a new total of 5,873. +820 active cases and seven deaths for the week. 19,643 tests with a positivity rate of 2.67%. The positivity rate is averaging 2.87% for the past seven days, compared to 2.56% for the preceding seven.

131 people in the ICU, -3 from yesterday and +6 over the past week. Total hospital population of 336, +41 for the week.

31,176 doses of vaccine administered yesterday, with a seven-day average at 33,105 (previous week was 38,817). 73.47% of total provincial population vaccinated (+0.08% from yesterday, +0.56% from 7 days ago), 67.55% fully vaccinated (+0.13% from yesterday, +1.01% from 7 days ago).

Cases/100K by region:

• 60 cases in Windsor-Essex: 15.4 per 100K
  
• 19 cases in Brant: 14.0 per 100K
  
• 41 cases in Niagara: 9.2 per 100K
  
• 42 cases in Hamilton: 7.3 per 100K
  
• 5 cases in Chatham-Kent: 4.7 per 100K
  
• 19 cases in Middlesex-London: 4.7 per 100K
  
• 60 cases in Peel: 4.3 per 100K
  
• 120 cases in Toronto: 4.1 per 100K
  
• 11 cases in Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph: 4.0 per 100K
  
• 21 cases in Simcoe-Muskoka: 3.9 per 100K
  
• 19 cases in Waterloo: 3.1 per 100K (based on provincial reporting)
  
• 19 cases in Durham: 2.9 per 100K
  
• 30 cases in York: 2.7 per 100K
  
• 14 cases in Halton: 2.6 per 100K
  
• 5 cases in Southwestern Ontario: 2.5 per 100K
  
• 2 cases in Huron Perth: 2.0 per 100K
  
• 3 cases in Grey Bruce: 1.9 per 100K
  
• 6 cases in Sudbury: 1.5 per 100K
  
• 3 cases in Eastern Ontario: 1.5 per 100K
  
• 10 cases in Ottawa: 1.0 per 100K
  

[jeffster]

Some people around the Region were refusing the Moderna vaccine in favour of Pfizer.
Moderna Makes Twice as Many Antibodies as Pfizer, Study Says

I had heard that Moderna might be a little better than Pfizer...but media and gov't basically made people want to avoid that vaccine.

[danbrotherston]

Some people around the Region were refusing the Moderna vaccine in favour of Pfizer.
Moderna Makes Twice as Many Antibodies as Pfizer, Study Says

I had heard that Moderna might be a little better than Pfizer...but media and gov't basically made people want to avoid that vaccine.

I totally see how they botched the discussion around AZ but I have absolutely no idea where the dislike of Moderna comes from. I haven't seen any news that would have led me to believe that's a thing.

I suspect it's more of just mob mentality/people be crazy kinda nonsense that social media has amplified.

[jeffster]

I heard of a lady in BC who has some sort of illness that prevents her from getting a shot, and she's out of luck at doing anything with her family due to passport requirements.

This is not cool.

I don’t know exactly how it should work, but it seems pretty clear to me that in many settings it’s fine for a few unvaccinated people with bona fide medical exemptions to be present. As such they should be granted a passport through some appropriate approval process.

At the same time, it seems like there are probably settings (ICU?) where nobody at all should be present for any reason if they are unvaccinated. So the passport system needs to support at least 2 levels of restriction: restriction to people who are vaccinated or have an exemption; and restriction to vaccinated people only.

Of course, this implies that if the setting in question is a medical one, there has to be a separate one for unvaccinated patients. It would be absurd to suggest that a nurse with an exemption can’t come in to do their job, but an unvaccinated patient is A-OK.

Anyway, depending on how the numbers go, it might be necessary to de-prioritize treatment of unvaccinated Covid patients. Somebody with a severe condition that they didn’t mostly cause themselves needs to have precedence.

What happens in BC: Vaccine passports are mandated. Businesses are mandated to only accept vaccine passports. No exception for those with actual medical conditions who can't get a vaccine, as the passport is only linked to people with 2 valid shots.

BTW: I was able to find the article regarding the lady that I was referring to in my other post:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c...-1.6151064

Yet -- at the same time, those that can't get vaccinated potentially pose a risk to other (the vaccinated) because the vaccine itself isn't all that effective.

There is no winning until science creates a more robust vaccine.

[jeffster]

I had heard that Moderna might be a little better than Pfizer...but media and gov't basically made people want to avoid that vaccine.

I totally see how they botched the discussion around AZ but I have absolutely no idea where the dislike of Moderna comes from. I haven't seen any news that would have led me to believe that's a thing.

