Some risk of living with COVID-19 will become normalized, as some risks of speeding have been normalized. People will follow the rules more or less, increasingly less.
I do understand the commentary here and agree with much of it.
Now, having said that... I worry that the restrictions that are currently imposed upon us might become permanent.
For example, masking. Many people say that masks are nothing at all. I respectfully disagree; no, I violently disagree. You see, I have trouble breathing with a mask. As a result, I wear a face shield, a cumbersome, awkward piece of hardware.
For example, vaccine passports. I am fully vaccinated and scheduled to get shot for the third time two days from now. I am eligible for a vaccine passport and have been ever since they were "issued" by those idiots that rule us. I refuse, however, to get a vaccine passport on philosophical grounds as I don't EVER want to live in a society where some 18 year old (or whatever age) twerp can demand to see "my papers." Silly? Maybe, but that is - or used to be - within my rights as a citizen.
Oh, I can go on all day with my examples but I really reserve my scorn for governments and health officials who have taken this very serious illness as a way to become arbitrary rulers of my life.
So, to summarize, this pandemic has become endemic and we need to treat it much as we would influenza, that is, a serious illness that does sometimes cause death but which most of us will get from time to time and from which we will then recover. And, yes, I am of an age and have underlying health issues that will possibly mean that I will be one of those to succumb but I do know that I am going to die sometime so perhaps that will be the cause.
Lyle, first off, I am in the vulnerable group: age, underlying conditions, etc.
Now, having said all of that, I absolutely contend that the restrictions being placed on society are more dangerous than the disease that we face and should therefore be eased.
I am almost fully shot - third shot coming tomorrow - so I am trying to do what I can. I know of various folks that have had very needed "elective" surgery postponed because of this disease situation.
All I can say is that at some point - this point RIGHT NOW - we must get back to what we used to call normal. The concept of the "new normal" of which we have been hearing is a crock. We must get back to our old normal ASAP.
If I am one of the casualties - and I very well could be, given my situation - then that is the way of the world. I do know that I will die; the only thing that I cannot say is when. This disease quite possibly makes my demise closer. If so, then so be it, but our society needs to return to normal so that people can earn a living, society can proceed and - if the media and politician mutual stupidity when they try to scare the populous ceases - we can all go forward rather than backward.
So, as to the "how many" that you reference, well, whatever that number, we do need to return to normal. Our old normal.
Lyle, you can argue Loblaws actions; that is up to you.
You can, similarly, argue that traffic congestion is back but I disagree there.
As I said, I will be getting my third shot tomorrow so I am doing my part on that.
What I think is terrifically important, though, is something that many people simply do not think about. They say that everyone who is not vaccinated is "bad" and is a denier of science, etc., etc. I say that I have made my choice but I also accept that other people can make their choice.
I am truly mystified by the idea that vaccination is such a wonderful thing but, then, I am told that although I am vaccinated, I can still get sick. A large part of the reason that I got/am getting vaccinated is I want all of these restrictions to go away.
You tell me to wear a mask. I cannot do that as I cannot breathe with a mask. I therefore have to wear a face shield, which is real pain and I do want to get rid of it.
I am vaxxed. So why am I required to wear a mask / face shield, etc. And please do not blame the unvaccinated folks; it is you vaxxed people that are making the rules.
And, speaking of rules, what level of vaccination is required before you all will get rid of this masking stupidity? Don't say 100% because that absolutely will not happen. We were previously told 70% was good enough then we were told 80% was good enough so what is it?
Jeannine, I take from your comment that you would like masks to become a permanent feature.
I absolutely cannot agree.
I have trouble breathing with a mask and when I go into a public building I wear a face shield. That face shield is cumbersome and very difficult to deal with in many ways, but I do it. Having said that, I absolutely want to be able to ditch the thing as soon as possible so the concept of masks (or, in my case, a face shield) being a mandatory ongoing thing is terrifically distasteful to me.
An “Open secret” is still a secret to some. It allows the police to pull over a person of color for going 5kph too fast. Also, government communication has not been clear and concise. It’s been confusing and contradictory and the worst of it is that by calling some people “essential,” it implied that the rest of us were “inessential.” Our governments are still failing us. We are being sold out…
In April, Cole Hartin was arguing "while the restrictions to human freedoms are immoral in a general sense, when we take into consideration competing goods like community safety in the context of a pandemic, it is permissible to impose them to stop a genuine threat."
