News Article: COVID 19 POSITIVITY THREAD: Useful links, hopeful news etc

[cheswick]

There's been next to zero evidence of transmission in the schools. Cases yes, but further transmission to other kids, no. So the kids in the school that are infected are identified, have picked it up elsewhere (i.e. NOT at school), subsequently stay home and aren't spreading it. What would closing do? If there's evidence of spread in schools, by all means, close them, but until there is you're shooting in the dark hoping to hit something and achieving nothing in the process except negative outcomes for a variety of people. Those outcomes aren't Covid related.

There's reasonable evidence that yes the bars should not have re-opened but minimal evidence of transmission from restaurants. Straight-forward restrictions on restaurants (50% capacity (which isn't really enough), 1 hour time limit, maximum 4 people per table, maximum 2 drinks, close at 9 P.M.) should have been sufficient. The Pancake House near me operated under all government restrictions but operated only from 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. to serve the seniors that are over-represented there. Was there spread going on there? Highly doubtful. Shutting them down when they put even greater restrictions on themselves is helpful?

As far as care homes go, we can amply fault our inglorious leader in Ottawa as well. They've done zip, zero, nada to make changes to the system.

Pretty much this. There have only been 4 or 5 schools with in school transmission. Considering the crush of lack of available staff going forward (due to sickness / isolations) for various essential services, forcing parents to stay home with their kids would be tricky. Also antidotally from a few of teacher friends, the closure last year set a lot of kids way back. Like they didn't do anything at all for the third of the year and regressed even.

 

[ps241]

There's been next to zero evidence of transmission in the schools. Cases yes, but further transmission to other kids, no. So the kids in the school that are infected are identified, have picked it up elsewhere (i.e. NOT at school), subsequently stay home and aren't spreading it. What would closing do? If there's evidence of spread in schools, by all means, close them, but until there is you're shooting in the dark hoping to hit something and achieving nothing in the process except negative outcomes for a variety of people. Those outcomes aren't Covid related.

There's reasonable evidence that yes the bars should not have re-opened but minimal evidence of transmission from restaurants. Straight-forward restrictions on restaurants (50% capacity (which isn't really enough), 1 hour time limit, maximum 4 people per table, maximum 2 drinks, close at 9 P.M.) should have been sufficient. The Pancake House near me operated under all government restrictions but operated only from 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. to serve the seniors that are over-represented there. Was there spread going on there? Highly doubtful. Shutting them down when they put even greater restrictions on themselves is helpful?

As far as care homes go, we can amply fault our inglorious leader in Ottawa as well. They've done zip, zero, nada to make changes to the system.

great post

I agree with what you are saying here.

 

[Duke749]

I disagree, Covid is starting to run loose through our hospitals and personal care homes right now and our hospital critical care wards are getting stretched to the limit. Deaths are starting to pile up. Our provincial government had their fingers up their collective bums for months and did little to prepare for a second wave, instead they put up billboards about Manitoba's glorious reopening plan. So if it helps save some more lives and reduces cases and it made our somewhat absentee Premier wake up, it is a positive.

I should probably clarify this isn't a total lockdown. Essential stores, businesses, pharmacies, health care related etc will still be open.

You think it’s positive that people are going to be sent back to the unemployment line so they can’t pay their bills, rent, mortgage, feed their kids? You think it’s positive some businesses will be shut down yet never reopen. You’re saving lives and ruining others no matter which side you take. It’s a no win. There is nothing positive about that.

Manitoba itself has about 8,500 cases and about 110 deaths. That is actually directly comparable to Cherokee County where I live.

 

[ps241]

Pretty much this. There have only been 4 or 5 schools with in school transmission. Considering the crush of lack of available staff going forward (due to sickness / isolations) for various essential services, forcing parents to stay home with their kids would be tricky. Also antidotally from a few of teacher friends, the closure last year set a lot of kids way back. Like they didn't do anything at all for the third of the year and regressed even.

I agree stay the coarse with schools for now since they are not transmission hubs.

 

[Whileee]

There's been next to zero evidence of transmission in the schools. Cases yes, but further transmission to other kids, no. So the kids in the school that are infected are identified, have picked it up elsewhere (i.e. NOT at school), subsequently stay home and aren't spreading it. What would closing do? If there's evidence of spread in schools, by all means, close them, but until there is you're shooting in the dark hoping to hit something and achieving nothing in the process except negative outcomes for a variety of people. Those outcomes aren't Covid related.