I suspect it's more of just mob mentality/people be crazy kinda nonsense that social media has amplified.

You have the media and gov't to blame. They both said that Moderna and Pfizer were identical. Then, after saying they were identical, they said that Moderna wasn't safe for those 18 and under, and that Pfizer should be used instead because it's safer.

Plus add to this that most people have heard of Pfizer, but not Moderna.

And yes, AZ was botched badly as well by the media and gov't.

I dislike Trump for everything he has done and said, especially in regard to covid-19, but he was right in one thing he said: The media is the enemy of the state. And it truly is. Many of them are half-wit trolls looking for blood. Looking for a chance to demonize a vaccine for views, as it was done with both AZ and Moderna, and Pfizer to a lesser extent, only to turn around and demonize those readers who read their vitreous vile vomiting from they moronic scam news pieces regarding the alleged serious dangers of said vaccine. Then we wonder why we have anti-vaxxers. We got them because the media gave them ammunition. And now, the media has something to talk about, and keep readers coming back.

The gov't is to blame as well, for not educating people enough regarding the risks and dangers of being vaccinated or not being vaccinated.

Overall, the handling of all of this, from local, to provincial, to federal, to the world, has been absolutely atrocious.

There are days I still hope that I wake up to find out that this was only a crazy nightmare. But no....that doesn't seem to be the case.

[plam]

There is no winning until science creates a more robust vaccine.

The vaccine is pretty damn good, far more than we were hoping for a year ago, and it's hard to imagine it being substantially better than it is. There is no silver bullet solution. It was always going to have to be a combination of measures.

[jeffster]

There is no winning until science creates a more robust vaccine.

The vaccine is pretty damn good, far more than we were hoping for a year ago, and it's hard to imagine it being substantially better than it is. There is no silver bullet solution. It was always going to have to be a combination of measures.

Yeah, not right now, but we might actually want to try to get that. For sure though, we'll need our third shot. Israel is already doing this for all citizens. We also need a safe vaccine for those under 12, unless one of the ones we have is approved at some point.

Considering how quickly these vaccines are losing their ability to fight the virus, though, does suggest we need something better in the arsenal. As long as we have unvaccinated (legit, like those under 12 or with health reason, and the anti-vax) and vaccinated getting sick, and others getting sick a 2nd time and 3rd time, we won't ever get over this.

[ijmorlan]

Anyway, depending on how the numbers go, it might be necessary to de-prioritize treatment of unvaccinated Covid patients. Somebody with a severe condition that they didn’t mostly cause themselves needs to have precedence.

As much as I am frankly angry at unvaxxinated people right now, I see this as a problematic slippery slope (much more IMO than vaccine passports). I really WANT to like this idea, but at the same time, do we also depriorize smokers? Overweight individuals? Drunk drivers who are in collisions? All these individuals have...to varying extents (please don't @ me with exceptions as I recognize that it is to varying extents)....made choices which impacted their need for care. Medicine should...unfortunately, probably be focused on outcomes. And again, I really hate this, because I am angry at the people who are not getting vaccinated, I want to support this policy, but, like I said, I see it as much more dangerous than vaccine passports.

I agree this is problematic, and in general I agree that we don’t want to go very far at all in this general direction. I understand we already have some of this — for example, try getting a liver transplant as a heavy drinker — but the extreme version of this policy would be truly horrifying.

That being said, in an emergency, sometimes things have to be done differently than in normal times. So while I think we just have to accept that OHIP will cost all of us more than it should due to the behaviour of smokers (for example), I don’t think we have to accept that people with severe non-Covid illnesses can’t get the care they need because the ICUs are full of involuntary suicide attempts.

[plam]

The vaccine is pretty damn good, far more than we were hoping for a year ago, and it's hard to imagine it being substantially better than it is. There is no silver bullet solution. It was always going to have to be a combination of measures.

Yeah, not right now, but we might actually want to try to get that. For sure though, we'll need our third shot. Israel is already doing this for all citizens. We also need a safe vaccine for those under 12, unless one of the ones we have is approved at some point.

Considering how quickly these vaccines are losing their ability to fight the virus, though, does suggest we need something better in the arsenal. As long as we have unvaccinated (legit, like those under 12 or with health reason, and the anti-vax) and vaccinated getting sick, and others getting sick a 2nd time and 3rd time, we won't ever get over this.

I remain unconvinced about third shots for the general population, and I definitely think that it's more useful to distribute first shots to countries that don't have any than third shots to the general population in Canada.

Pfizer for 5-11 should be approved by the end of September, I expect. 0-11 is critical there, but especially 5-11, because of schools.

