Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
Yesterday I was hearing scientists have identified 200+ symptoms associated with long covid. Some persons have conditions similar to ME and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, they are saying covid can get into every system within the body. For now 8 months is the duration of symptoms seem but as time goes on this duration can lengthen. There is so much which we can't know because this is so very new,
One of my close follows on Linkedin also speculated we will see an explosion of Alzheimer's in a few years due to Covid-19. He's among many of the very top scientists in the field that now feel that a virus penetrating the brain barrier causes Alzheimer's. Bottom line is we just don't know what the long terms affects are just yet.
Hope not. Cruel disease. Horrible on the patient and everyone that is immediate family.11 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »Yesterday I was hearing scientists have identified 200+ symptoms associated with long covid. Some persons have conditions similar to ME and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, they are saying covid can get into every system within the body. For now 8 months is the duration of symptoms seem but as time goes on this duration can lengthen. There is so much which we can't know because this is so very new,
One of my close follows on Linkedin also speculated we will see an explosion of Alzheimer's in a few years due to Covid-19. He's among many of the very top scientists in the field that now feel that a virus penetrating the brain barrier causes Alzheimer's. Bottom line is we just don't know what the long terms affects are just yet.
Hope not. Cruel disease. Horrible on the patient and everyone that is immediate family.
After dealing with blood clots for 6 months and general weakness still Covid-19 is worse than anything I have experienced. Organ and brain damage can be expected.
17 -
Debate is rife here in the UK this morning about covid particularly the effects of delta version. Our having left the under 30's exposed. By the end of September it is being said, these people will all have been offered the opportunity of two doses| There is even more debate, when to vaccinate children. In one of our most affected areas the health spokes person was advocating vaccinating all children to ensure those in homes of multi generations will be covered. The need for this does not seem to be being listened to.
I realise, from information heard yesterday, there can be a condition in some children where the muscle of the heart becomes inflamed but this is treatable. (Possibly with genetic testing, it is said to be much more easy these days, of those sadly affected, could identify those at risk.) No parent wants any child to become unnecessarily ill the balance which needs to be struck is, is the risk of long covid worse than the risk of an easily treated possible side effect.
I understand so little is known about this virus, less about the variants but there have been other strains which come in under the same umbrella that much is known about, from this it should be possible to extrapolated and anticipate common difficulties. Its true the international community was hotter onto the viruses like Sars in the first place, all knowledge is helpful.
I hate the idea of anyone developing long term conditions, one person doing so it too many. Its is as if those in authority over us are unable to consider the personal and societal costs of long term depilating conditions. That person not being able to function to their original potential then not contributing to society more easily expresses as the dissatisfaction in their lives and the reduction in various taxes possibly even drawing down benefits over their life times.
It seems now the majority of persons in hospital with Covid, particularly the Delta variant across the UK are those 30-40 year olds who had previously seen themselves as healthy, they are replacing the over 80 year olds in facing a dubious future.
The adviser who left Downing Street some months ago, who has since given evidence of Prim Ministerial conduct over covid to some parliamentary committee, is now saying, what many of us thought last year, each time the scientists were saying bring in more controls the action was delayed so the cases and consequences of cases rose more than they need have done. This adviser has evidence of this prevarication is having an interview broadcast later today.
Many of us fear something very similar to that prevarication is happening. Our Delta variant cases are rising week on week. Summer is probably the best time to open up social contacts but set against the NHS being challenged with getting waiting lists for operations and other procedures down. When children's departments are feeling pressures because of childhood respiratory conditions mostly in the under 6 year olds because they have not encountered the various things as they would in other years. Finally when the numbers of covid cases are at the same level as they were in mid January and rising. This is not the right time to throw out the masks as they were saying a week ago.
Its modified to wear a mask if you want to, its down to you, we are no longer telling you what to do. In September it is being said by the PM, anyone attending a Night Club will need evidence of being twice vaccinated, assuming plus two weeks for antibody build up. Reports from Night Clubs, which opened up at 1minute past 12 am on Monday morning, masks were not required not was the vaccination status of attender, nor a covid status test asked for. within two weeks we will have even higher cases then hospitalisations and then.............. back to square one.
10 -
Similar debates in the US. There is a faction advocating for protecting those too young to be vaccinated (under 12 in the US) by vaccinating more eligible adults and masking in localities where the delta variant is surging. The advocates are mostly public health officials and some parents of children under 12. But a lot of people just don't care, including parents. It amazes me that as a species we don't seem to have better self-preservation instincts.13
-
I am and remain a bit perplexed with some of our decisions.
So in Canada we are demanding that Maria from Greece--who has received two doses of Pfizer, self tests once a week for work (twice for hospitality), and gets a third party rapid test every week she travels to a nearby island before being allowed in an open air seating available ferry boat, and who would board after a negative PCR test--we are demanding that Maria quarantines for two weeks on arrival, which means she is staying home.
Yet yesterday I was in two fully (I mean can we please have your hand luggage to check it under for free type fully) full Air Canada/Westjet flights (Listing both alphabetically to protect yesterday's guilty party since they're no different in reality).
We get people to arrive at the airport more than an hour ahead of the flight these days. Even though they're currently discounted these tickets are not exactly free. They also include a good $45 to $75 in airport Improvement and post 9/11 security fees that we all grumble about and yet we end up paying
And we cannot throw in and demand a $20 rapid test before boarding everybody in each other's lap?
And we can demand that people match their ID and have no choice about going through the thermal imaging / metal detection replacement scanner and have their temperatures checked, but we can't demand that the produce proof of two vaccinations and or clean rapid test and or both?
How long are we quarantining the migrant agricultural workers or the work permit workers at the meat plants?
Why are masks no longer obligatory for staff and customers in large and small grocery, department, and any other stores? Yes it is annoying that I can't sip my coffee while shopping. But it's not as if the primary purpose of going shopping is to drink my coffee. So wearing a mask doesn't seem to be The end of the world in that context
And yet we want to quarantine Maria from Greece for 2 weeks.
And I'm being told by smokers who have had no shots and who are allowed to sit next to me in the plane for a few hours that it's too complicated to get an appointment for a shot.. in the same province where it took one phone call for me to get one for the next morning as an out of province visitor (and yes this means I got my second shot one week before my scheduled appointment at my own province instead of cancelling and re-booking it for after my return)
There's many instances where Gale and I do not fully agree; but, I'm wondering if he's right and we're not trying to achieve herd immunity by getting the unvaccinated sick?