There's reasonable evidence that yes the bars should not have re-opened but minimal evidence of transmission from restaurants. Straight-forward restrictions on restaurants (50% capacity (which isn't really enough), 1 hour time limit, maximum 4 people per table, maximum 2 drinks, close at 9 P.M.) should have been sufficient. The Pancake House near me operated under all government restrictions but operated only from 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. to serve the seniors that are over-represented there. Was there spread going on there? Highly doubtful. Shutting them down when they put even greater restrictions on themselves is helpful?

As far as care homes go, we can amply fault our inglorious leader in Ottawa as well. They've done zip, zero, nada to make changes to the system.

Actually, I don't think we have the necessary data to assess whether there has been substantial transmission within schools or related to restaurants. Manitoba just isn't doing enough testing (especially of asymptomatic people) to know what the transmission patterns are.

 

[Jets 31]

There's been next to zero evidence of transmission in the schools. Cases yes, but further transmission to other kids, no. So the kids in the school that are infected are identified, have picked it up elsewhere (i.e. NOT at school), subsequently stay home and aren't spreading it. What would closing do? If there's evidence of spread in schools, by all means, close them, but until there is you're shooting in the dark hoping to hit something and achieving nothing in the process except negative outcomes for a variety of people. Those outcomes aren't Covid related.

There's reasonable evidence that yes the bars should not have re-opened but minimal evidence of transmission from restaurants. Straight-forward restrictions on restaurants (50% capacity (which isn't really enough), 1 hour time limit, maximum 4 people per table, maximum 2 drinks, close at 9 P.M.) should have been sufficient. The Pancake House near me operated under all government restrictions but operated only from 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. to serve the seniors that are over-represented there. Was there spread going on there? Highly doubtful. Shutting them down when they put even greater restrictions on themselves is helpful?

As far as care homes go, we can amply fault our inglorious leader in Ottawa as well. They've done zip, zero, nada to make changes to the system.

You don't think with our counts so high right now it would help? I gotta figure it would, i don't know , just trying to cover all bases. I read the other day that Manitoba had the 18th highest positivity rate per capita in the world right now, scary stuff.

 

[Jets 31]

You think it’s positive that people are going to be sent back to the unemployment line so they can’t pay their bills, rent, mortgage, feed their kids? You think it’s positive some businesses will be shut down yet never reopen. You’re saving lives and ruining others no matter which side you take. It’s a no win. There is nothing positive about that.

Manitoba itself has about 8,500 cases and about 110 deaths. That is actually directly comparable to Cherokee County where I live.

Totally agree, we can't have people out of work or businesses closing. This whole pandemic is nothing but bad all around.

 

[Ducky10]

It's disappointing that since this began in the Spring, they have pretty much learned nothing about transmission patterns and hubs, which would allow a more targeted approach to any kind of shutdown. They've also continued to be woefully inadequate in expanding testing to be able to determine these things as well.

I run 3 large retail stores in Winnipeg, we follow all the guidelines set out by the province, masks, distancing, cleaning etc. These are the things health officials have said for months we need to do in order to help control the spread of the virus. We've had one positive test since the Spring, with no further transmissions from that case. Yet here we sit, being shut down again because none of them can get their collective heads out of their asses to figure out where the significant sources of spread is coming from and actually do something tangible about it.

My son's baseball league and Fall program ran successfully all summer and Fall, followed all the guidelines, not a single reported case. Shut down from doing anything further despite all of this, because clearly this is where transmission is occurring.

Public health official have lost all credibility, they have no idea what is going on or what to do about it. They are throwing darts blindfolded and don't care about any residual damage.

Pallister is a clown.

 

[surixon]

You think it’s positive that people are going to be sent back to the unemployment line so they can’t pay their bills, rent, mortgage, feed their kids? You think it’s positive some businesses will be shut down yet never reopen. You’re saving lives and ruining others no matter which side you take. It’s a no win. There is nothing positive about that.

Manitoba itself has about 8,500 cases and about 110 deaths. That is actually directly comparable to Cherokee County where I live.

Simple fact of the matter is that the health care system is getting overrun and we can't keep supporting near record number cases on a daily basis so something needed to be done.

No there is nothing positive about it but this is where you need your government to step up and help out the businesses that are forced to close their doors with grants and financial support to keep them viable. As for individuals so far our federal Government has done a solid job taking care of the unemployed individuals with CERB and other programs.

