Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't get me wrong - I love Canada - but here's an interesting observation.
Canada had fewer deaths and fewer cases per-capita - by a pretty good margin - than Ohio. In absolute numbers, with just 25% of the population of Canada - Ohio had nearly as many deaths in the last couple of weeks.
Canada (well, Ontario, at least) has gone back to a "stay at home" situation. Ohio is considering this a success and counting the days until we remove our masks. Same numbers: Different philosophy.
I've pointed out many times that this is about resources: The potential for COVID to swamp a local health care system. So - I have to ask: Is Canada's system "swamped" with the amount of cases Ohio has? Or - has Canada decided that resources aren't their concern - and they're going for a different goal?
It's important to understand - that this is never going away. Ever. It will always be here. All life has risks. Once the drain on resources meets that of, say, 100 other common problems, like the flu or whatever - then what are we trying to accomplish?
Well there is no Canada system, but systems in each province and territory.
That said, yes there is concern about being swamped. So far we have managed but the new variants that Canada is dealing with is a concern. This article explains the situation.
Comparing the situation in Canada, vs Ohio is tricky. Is Ohio concerned about the variants? Do you have any? How many hospital beds and ICU beds per capita?
Also the percentage of those vaccinated in Ohio is 30 percent, Canada is 15 percent, but that number is meaningless, it is the percentage of those vaccinated in Vancouver that really matters to me, but I can't find the number.
IMO what Ohio calls a success, would be classified as heading in the right direction, but way too early to ease restrictions. Once a certain percentage of the population is vaccinated, then anyone can call it a success.
That is what we are trying to accomplish. If they find a need for booster shots, so be it, but the day is coming when we will live normally again.
Don't get me wrong - I love Canada - but here's an interesting observation.
Canada had fewer deaths and fewer cases per-capita - by a pretty good margin - than Ohio. In absolute numbers, with just 25% of the population of Canada - Ohio had nearly as many deaths in the last couple of weeks.
Canada (well, Ontario, at least) has gone back to a "stay at home" situation. Ohio is considering this a success and counting the days until we remove our masks. Same numbers: Different philosophy.
The total number of cases and deaths per capita is not the basis for these current restrictions. If you look at recent trends in cases and hospitalizations you will see why Ontario did that.
But you certainly have the "different philosophy" part right. The number of deaths that are considered acceptable is certainly lower in Canada on average, and the view that we should simply aim for the fewest restrictions as long as the virus doesn’t overwhelm the healthcare system is not as widespread here. We have all seen what this virus can do among unvaccinated people, and it is going to kill an unnecessarily high number of people if we try to go back to normal as quickly as possible and another wave hits. We need to vaccinate like our lives depend on it, because they do, and then once the spread is back down to negligible levels we can be thankful that the push for more aggressive mitigation strategies really did have an impact on the number of casualties.
The total number of cases and deaths per capita is not the basis for these current restrictions. If you look at recent trends in cases and hospitalizations you will see why Ontario did that.
But you certainly have the "different philosophy" part right. The number of deaths that are considered acceptable is certainly lower in Canada on average, and the view that we should simply aim for the fewest restrictions as long as the virus doesn’t overwhelm the healthcare system is not as widespread here. We have all seen what this virus can do among unvaccinated people, and it is going to kill an unnecessarily high number of people if we try to go back to normal as quickly as possible and another wave hits. We need to vaccinate like our lives depend on it, because they do, and then once the spread is back down to negligible levels we can be thankful that the push for more aggressive mitigation strategies really did have an impact on the number of casualties.
I think there are other causes of death and tragedy that are exacerbated by sever restrictions. One obvious one is suicide. Depression and its companion suicide are definitely exacerbated by the severe isolation posed by these "mitigation" measures. Also, there is a significant drop in cancer diagnoses over the last year. I doubt that cancer has gone away; people are just not going to their (closed???) doctor's offices.
Less quantifiable is how many deaths or clinical illnesses happen indirectly from depression. Suicide is the most dramatic illustration but when people lose their will to live bad things happen. I am lucky enough to be happily married. My two adult children have not moved out because, why move if there are no social opportunities? All the same, not having our usual activities open or truly functioning is depressing.
For example, my tennis club is "open." But instead of being able to mingle we have to arrive no more than ten minutes before pre-scheduled play,and head directly back to our cars. This has been typical of "re-openings."
The politicians can say they have "reopened" activities, but the thumb is kept firmly on the activity. For example Broadway theater is "reopened" to 33% capacity. That is fiscally impossible and if any actually opened that way dispiriting. There's no reason not to let in fully vaccinated people and people with negative Covid tests.
When people say "well, how do you reopen" you just do it. Just as when oil prices were decontrolled, Carter had an elaborate mechanism and prices rose. Reagan pulled the controls eight days after entering offices, and prices plunged. Sometimes, "just do it."
I think there are other causes of death and tragedy that are exacerbated by sever restrictions. One obvious one is suicide. Depression and its companion suicide are definitely exacerbated by the severe isolation posed by these "mitigation" measures. Also, there is a significant drop in cancer diagnoses over the last year. I doubt that cancer has gone away; people are just not going to their (closed???) doctor's offices.