Which sort of boggles my mind.
Because in spite of my rant above I'm not yet 2 weeks post second shot and this is not for lack of trying. Which means that there are still quite a few people who are not vaccine hesitant and who have not quite yet fully had their chance for two shots plus 2 weeks.
The option of witnessed self tests, or rapid tests before entering crowded venues exist and in the whole security context and lineups and general costs I don't see how they would be the end of the world. Certainly not as bad as the increased health costs and toll on people.
And before somebody mentions that it costs $150 to do a rapid test commercially, I am talking about large-scale government supported intervention. A UNICEF page that popped up on a search is talking about a reduction in rapid test costs from four US dollars to $2.50.
So I don't think that my $10 to $20 range as the cost to enter a crowded venue and potentially with an app indicated that you've already been tested today is that far out of line ..
11 -
Why are masks no longer obligatory for staff and customers in large and small grocery, department, and any other stores? Yes it is annoying that I can't sip my coffee while shopping. But it's not as if the primary purpose of going shopping is to drink my coffee. So wearing a mask doesn't seem to be The end of the world in that context
Masks are as mandatory as ever in Ontario and apparently they're not considering changing that for a while yet.
Most of the vaccine customers right now are second-shot folks. I guess they're looking to coax more first shots into the hesitant. Part of that is making vaccination available in settings like neighbourhood pharmacies and clinics, where some people might feel more comfortable than the mass sites, but I honestly don't think that's going to capture a huge number.5 -
Masks are as mandatory as ever in Ontario and apparently they're not considering changing that for a while yet.
Not so in both Alberta and BC where it is mask-less in July. I am gratified that at least the airports seem to be more reasonable in terms of keeping to mask mandates especially given the crowding. But grocery stores? Gone are the no side by side bagging and single path and other movement restrictions.3 -
I am and remain a bit perplexed with some of our decisions.
So in Canada we are demanding that Maria from Greece--who has received two doses of Pfizer, self tests once a week for work (twice for hospitality), and gets a third party rapid test every week she travels to a nearby island before being allowed in an open air seating available ferry boat, and who would board after a negative PCR test--we are demanding that Maria quarantines for two weeks on arrival, which means she is staying home.
Yet yesterday I was in two fully (I mean can we please have your hand luggage to check it under for free type fully) full Air Canada/Westjet flights (Listing both alphabetically to protect yesterday's guilty party since they're no different in reality).
We get people to arrive at the airport more than an hour ahead of the flight these days. Even though they're currently discounted these tickets are not exactly free. They also include a good $45 to $75 in airport Improvement and post 9/11 security fees that we all grumble about and yet we end up paying
And we cannot throw in and demand a $20 rapid test before boarding everybody in each other's lap?
And we can demand that people match their ID and have no choice about going through the thermal imaging / metal detection replacement scanner and have their temperatures checked, but we can't demand that the produce proof of two vaccinations and or clean rapid test and or both?
How long are we quarantining the migrant agricultural workers or the work permit workers at the meat plants?
Why are masks no longer obligatory for staff and customers in large and small grocery, department, and any other stores? Yes it is annoying that I can't sip my coffee while shopping. But it's not as if the primary purpose of going shopping is to drink my coffee. So wearing a mask doesn't seem to be The end of the world in that context
And yet we want to quarantine Maria from Greece for 2 weeks.
And I'm being told by smokers who have had no shots and who are allowed to sit next to me in the plane for a few hours that it's too complicated to get an appointment for a shot.. in the same province where it took one phone call for me to get one for the next morning as an out of province visitor (and yes this means I got my second shot one week before my scheduled appointment at my own province instead of cancelling and re-booking it for after my return)
There's many instances where Gale and I do not fully agree; but, I'm wondering if he's right and we're not trying to achieve herd immunity by getting the unvaccinated sick?
Which sort of boggles my mind.
Because in spite of my rant above I'm not yet 2 weeks post second shot and this is not for lack of trying. Which means that there are still quite a few people who are not vaccine hesitant and who have not quite yet fully had their chance for two shots plus 2 weeks.
The option of witnessed self tests, or rapid tests before entering crowded venues exist and in the whole security context and lineups and general costs I don't see how they would be the end of the world. Certainly not as bad as the increased health costs and toll on people.
And before somebody mentions that it costs $150 to do a rapid test commercially, I am talking about large-scale government supported intervention. A UNICEF page that popped up on a search is talking about a reduction in rapid test costs from four US dollars to $2.50.
So I don't think that my $10 to $20 range as the cost to enter a crowded venue and potentially with an app indicated that you've already been tested today is that far out of line ..
I am against increased testing - for the simple reason that vaccinated people can still test positive without getting sick. I don't think that as this point, when vaccines are readily available to mitigate severe illness, I should have to quarantine or avoid places because I test positive for a virus that I believe is going to be endemic. Covid isn't going anywhere. If people don't want to get sick then get the vaccine. We need to stop putting the onus on those of us who have been vaccinated to protect those who choose not to.
8 -
I am against increased testing - for the simple reason that vaccinated people can still test positive without getting sick. I don't think that as this point, when vaccines are readily available to mitigate severe illness, I should have to quarantine or avoid places because I test positive for a virus that I believe is going to be endemic. Covid isn't going anywhere. If people don't want to get sick then get the vaccine. We need to stop putting the onus on those of us who have been vaccinated to protect those who choose not to.
I am pro testing because as a vaccinated person I can still get sick from another vaccinated person who is sick.
And an asymptomatic vaccinated person who is legitimately testing positive is sick. Literally a Typhoid Mary.
Even if I am vaccinated, why the blazes would I want to get "not sick enough to end up in hospital or die" sick so that you can enjoy your outing? You better believe that I believe you should be avoiding places where you can give your cooties to other people.
So, no, I don't see it as exceedingly onerous to have you and me reasonably prove to each other that we are mutually not sick if we are going to be breathing each others' fumes for a few hours.
If we accept that it will be endemic, then we are playing the flu game and if the vaccine odds deteriorate to the (relatively) dismal record of the flu vaccine then we better get going on some societal behavioural modifications as to what is considered acceptable.
Because there is a vast distance between not sick and not sick enough to end up in hospital or die.21 -
I am against increased testing - for the simple reason that vaccinated people can still test positive without getting sick. I don't think that as this point, when vaccines are readily available to mitigate severe illness, I should have to quarantine or avoid places because I test positive for a virus that I believe is going to be endemic. Covid isn't going anywhere. If people don't want to get sick then get the vaccine. We need to stop putting the onus on those of us who have been vaccinated to protect those who choose not to.