I also wouldn't say that the vaccines are losing the ability to fight the virus. It's rather that the first six months is more protection than you would normally get long term, because antibodies don't hang around, while B cells do. It's also the case that the vaccines are still extraordinarily effective vs severe illness, hospitalization, and death.

[danbrotherston]

I totally see how they botched the discussion around AZ but I have absolutely no idea where the dislike of Moderna comes from. I haven't seen any news that would have led me to believe that's a thing.

I suspect it's more of just mob mentality/people be crazy kinda nonsense that social media has amplified.

You have the media and gov't to blame. They both said that Moderna and Pfizer were identical. Then, after saying they were identical, they said that Moderna wasn't safe for those 18 and under, and that Pfizer should be used instead because it's safer.

Plus add to this that most people have heard of Pfizer, but not Moderna.

And yes, AZ was botched badly as well by the media and gov't.

I dislike Trump for everything he has done and said, especially in regard to covid-19, but he was right in one thing he said: The media is the enemy of the state. And it truly is. Many of them are half-wit trolls looking for blood. Looking for a chance to demonize a vaccine for views, as it was done with both AZ and Moderna, and Pfizer to a lesser extent, only to turn around and demonize those readers who read their vitreous vile vomiting from they moronic scam news pieces regarding the alleged serious dangers of said vaccine. Then we wonder why we have anti-vaxxers. We got them because the media gave them ammunition. And now, the media has something to talk about, and keep readers coming back.

The gov't is to blame as well, for not educating people enough regarding the risks and dangers of being vaccinated or not being vaccinated.

Overall, the handling of all of this, from local, to provincial, to federal, to the world, has been absolutely atrocious.

There are days I still hope that I wake up to find out that this was only a crazy nightmare. But no....that doesn't seem to be the case.

I don't recall any media saying Moderna wasn't "safe" for people under 18. I saw reports that it wasn't "approved" for people under 18. Perhaps the media needs to explain that better, but I'm hard pressed to believe that is why people got in a fit about Moderna.

As for Trump claiming the media is the enemy of the state, good God man, no, that is not true, the media advances the interests of the establishment. In fact, that was exactly why Trump attacked the media.

There is no winning until science creates a more robust vaccine.

A more robust vaccine? The vaccine we have is highly effective, even in the face of mutations. It is being pressed by a pandemic of a highly infectious disease--but even then, if we pushed vaccination rates high enough it would provide herd immunity. That's one extremely effective vaccine.

[danbrotherston]

The vaccine is pretty damn good, far more than we were hoping for a year ago, and it's hard to imagine it being substantially better than it is. There is no silver bullet solution. It was always going to have to be a combination of measures.

Yeah, not right now, but we might actually want to try to get that. For sure though, we'll need our third shot. Israel is already doing this for all citizens. We also need a safe vaccine for those under 12, unless one of the ones we have is approved at some point.

Considering how quickly these vaccines are losing their ability to fight the virus, though, does suggest we need something better in the arsenal. As long as we have unvaccinated (legit, like those under 12 or with health reason, and the anti-vax) and vaccinated getting sick, and others getting sick a 2nd time and 3rd time, we won't ever get over this.

The vaccines we have are safe for under 12, we already know this, the studies being done now are to show efficacy and look for highly rare reactions. The ones we have now should be approved in the nearish future.

The vaccines are not losing their ability to fight the virus, all the vaccines have demonstrated a long term efficacy even in the face of variants. The ONLY thing being lost is the antibodies which will stamp out a vaccine before a person becomes contagious. The memory cells have been shown to be effective at retaining immunity, so they still are effective at fighting the infection.

[danbrotherston]

As much as I am frankly angry at unvaxxinated people right now, I see this as a problematic slippery slope (much more IMO than vaccine passports). I really WANT to like this idea, but at the same time, do we also depriorize smokers? Overweight individuals? Drunk drivers who are in collisions? All these individuals have...to varying extents (please don't @ me with exceptions as I recognize that it is to varying extents)....made choices which impacted their need for care. Medicine should...unfortunately, probably be focused on outcomes. And again, I really hate this, because I am angry at the people who are not getting vaccinated, I want to support this policy, but, like I said, I see it as much more dangerous than vaccine passports.

I agree this is problematic, and in general I agree that we don’t want to go very far at all in this general direction. I understand we already have some of this — for example, try getting a liver transplant as a heavy drinker — but the extreme version of this policy would be truly horrifying.