Congratulations for finally joining those of us who were skeptical then about all these supposedly well-intentioned infringements of our rights. Better late than never.
Before anyone slams me, just going to add that I'm fully vaccinated and boosted, and am aware that Covid is a real and serious thing.
But to me the pandemic response as it dragged on looked a lot like the post 9/11 security theater that we still experience today. The Authorization of Military Force Act that Congress passed 9/18/01 is still being used as a justification to blow people up to this day. We are probably going to be going through full body scanners until eternity at the airport because a single person smuggled a device in his pants.
One more point, putting laws on the books that you don't expect to be fully enforced gives the authorities license to selectively harass people. And we know from experience that the most vulnerable people in society tend to bear the brunt of that harassment.
I see it almost the opposite way. I notice that exploding case-counts in lying-fascist-government places like India and Brazil, will go down, after getting bad enough, despite the government never calling for any lockdowns.
People get scared when they see full ICUs in the news, and modify their behaviour whether you restrict them or not. You don't need speed signs if there's flaming wreckage on the highway every other kilometre.
There's a steady-state coming, for sure. We may already be there in BC, which has daily cases about where they were a month ago. But the balance won't be "whatever's allowed plus a margin small enough to keep me from getting arrested" but rather "whatever feels safe", which for a lot of people, may be less than the allowed.
Certainly for older people; it'll be years before you see many of them in theatres again.
Absolutely. It's similar to what those of us who went through the AIDS pandemic experienced: You either chose celibacy, or lived your life assessing degrees of risk. (And that was over two decades with 100% mortality for the first.)
Sure, in the mid-80s with better meds by the 90s, although I'm not sure what the parallel is here since governments are actively engaged and there have been multiple vaccines within a year, whereas we had basically nothing for a decade unless you count AZT which was garbage.
I'm not sure your age or where you were living in 1982-85. I was in Manhattan and I'm talking basics like do you risk oral, and if so how far? Or do you risk anal if a bottom, even with a condom, and what conditions to put on that? At 100% mortality then, the stakes were pretty significant. I mean, for a while, some people were afraid of mutual masturbation.
As now, things started with a lot of panic and denial in some quarters. We didn't even know the virus was in blood and blood byproducts and learning that was all before people even thought to use condoms. And then to figure out to use latex rather than sheepskin, and non-oil lubricant. Not to mention fear of leaks and breakage with condoms Also whether to trust people's assurances that they were negative in the absence of proof of testing. And questions about whether the virus was killed by saliva, and did one have a sore in one's mouth or throat, not to put too fine as point on it. Practical stuff to know and act on or not.
That's what I mean about the parallel. After the panic, which was crazy scary, learning to live one's life in the face of potential accidents, etcetera. By the time proper meds and government attention was paid, half my generation was wiped out. Like, I'm talking back in the day when an intellectual like William F. Buckley could get away with saying in a major media that anyone infected with HIV should be tattooed. So the parallel is kind of now to the nth degree.
Woah! WTF? That's NOT my argument at all. I'm FOR vaccination and mandates. My parallel is to make the same point as the columnist: That eventually people will start living their lives, taking precautions as the situation evolves. We gay men lived *back then* what people are going to start living now.
BTW, I could be wrong but your use of "how we've treated gay people" makes me think you're straight. Your comment also reads as if you weren't alive and/or sexually active at the time. Anyone who was knows exactly what I mean. We talk about it all the time.
For instance, Lyle, there were endless homophobes who argued we shouldn't have sex at all. Some wanted those of us who were infected to be locked away, as happened in Cuba. We were beaten and murdered in extra numbers because we were blamed for the 'gay plague'.
None of this is an argument against taking precautions. The parallel to vaccines, in this case, is the use of condoms: they don;t always work, but they cut the risk significantly and let people live their lives. Similarly, the parallel to social distancing is limiting sex partners. Etcetera.
The point is simply that human beings don't live in a state of emergency indefinitely. Historically, they find ways of working things out. That's how people have survived and lived through years long wars, btw, a useful thought on Remembrance Day.
Speaking as someone from Western Canada who travels regularly to Central Canada (Ontario and Quebec) the ludicrously low speed limits in those places coupled with the wanton disregard of them is not something that is common in the rest of the developed world. That's a weird cultural quirk in Central Canada.