Less quantifiable is how many deaths or clinical illnesses happen indirectly from depression. Suicide is the most dramatic illustration but when people lose their will to live bad things happen. I am lucky enough to be happily married. My two adult children have not moved out because, why move if there are no social opportunities? All the same, not having our usual activities open or truly functioning is depressing.
I agree that cancer screenings and other aspects of the health care system went slower during this pandemic. But I don’t think anyone has established that this is because of restrictions. Here, those issues are side effects of hospitals channeling resources towards COVID-19 patients. I know you are staunchly against restrictions but I doubt things would have been different if all restrictions had been dropped.
As for depression and suicide, it is a lot more complicated than that. Suicides were down in the US in 2020:
But on many aspects, suicides are an extreme and a bit of a red herring. For people like you and I who are normally not at risk for suicide, the pandemic and its restrictions bring in a lot of crap and we are now at a greater risk of depression. Are you thinking of suicide? I certainly am not. There is no question more people are suffering from health issues than before the pandemic, whether it is due to a general decline to their QOL or to economic hardship (some of which can be due to restrictions). But among people at a higher risk for suicide, it seems that the pandemic may have led to less suicides, perhaps because restrictions have reduced the number of destructive social interactions that can take place in bars, schools, etc.
I agree that cancer screenings and other aspects of the health care system went slower during this pandemic. But I don’t think anyone has established that this is because of restrictions. Here, those issues are side effects of hospitals channeling resources towards COVID-19 patients. I know you are staunchly against restrictions but I doubt things would have been different if all restrictions had been dropped.
I would not say I'm "staunchly against restrictions." I think restrictions should be limited to protecting the health care system. When restrictions are over-utilized there's the "boy who cried wolf" problem. Getting compliance for the few weeks needed to "flatten the curve" was easy and made sense. Getting people to endure lockdowns of twelve weeks is much harder then two to four weeks. Also reopening is a lot more complex when the goal shifts from spreading out a devastating surge to the hospitals to trying to stop all contagion. I am not against all restrictions but I am against life being kept at quarter speed or less longer than absolutely needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg
As for depression and suicide, it is a lot more complicated than that. Suicides were down in the US in 2020:
But on many aspects, suicides are an extreme and a bit of a red herring. For people like you and I who are normally not at risk for suicide, the pandemic and its restrictions bring in a lot of crap and we are now at a greater risk of depression. Are you thinking of suicide? I certainly am not. There is no question more people are suffering from health issues than before the pandemic, whether it is due to a general decline to their QOL or to economic hardship (some of which can be due to restrictions). But among people at a higher risk for suicide, it seems that the pandemic may have led to less suicides, perhaps because restrictions have reduced the number of destructive social interactions that can take place in bars, schools, etc.
I doubt that report. But even if it is accurate many peoples' support system, i.e. going to religious, athletic or civic activities has been crushed, perhaps forever. One cannot directly measure the losses from that. Suicides arguably decreased (and I doubt that Twitter post highly) but people just let themselves decline and ultimately die when life is staring at the four walls of a house or apartment?
I would not say I'm "staunchly against restrictions." I think restrictions should be limited to protecting the health care system. When restrictions are over-utilized there's the "boy who cried wolf" problem. Getting compliance for the few weeks needed to "flatten the curve" was easy and made sense. Getting people to endure lockdowns of twelve weeks is much harder then two to four weeks. Also reopening is a lot more complex when the goal shifts from spreading out a devastating surge to the hospitals to trying to stop all contagion. I am not against all restrictions but I am against life being kept at quarter speed or less longer than absolutely needed.
I doubt that report. But even if it is accurate many peoples' support system, i.e. going to religious, athletic or civic activities has been crushed, perhaps forever. One cannot directly measure the losses from that. Suicides arguably decreased (and I doubt that Twitter post highly) but people just let themselves decline and ultimately die when life is staring at the four walls of a house or apartment?
I did a quick skim of these reports. I am not convinced. They don't line up with what professionals in the field tell me. Most important they don't include subintentional suicides which basically means life choices that lead to death. The classic is someone who crashes into a wall at a high rate of speed on a dry road. But allowing other illnesses to take their course, or worsening of already-poor health, to decreased resistance to serious Covid infections play there part. Anyone can do "research" to match the desired result.
I could create "research" to show that since quitting smoking causes weight gain, chronic smoking is actually good for you.
Canadian vaccine distribution is a mess. 3% of Canadians fully vaccinated vs. 29% of Americans. Positive test rates in Canada running around 7% vs. under 4% in the U.S.. I have family in Toronto I'd like to visit, but putting it off until 2022 when maybe Canada will have its act together.
Canadian vaccine distribution is a mess. 3% of Canadians fully vaccinated vs. 29% of Americans. Positive test rates in Canada running around 7% vs. under 4% in the U.S.. I have family in Toronto I'd like to visit, but putting it off until 2022 when maybe Canada will have its act together.
You are ignoring Canada and the US are using completely different vaccine strategies. Canada will like vaccinate 50% of the population with the first dose before the US by the way
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