That being said, in an emergency, sometimes things have to be done differently than in normal times. So while I think we just have to accept that OHIP will cost all of us more than it should due to the behaviour of smokers (for example), I don’t think we have to accept that people with severe non-Covid illnesses can’t get the care they need because the ICUs are full of involuntary suicide attempts.

Yes, the liver transplant is an extreme example, but even then, you can look at it in terms of outcomes, a person who is a problem drinker is unlikely to survive a liver transplant long term.

It is an emergency situation, but not an unprecedented one (at least not at a small scale). In situations where healthcare resources are overwhelmed, triage is applied, where those who have the best possibility of surviving are given care preferentially to those who are less likely to survive (as with the extremely limited liver transplants--which is a form of triage).

It would make me extremely angry if an anti-vaxxer was given care over someone else, but I think you'd be hard pressed to convince the medical community that someone who is less likely to survive should get care over someone more likely to survive.

That being said, medicine is more complicated than just acute care, anti-vaxxers are fucking over people who need non-emergency but important to quality of life or long term survival care, and this can't really be handled with triage.

[Bjays93]

Ok my comment generated a lot of discussion so warning for a long comment incoming, I'm going to address several things that were brought up from my perspective. 

First and foremost, I really appreciate that this whole discussion has been civil because that's rare these days, I've brought up my opposition to vaccine passports at other places and basically been ridiculed for it. 

I'd like to clarify that my opposition to vaccine passports is not simply just that I'm against it, but more so the lack of any sort of clarity or explanation around them worries me. 

There has been absolutely no discussion or dialogue around what these vaccine passports will look like or how long they'll last until after they're in effect. 

I am not against mandatory vaccination and/or rapid test (I understand neither of these methods are flawless but they are substantially better than nothing). I'm not a fan of forcing mandatory vaccinations without allowing negative tests it just seems unnecessary and contradictory if the ultimate goal is simply just public health. 

Secondly, I'm not against temporary vaccine measures, like say a lockdown of unvaccinated until the case numbers drop again. That's totally fair imo and those who are fully vaxed should not have to endure another lockdown if it were to come to that, otherwise what even was the point of getting vaccinated (at least in terms of regaining your freedoms) 

Currently there is no guarantee about the length, or purpose of vaccine passport systems. I would be against such as system remaining in place if we were down to only a handful of cases a day at some point for example. 

It's also not been outlined what specifically the passports will apply to. Travel to foreign countries and require immunization. That's totally fine thats a sovereignty issue. Concerts and sporting events, or movies where you are sitting and standing still in close quarters for long periods of time. I'm fine with vaccine requirements for that too. Preventing someone from entering a mall fully masked because they're unvaxed. I'm not all too keen on that. Or prohibiting outdoor dining for unvaxed as well for example. 

I'm also not ok with BCs no exception system and forcing businesses to use the system or risk being shut down. While unfortunate imagine if even 30% of your business is made up of unvaccinated individuals and you either have to throw out that 30% or get shut down after everything that's you've been through in the past two years. I dont think that's fair either and significant overreach. 

Additionally there are some obvious differences between something like a health card or driver's license and a vaccine passport. The primary difference being a driver's license does not force you to physically put anything into your body. I don't like the my body my choice argument for vaccines it's  stupid, but one should acknowledge theres a key difference between only being allowed to drive after taking a test vs only being able to go into a store if you've gotten a shot. 

I don't know how bodily autonomy ultimately applies to something like this because I understand both sides, in that people should have the right to choose if they want to get a shot of something injected, but also that someone's rights end where someone else's begin and unvaccinated pose a risk to society. But then there's the question of do unvaccinated pose much of a risk to anyone but themselves, and you have ethical dilemmas if the hospital is full of unvaccinated patients such that vaccinated ones aren't able to access certain healthcare. Its messy and I think it's hard to easily go one way or another on it. 

I also understand how peoples experiences shape their opinions and having grown up in Hong Kong/Communist China and having seen the takeover and how they did all these little things to slowly chip away at peoples freedom and basically hope people would brush it aside because it was trivial (basically a slow boil) naturally seeing similar types of restrictions pop up here spooks me even if it really shouldn't. 

At the end of the day I don't know what the RIGHT thing to do is, but I do know that blanket vaccine passports with no explanation or transparency dont sit well with me. More than anything I think it's the precedent it sets less than the rationale behind it. 

There are of course other things too, like ultimately what is the goal. Is it to prevent anyone from ever getting covid and dying from it, or is it to keep our healthcare system stable. I think it should be the latter and as such restrictions should be made according in my opinion. 

Like I said very long comment. I don't even know if I touched on everything i wanted to but I'll stop now lol. Hope i cleared up my position a little bit.