I am pro testing because as a vaccinated person I can still get sick from another vaccinated person who is sick.
And an asymptomatic vaccinated person who is legitimately testing positive is sick. Literally a Typhoid Mary.
Even if I am vaccinated, why the blazes would I want to get "not sick enough to end up in hospital or die" sick so that you can enjoy your outing? You better believe that I believe you should be avoiding places where you can give your cooties to other people.
I f
So, no, I don't see it as exceedingly onerous to have you and me reasonably prove to each other that we are mutually not sick if we are going to be breathing each others' fumes for a few hours.
If we accept that it will be endemic, then we are playing the flu game and if the vaccine odds deteriorate to the (relatively) dismal record of the flu vaccine then we better get going on some societal behavioural modifications as to what is considered acceptable.
Because there is a vast distance between not sick and not sick enough to end up in hospital or die.
I wouldn't consider someone who is asymptomatic to be "sick" though. I would consider that they have been exposed. If they are vaccinated they are most likely not sick because the vaccine is doing the job it was designed to do. Sterilizing immunity was never the end goal of these vaccines.
Yes there is a minimal risk of severe illness after vaccine, but it's not any higher than the risks we take every day with other illness that are circulating. I personally do think it is onerous to continue to be excluded from participating in normal activities of society because someone else chooses to take the risk of remaining unvaccinated.
Not sure what you mean by "accept" it will be endemic, we don't have a choice. There are several coronaviruses that are already endemic and cause mild illness. Hopefully this one will be the same and as natural and vaccine induced immunity increases it will fade into the background and just become one of those seasonal "things" that kids get exposed to early in life, and no one thinks twice about it. I think that is the best case scenario we can hope for at this point. The flu from the 1918 pandemic is still around 100+ years later, I think that Covid will be the same. Hopefully it will follow the pattern and become less virulent in subsequent years.
Coronaviruses (in general) mutate more slowly than flu viruses, so comparing the "dismal" record of the flu vaccine is kind of an apples to oranges thing.8 -
I am against increased testing - for the simple reason that vaccinated people can still test positive without getting sick. I don't think that as this point, when vaccines are readily available to mitigate severe illness, I should have to quarantine or avoid places because I test positive for a virus that I believe is going to be endemic. Covid isn't going anywhere. If people don't want to get sick then get the vaccine. We need to stop putting the onus on those of us who have been vaccinated to protect those who choose not to.
I am pro testing because as a vaccinated person I can still get sick from another vaccinated person who is sick.
And an asymptomatic vaccinated person who is legitimately testing positive is sick. Literally a Typhoid Mary.
Even if I am vaccinated, why the blazes would I want to get "not sick enough to end up in hospital or die" sick so that you can enjoy your outing? You better believe that I believe you should be avoiding places where you can give your cooties to other people.
I f
So, no, I don't see it as exceedingly onerous to have you and me reasonably prove to each other that we are mutually not sick if we are going to be breathing each others' fumes for a few hours.
If we accept that it will be endemic, then we are playing the flu game and if the vaccine odds deteriorate to the (relatively) dismal record of the flu vaccine then we better get going on some societal behavioural modifications as to what is considered acceptable.
Because there is a vast distance between not sick and not sick enough to end up in hospital or die.
I wouldn't consider someone who is asymptomatic to be "sick" though. I would consider that they have been exposed. If they are vaccinated they are most likely not sick because the vaccine is doing the job it was designed to do. Sterilizing immunity was never the end goal of these vaccines.
Yes there is a minimal risk of severe illness after vaccine, but it's not any higher than the risks we take every day with other illness that are circulating. I personally do think it is onerous to continue to be excluded from participating in normal activities of society because someone else chooses to take the risk of remaining unvaccinated.
Not sure what you mean by "accept" it will be endemic, we don't have a choice. There are several coronaviruses that are already endemic and cause mild illness. Hopefully this one will be the same and as natural and vaccine induced immunity increases it will fade into the background and just become one of those seasonal "things" that kids get exposed to early in life, and no one thinks twice about it. I think that is the best case scenario we can hope for at this point. The flu from the 1918 pandemic is still around 100+ years later, I think that Covid will be the same. Hopefully it will follow the pattern and become less virulent in subsequent years.
Coronaviruses (in general) mutate more slowly than flu viruses, so comparing the "dismal" record of the flu vaccine is kind of an apples to oranges thing.
The problem with considering an asymptomatic infection "not sick" is that we don't actually know that yet. We dont know that someone with an asymptomatic COVID-19 infection won't end up with a shingles-like or polio-like secondary illness 20 years from now. I also know a couple of people my age who tested positive back when this started, never really got sick but still over a year later can't complete their old workouts due to extreme fatigue. If your 65+, maybe you take that bet, but at 48, that part of the unknown is daunting I think
It would be awesome to just write off the unvaccinated, but in order for that to work we'd need to quarantine them on an island. There are too many of them to ignore. They are a fertile breeding ground for mutations, one of which that could blow right thru the vaccines being a possibility. And it seems with covid-19, the volume of shedding and time and closeness of exposure is important. So if you walk past a shedder in the grocery, your risk is really low. But if you sit next to an unvaxxed shedding person on a bus for 20 minutes, even vaxxed there is a better chance you will get legit sick. I follow a guy on Twitter whose family of 4, three vaxxed and a little one not vaxxed, went on a road trip. They all felt fluish by the time they got home, and all tested positive and were sick at home for a week or so. The assumption being the little one caught it and spread it to the rest of the family over hours in a car.
I'm not going to throw a party for testing though, I think the current tests are too sensitive, and they aren't even actually sure if vaxxed people can test positive because the reaction to the vaccine mimics whatever the tests look for, or if the tests pick up viral particles circulating harmlessly in the body without infection, or if they do have a minor infection.
Further complicating all this is that children can't be vaxxed yet. While they are at lower risk, there are still cases of children getting sick, hospitalized, and even dying, and that number is increasing, probably because restrictions have been lifted. And I think it's unacceptable to allow kids to get infected because the risk is low, since it's not zero and again, we don't know if that few days of a cough will lead to a lifelong nagging chronic condition we simply haven't catalogued yet.