It's our Provincial Government that has dropped the ball in terms of support to companies. They also haven't at all adequately figured out how this virus has been transmitted.

 

[Howard Chuck]

More positive news today.

U.S. allows emergency use of Eli Lilly's Covid antibody therapy


Interesting this is targeted at the higher risk individuals and can be used to treat mild-to-moderate Covid-19 in adults and pediatric patients over the age of 12, the FDA said. This is helping reduce the need for hospitalization and emergency room visits with patients at high risk of the disease. The Company also has plans to pursue a similar authorization in late November for its two-antibody cocktail, which is described as having helped reduce the viral levels even more than the approved single-antibody treatment.

The more weapons that we have to fight this battle the better, whether it's vaccines or treatments or anything else. I doubt very much that we will eliminate it completely, but if we can stop the bleeding enough to get back some sort of normalcy, that would be incredible.

 

[Howard Chuck]

Nothing important really, i work in a large grocery store. Well i guess people need food but i'm no doctor or anything like that.

People like you are essential and put themselves at risk so that the rest of us can eat

Don't sell yourself short!

 

[buggs]

Actually, I don't think we have the necessary data to assess whether there has been substantial transmission within schools or related to restaurants. Manitoba just isn't doing enough testing (especially of asymptomatic people) to know what the transmission patterns are.

On restaurants, I'm basing it anecdotally (at absolute best). Roussin has repeatedly indicated that bars/drinking implicates high risk behavior and that's why they were shut down first again. The case loads are highest among the 20-30 year olds. Not surprising since they feel indestructible and have behaviors that are rather careless due to those feelings. I can tell you that our neighbors across the back fence had a party with 30 people the first night the bars were shut down. The kids in the house are 21 and 23. They don't care. So bars, yes.

I expect that lounges may have played a role as well because we've been at Joey's and seen groups of youngun's at separate tables moving about the lounge to chat with each other on occasions. This in spite of requests of staff to limit their movement within the establishment. You don't see that behavior on the restaurant side for the most part so I suspect, with zero proof, that transmission is more limited than a lounge/bar situation would be. The behaviors are different and speculatively on my part I think that plays a tremendous role.

On schools I'm paraphrasing Roussin so while there may not be ample data, we need to be at least a little bit pragmatic here. Roussin has stated that there's been "no" (and I don't know if no means zero or extremely limited) evidence of transmission in schools which is why in spite of relatively large groupings (= class size). He has clearly stated that there are cases (I know of two specifically in St. Boniface) and has also clearly stated he's not seeing subsequent transmission.

I don't disagree with you at all that we aren't doing enough testing. But everyone is flying by the seat of their pants. I'm fully supportive of shutting down aspects if there's sufficient evidence of high risk of transmission but I'm adamantly opposed to doing so when the evidence is lacking. That's clearly a reactive approach versus a proactive approach but that proactive approach has major potential for damages that aren't being accounted for very much at this point (spousal abuse, various forms of drug abuse, suicide, bankruptcy, etc.). In a novel situation, such as we are (and even 8 months in I consider this to still be highly novel) we need to make a balanced approach as best we can. We can't commit economic suicide either. Work pragmatically with what we can, where we can.

The data you're asking for won't be in place for years, if ever, because we don't have sufficient testing as you suggest. We likely aren't going to ever have that data because it's likely not being recorded in detail or teased out anyway. So I'm rather leery of shutting down the economy wholesale because of presumptions. I'm trusting Roussin to figure this out. He's guessing, to be sure, but better him than a purely political figure. If Roussin comes out and says 'hey, we're seeing evidence of widespread transmission in schools and we need to shut them down" then I'll be accepting of that.

 

[LucianoBorsato]

You think it’s positive that people are going to be sent back to the unemployment line so they can’t pay their bills, rent, mortgage, feed their kids? You think it’s positive some businesses will be shut down yet never reopen. You’re saving lives and ruining others no matter which side you take. It’s a no win. There is nothing positive about that.

Manitoba itself has about 8,500 cases and about 110 deaths. That is actually directly comparable to Cherokee County where I live.

I said positive in the sense that it will help get numbers under control, help the health care system and it seems to have woken our government up out of their stupor. Of course there are negative aspects to it. There actually are positive and negative aspects to a situation, even a real shitty one. Finding some positives is actually a valuable coping mechanism.

Sorry, I don't view things purely as black and white, although that seems to be the default way of thinking now.

