Canadian COVID-19 News

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Quick, what's the risk of dying of Omicron if you are young and don't have comorbidities? It certainly isn't high enough to mandate vaccination. If it were, we'd also have to mandate vaccination for the flu, and a variety of other illnesses.

As far as risk to others, vaccinated people can spread it as well, and because of public health guidance, may be less cautious around others.

So it's a bit arrogant to assume that someone else isn't informed, or pose a bigger risk to society than a vaccinated person.

No, it's accurate. The unvaccinated are more susceptible to catching all flavours of COVID, and therefore more likely to spread it, if they don't take precautions, observe restrictions, mask in public, etc. The unvaccinated are also more likely to get sicker and have a higher risk of long illness or dying, but I'm OK to let them make the call for their own selves, even though the unvaccinated make up half or more of the COVID caseload in hospitals.

Like Mike, I'm not that crazy about mandating vaccines, but there IS a serious social and financial cost to letting it keep ripping - healthcare overload, absenteeism, long COVID. Not my call; we've elected people who are hopefully well-informed enough to make that call on our behalf.

When there's enough resistance in the population, from vaccination and/or recovering from COVID, then yes it will be like another flu. And I think that time is coming soon - give or take a new variant - but we're not there yet.

So it's really arrogant to demand that the unvaccinated can resume normal activity without restrictions, or to assert that it's OK for them to carry on as if they were as protected and as low a threat to others as the fully-vaccinated. At this time, they are not.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

Out here in the GPSW (Great Pacific South West!),

Good luck making that one stick. Maybe I should change my status/location?

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Good luck making that one stick. Maybe I should change my status/location? [emoji3]

But it's correct, from a Canada (land-based) viewpoint!

Or "Pacific Northeast" (from an ocean viewpoint).

Certainly NOT "PNW"... [emoji848]

[Mike OReilly]

Look what happens when I have better things to do for a few days... .

There's no need for me to rehash what has just been said in response to our new friend's rants. Scorpius, pelagia, Stu, LE and Mac have already said it better than I could, so let's just move on, and not get bogged down with yet another mis or disinformed individual.

[hpeer]

In the states, but….

My daughter is single working car sales, my son, a Corrections Officer, is married with a kid.

Dec 2020, Christmas, they all got Covid, all the symptoms but did fine. We were visiting but left. In the meantime everyone got the jab, the Wife and I booster jabs. Meanwhile this Christmas Daughter got Covid and now my Son has Covid but are doing fine.

We are pretty isolated but not especially careful either. Maybe it is the Vitamin D the Wife feeds me daily.

Just one guys experience.

[rbk]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

Not sure what you mean by this. Canada only accepts PCR ("molecular") tests at border.
https://travel.gc.ca/travel-covid/tr...-entry-testing

You have to read the whole list from CBSA. Below are all accepted types.

Accepted types of molecular tests
PCR - Polymerase chain reaction
Nucleic acid test (NAT) or Nucleic acid amplification test (NAATs)
Reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP)
These tests use methods such as a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab, nose swab, or saliva sample.

RT-PCR – reverse transcription real time PCR
Quantitative PCR (qPCR)
Isothermal amplification
Droplet digital PCR or digital droplet PCR (ddPCR)
Transcription-mediated amplification (TMA)
RNA (Ribonucleic acid)
Ct (cycle threshold)
CRISPR
Sequencing
Next generational sequencing (NGS) or whole genome sequencing (WGS)
Oxford Nanopore sequencing (LamPORE)
Detection of the N gene
Detection of Orf1a/b
Detection of the S gene
Detection of the E gene
Detection of the RdRp gene

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Pot, meet kettle...

Love it!

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by rbk

You have to read the whole list from CBSA. Below are all accepted types.



Accepted types of molecular tests

PCR - Polymerase chain reaction

Nucleic acid test (NAT) or Nucleic acid amplification test (NAATs)

Reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP)

These tests use methods such as a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab, nose swab, or saliva sample.



RT-PCR – reverse transcription real time PCR

Quantitative PCR (qPCR)

Isothermal amplification

Droplet digital PCR or digital droplet PCR (ddPCR)

Transcription-mediated amplification (TMA)

RNA (Ribonucleic acid)

Ct (cycle threshold)

CRISPR

Sequencing

Next generational sequencing (NGS) or whole genome sequencing (WGS)

Oxford Nanopore sequencing (LamPORE)

Detection of the N gene

Detection of Orf1a/b

Detection of the S gene

Detection of the E gene

Detection of the RdRp gene

NOT in my expertise...! But aren't some of the names related (eg NAAT and PCR)? https://www.idsociety.org/covid-19-r...-pcr-testing/#

Whatever. I guess my earlier reply would have been more helpful if it had stated:
"Molecular tests (such as PCR) acceptable but NOT rapid antigen tests."

[rbk]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

NOT in my expertise...! But aren't some of the names related (eg NAAT and PCR)? https://www.idsociety.org/covid-19-r...-pcr-testing/#

Whatever. I guess my earlier reply would have been more helpful if it had stated:
"Molecular tests (such as PCR) acceptable but NOT rapid antigen tests."

Those are all the accepted tests for border crossing pulled directly from
CBSA website. You can also provide a POSITIVE one of those accepted tests and use it for multiple crossing from 11 days after the test to 180 days after the test. Some are deep NP swabs, some are saliva (throat) some are blood. Personally I’d rather give a pint of blood versus a deep NP swab.

[N Coast Murray]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

But it's correct, from a Canada (land-based) viewpoint!

Or "Pacific Northeast" (from an ocean viewpoint).

Certainly NOT "PNW"... [emoji848]

Pet peeve of mine as well. From my perspective sitting here on BC's north coast, Vancouver is *not* the PNW. Likewise, Seattle being in the PNW is ridiculous if you live in Alaska.

Pacific North East makes the most sense, but then again, we aren't landlubbers.

[Montanan]

Researchers at the University of Exeter in England report that 13 percent of patients are still infectious and show clinically-relevant levels of the virus after 10 days of quarantine. In the most extreme of these cases, individuals were still carrying the virus for 68 days.

For the study, researchers applied a new test on 176 people who had tested positive on standard PCRs to determine whether the virus was still active. The results suggest the new testing of recently infected and quarantined persons should be applied in settings where people are vulnerable to infection so as mitigate against the spread of COVID-19.

"While this is a relatively small study, our results suggest that potentially active virus may sometimes persist beyond a 10 day period, and could pose a potential risk of onward transmission," says study co-author Lorna Harries, a professor at the University of Exeter Medical School, in a statement. "Furthermore, there was nothing clinically remarkable about these people, which means we wouldn't be able to predict who they are"

Warning that people should still be cautious about those who were recently infected. That's especially the case after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lowered recommended isolation time to five days for infected patients.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...?ocid=msedgntp

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by Scorpius

I don't believe that it is at all arrogant. The unvaccinated person DOES pose a bigger risk to society, and particularly to our health care system, than does the vaccinated. Despite over 80% of the population being vaccinated, our hospitals and ICU's are overwhelmed with the unvaccinated suffering from Covid. And yes, the vaccinated can still catch and spread the disease, but at only 50% the rate of the unvaccinated. Even though you are young and healthy and unlikely to suffer seriously yourself, you can still spread the disease to the elderly and those with, as you say, co-morbidities - and since the unvaccinated are twice as likely to catch the disease as the vaccinated, and are likely to have it much longer and more severely, they are much more likely to spread it than are the vaccinated.
...


BTW, this is a thread for the discussion of Covid in Canada. Your profile does not show a location. Are you in Canada? Are you Canadian?

I'd like to see where you got your numbers, because they don't seem to be accurate.

This, in particular, seems fabricated: the unvaccinated are twice as likely to catch the disease as the vaccinated

What does that even mean? I know a LOT of people who've been vaccinated who got covid. And they are certainly capable of spreading it. This is partially because of how the vaccine works. It doesn't actually stop you from becoming infected, it just limits the body's reaction. It's makes your case milder. As per its design.

The WHO just said that half of Europe is likely to be infected with COVID in the next two months. Many of those folks are vaccinated. The likelihood of everyone eventually getting covid seems quite high. Vaccinated or not.

Vaccination may make you less likely to get a severe case of Omicron, but it depends on the following: length of time since vaccination, which vaccine you took, and the exposure with someone who has it. According to some reports I've seen, vaccines are only 70% effective against symptomatic omicron, and that diminishes by 50% after 10 weeks. Which implies that even vaccinated people are only about 35% protected from symptomatic infection after 10 weeks. Granted, they're likely to have a milder case than someone who is unvaccinated.

BTW, I'm a big believer in the effectiveness and benefit of the vaccine. I'm also OK with requiring it (or a negative test) to participate in social activities.

But what I dislike is the tendency for the political types to try and point fingers at someone else, and try to blame them for the spread or the effects of covid. Firstly, because the science doesn't back that conclusion. And secondly, because it's just someone playing partisan politics with a pandemic. Which, to me, is being part of the problem instead of part of the solution.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

Ah, the "flu" argument. Sadly, it's NOT like the flu. The stats are abundantly clear on this. Perhaps you're not aware of the stats?

Not sure where you are writing from, but a KEY point is the important role of social responsibility here in Canada: such as protecting others, protecting our health care systems, etc.

It's not all about the individual.

No, it's not the flu.

But it's increasingly similar to it, and our health care policies will be changing over the next year or two to reflect that.

As we develop some level of collective immunity, and as our treatments, testing, and vaccines get better, people will become more comfortable with letting people make their own choices.

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

I'd like to see where you got your numbers, because they don't seem to be accurate.

This, in particular, seems fabricated: the unvaccinated are twice as likely to catch the disease as the vaccinated

.

Must be some confusion between absolute numbers and RATES. UNvaccinated clearly show much higher RATE of infection.

From NYC:


From Massachusetts:
Attachment 251385

From BC:



Of course, when 70-90% of adults are vaccinated, the unvaccinated are a smaller pool. So RATES (per 100,000 or per 1 million) are the better metric.

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

Must be some confusion between absolute numbers and RATES. UNvaccinated clearly show much higher RATE of infection.

From NYC:
Attachment 251382

From Massachusetts:
Attachment 251385

From BC:
Attachment 251383


Of course, when 70-90% of adults are vaccinated, the unvaccinated are a smaller pool. So RATES (per 100,000 or per 1 million) are the better metric.
Attachment 251384

Yup, those are the numbers all right. I find it interesting that those who demand we provide numbers to support our position don't provide numbers to support their's.

And I agree: it's getting more and more like the flu and hopefully Covid will decline to that level as herd immunity builds (assuming we don't get a new virulent, deadly variant). The decline is already being reflected in public policy as quarantine periods are shortened and restrictions, while still in place, are not as severe as a year ago when the actual infection rate was lower.

However, if it does become another flu, our health care system is going to continue to suffer as that small percentage of the population that needs to be hospitalized due to Covid is added to that small percentage that needs to be hospitalized for the flu. Remember, at the best of times, our health care system can only provide for a TINY percentage of the population at any one time. Any new endemic disease will require resources we don't currently have.