Darnit @33gail33 I didn't mean this to be a whole disagreeing with you post. There's so much they just don't know yet, and as impatient as we are, it's only been a bit less than 2years,which isn't very long when you're talking about figuring out a new virus. And there are lots of conflicting priorities, so it all depends on which direction you're looking from. Regardless, I share your frustration with those who choose to not get the shot. But I do think we need to get the little ones vaxxed at least before we shrug our shoulders and accept covid-19 as an endemic virus we don't try to stop further. That lack of herd immunity is going to bite us in the butt one way or the other - sick kids or paying higher insurance premiums or wearing masks longer or some other way
17 -
I am and remain a bit perplexed with some of our decisions.
So in Canada we are demanding that Maria from Greece--who has received two doses of Pfizer, self tests once a week for work (twice for hospitality), and gets a third party rapid test every week she travels to a nearby island before being allowed in an open air seating available ferry boat, and who would board after a negative PCR test--we are demanding that Maria quarantines for two weeks on arrival, which means she is staying home.
Yet yesterday I was in two fully (I mean can we please have your hand luggage to check it under for free type fully) full Air Canada/Westjet flights (Listing both alphabetically to protect yesterday's guilty party since they're no different in reality).
We get people to arrive at the airport more than an hour ahead of the flight these days. Even though they're currently discounted these tickets are not exactly free. They also include a good $45 to $75 in airport Improvement and post 9/11 security fees that we all grumble about and yet we end up paying
And we cannot throw in and demand a $20 rapid test before boarding everybody in each other's lap?
And we can demand that people match their ID and have no choice about going through the thermal imaging / metal detection replacement scanner and have their temperatures checked, but we can't demand that the produce proof of two vaccinations and or clean rapid test and or both?
How long are we quarantining the migrant agricultural workers or the work permit workers at the meat plants?
Why are masks no longer obligatory for staff and customers in large and small grocery, department, and any other stores? Yes it is annoying that I can't sip my coffee while shopping. But it's not as if the primary purpose of going shopping is to drink my coffee. So wearing a mask doesn't seem to be The end of the world in that context
And yet we want to quarantine Maria from Greece for 2 weeks.
And I'm being told by smokers who have had no shots and who are allowed to sit next to me in the plane for a few hours that it's too complicated to get an appointment for a shot.. in the same province where it took one phone call for me to get one for the next morning as an out of province visitor (and yes this means I got my second shot one week before my scheduled appointment at my own province instead of cancelling and re-booking it for after my return)
There's many instances where Gale and I do not fully agree; but, I'm wondering if he's right and we're not trying to achieve herd immunity by getting the unvaccinated sick?
Which sort of boggles my mind.
Because in spite of my rant above I'm not yet 2 weeks post second shot and this is not for lack of trying. Which means that there are still quite a few people who are not vaccine hesitant and who have not quite yet fully had their chance for two shots plus 2 weeks.
The option of witnessed self tests, or rapid tests before entering crowded venues exist and in the whole security context and lineups and general costs I don't see how they would be the end of the world. Certainly not as bad as the increased health costs and toll on people.
And before somebody mentions that it costs $150 to do a rapid test commercially, I am talking about large-scale government supported intervention. A UNICEF page that popped up on a search is talking about a reduction in rapid test costs from four US dollars to $2.50.
So I don't think that my $10 to $20 range as the cost to enter a crowded venue and potentially with an app indicated that you've already been tested today is that far out of line ..
I'm not sure how I feel about your testing focus, but as far as I'm concerned proof of vaxx or consecutive negative tests should be required for the time being for any crowded public places, like a plane. Especially in situations where masking isn't realistic or would be stressful for employees to enforce.
I know on TWiV they are very disappointed with the lack of improvement in testing. Theres still disagreement on what exactly is the best particle to test for, and how to determine whether someone is contagious or not. They seem to feel an inexpensive, universal, better targeted test is realistic, but there just hasn't been a push to get it figured out.
I'd bet the professed "logic" of poor Maria's plight is stopping new variants from spreading internationally. But it's pretty clear that's an unwinnable fight, no matter how long you quarantine visitors for. Shockingly (sarcasm) it seems decisions for individual situations are being made with no consideration to other restrictions and with priorities outside of public health. So frustrating.4 -
There's many instances where Gale and I do not fully agree; but, I'm wondering if he's right and we're not trying to achieve herd immunity by getting the unvaccinated sick?
In the US I hear this a lot (from vaccinated people, in that I only know one unvaccinated person over 12, and she is anti covid vaxx) in a frustrated kind of way -- like oh, well, I guess we'll get herd immunity somehow, but what can one do, and it's their choice, not my problem. I think there's huge covid fatigue and also some degree of worry, in that people are aware of possible variants and so on, but also some degree of anger/frustration (as noted) in that most vaccinated people are more likely to be in areas where bad outbreaks were had or were the people who actually tried to follow the rules. Hard to say one should keep acting as if protecting the unvaxxed is #1 priority if one sees them as those running through stores in violation of the rules screaming "freedom" (Braveheart voice) while one has been following the rules and recommendations since March '20.Because in spite of my rant above I'm not yet 2 weeks post second shot and this is not for lack of trying. Which means that there are still quite a few people who are not vaccine hesitant and who have not quite yet fully had their chance for two shots plus 2 weeks.
I don't think this is the case in the US, although I sympathize, so the circumstances are different.The option of witnessed self tests, or rapid tests before entering crowded venues exist and in the whole security context and lineups and general costs I don't see how they would be the end of the world. Certainly not as bad as the increased health costs and toll on people.
But aren't these not actually accurate? I'm not opposed in various circumstances, but I thought that's what they were using at the White House when Trump and others contracted it. Here, I am worried since Lollapalooza is happening (which I am okay with with adequate protections) with only either proof of vaxx or negative test w/in 72 hours, which seems unlikely to be enough even with vaxx proof more likely to be genuine in all cases. (Also we are doing the quarantine from higher case states again thing which has always been absurd bc it's 100% honor system and not enforced.) We don't need a new spike.
I do think the rapid tests are better than nothing for big stuff like Lolla and better than temp checks -- they are/have been used at various universities.2 -
I'm not going to claim that tests are perfect. Far from it. There's both false positives and false negatives.
In time tests can be improved.
False positives can be handled with second and third tests.
False negatives are no different than doing no test at all. So at that point we are arguing that we shouldn't try anything because sometimes we will fail no matter what
I realize that I'm harping a little bit on a sector that has been both affected and that generally has made some effort to mitigate. And where tests are required when flying in from international locations.