 

[Howard Chuck]

On restaurants, I'm basing it anecdotally (at absolute best). Roussin has repeatedly indicated that bars/drinking implicates high risk behavior and that's why they were shut down first again. The case loads are highest among the 20-30 year olds. Not surprising since they feel indestructible and have behaviors that are rather careless due to those feelings. I can tell you that our neighbors across the back fence had a party with 30 people the first night the bars were shut down. The kids in the house are 21 and 23. They don't care. So bars, yes.

I expect that lounges may have played a role as well because we've been at Joey's and seen groups of youngun's at separate tables moving about the lounge to chat with each other on occasions. This in spite of requests of staff to limit their movement within the establishment. You don't see that behavior on the restaurant side for the most part so I suspect, with zero proof, that transmission is more limited than a lounge/bar situation would be. The behaviors are different and speculatively on my part I think that plays a tremendous role.

On schools I'm paraphrasing Roussin so while there may not be ample data, we need to be at least a little bit pragmatic here. Roussin has stated that there's been "no" (and I don't know if no means zero or extremely limited) evidence of transmission in schools which is why in spite of relatively large groupings (= class size). He has clearly stated that there are cases (I know of two specifically in St. Boniface) and has also clearly stated he's not seeing subsequent transmission.

I don't disagree with you at all that we aren't doing enough testing. But everyone is flying by the seat of their pants. I'm fully supportive of shutting down aspects if there's sufficient evidence of high risk of transmission but I'm adamantly opposed to doing so when the evidence is lacking. That's clearly a reactive approach versus a proactive approach but that proactive approach has major potential for damages that aren't being accounted for very much at this point (spousal abuse, various forms of drug abuse, suicide, bankruptcy, etc.). In a novel situation, such as we are (and even 8 months in I consider this to still be highly novel) we need to make a balanced approach as best we can. We can't commit economic suicide either. Work pragmatically with what we can, where we can.

The data you're asking for won't be in place for years, if ever, because we don't have sufficient testing as you suggest. We likely aren't going to ever have that data because it's likely not being recorded in detail or teased out anyway. So I'm rather leery of shutting down the economy wholesale because of presumptions. I'm trusting Roussin to figure this out. He's guessing, to be sure, but better him than a purely political figure. If Roussin comes out and says 'hey, we're seeing evidence of widespread transmission in schools and we need to shut them down" then I'll be accepting of that.

I agree. If we can ever get on top of this regarding testing an tracing, to the point where some real analysis can take place, we will be much better off. This will allow us to do targeted shut downs of places where we know are high risk, and allow other low risk places to remain in operation.

I understand that we are still scrambling here and everyone is doing the best they can. I really hope that we can get to the point of targeting specific places instead of general swaths of places.

As someone above said, there are businesses and activities that have done an incredible job of maintaining safe operations and have had no transmissions at all, but they will get closed down with other similar businesses that didn't do as good of a job during this. I know from personal experience that there is a vast range of proper precautions being exercised within the same business groups.

Human nature I guess.

 

[Howard Chuck]

I said positive in the sense that it will help get numbers under control, help the health care system and it seems to have woken our government up out of their stupor. Of course there are negative aspects to it. There actually are positive and negative aspects to a situation, even a real shitty one. Finding some positives is actually a valuable coping mechanism.

Sorry, I don't view things purely as black and white, although that seems to be the default way of thinking now.

No comments directed at anyone here, but most views are black/white now. There is little compromise anymore, but that's a different topic

I understand what you were getting at.

 

[surixon]

On restaurants, I'm basing it anecdotally (at absolute best). Roussin has repeatedly indicated that bars/drinking implicates high risk behavior and that's why they were shut down first again. The case loads are highest among the 20-30 year olds. Not surprising since they feel indestructible and have behaviors that are rather careless due to those feelings. I can tell you that our neighbors across the back fence had a party with 30 people the first night the bars were shut down. The kids in the house are 21 and 23. They don't care. So bars, yes.

I expect that lounges may have played a role as well because we've been at Joey's and seen groups of youngun's at separate tables moving about the lounge to chat with each other on occasions. This in spite of requests of staff to limit their movement within the establishment. You don't see that behavior on the restaurant side for the most part so I suspect, with zero proof, that transmission is more limited than a lounge/bar situation would be. The behaviors are different and speculatively on my part I think that plays a tremendous role.

On schools I'm paraphrasing Roussin so while there may not be ample data, we need to be at least a little bit pragmatic here. Roussin has stated that there's been "no" (and I don't know if no means zero or extremely limited) evidence of transmission in schools which is why in spite of relatively large groupings (= class size). He has clearly stated that there are cases (I know of two specifically in St. Boniface) and has also clearly stated he's not seeing subsequent transmission.

I don't disagree with you at all that we aren't doing enough testing. But everyone is flying by the seat of their pants. I'm fully supportive of shutting down aspects if there's sufficient evidence of high risk of transmission but I'm adamantly opposed to doing so when the evidence is lacking. That's clearly a reactive approach versus a proactive approach but that proactive approach has major potential for damages that aren't being accounted for very much at this point (spousal abuse, various forms of drug abuse, suicide, bankruptcy, etc.). In a novel situation, such as we are (and even 8 months in I consider this to still be highly novel) we need to make a balanced approach as best we can. We can't commit economic suicide either. Work pragmatically with what we can, where we can.

The data you're asking for won't be in place for years, if ever, because we don't have sufficient testing as you suggest. We likely aren't going to ever have that data because it's likely not being recorded in detail or teased out anyway. So I'm rather leery of shutting down the economy wholesale because of presumptions. I'm trusting Roussin to figure this out. He's guessing, to be sure, but better him than a purely political figure. If Roussin comes out and says 'hey, we're seeing evidence of widespread transmission in schools and we need to shut them down" then I'll be accepting of that.

The problem is that this govenrment missed the window to take a proactive approach. We are shutting everything down because things are so bad that its forced them to be reactive.

A proactive approach would have included:

• Increasing testing capacity in anticipation for a large second wave during flu season
• Pushing for and acquiring rapid testing capability and distributing it for widespread testing
• Learning what happened in personal care homes in other provinces and implementing updated measures
• Ensuring our front line health workers had adequate PPE
• Modeling scenarios and keeping places where you cant trust the population demographic (late teens and 20nyear olds) to practice social distancing closed.

We are where we are because this government has been reactionary at every step this fall after being too busy parting themselves on the back all summer then adequately planning and being prepared for what is happening.

 

[DRW204]

not surprised that shit got locked down, but man it's frustrating. my mental health was in the gutter during spring, and now the fact i can't see my fam, with winter coming up even walks outside will be limited. just bullshit.

all my gym equipment is at my parents too, so i can't even go there anymore.

 

[LucianoBorsato]

I agree. If we can ever get on top of this regarding testing an tracing, to the point where some real analysis can take place, we will be much better off. This will allow us to do targeted shut downs of places where we know are high risk, and allow other low risk places to remain in operation.

I understand that we are still scrambling here and everyone is doing the best they can. I really hope that we can get to the point of targeting specific places instead of general swaths of places.

As someone above said, there are businesses and activities that have done an incredible job of maintaining safe operations and have had no transmissions at all, but they will get closed down with other similar businesses that didn't do as good of a job during this. I know from personal experience that there is a vast range of proper precautions being exercised within the same business groups.

Human nature I guess.

That Hookah restaurant place on Corydon comes to mind, of a place that didn't do as good of a job maintaining safe operations. Yet all they did was give them a few fines at the time IIRC, and it obviously wasn't much of a deterrent.

 

[buggs]

The problem is that this govenrment missed the window to take a proactive approach. We are shutting everything down because things are so bad that its forced them to be reactive.

A proactive approach would have included:

• Increasing testing capacity in anticipation for a large second wave during flu season
• Pushing for and acquiring rapid testing capability and distributing it for widespread testing
• Learning what happened in personal care homes in other provinces and implementing updated measures
• Ensuring our front line health workers had adequate PPE
• Modeling scenarios and keeping places where you cant trust the population demographic (late teens and 20nyear olds) to practice social distancing closed.

We are where we are because this government has been reactionary at every step this fall after being too busy parting themselves on the back all summer then adequately planning and being prepared for what is happening.

How is that approach any different than Horgan (NDP) in BC? Or Trudeau (Liberal) in Ottawa? Ottawa for the longest time blocked rapid testing kits for reasons I can't fathom. You're blaming Pallister for what Trudeau didn't allow? The kits weren't allowed to be released in Canada by Health Canada.

