It was last on a list of eight threat scenarios, but the danger of a global pandemic made the cut when the Liberal government issued a national security policy in 2004.
So how is it a failure when we have one of the lowest infection rates in the G7? Alberta has one of th elowest infections rates, possibly in the world? This is a failure?
"DrCaleb" said So how is it a failure when we have one of the lowest infection rates in the G7? Alberta has one of th elowest infections rates, possibly in the world? This is a failure?
You failing to keep up with the rest of the world. Canada is full of slackers.
"raydan" said We were saved by our geography. If we had reacted sooner one might even be able to go get a haircut today.
I look like Grizzly Adams now.
Same! But I own clippers, so that is by choice.
And, as usual he's wrong. Unless symptoms present as soon as you catch a pathogen, there will always be the time needed for someone to cross borders and start spreading a new virus. This is how pathogens evolve. By the time it's caught, it's already wild in the population. All that can be done is mitigate that spread through testing for the disease, if there is a test. And by isolating everyone who is vulnerable to it.
You're wrong about that, of course. But what else is new. If you weren't the one who was always shown to be wrong you wouldn't have to hide.
There's a reason they call New York the "epicenter" of the American spread.
The disease spreads out from the larger population centers. If you have time you can slow the spread. A well spread out geography gives you time.
The first old folks home was hit in Vancouver. This makes sense. It's on the other side of the Pacific from China. Then it spread. We didn't hear about the major spread in Toronto until a week or more after the freakout in North Vancouver. There was time to freak out in the broader Canada. After Toronto it spread everywhere, but slower because there are less people per kilometre.
That's what we call common sense.
And if it wasn't geography, what was it? Show me these miraculous interventions of the Trudeau regime that no other country thought of. Why was Trump ahead of Canada on almost every maneuver to combat the spread?
Oh wait, you can't reply, right? Because you have to pretend you didn't read this.
Hey, any know-it-all experts on "The Science" out there? You know...the guys who tell you computer models can predict the future and that's "The Science." I know one, but he won't see this and that's too bad because he gets to run around claiming he's right when he's wrong.
Scape posted an interesting graph of statistics on another thread.
I can't help noticing the highest death rates (deaths per hundred, let's say) are in provinces with areas of the highest population density.
That can't be, of course, because I just heard a Doctor of some strange perversion of reality he calls "The Science" tell me population density has no effect on the speed and likelihood of the spread of the virus.
"Scape" said Or testing and the lack thereof maybe?
Do you mean it might take a while longer or never happen in a less concentrated population per square kilometer or a more densely concentrated population?
So how is it a failure when we have one of the lowest infection rates in the G7? Alberta has one of th elowest infections rates, possibly in the world? This is a failure?
You failing to keep up with the rest of the world. Canada is full of slackers.
get a haircut today.
Yea, we can't even be bothered to get up off the couch. I've been wearing sweatpants for almost a month!
I have daytime pyjamas and night-time pyjamas.
We were saved by our geography. If we had reacted sooner one might even be able to go get a haircut today.
I look like Grizzly Adams now.
We were saved by our geography. If we had reacted sooner one might even be able to go get a haircut today.
I look like Grizzly Adams now.
Same! But I own clippers, so that is by choice.
And, as usual he's wrong. Unless symptoms present as soon as you catch a pathogen, there will always be the time needed for someone to cross borders and start spreading a new virus. This is how pathogens evolve. By the time it's caught, it's already wild in the population. All that can be done is mitigate that spread through testing for the disease, if there is a test. And by isolating everyone who is vulnerable to it.
We were saved by our geography. If we had reacted sooner one might even be able to go
get a haircut today.
really hurting for that trim, eh?
[
And, as usual he's wrong.
You're wrong about that, of course. But what else is new. If you weren't the one who was always shown to be wrong you wouldn't have to hide.
There's a reason they call New York the "epicenter" of the American spread.
The disease spreads out from the larger population centers. If you have time you can slow the spread. A well spread out geography gives you time.
The first old folks home was hit in Vancouver. This makes sense. It's on the other side of the Pacific from China. Then it spread. We didn't hear about the major spread in Toronto until a week or more after the freakout in North Vancouver. There was time to freak out in the broader Canada. After Toronto it spread everywhere, but slower because there are less people per kilometre.
That's what we call common sense.
And if it wasn't geography, what was it? Show me these miraculous interventions of the Trudeau regime that no other country thought of. Why was Trump ahead of Canada on almost every maneuver to combat the spread?
Oh wait, you can't reply, right? Because you have to pretend you didn't read this.
The key culprit is that we are relying way to much on external players acting in good faith such as and not limited to the WHO, the CDC and the US.
Scape posted an interesting graph of statistics on another thread.
https://www.covid-19canada.com/
I can't help noticing the highest death rates (deaths per hundred, let's say) are in provinces with areas of the highest population density.
That can't be, of course, because I just heard a Doctor of some strange perversion of reality he calls "The Science" tell me population density has no effect on the speed and likelihood of the spread of the virus.
Coincidence, I guess.
Or testing and the lack thereof maybe?
Do you mean it might take a while longer or never happen in a less concentrated population per square kilometer or a more densely concentrated population?
What are the mechanics of this hypothesis?