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
This is an industry where all the data and contact information for every one of these seats is both fully available and verified. And attendants even note seat swaps.
Text and emails that you can check in, or that the gate has changed, or that the flight will be 10 minutes late.
And yet in January when I was in the middle of a covid exposed 5 row area... there was no text, no email, and no phone call. Just me looking at a website 10 days later and seeing that I hàd been exposed12 -
In places like the U.S. where vaccines are now easy to obtain, it definitely makes sense to require airline passengers provide proof of vaccination. Other countries, though? Aside from helping them get vaccines, and restricting travel until then, what else can you do?!4
-
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.4 -
I'm not going to claim that tests are perfect. Far from it. There's both false positives and false negatives.
In time tests can be improved.
False positives can be handled with second and third tests.
False negatives are no different than doing no test at all. So at that point we are arguing that we shouldn't try anything because sometimes we will fail no matter what
I realize that I'm harping a little bit on a sector that has been both affected and that generally has made some effort to mitigate. And where tests are required when flying in from international locations.
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
This is an industry where all the data and contact information for every one of these seats is both fully available and verified. And attendants even note seat swaps.
Text and emails that you can check in, or that the gate has changed, or that the flight will be 10 minutes late.
And yet in January when I was in the middle of a covid exposed 5 row area... there was no text, no email, and no phone call. Just me looking at a website 10 days later and seeing that I hàd been exposed
So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is? Given the ubiquitousness of Covid in January I would assume an exposure on any flight (thus why we were advised not to travel) and take necessary precautions. Maybe get tested when I was done.
In January the public health advice was to avoid all but essential travel - not sure whether or not your travel was essential - but for those for whom it wasn't the idea that health departments should extend their resources to personally contact those who can't be bothered to follow public health advice, or even check a website for exposure information, strikes me as a bit entitled.
So basically you travelled by air in January, against public health advice, during the height of the third wave, got exposed, potentially spread Covid around. But you don't feel like it is "too onerous" for those of us who followed public health advice from day one, didn't travel, got the vaccine, to continue being excluded from living a normal life, in order to protect all the other people who didn't follow public health advice, by refusing the vaccine.
And people wonder why I am fed up with this.7 -
So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is? Given the ubiquitousness of Covid in January I would assume an exposure on any flight (thus why we were advised not to travel) and take necessary precautions. Maybe get tested when I was done.
In January the public health advice was to avoid all but essential travel - not sure whether or not your travel was essential - but for those for whom it wasn't the idea that health departments should extend their resources to personally contact those who can't be bothered to follow public health advice, or even check a website for exposure information, strikes me as a bit entitled.
So basically you travelled by air in January, against public health advice, during the height of the third wave, got exposed, potentially spread Covid around. But you don't feel like it is "too onerous" for those of us who followed public health advice from day one, didn't travel, got the vaccine, to continue being excluded from living a normal life, in order to protect all the other people who didn't follow public health advice, by refusing the vaccine.
And people wonder why I am fed up with this.
Assumptions many? Did I say I didn't quarantine EVEN THOUGH I WASN'T REQUIRED TO. Did I say I didn't check the web page? How did I magically discover the information I've relayed to you?
For your information, advice by the government was to avoid non-essential travel and to avoid international travel. Interprovincial travel was regulated by the provinces. I can't find the restriction right now, but by my count at the time I was eligible for more than 50% of the BC exemptions, with BC being substantially more restrictive than Alberta.
Though I find it intellectually dishonest that you're basing your argument on the lesser as opposed to greater of government restriction and common sense. And that you continue to use the strawman of people refusing the vaccine.
I have had two vaccines and I still don't want your cooties. Because in spite of your belief that "not sick enough to die or end up in hospital" is good enough, I have zero desire to discover otherwise, or to impose on other people the "joy" of discovering for themselves how sick they can get without "ending up in hospital or dying" when it can be "easily" avoided.
As to travel within the country both in January and now, direction by the government should have been to send a **kitten** text notification to passengers who are in affected rows. Doesn't strike me as particularly onerous when I get a multiple text messages for gate changes or even 10 minute flight delays.
Beyond that, do you think that there is a special medal you deserve for being careful, one that obviates the need for you to not generate problems that can be easily avoided? I don't hear me arguing against simple testing before people spend a lot of time together in close quarters. You're the one arguing that. I don't hear me arguing against the simple notification of individuals whose full particulars are already known and stored in an easily accessible database. You're the one arguing that because? How exactly are these things particularly onerous or expensive?
You're basically arguing that because you've had the vaccine and done your bit (how is getting a vaccine that protects you "doing your bit"? All you've done is protect yourself--no bit doing!) it's none of your concern that you're shedding virus.
Hey I stopped at the four way stop sign. It's my turn to go. So I've done everything right and I will just drive through! No need to check whether there's anything in front of me, because I've done my bit by law, right?
Who is the one acting entitled?
At the end of the day our viewpoint differs in that you believe that pre-COVID is 'normal' and nothing changes post COVID because you're fed up.
Pre 9-11 was normal and nothing should or would change post 9-11....
Pre climate-change was normal and nothing should or will change post climate-change...
I don't quite agree that nothing should change post COVID.9 -
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
0 -
So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is? Given the ubiquitousness of Covid in January I would assume an exposure on any flight (thus why we were advised not to travel) and take necessary precautions. Maybe get tested when I was done.
In January the public health advice was to avoid all but essential travel - not sure whether or not your travel was essential - but for those for whom it wasn't the idea that health departments should extend their resources to personally contact those who can't be bothered to follow public health advice, or even check a website for exposure information, strikes me as a bit entitled.
So basically you travelled by air in January, against public health advice, during the height of the third wave, got exposed, potentially spread Covid around. But you don't feel like it is "too onerous" for those of us who followed public health advice from day one, didn't travel, got the vaccine, to continue being excluded from living a normal life, in order to protect all the other people who didn't follow public health advice, by refusing the vaccine.
And people wonder why I am fed up with this.
Assumptions many? Did I say I didn't quarantine EVEN THOUGH I WASN'T REQUIRED TO. Did I say I didn't check the web page? How did I magically discover the information I've relayed to you?
For your information, advice by the government was to avoid non-essential travel and to avoid international travel. Interprovincial travel was regulated by the provinces. I can't find the restriction right now, but by my count at the time I was eligible for more than 50% of the BC exemptions, with BC being substantially more restrictive than Alberta.