Context is important when it comes to restrictions/public health orders, as well as personal experience. The main reason we have restrictions is to manage healthcare capacity. My coworker's Dad suffered a heart attack about two months ago. While he was admitted to hospital right away, the required surgery (four stents and a repair to the aorta) was postponed twice because there was a lack of nurses/rooms for the operation, due to the number of people in ICU, most of them battling COVID-19. He was monitored but at elevated risk of death for 6 days. That is not acceptable, in my opinion.
Masks... Culture here plays a role. They are commonly used in Asia, and it is logical to think that if you have symptoms of an upper respiratory infection (whatever it may be), wearing a mask indoors would help reduce transmission. Vaccine passports seem to be a lot more challenging because it is effectively creating different access abilities based on vaccination status. (Full disclosure I am fully vaccinated and the second I can get a booster, I will!). And what about Singapore? Are we okay if we ditch vaccine certificates but if you end up in hospital, are not fully vaccinated and need to use the system you have to pay out of your own pocket? Is that better than vaccine passports? I do not know.
The moral hazard still exists. If people with conditions such as a cardiac event or an accident or a stroke receive substandard care because we are letting our collective guard down... Is that okay? On the other hand vaccines are reducing the risk of hospitalization and death by 90% or so, and we have pills waiting Health Canada approval which will further help people recover at home. So at certain point we should be back to what it was, o close to it.
So instead of being tired or thinking about going 10% above the speed limit, the indicator should be capacity in the health care system to treat every patient with the expediency that is required and deserved. Postponing non-emergent surgeries, having to delay critical ones because we don't like to wear a mask or we want to get together with friends seems to me a bit selfish.
What we are lacking are clear goalposts: for example if ICU capacity goes back to 80% pre-pandemic and surgeries are not postponed and 9% of the entire population is fully vaccinated, then we can get rid of all mandates. Make it a clear goal linked to the common good.
My fingernails have millions of years of evolution, but my penknife can do a lot more than they can. My teeth have millions of years of evolution to resist dental caries with, but they do a lot better at it with the artificial help of brushing.
I do understand the commentary here and agree with much of it.
Now, having said that... I worry that the restrictions that are currently imposed upon us might become permanent.
For example, masking. Many people say that masks are nothing at all. I respectfully disagree; no, I violently disagree. You see, I have trouble breathing with a mask. As a result, I wear a face shield, a cumbersome, awkward piece of hardware.
For example, vaccine passports. I am fully vaccinated and scheduled to get shot for the third time two days from now. I am eligible for a vaccine passport and have been ever since they were "issued" by those idiots that rule us. I refuse, however, to get a vaccine passport on philosophical grounds as I don't EVER want to live in a society where some 18 year old (or whatever age) twerp can demand to see "my papers." Silly? Maybe, but that is - or used to be - within my rights as a citizen.
Oh, I can go on all day with my examples but I really reserve my scorn for governments and health officials who have taken this very serious illness as a way to become arbitrary rulers of my life.
So, to summarize, this pandemic has become endemic and we need to treat it much as we would influenza, that is, a serious illness that does sometimes cause death but which most of us will get from time to time and from which we will then recover. And, yes, I am of an age and have underlying health issues that will possibly mean that I will be one of those to succumb but I do know that I am going to die sometime so perhaps that will be the cause.
me too
fully vaccinated with no intention of ever getting a 'passport' to move freely in society. if papers are required to enter, then I don't
Lyle, first off, I am in the vulnerable group: age, underlying conditions, etc.
Now, having said all of that, I absolutely contend that the restrictions being placed on society are more dangerous than the disease that we face and should therefore be eased.
I am almost fully shot - third shot coming tomorrow - so I am trying to do what I can. I know of various folks that have had very needed "elective" surgery postponed because of this disease situation.
All I can say is that at some point - this point RIGHT NOW - we must get back to what we used to call normal. The concept of the "new normal" of which we have been hearing is a crock. We must get back to our old normal ASAP.
If I am one of the casualties - and I very well could be, given my situation - then that is the way of the world. I do know that I will die; the only thing that I cannot say is when. This disease quite possibly makes my demise closer. If so, then so be it, but our society needs to return to normal so that people can earn a living, society can proceed and - if the media and politician mutual stupidity when they try to scare the populous ceases - we can all go forward rather than backward.