It's all fine to throw shade at Pallister but he's not done anything different than any other province. If our Federal government gave a shit about old people they'd have looked at Ontario's first wave disaster and done something, anything. Did they? Nope. But they could have mandated staffing restrictions that disallow staff from one facility to move to another. Yes, certainly Pallister could have done that on his own but the presumption (erroneous as it was) was that Winnipeg is boring, small and no one comes here. In a novel situation it's rather impossible to predict the future.

Are you aware that the Federal government shut down three warehouses(that's fully one third of capacity) of PPE that the preceding Federal government had stockpiled Canada cut number of stockpile storage locations for critical medical supplies by one third in past two years That's not just PPE for Ottawa, that's the entire country. You know where the surplus was sent, right? There was ample PPE available this summer in a worldwide pandemic that would have allowed stockpiling of PPE? That's a bit of convenient pipedream.

I'm not sure you could accurately model that behavior of young people without being accused of selective bias and discrimination. After all, look at the social media of young people: they're all highly open and accepting, opposed to bullying (hah, what a frickin' joke that is), woke and environmentally conscious. If you modeled based off social media you'd have reached precisely the wrong conclusion. As an old guy yelling at clouds I agree with you completely but this is now and we aren't allowed to model behavior that negatively affects anyone.

We are where we are now because EVERY government across this country (world?) is in a novel situation and has underestimated (as did I at the start by a substantial margin) this virus substantially.

 

[surixon]

How is that approach any different than Horgan (NDP) in BC? Or Trudeau (Liberal) in Ottawa? Ottawa for the longest time blocked rapid testing kits for reasons I can't fathom. You're blaming Pallister for what Trudeau didn't allow? The kits weren't allowed to be released in Canada by Health Canada.

It's all fine to throw shade at Pallister but he's not done anything different than any other province. If our Federal government gave a shit about old people they'd have looked at Ontario's first wave disaster and done something, anything. Did they? Nope. But they could have mandated staffing restrictions that disallow staff from one facility to move to another. Yes, certainly Pallister could have done that on his own but the presumption (erroneous as it was) was that Winnipeg is boring, small and no one comes here. In a novel situation it's rather impossible to predict the future.

Are you aware that the Federal government shut down three warehouses(that's fully one third of capacity) of PPE that the preceding Federal government had stockpiled Canada cut number of stockpile storage locations for critical medical supplies by one third in past two years That's not just PPE for Ottawa, that's the entire country. You know where the surplus was sent, right? There was ample PPE available this summer in a worldwide pandemic that would have allowed stockpiling of PPE? That's a bit of convenient pipedream.

I'm not sure you could accurately model that behavior of young people without being accused of selective bias and discrimination. After all, look at the social media of young people: they're all highly open and accepting, opposed to bullying (hah, what a frickin' joke that is), woke and environmentally conscious. If you modeled based off social media you'd have reached precisely the wrong conclusion. As an old guy yelling at clouds I agree with you completely but this is now and we aren't allowed to model behavior that negatively affects anyone.

We are where we are now because EVERY government across this country (world?) is in a novel situation and has underestimated (as did I at the start by a substantial margin) this virus substantially.

Oh Trudeau has his fair share of blame here as well but I will give him small props for atleast taking care of the individual people and doing a decent amount for companies with their financial aid programs.

I will not be giving Pallister any props for failing to help individuals and businesses while electing to not open the purse strings. I will not give him props for not adequately giving his front line workers adequate PPE. Those are all his responsibilities and he has failed at them. There is no reason whatsoever that we should have double the cases as a similar population sized province as Saskatchewan.

 

[Eyeseeing]

Oh Trudeau has his fair share of blame here as well but I will give him small props for atleast taking care of the individual people and doing a decent amount for companies with their financial aid programs.

I will not be giving Pallister any props for failing to help individuals and businesses while electing to not open the purse strings. I will not give him props for not adequately giving his front line workers adequate PPE. Those are all his responsibilities and he has failed at them. There is no reason whatsoever that we should have double the cases as a similar population sized province as Saskatchewan.

Our city alone has 3/4 of the population within the Perimeter so that in itself differentiates us from Saskatchewan which is far more spread out.
Saskatoon and Regina are pretty small cities.
They have several medium size cities and tons more small towns.

 

[Ducky10]

I won't be giving Pallister any props for still allowing outbreaks to occur in seniors homes, 8 months after the rest of the world learned they were the most vulnerable places for the virus. What happened at Maples is beyond disgusting.

I fully realize such talk will risk my spot on Pallister's "Team Manitoba".

 

[DRW204]

I won't be giving Pallister any props for still allowing outbreaks to occur in seniors homes, 8 months after the rest of the world learned they were the most vulnerable places for the virus. What happened at Maples is beyond disgusting.

I fully realize such talk will risk my spot on Pallister's "Team Manitoba".

i don't follow politics as much as i should. but he and Cam Friesen both come off as absolute clowns to me

 

[Whileee]

On restaurants, I'm basing it anecdotally (at absolute best). Roussin has repeatedly indicated that bars/drinking implicates high risk behavior and that's why they were shut down first again. The case loads are highest among the 20-30 year olds. Not surprising since they feel indestructible and have behaviors that are rather careless due to those feelings. I can tell you that our neighbors across the back fence had a party with 30 people the first night the bars were shut down. The kids in the house are 21 and 23. They don't care. So bars, yes.

I expect that lounges may have played a role as well because we've been at Joey's and seen groups of youngun's at separate tables moving about the lounge to chat with each other on occasions. This in spite of requests of staff to limit their movement within the establishment. You don't see that behavior on the restaurant side for the most part so I suspect, with zero proof, that transmission is more limited than a lounge/bar situation would be. The behaviors are different and speculatively on my part I think that plays a tremendous role.

On schools I'm paraphrasing Roussin so while there may not be ample data, we need to be at least a little bit pragmatic here. Roussin has stated that there's been "no" (and I don't know if no means zero or extremely limited) evidence of transmission in schools which is why in spite of relatively large groupings (= class size). He has clearly stated that there are cases (I know of two specifically in St. Boniface) and has also clearly stated he's not seeing subsequent transmission.

I don't disagree with you at all that we aren't doing enough testing. But everyone is flying by the seat of their pants. I'm fully supportive of shutting down aspects if there's sufficient evidence of high risk of transmission but I'm adamantly opposed to doing so when the evidence is lacking. That's clearly a reactive approach versus a proactive approach but that proactive approach has major potential for damages that aren't being accounted for very much at this point (spousal abuse, various forms of drug abuse, suicide, bankruptcy, etc.). In a novel situation, such as we are (and even 8 months in I consider this to still be highly novel) we need to make a balanced approach as best we can. We can't commit economic suicide either. Work pragmatically with what we can, where we can.

The data you're asking for won't be in place for years, if ever, because we don't have sufficient testing as you suggest. We likely aren't going to ever have that data because it's likely not being recorded in detail or teased out anyway. So I'm rather leery of shutting down the economy wholesale because of presumptions. I'm trusting Roussin to figure this out. He's guessing, to be sure, but better him than a purely political figure. If Roussin comes out and says 'hey, we're seeing evidence of widespread transmission in schools and we need to shut them down" then I'll be accepting of that.

Roussin can't "figure it out" if he doesn't have the data (or the analytical resources).
Even if he does figure it out, he might not have the latitude to take decisions due to political / bureaucratic pressure.

It would be beyond remarkable if there is actually no transmission in school contexts, given the high community transmission levels now. I'm not persuaded that they are actually doing enough testing to actually understand how much transmission is happening within schools, and I think they might not like the answer in any case.

The reality is that the health care system and the vulnerable populations can't tolerate sustained transmission at this level. Things will get worse before they get better. Timing is everything - if public health had put in place more controls earlier (including a sharp lock-down), the duration would have been shorter and a lot of the morbidity and mortality and strain on the health system would have been avoided. Waiting until forced into a lock-down is basically the worst of all possible options, because you get a lot of health burden, and end up having to lock down more severely and for longer.

 

[Whileee]

The problem is that this govenrment missed the window to take a proactive approach. We are shutting everything down because things are so bad that its forced them to be reactive.

A proactive approach would have included:

• Increasing testing capacity in anticipation for a large second wave during flu season
• Pushing for and acquiring rapid testing capability and distributing it for widespread testing
• Learning what happened in personal care homes in other provinces and implementing updated measures
• Ensuring our front line health workers had adequate PPE
• Modeling scenarios and keeping places where you cant trust the population demographic (late teens and 20nyear olds) to practice social distancing closed.

We are where we are because this government has been reactionary at every step this fall after being too busy parting themselves on the back all summer then adequately planning and being prepared for what is happening.

Couldn't agree more. Every reaction has been too late, limiting options severely. When school started, there should have been more constraints in other sectors to begin with. As soon as this big wave was obvious (about 1 month ago), they could have shut it down with a brief / sharp intervention.