Though I find it intellectually dishonest that you're basing your argument on the lesser as opposed to greater of government restriction and common sense. And that you continue to use the strawman of people refusing the vaccine.
I have had two vaccines and I still don't want your cooties. Because in spite of your belief that "not sick enough to die or end up in hospital" is good enough, I have zero desire to discover otherwise, or to impose on other people the "joy" of discovering for themselves how sick they can get without "ending up in hospital or dying" when it can be "easily" avoided.
As to travel within the country both in January and now, direction by the government should have been to send a **kitten** text notification to passengers who are in affected rows. Doesn't strike me as particularly onerous when I get a multiple text messages for gate changes or even 10 minute flight delays.
You're basically arguing that because you've had the vaccine and done your bit (how is getting a vaccine that protects you "doing your bit"? All you've done is protect yourself--no bit doing!) it's none of your concern that you're shedding virus.
Hey I stopped at the four way stop sign. It's my turn to go. So I've done everything right and I will just drive through! No need to check whether there's anything in front of me, because I've done my bit by law, right?
Who is the one acting entitled?
At the end of the day our viewpoint differs in that you believe that pre-COVID is 'normal' and nothing changes post COVID because you're fed up.
Pre 9-11 was normal and nothing should or would change post 9-11....
Pre climate-change was normal and nothing should or will change post climate-change...
I don't quite agree that nothing should change post COVID.
Assumptions many? Did I say I didn't quarantine EVEN THOUGH I WASN'T REQUIRED TO. Did I say I didn't check the web page? How did I magically discover the information I've relayed to you?
I am aware that you checked the website, you complained that you had to do it and would have preferred that someone text you with the information. I simply pointed out that checking a website to see if you were exposed on a flight during the height of the pandemic doesn't seem like a huge amount of trouble to me.
For your information, advice by the government was to avoid non-essential travel and to avoid international travel. Interprovincial travel was regulated by the provinces. I can't find the restriction right now, but by my count at the time I was eligible for more than 50% of the BC exemptions, with BC being substantially more restrictive than Alberta.
I'm don't really understand this. January was the height of the pandemic, we were locked down here, and people were being advised to stay local. Not sure what "50% of the BC exemptions" even means.
Though I find it intellectually dishonest that you're basing your argument on the lesser as opposed to greater of government restriction and common sense. And that you continue to use the strawman of people refusing the vaccine.
I was drawing a parallel between those who insisted on travelling during the height of the pandemic, and those who refuse the vaccine, as they are both disregarding public health advice, and both contributed to the spread of the virus. Neither of those things was/is mandated, but they were both strongly encouraged.
Beyond that, do you think that there is a special medal you deserve for being careful, one that obviates the need for you to not generate problems that can be easily avoided? I don't hear me arguing against simple testing before people spend a lot of time together in close quarters. You're the one arguing that.
I don't want a medal, I am quite happy with just the vaccine. But having followed public health advice, isolated when neccessary and got the vaccine, with the express intention of not only protecting my health but also moving beyond pandemic life restrictions, I believe that we are ready to do that now. And yes I am arguing against increased testing and restrictions NOW - because highly effective vaccines are readily available to anyone who wants them (here in this country). I was quite happy to do my part regarding testing and isolating when it was required. Now that we have effective vaccines it is time to shift away from strictly case counts, to more meaningful metrics.
I don't hear me arguing against the simple notification of individuals whose full particulars are already known and stored in an easily accessible database. You're the one arguing that because? How exactly are these things particularly onerous or expensive?
I guess because at the height of the pandemic the health department was overwhelmed with, you know, dealing with the pandemic, and having to take the time to notify people who decided to disregard health advice and travel anyway would add to their contact tracing efforts. You realize these people have been working seven days a week for months right? You think they just have staff sitting around waiting to take on more tasks? I mean I didn't even say it was onerous or expensive, you are the one who complained that you had to *gasp* check the website yourself. But now that you mention it contact tracing is time and labour intensive.
You're basically arguing that because you've had the vaccine and done your bit (how is getting a vaccine that protects you "doing your bit"? All you've done is protect yourself--no bit doing!) it's none of your concern that you're shedding virus.
The vaccine protects me, and those around me. If I was exposed it would substantially reduce the viral load, thereby almost eliminating my risk of severe illness, while ALSO greatly reducing my capacity to spread the virus to others.
I have had two vaccines and I still don't want your cooties. Because in spite of your belief that "not sick enough to die or end up in hospital" is good enough, I have zero desire to discover otherwise, or to impose on other people the "joy" of discovering for themselves how sick they can get without "ending up in hospital or dying" when it can be "easily" avoided.
I get that for some people it is going to be difficult to move beyond the "pandemic mentality" that we have been living in the last year. Obviously you are one of those people for whom reintegration back into normal life will be challenging, but at this point I would say it is up to you to isolate yourself if that is how you feel. If we trusted the science all along that drove the decision making on masking, restrictions, lockdowns and vaccines - then why should we not trust the science when it is telling us that vaccines are highly effective? Again - the goal of the vaccines was never to provide sterilizing immunity - it was to prevent severe illness, hospitalization and death. And it is very effective at doing that.6 -
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
Um, check the timing of the comments, as well as your comment I replied to. Am I supposed to have anticipated what 33gail33 might say after I posted? Once again, re the comment of yours I responded to I can't figure out who you thought you were arguing with, but it sure seemed like it was directed toward my post even though I said nothing about Canada or airplane policy.
Specifically, this comment by you: "So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected" seemed to be responsive to a comment by me given a prior response in the same post to something about testing in my post that had absolutely nothing to do with Canada or airplanes. Nor do I think anyone else was talking about airplane flights.
I haven't flown since covid started, and I suspect no US flight could be relied on to even know if someone had covid on the plane (I'd mask on a plane and hope those around me did, as I think is normally required as it is on public transit where I live but dunno about airplane policy since I haven't and so haven't kept up on the rules). If the plane gave notice on the website or through a text (both great!) of a known case, I'd appreciate it, but I doubt either would be available here so I can't get angry with Canada in this situation. I will probably fly later this summer, although I've heard O'Hare is really crazy at the moment so would rather not deal with flying out of it.1 -
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
Um, check the timing of the comments, as well as your comment I replied to. Am I supposed to have anticipated what 33gail33 might say after I posted? Once again, re the comment of yours I responded to I can't figure out who you thought you were arguing with, but it sure seemed like it was directed toward my post even though I said nothing about Canada or airplane policy.
