CDN/US Covid-related political discussion

[Booter]

It was unprecedented. Had to make calls. Some good. Some bad. Learn from it and move on. I think any government would have made their own mistakes. And I dislike this government a lot.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I guess the majority of folks like me who think that it wasn't handled bad at all don't matter?? I noticed we're both still alive.....

On the contrary; the vast majority of people I know professionally and personally felt the government's responses, both federal, provincial, and municipal, were apt. We're mistakes made? Sure, but that gets chaulked up to the novelty and difficulty of the situation, and the wins far out weight the mistakes.

From what I've seen with respect to "COVID Opinions in 2024" the overwhelming majority sentiment is
"Four years ago already?lol Tiger King. Wow what a weird time.. Wings Thursday?" It's not really on people's radar.

That being said, there are people dealing with the downstream consequences of the mistakes made (parents, small businesses owners, etc). But by and large, their focus is on dealing with their situation in the present and future, soldiering on.

Life has moved on and gotten back to normal - except for those that staked a big ole part of their identity on a past reality that can't be reconciled with life having gotten back to normal. The future came, with a safe vaccine and lockdowns/mandates that disappeared with the threat. All that's left is magnifying and clinging to the mistakes made.

 

[Brad Sallows]

That's not at all what he was saying. And the push back against "skeptics" wasn't vociferous and unforgiving; it was against "deniers" that the push-back was so extreme.

That may be true in some cases, but by no means all. I read reports of people who were raising measured objections and received essentially ad hominem attacks in return.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Yet you sure make your opinion of how it all unfolded is our business........

That's what discussion forums are for. Are you disappointed I wished you a long life? I've read plenty of your one side opinions on here, but don't agree. Yet they are yours, so I seldom comment on them. Usually, the only time I respond to you is due to a personal attack because you don’t like my opinion, which I'm then entitled to defend. So far, all you've given me is hurt feelings and personal attacks, but if it feels good to you and makes you happy, go ahead and continue. I've said my piece, but your tangent has run out for me. If you want to continue, have at it. I have no emotional need to continue in this fashion.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

That may be true in some cases, but by no means all. I read reports of people who were raising measured objections and received essentially ad hominem attacks in return.

I can relate Happens a lot.

 

[lenaitch]

That being said, there are people dealing with the downstream consequences of the mistakes made (parents, small businesses owners, etc). But by and large, their focus is on dealing with their situation in the present and future, soldiering on.

There are a lot of people, primarily the families of residents of the LTC facilities dealing with the downstream impacts of inaction as well.

 

[lenaitch]

The damage is done and the lessons learned. While the admissions of culpability are good, they are too late for the lives they ruined or the people they harmed. They have made skeptics out of millions (actually a good thing) and destroyed the trust that you can look to your government for help and relief. WHO and the UN showed themselves as the controlling charlatans they truly are. People just need to stop listening to them and stop sending them money. Fauci and Tam need to be hauled up into commissions and tribunals and held accountable.

'Trust the science' has become a sarcastic footnote and anyone using it will be looked at with a jaundiced eye and mistrust.


View attachment 82090

I'm a Conspiracy Theorist and my pronouns are 'I told you so'

Do I assume correctly that your newfound or reinforced mistrust of science or expertise will apply and if you find yourself in an emergent or critical medical situation you will eschew all medication and intervention until you have reviewed the approving background peer studies?

What would a formal review of Tam's performance really accomplish, other than to give those who never agreed with the direction, now or then, some kind of platform? She would cite her training and background and testify that she applied it to the information she received. Isn't that what pretty much all of us do every single day? How do you counter that in any meaningful way? Why just her and not every provincial and local MOH or even the federal, provincial and municipal government leader?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Do I assume correctly that your newfound or reinforced mistrust of science or expertise will apply and if you find yourself in an emergent or critical medical situation you will eschew all medication and intervention until you have reviewed the approving background peer studies?

I doubt most skeptics are skeptical of proven treatments and methods. A problem facing everyone was the novelty of the situation, aggravated by the insistent certainty of people who - as many have now admitted - had a weak foundation for certainty.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Do I assume correctly that your newfound or reinforced mistrust of science or expertise will apply and if you find yourself in an emergent or critical medical situation you will eschew all medication and intervention until you have reviewed the approving background peer studies.

Start out your questioning without the ridiculous, hyperbolic hypotheticals and maybe you'll get an answer.

 

[lenaitch]

I doubt most skeptics are skeptical of proven treatments and methods. A problem facing everyone was the novelty of the situation, aggravated by the insistent certainty of people who - as many have now admitted - had a weak foundation for certainty.

A much better answer than the one to whom I posed the question.

Isn't that an inherent problem of leadership, though? You take the information you are handed and take your best shot with confidence and decisiveness. The people subject to your direction expect little else. If the decisions of the moment are later found wanting, such is humanity.

Was every wartime field commander raked over the coals because they were subject to a later analysis that found a different decision would have caused x% fewer casualties?

There is an upside to review and accountability, but there is a downside when it becomes a witch hunt and results in no one ever wanting to put themselves in that position.

I'm neither supporting nor opposing the decisions that were made. Our country's economy and population were massively impacted, but were there ones that weren't (at least functioning democracies anyway)? While I no doubt took an financial hit, neither my or my family's situation was significantly impacted other than boredom and cancellation of m/c trips. I have no political axe to grind.

 

[Winds]

On the contrary; the vast majority of people I know professionally and personally felt the government's responses, both federal, provincial, and municipal, were apt. We're mistakes made? Sure, but that gets chaulked up to the novelty and difficulty of the situation, and the wins far out weight the mistakes.

I lost a lot of respect for many people I know personally and professionally who are supposed to be educated but demonstrably lacked critical or even unique thoughts of their own. Instead, they were quick to follow the herd, adopting binary thinking and creating in-groups and out-groups... the blue eyed students looked down on the brown eyed students once they were told of their inferiority.

Of course the government should be given slack in such an unprecedented time, but not carte blanche. As an example, court testimony from PHAC's head epidemiologist confirmed that they never recommended vaccine mandates for travel on aircraft, because there wasn't evidence that it would be effective... but the government imposed domestic travel restrictions anyway (unlike other Western countries), seemingly because it was polling well. The court case (Peckford case) was deemed moot once they restrictions were "suspended" (they have yet to be officially repealed) ... should we all just shrug our shoulders and move on? So what if the government flagrantly violated the mobility rights of millions of Canadians, that was yesterday after all... right?

 

[MJP]

On the contrary; the vast majority of people I know professionally and personally felt the government's responses, both federal, provincial, and municipal, were apt. We're mistakes made? Sure, but that gets chaulked up to the novelty and difficulty of the situation, and the wins far out weight the mistakes.

Agreed, despite the vocal minority naysayers in unprecedented times the steps taken despite it's faults were largely ok. Not great but I am ok with over protection vs none

 

[Lumber]

should we all just shrug our shoulders and move on? So what if the government flagrantly violated the mobility rights of millions of Canadians, that was yesterday after all... right?

Yes, that's exactly what you should do. It's not like they did it "willy nilly", there was an underlying reason for their actions. PHAC gave them advice, they didn't act on that advice. Are you still required to be vaccinated to get on a flight? No?

 

[Winds]

Yes, that's exactly what you should do. It's not like they did it "willy nilly", there was an underlying reason for their actions. PHAC gave them advice, they didn't act on that advice. Are you still required to be vaccinated to get on a flight? No?

PHAC gave them advice that a travel mandate would not reduce virus transmission. The government then instituted such a mandate in violation of the Charter, stating that they were following expert advice... if not PHAC's epidemiologists, what experts were they listening to? Thousands of people's lives were severly impacted (unable to travel for work, unable to visit loved ones before they died or attend their funerals, etc.).

It's not that they didn't act on advice, it's that they then lied about it in an attempt to justify curtailing of Charter rights. Maybe you're okay with the government acting in such a way, but it's not a very liberal (small "l") position. I guess we could take the same approach to crime, as long as the criminals aren't still actively committing the offence, then who cares, right?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

advice

Nuff' said...

 

[brihard]

There are a lot of people, primarily the families of residents of the LTC facilities dealing with the downstream impacts of inaction as well.

There are also many people still living with serious debilitating effects of ‘long COVID’ - neurological, cognitive, respiratory, pulmonary, etc. There’s been more evidence emerge in the past few years that long COVID disability is not dependent on having had an acutely symptomatic case. These risks extend to paediatric patients too. I know that in my family we’re still making evidence-based choices to protect our infant from exposure.

 

[Winds]

Nuff' said...

Advice from medical experts that was ignored, then the public told that the decisions made were explicitly following said advice.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Advice from medical experts that was ignored, then the public told that the decisions made were explicitly following said advice.

There were some medical experts calling for even stricter measures........and my made up position is as valid as your made up position.

Lets all have ice cream.........lactose intolerant's, you get sorbet.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

There were some medical experts calling for even stricter measures........and my made up position is as valid as your made up position.

Lets all have ice cream.........lactose intolerant's, you get sorbet.

Works. Cheers.

 

[Winds]

There were some medical experts calling for even stricter measures........and my made up position is as valid as your made up position.

Lets all have ice cream.........lactose intolerant's, you get sorbet.

If you read the submitted testimony from PHAC and Transport Canada, you'd see that other medical experts were not consulted.

Court Documents Reveal Canada’s Travel Ban Had No Scientific Basis

In the days leading up to the mandate, transportation officials were frantically looking for a rationale for it. They came up short.

www.thefp.com

Over 14,000 pages of Evidence Filed in lawsuit against Federal Travel Vaccine Ban | Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

CALGARY: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms filed its legal Argument and over 14,000 pages of Evidence as part of an ongoing legal challenge on behalf of the Honourable Brian Peckford, the Honourable Maxime Bernier, and four other Canadians, to strike down the federal government’s...

www.jccf.ca