So, as to the "how many" that you reference, well, whatever that number, we do need to return to normal. Our old normal.
Lyle, you can argue Loblaws actions; that is up to you.
You can, similarly, argue that traffic congestion is back but I disagree there.
As I said, I will be getting my third shot tomorrow so I am doing my part on that.
What I think is terrifically important, though, is something that many people simply do not think about. They say that everyone who is not vaccinated is "bad" and is a denier of science, etc., etc. I say that I have made my choice but I also accept that other people can make their choice.
I am truly mystified by the idea that vaccination is such a wonderful thing but, then, I am told that although I am vaccinated, I can still get sick. A large part of the reason that I got/am getting vaccinated is I want all of these restrictions to go away.
You tell me to wear a mask. I cannot do that as I cannot breathe with a mask. I therefore have to wear a face shield, which is real pain and I do want to get rid of it.
I am vaxxed. So why am I required to wear a mask / face shield, etc. And please do not blame the unvaccinated folks; it is you vaxxed people that are making the rules.
And, speaking of rules, what level of vaccination is required before you all will get rid of this masking stupidity? Don't say 100% because that absolutely will not happen. We were previously told 70% was good enough then we were told 80% was good enough so what is it?
Much to agree with here. Though I do hope that masks are like the seatbelt - understood for what they do, and almost universally used.
Jeannine, I take from your comment that you would like masks to become a permanent feature.
I absolutely cannot agree.
I have trouble breathing with a mask and when I go into a public building I wear a face shield. That face shield is cumbersome and very difficult to deal with in many ways, but I do it. Having said that, I absolutely want to be able to ditch the thing as soon as possible so the concept of masks (or, in my case, a face shield) being a mandatory ongoing thing is terrifically distasteful to me.
An “Open secret” is still a secret to some. It allows the police to pull over a person of color for going 5kph too fast. Also, government communication has not been clear and concise. It’s been confusing and contradictory and the worst of it is that by calling some people “essential,” it implied that the rest of us were “inessential.” Our governments are still failing us. We are being sold out…
In April, Cole Hartin was arguing "while the restrictions to human freedoms are immoral in a general sense, when we take into consideration competing goods like community safety in the context of a pandemic, it is permissible to impose them to stop a genuine threat."
Congratulations for finally joining those of us who were skeptical then about all these supposedly well-intentioned infringements of our rights. Better late than never.
Before anyone slams me, just going to add that I'm fully vaccinated and boosted, and am aware that Covid is a real and serious thing.
But to me the pandemic response as it dragged on looked a lot like the post 9/11 security theater that we still experience today. The Authorization of Military Force Act that Congress passed 9/18/01 is still being used as a justification to blow people up to this day. We are probably going to be going through full body scanners until eternity at the airport because a single person smuggled a device in his pants.
One more point, putting laws on the books that you don't expect to be fully enforced gives the authorities license to selectively harass people. And we know from experience that the most vulnerable people in society tend to bear the brunt of that harassment.
I see it almost the opposite way. I notice that exploding case-counts in lying-fascist-government places like India and Brazil, will go down, after getting bad enough, despite the government never calling for any lockdowns.
People get scared when they see full ICUs in the news, and modify their behaviour whether you restrict them or not. You don't need speed signs if there's flaming wreckage on the highway every other kilometre.
There's a steady-state coming, for sure. We may already be there in BC, which has daily cases about where they were a month ago. But the balance won't be "whatever's allowed plus a margin small enough to keep me from getting arrested" but rather "whatever feels safe", which for a lot of people, may be less than the allowed.
Certainly for older people; it'll be years before you see many of them in theatres again.
Absolutely. It's similar to what those of us who went through the AIDS pandemic experienced: You either chose celibacy, or lived your life assessing degrees of risk. (And that was over two decades with 100% mortality for the first.)
Sure, in the mid-80s with better meds by the 90s, although I'm not sure what the parallel is here since governments are actively engaged and there have been multiple vaccines within a year, whereas we had basically nothing for a decade unless you count AZT which was garbage.
I'm not sure your age or where you were living in 1982-85. I was in Manhattan and I'm talking basics like do you risk oral, and if so how far? Or do you risk anal if a bottom, even with a condom, and what conditions to put on that? At 100% mortality then, the stakes were pretty significant. I mean, for a while, some people were afraid of mutual masturbation.
As now, things started with a lot of panic and denial in some quarters. We didn't even know the virus was in blood and blood byproducts and learning that was all before people even thought to use condoms. And then to figure out to use latex rather than sheepskin, and non-oil lubricant. Not to mention fear of leaks and breakage with condoms Also whether to trust people's assurances that they were negative in the absence of proof of testing. And questions about whether the virus was killed by saliva, and did one have a sore in one's mouth or throat, not to put too fine as point on it. Practical stuff to know and act on or not.
That's what I mean about the parallel. After the panic, which was crazy scary, learning to live one's life in the face of potential accidents, etcetera. By the time proper meds and government attention was paid, half my generation was wiped out. Like, I'm talking back in the day when an intellectual like William F. Buckley could get away with saying in a major media that anyone infected with HIV should be tattooed. So the parallel is kind of now to the nth degree.
Woah! WTF? That's NOT my argument at all. I'm FOR vaccination and mandates. My parallel is to make the same point as the columnist: That eventually people will start living their lives, taking precautions as the situation evolves. We gay men lived *back then* what people are going to start living now.
BTW, I could be wrong but your use of "how we've treated gay people" makes me think you're straight. Your comment also reads as if you weren't alive and/or sexually active at the time. Anyone who was knows exactly what I mean. We talk about it all the time.
For instance, Lyle, there were endless homophobes who argued we shouldn't have sex at all. Some wanted those of us who were infected to be locked away, as happened in Cuba. We were beaten and murdered in extra numbers because we were blamed for the 'gay plague'.
None of this is an argument against taking precautions. The parallel to vaccines, in this case, is the use of condoms: they don;t always work, but they cut the risk significantly and let people live their lives. Similarly, the parallel to social distancing is limiting sex partners. Etcetera.
The point is simply that human beings don't live in a state of emergency indefinitely. Historically, they find ways of working things out. That's how people have survived and lived through years long wars, btw, a useful thought on Remembrance Day.
Haha. Thanks. Yeah. Reading through all the comments, I finally figured it out. :)
Speaking as someone from Western Canada who travels regularly to Central Canada (Ontario and Quebec) the ludicrously low speed limits in those places coupled with the wanton disregard of them is not something that is common in the rest of the developed world. That's a weird cultural quirk in Central Canada.
Context is important when it comes to restrictions/public health orders, as well as personal experience. The main reason we have restrictions is to manage healthcare capacity. My coworker's Dad suffered a heart attack about two months ago. While he was admitted to hospital right away, the required surgery (four stents and a repair to the aorta) was postponed twice because there was a lack of nurses/rooms for the operation, due to the number of people in ICU, most of them battling COVID-19. He was monitored but at elevated risk of death for 6 days. That is not acceptable, in my opinion.
Masks... Culture here plays a role. They are commonly used in Asia, and it is logical to think that if you have symptoms of an upper respiratory infection (whatever it may be), wearing a mask indoors would help reduce transmission. Vaccine passports seem to be a lot more challenging because it is effectively creating different access abilities based on vaccination status. (Full disclosure I am fully vaccinated and the second I can get a booster, I will!). And what about Singapore? Are we okay if we ditch vaccine certificates but if you end up in hospital, are not fully vaccinated and need to use the system you have to pay out of your own pocket? Is that better than vaccine passports? I do not know.
The moral hazard still exists. If people with conditions such as a cardiac event or an accident or a stroke receive substandard care because we are letting our collective guard down... Is that okay? On the other hand vaccines are reducing the risk of hospitalization and death by 90% or so, and we have pills waiting Health Canada approval which will further help people recover at home. So at certain point we should be back to what it was, o close to it.
So instead of being tired or thinking about going 10% above the speed limit, the indicator should be capacity in the health care system to treat every patient with the expediency that is required and deserved. Postponing non-emergent surgeries, having to delay critical ones because we don't like to wear a mask or we want to get together with friends seems to me a bit selfish.
What we are lacking are clear goalposts: for example if ICU capacity goes back to 80% pre-pandemic and surgeries are not postponed and 9% of the entire population is fully vaccinated, then we can get rid of all mandates. Make it a clear goal linked to the common good.
90% of the population! Typo and I cannot seem to edit the post.
My fingernails have millions of years of evolution, but my penknife can do a lot more than they can. My teeth have millions of years of evolution to resist dental caries with, but they do a lot better at it with the artificial help of brushing.