Specifically, this comment by you: "So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected" seemed to be responsive to a comment by me given a prior response in the same post to something about testing in my post that had absolutely nothing to do with Canada or airplanes. Nor do I think anyone else was talking about airplane flights.
I haven't flown since covid started, and I suspect no US flight could be relied on to even know if someone had covid on the plane (I'd mask on a plane and hope those around me did, as I think is normally required as it is on public transit where I live but dunno about airplane policy since I haven't and so haven't kept up on the rules). If the plane gave notice on the website or through a text (both great!) of a known case, I'd appreciate it, but I doubt either would be available here so I can't get angry with Canada in this situation. I will probably fly later this summer, although I've heard O'Hare is really crazy at the moment so would rather not deal with flying out of it.
My response to your saying nobody's arguing this was to point out to you that Gail was.
It's just that her more overt and quotable argument came in after your post, but the arrival of her comment was expected given her position that her circus and her monkeys do not expand post her vaccination
Sorry but none of my responses were mainly to things you've said, so no I have not directed much of what I've said to you specifically other than to disagree with your point that nobody's arguing that.
My discussion is mainly centered to Gail's assertion that we don't need much more than vaccination.
I hope I'm proven wrong and that she's proven right because while other countries seem to be willing to test Canada certainly doesn't seem to be putting any effort in that direction
mask mandates remain during air travel and at airports anywhere I've been. Not so at other enclosed areas.
Being a risk seeking inconsiderate person I continued to wear a kn95 mask unless I'm actively eating or drinking.
As to the difficulty of contact tracing under certain specific circumstances {and that difficulty being the reason why people were not contacted by overwhelmed health workers during the height of the pandemic (and at all other times)} I call BS. Not that the health workers were not overwhelmed, or that full contact tracing would have been prohibitive, but because it's utterly unnecessary By the time you've entered the information on the affected flights web page there's no extra contact tracing involved in order to send out text messages to potentially affected individuals. It is a part-time job for one person per airline who get to notify their potentially affected customers after the government politely tell them to do so instead of keeping quiet in the hope that no one notices5 -
Covid fatigue is real . I feel for those without access to Vaccine or have medical conditions preventing get vaccinated.
There's some that I avoid like the plague. I have not been in places like churches, movie etc since March 2020. Saw a church friend recently outside his shop working on a car so I stopped to say hello. He told
me that people doing god's will can not get Covid-19. I wished him well and made tracks. Normally he is rational. Locally some still believe Covid-19 is just fake news. Some just need to avoided at all cost.I hope they stay as in well away from me. Some people may have brain damage for life.
At age 70 I am clueless as to the statements and actions from some people. I wonder what the NEW normal is going to be like?
10 -
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
Um, check the timing of the comments, as well as your comment I replied to. Am I supposed to have anticipated what 33gail33 might say after I posted? Once again, re the comment of yours I responded to I can't figure out who you thought you were arguing with, but it sure seemed like it was directed toward my post even though I said nothing about Canada or airplane policy.
Specifically, this comment by you: "So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected" seemed to be responsive to a comment by me given a prior response in the same post to something about testing in my post that had absolutely nothing to do with Canada or airplanes. Nor do I think anyone else was talking about airplane flights.
I haven't flown since covid started, and I suspect no US flight could be relied on to even know if someone had covid on the plane (I'd mask on a plane and hope those around me did, as I think is normally required as it is on public transit where I live but dunno about airplane policy since I haven't and so haven't kept up on the rules). If the plane gave notice on the website or through a text (both great!) of a known case, I'd appreciate it, but I doubt either would be available here so I can't get angry with Canada in this situation. I will probably fly later this summer, although I've heard O'Hare is really crazy at the moment so would rather not deal with flying out of it.
My response to your saying nobody's arguing this was to point out to you that Gail was.
But she hadn't before my comment, so how's that relevant?Sorry but none of my responses were mainly to things you've said, so no I have not directed much of what I've said to you specifically other than to disagree with your point that nobody's arguing that.
Your post immediately after mine questioning the accuracy of rapid testing (re the Lolla rules to allow people with vaccines or within 72 hr negative tests) certainly seemed responsive, or at least going off about something about texts no one had discussed.My discussion is mainly centered to Gail's assertion that we don't need much more than vaccination.
If enough people would get vaxxed we wouldn't. In my country (the US) we aren't, so various places are testing and others are still requiring masking for non vaxxed or all (public transit). But it's not actually easy to enforce so I am pushing for more vax. And anyone not vaxxed and not a child has chosen not to be vaxxed here.As to the difficulty of contact tracing under certain specific circumstances {and that difficulty being the reason why people were not contacted by overwhelmed health workers during the height of the pandemic (and at all other times)} I call BS. Not that the health workers were not overwhelmed, or that full contact tracing would have been prohibitive, but because it's utterly unnecessary By the time you've entered the information on the affected flights web page there's no extra contact tracing involved in order to send out text messages to potentially affected individuals. It is a part-time job for one person per airline who get to notify their potentially affected customers after the government politely tell them to do so instead of keeping quiet in the hope that no one notices
I didn't say anything about the reason you were not contacted -- I said contact your gov't or the airline if you have an issue -- I explained why I would not expect to be contacted or to even have a website be especially helpful. Had I flown in Jan (and yes case levels where I am, not to mention death levels, have almost certainly been way higher than where you are), I would have tested before and after, regardless of airline policy. I have no confidence someone with a positive test would have informed the airline or that the airline would have phone numbers that were active for everyone on the plane. I have chosen not to fly since covid began (which has been frustrating) and figured flying would introduce uncertainties (not that other things do not). So yes, that flying means one might get exposed doesn't seem shocking, and I would ask what the airline does to protect people.
I am not anti adding a rapid test given current rates if businesses want to and if someone can show me there's a rapid enough and accurate test for someone wanting to grocery shop or go to a restaurant if someone wants to. But I do think getting more people vaxxed is the better solution. My dad flew from Mexico to the US and had to have a negative test first. I don't think he got any contact tracing after that. I don't think anyone in the US has gotten contact tracing really, maybe Canada is different?2 -
Yes, covid fatigue is real, as are symptoms which echo long standing, previously recognised illnesses. Now, CFS and ME are starting to be seen as autoimmune issues, both in different parts of the "immune" system, possibly reflecting endocrine damage. So as the effects of this virus have been found to get into the many parts of our body's systems, catching covid is nothing to great with enthusiasm as some seem to. (from observations in the UK, deep south, just to leave no confusion about the culture I refer too.)5
-
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
Um, check the timing of the comments, as well as your comment I replied to. Am I supposed to have anticipated what 33gail33 might say after I posted? Once again, re the comment of yours I responded to I can't figure out who you thought you were arguing with, but it sure seemed like it was directed toward my post even though I said nothing about Canada or airplane policy.
