Forums

Joel said :
As I understand it, Ontario is testing less so that's a concern. A friend my mine had one of his employees test positive a few weeks back, so he took his entire Toronto office to get tested as a precaution. Test centre was pretty quiet, nurses were not doing too much and they were hesitant to test them since none had 'direct contact' with the person who tested positive in a certain time frame I believe the reasoning was. So that's worrying. Less testing means less "positive cases". All they have to do to increase the numbers is do more testing.

But they won't even have to do that right now. The data migration that is currently happening in Toronto will be used to create a spike in cases, which will then be used to justify more restrictions.

Currently, they're "underestimating" the number of cases in Toronto and southern Ontario, while they're working to migrate the system from the city based system to the provincial based system. When that migration is done, it will appear that the number of new cases has gone down through the use of underestimating, but, that will be short lived as the number are adjusted and added to the future numbers. Those numbers will pad the existing numbers to give the impression that the number daily cases has gone up, when in reality, those cases are previous cases, which should have been added to previous numbers, but are instead added to the current numbers, giving the impression that there is now a spike in new cases.

Joel said :
Only difference is, curfew right now is being maintained for a while longer to discourage private home gatherings so it's hardly devoid of all logic. It's logical, is it? 500 people in Walmart, not a danger. 6 people in a house instead of 5? So dangerous that people need to be confined to their homes under threat of violence by the authorities.

That's logical to you? I'm better than you, but that doesn't mean you're not great!

17-Feb-2021 15:26:48

17-Feb-2021 16:15:51

FiFi LaFeles said :
So - greed, really. Is it greed? Or is it desperation?

If you have no income because of the lockdowns and restrictions, and you're saying "we'll do anything you say, even things you're not asking us to do" is that greed or desperation?

I get it, weddings are not "essential", but, the money that the people who run those businesses earn, is essential to them. They have to eat too. I'm better than you, but that doesn't mean you're not great!

17-Feb-2021 16:25:37

Joel said :
NexOrigin said :
It's logical, is it? 500 people in Walmart, not a danger. 6 people in a house instead of 5? So dangerous that people need to be confined to their homes The reality is, people need to shop for groceries. Home delivery services simply do not have the capacity to deliver to the population to remove the need for people to visit a grocery store, what they can do is limit supermarket capacity to minimize that risk which is what has happened.
81 employees of one Massachusetts Walmart test positive for coronavirus

https://www.southcoasttoday.com/news/20200503/81-employees-of-one-massachusetts-walmart-test-positive-for-coronavirus

But yeah, it's the additional person in your home that's the real danger, right?

Like, the logic is "Sure, you can stand outside and talk to your nextdoor neighbors all you want, but if they go in your house, you owe us $1000". I'm better than you, but that doesn't mean you're not great!

17-Feb-2021 17:00:05

Where is there any evidence that the spread is being caused by people visiting their family/friends?



Maybe you (or someone else) could answer this question as well:

Where is there evidence that asymptomatic spread is occurring?

The claim is that over half the people infected are asymptomatic. This is why you have to wear a mask, even if you're not sick. But... where is the evidence that asymptomatic people can spread the virus? Where is the evidence that asymptomatic people exist at all?

I'm only asking because I see this:
Original message details are unavailable.
The UK government’s plans for community testing for covid-19 received a further blow this week when early results from students testing at the University of Birmingham and universities in Scotland showed that tests had a sensitivity of just 3% and that

58% of positive test results were false

.

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4941

And I'm left thinking... over half the positive tests were false... over half the positive test results are from asymptomatic people...

There has to be some evidence somewhere that asymptomatic people exist, and asymptomatic people are capable of spreading the virus, doesn't there? Something beyond "this guy wasn't sick, but his test came back positive", as that could simply be a false positive. There must be more scientific evidence than that, surely, there must be.

Anyone come across something of that nature? I'm better than you, but that doesn't mean you're not great!

17-Feb-2021 17:42:25 - Last edited on 17-Feb-2021 17:43:02 by NexOrigin

Megycal said :
I've cancelled my vaccination appointment that was due today. I've had an upset tummy today which hasn't settled down so I decided its better to wait a while. My husband is fine so is going ahead with his appointment. I just hope someone can make use of my cancelled slot. I've remade it for next week.

At least you won't both be unwell at the same time now. Its OK.

17-Feb-2021 17:57:00