Novel Coronavirus

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Even then, it really depends on the virus, how deadly it is to how many. Living involves risk.

There had better be some serious research going into how deadly this virus actually is for humans on the whole before we blindly go into a crazy new normal. We know it spreads fast, but its deadliness is what matters most. And if it turns out to be most deadly to marginalized groups then those root social factors need to be priority - poverty, discrimination, lack of healthcare - not having hermetically sealed everything.
 
Last edited:
In fact, on a macro scale, that's what Ontario has done. Opened up to "stage 3", but kept some at risk communities - Toronto (and I think parts of Windsor; anywhere near the border is difficult), more locked down.
 
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
Now that we know. Now that we’ve been through a wave (ongoing). Two week neighbourhood bubbles (with careful exceptions to medical staff and patients who live outside of needed medical facilities) going into effect would be much freer. Could still visit in neighbours homes and go for lunch in neighbourhood restaurants. And kids could still play in neighbourhood parks, etc. Two weeks. Not months going on years like this.

It could stamp viruses out without the need for hermetically sealed new normals.
Click to expand...
Many essential workers are not in their own neighbourhood. What about basic needs like groceries?
 
ChemGal said:
Many essential workers are not in their own neighbourhood. What about basic needs like groceries?
Click to expand...
Response teams, pre-arranged. Essential workers not in their own neighbourhoods laid off with emergency pay for two weeks, or transferred to within neighbourhood if available and/ or necessary. Auxiliary staff ready to go. (And this will involve better pay - reassessing the importance of essential workers like grocery store staff! Graphic design firms, advertising, real estate, other exclusive lucrative careers?...meh. Not so essential are they? When the rubber hits the road, all we need, essentially, are people who take care of people. Not fancy degrees in self-absorption/ self-satisfaction.)
 
Last edited:
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
If they divided health regions into smaller neighbourhoods
Click to expand...


Health authorities in this province do have smaller subsections. Even if they let people know where in the subsections there are outbreaks, then a variation of what you suggest might be feasible. Something like what other provinces are doing in keeping restrictions higher in affected areas

People in the north were not happy with the reporting. Northern Health starts just south of Prince George and goes all the way to the BC/Yukon border. That's a lot of geography, so saying there are x number of cases in NHA is next to useless information.
 
Northwind said:
Health authorities in this province do have smaller subsections. Even if they let people know where in the subsections there are outbreaks, then a variation of what you suggest might be feasible. Something like what other provinces are doing in keeping restrictions higher in affected areas

People in the north were not happy with the reporting. Northern Health starts just south of Prince George and goes all the way to the BC/Yukon border. That's a lot of geography, so saying there are x number of cases in NHA is next to useless information.
Click to expand...
We have health subzones. I can understand having different restrictions - but then you do get issues where people will travel to other areas that have less restrictions to say get a haircut. It's way too difficult to police people not doing that, especially when they are working in another area.
Different restriction levels is very different than telling people they can't go to another area at all. When down to the subhealth zone level there are 1) way too many exceptions that would be needed 2) too hard to police as people wouldn't follow those rules for it to be that beneficial.
 
Yes, I have some friends (not me, obviously, with my butt-length braid) who would seriously rebel at being told that they couldn't go to "their" beauty salon, lol.
 
Northwind said:
Health authorities in this province do have smaller subsections. Even if they let people know where in the subsections there are outbreaks, then a variation of what you suggest might be feasible. Something like what other provinces are doing in keeping restrictions higher in affected areas

People in the north were not happy with the reporting. Northern Health starts just south of Prince George and goes all the way to the BC/Yukon border. That's a lot of geography, so saying there are x number of cases in NHA is next to useless information.
Click to expand...
City neighbourhoods...like, voting districts. Small enough to manage, but big enough to have places to go out to, is what I was thinking.
 
ChemGal said:
We have health subzones. I can understand having different restrictions - but then you do get issues where people will travel to other areas that have less restrictions to say get a haircut. It's way too difficult to police people not doing that, especially when they are working in another area.
Different restriction levels is very different than telling people they can't go to another area at all. When down to the subhealth zone level there are 1) way too many exceptions that would be needed 2) too hard to police as people wouldn't follow those rules for it to be that beneficial.
Click to expand...
We need to clone Bonnie Henry, then. Lol. Here, I think people just voluntarily did it. Begrudgingly, a bit, at first (I was annoyed but I did it anyway). But now that we know more maybe it could work “next time”. I think people, if asked, might prefer two weeks of being confined to a few square km, to years - indefinitely - of rigamarole everywhere we go.
 
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
We need to clone Bonnie Henry, then. Lol. Here, I think people just voluntarily did it. Begrudgingly, a bit, at first. But now that we know more maybe it could work “next time”. I think people, if asked, might prefer two weeks of being confined to a few square km, to years - indefinitely - of rigamarole everywhere we go.
Click to expand...
It won't just be for 2 weeks though. Or if that's all what you're suggesting it's not going to help. One person gets sick - in 2 weeks they aren't likely to spread it, but in that time they made a few people sick, who made a few people sick ...
 
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
We need to clone Bonnie Henry, then. Lol. Here, I think people just voluntarily did it. Begrudgingly, a bit, at first (I was annoyed but I did it anyway). But now that we know more maybe it could work “next time”. I think people, if asked, might prefer two weeks of being confined to a few square km, to years - indefinitely - of rigamarole everywhere we go.
Click to expand...
I doubt a large percentage stuck to their neighbourhood. Did you see Costco lineups?
 
ChemGal said:
It won't just be for 2 weeks though. Or if that's all what you're suggesting it's not going to help. One person gets sick - in 2 weeks they aren't likely to spread it, but in that time they made a few people sick, who made a few people sick ...
Click to expand...
Like this: A deadly virus begins somewhere. There are contingency plans in place to keep it from spreading right away. Sick people and immediate contacts quarantined. Failing that, a few cases get out. As soon as a designated enclave has one case everybody in that enclave stays home for 2 weeks, can only leave “within” their enclave with masks, etc. if they are an essential worker. Social distancing in high effect. Every other enclave goes into emergency mode and stays within their boundaries - but is free to live as normal - for two weeks, unless a case pops up...then if that happens they have to isolate. It could be stopped in weeks. Now, “they’re” going to screw us around (the free market and those who profit from this) for months maybe years maybe forever with virus fears and predictions.

(The mistake China made was in not listening to their citizens in the first place, so it grew too big to handle. If they had done what they did on a much smaller scale, right away, to begin with, it might’ve been contained.)
 
Last edited:
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
Like this: A deadly virus begins somewhere. There are contingency plans in place to keep it from spreading right away. Failing that, a few cases get out. As soon as a designated enclave has one case everybody in that enclave stays home for 2 weeks, can only leave “within” their enclave with masks, etc. if they are an essential worker. Social distancing in high effect. Every other enclave goes into emergency mode and stays within their boundaries for two weeks.
Click to expand...
And then at the end of 2 weeks it spreads elsewhere. How does the 2 week time frame help?
 
Here's a real life example @Kimmio Laughterlove that you can use to explain it.
The outbreak with the Misericordia started on June 21 in terms of positive tests. 14 days goes to July 4, inclusive.
There were still new cases happening, the most recent ones I have heard on occurred on July 9, there may be more that still occur.

How big of an area/how many people would you have expected to stay within that area? For how long?

Also, cases are accounted by residents, not where contracted, so while the Misercordia is considered to be the outbreak location, the workers/patients can account for various subhealth zones. That's true of many workplaces as well where outbreaks can occur - so how is that aspect handled?
 
German news showed that they are now researching people post covid. Had the case of a lady who was positive with very few symptoms three months ago, but still is getting bouts of fever and practically has a fatigue syndrome as well as some nerve symptoms. She has a desk job but says she still is not able to go back to work.She looked like age late fourties, early fifties.
 
Oh, and to give an example of just the ridiculousness people will go to break rules - the community lake got guidance from public health officials and what was safe. Guests are not allowed, there's a limit of 350 going through gate access (there could potentially be more, as there are households too). Some households that do not back onto the lake but are close have little walking paths to shared docks. There are locked gates between these public areas and the shared semi-private paths. People from outside of the neighbourhood have been climbing the gates, with boats to get access to the lake.
 
ChemGal said:
Oh, and to give an example of just the ridiculousness people will go to break rules - the community lake got guidance from public health officials and what was safe. Guests are not allowed, there's a limit of 350 going through gate access (there could potentially be more, as there are households too). Some households that do not back onto the lake but are close have little walking paths to shared docks. There are locked gates between these public areas and the shared semi-private paths. People from outside of the neighbourhood have been climbing the gates, with boats to get access to the lake.
Click to expand...
You live in Alberta, where what Trump has to say about covid is a bigger influence than in many places in Canada. Wherever Conservatives are prevalent the response has been less effective. There will be people who break the rules. Here, retail stores were never ordered to close, for example. It was done voluntarily.

Unfortunately, Trump has an outsized opinion that people listen to. This virus response has been politically polarized (by Conservatives not listening just like they don’t on the environment and poverty and systemic discrimination - all factors in this) and that’s a shame. It would be nice to have smart reasonable leadership down south.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top