Specifically, this comment by you: "So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected" seemed to be responsive to a comment by me given a prior response in the same post to something about testing in my post that had absolutely nothing to do with Canada or airplanes. Nor do I think anyone else was talking about airplane flights.
I haven't flown since covid started, and I suspect no US flight could be relied on to even know if someone had covid on the plane (I'd mask on a plane and hope those around me did, as I think is normally required as it is on public transit where I live but dunno about airplane policy since I haven't and so haven't kept up on the rules). If the plane gave notice on the website or through a text (both great!) of a known case, I'd appreciate it, but I doubt either would be available here so I can't get angry with Canada in this situation. I will probably fly later this summer, although I've heard O'Hare is really crazy at the moment so would rather not deal with flying out of it.
We flew about a month ago. Masks are required at all times in airports and on planes in the US.
4 -
@lemurcat2 Come on now - surely you can read my mind!!
3 -
So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
Um, check the timing of the comments, as well as your comment I replied to. Am I supposed to have anticipated what 33gail33 might say after I posted? Once again, re the comment of yours I responded to I can't figure out who you thought you were arguing with, but it sure seemed like it was directed toward my post even though I said nothing about Canada or airplane policy.
Specifically, this comment by you: "So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected" seemed to be responsive to a comment by me given a prior response in the same post to something about testing in my post that had absolutely nothing to do with Canada or airplanes. Nor do I think anyone else was talking about airplane flights.
I haven't flown since covid started, and I suspect no US flight could be relied on to even know if someone had covid on the plane (I'd mask on a plane and hope those around me did, as I think is normally required as it is on public transit where I live but dunno about airplane policy since I haven't and so haven't kept up on the rules). If the plane gave notice on the website or through a text (both great!) of a known case, I'd appreciate it, but I doubt either would be available here so I can't get angry with Canada in this situation. I will probably fly later this summer, although I've heard O'Hare is really crazy at the moment so would rather not deal with flying out of it.
My response to your saying nobody's arguing this was to point out to you that Gail was.
It's just that her more overt and quotable argument came in after your post, but the arrival of her comment was expected given her position that her circus and her monkeys do not expand post her vaccination
Sorry but none of my responses were mainly to things you've said, so no I have not directed much of what I've said to you specifically other than to disagree with your point that nobody's arguing that.
My discussion is mainly centered to Gail's assertion that we don't need much more than vaccination.
I hope I'm proven wrong and that she's proven right because while other countries seem to be willing to test Canada certainly doesn't seem to be putting any effort in that direction
mask mandates remain during air travel and at airports anywhere I've been. Not so at other enclosed areas.
Being a risk seeking inconsiderate person I continued to wear a kn95 mask unless I'm actively eating or drinking.
As to the difficulty of contact tracing under certain specific circumstances {and that difficulty being the reason why people were not contacted by overwhelmed health workers during the height of the pandemic (and at all other times)} I call BS. Not that the health workers were not overwhelmed, or that full contact tracing would have been prohibitive, but because it's utterly unnecessary By the time you've entered the information on the affected flights web page there's no extra contact tracing involved in order to send out text messages to potentially affected individuals. It is a part-time job for one person per airline who get to notify their potentially affected customers after the government politely tell them to do so instead of keeping quiet in the hope that no one notices
I'm not sure you realize how many flights are in the air at any given time. At this moment in time (I just checked) there are close to 14,000 worldwide. It is definitely not a part-time job for one airline employee to contact trace exposures, especially back in January when I would guess that *most* flights would have a positive case.
I'm also not sure of the ethics of giving a part time airline worker access to passenger health information - I would think that would be the mandate of the health department not the airline (but I am open to correction on that because it is an assumption on my part that I have neither the time nor inclination to confirm rn).6 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected.
Seems like this is a question for the airline in question or the relevant gov't. I don't think anyone here is saying this is how it should be handled.So you think that a rapid test for every passenger isn't too onerous, but taking responsibility for your own health by checking a website for exposure information is?
Um, check the timing of the comments, as well as your comment I replied to. Am I supposed to have anticipated what 33gail33 might say after I posted? Once again, re the comment of yours I responded to I can't figure out who you thought you were arguing with, but it sure seemed like it was directed toward my post even though I said nothing about Canada or airplane policy.
Specifically, this comment by you: "So please explain to me in little words that I can understand why people have to keep looking at a government website to see whether a flight they were on had covid exposure and which rows were affected" seemed to be responsive to a comment by me given a prior response in the same post to something about testing in my post that had absolutely nothing to do with Canada or airplanes. Nor do I think anyone else was talking about airplane flights.
I haven't flown since covid started, and I suspect no US flight could be relied on to even know if someone had covid on the plane (I'd mask on a plane and hope those around me did, as I think is normally required as it is on public transit where I live but dunno about airplane policy since I haven't and so haven't kept up on the rules). If the plane gave notice on the website or through a text (both great!) of a known case, I'd appreciate it, but I doubt either would be available here so I can't get angry with Canada in this situation. I will probably fly later this summer, although I've heard O'Hare is really crazy at the moment so would rather not deal with flying out of it.
We flew about a month ago. Masks are required at all times in airports and on planes in the US.
That's good. I knew they were a while back, but wasn't sure if they still were.2 -
Easy and direct article with information from Dr. Wen. I encourage everyone to click the link and to froward as well.
How worried should vaccinated people be about Covid-19 breakthrough infections?
"...The most important thing the Covid-19 vaccines do is to protect against hospitalization and death. They have proven to be remarkably effective at this, even with the Delta variant. Breakthrough infections are to be expected, and the more infections occur among the unvaccinated, the more infections there will be among the vaccinated.
The key to stopping the pandemic is for us to reach a high enough level of immunity that the virus has nowhere else to go. We can get there — but all of us have to do our part and get vaccinated. Vaccination protects the individual, and it protects others around us, too."
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/health/breakthrough-covid-infections-wellness/index.html11
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions