Who Benefits?

 

Some time ago, I read an excellent book by Michael Lewis called The Premonition: A Pandemic Story. In it, the author follows a group of dedicated researchers and a public health officer who fearlessly follow the science of the emerging pandemic, frequently facing obstructions and even threats to their very careers. Their heroism stands in sharp contrast to the careerists who lead entities like the Centers for Disease Control, utterly failing to fulfill their mandate of protecting and keeping the public adequately informed on the emerging virus. To say that such people are political whores is the gentlest way to describe them.

I was therefore not entirely surprised that the CDC has now loosened its guidelines around COVID-19. Here are some of them, with emphasis added:

The changes shift much of the responsibility for risk reduction from institutions to individuals. The C.D.C. no longer recommends that people stay six feet away from others. Instead, it notes that avoiding crowded areas and maintaining a distance from others are strategies that people may want to consider in order to reduce their risk.

People who are exposed to the virus no longer must quarantine at home regardless of their vaccination status, although they should wear a mask for 10 days and get tested for the virus on Day 5, according to the new guidelines. Contact tracing and routine surveillance testing of people without symptoms are no longer recommended in most settings. 

...the guidelines note that schools may want to consider surveillance testing in certain scenarios, such as for when students are returning from school breaks or for those who are participating in contact sports.

Unvaccinated students who are exposed to the virus will no longer need to test frequently in order to remain in the classroom, an approach known as “test to stay.” The C.D.C. no longer recommends a practice known as cohorting, in which schools divide students into smaller groups and limit contact between them to reduce the risk of viral transmission. 

Not everyone is onboard with the new guidelines: 

Dr. Saskia Popescu took issue with the CDC removing the quarantine recommendation for those who have been exposed, particularly those unvaccinated. She also questioned the feasibility of people wearing masks in small offices where they will have to take them off for eating and drinking.

Additionally, Popescu said discouraging routine testing ignores the "high levels of asymptomatic cases."

"We should be providing people the resources to stay home if they're exposed, especially if unvaccinated and [without] vaccine-induced protection, not doing away with the quarantine guidance [altogether]," Popescu said.

Dr. Judy Stone called the CDC's guidelines "capitulation" in a tweet.

"What would be welcome to me and many others would be masking until rates are down and a focus on improving ventilation," she said. "Immunocompromised/elderly people have been devalued and discarded."

So, as I often ask about suspicious actions and decisions, "Who benefits?" 

Clearly, those disruptive elements of society who have made a fetish of their opposition to masks and mandates benefit. But if appeasement of such people is part of the motivation here, they will surely be on about something else in short order.

Perhaps the biggest winners are to be found in the world of commerce. The past two years have been admittedly very difficult, with shut-downs, staff absences, etc. But, as Rick Salutin has asked on more than one occasion, "Does the economy exist to serve us, or do we exist to serve the economy?

The new guidelines also serve to weaken calls by workers to provide more sick days, another cost to business, along with the expenses of  hiring temps in many instances. The strongest suggestion in the guidelines is that people who test positive should stay at home for five days. 

As well, the new CDC direction pays no heed to the dangers of long-Covid. If anything, they will facilitate the spread of a virus about whose long-term effects we still really understand little.

Ultimately, everything is up to the individual in the new guidelines. And if the past two years have taught us anything at all, it is that individuals, and groups of individuals, make some pretty poor, even dangerous, choices.

A Cogent Rebuttal To Privatized Healthcare

Here in Ontario, the newly re-elected Conservatives under Doug Ford are making oblique sounds about private health care as a way to help solve our hospital crises. While we do have private clinics, etc. in this province, it would seem that they are suggesting much more than that. 

One needn't be a particularly deep thinker to see some of the flaws in that logic, the most egregious being that private entities exist to make profits, and that anyone working for a private healthcare entity is bled off from the public system.

The following is Brittlestar offering a clear explanation to those who react ideologically instead of thinking critically. I also include a couple of comments from his followers:

Geez..you nailed this! My sister has a doc who runs a private clinic in TO. She pays $5,000 a year to see her doctor. When she had a heart attack this doc actually said she couldn't treat her as her annual fee was due. She suggested my sister find an OHIP doc. Private Healthcare!

.................

My daughter was in the hospital for 4 months due 2 complications from brain surgery. Nine years ago i had cancer. I could not imagine having 2 pick & choose what healthcare 2 get based on our income. My daughter & i are still alive thanks to universal Healthcare.

A Timely Reminder

That division exists in our country is undeniable. That there are those amongst us who seek to exploit those divisions is also a fact. Two Star letter-writers remind us to be very wary of such merchants of discord:

Poilievre leads candidates in donations, Aug. 3

Uncivil behaviour, unbridled entitlement, a paranoid stance, leading to demonizing others is not how you build community and it’s certainly not how you build a nation.

Watching two Conservative leadership races play out, I am left wondering how we come together as a united country, with trust, and hope, for a future together.

Are others concerned?

Desmond Pouyat, Toronto

 An emperor with no clothes, Aug. 6

Rosie DiManno aptly describes Alex Jones as “the conspiracy monger most responsible for promoting that web of deceit.” Ex- president Donald Trump said to Jones: “your reputation is amazing.” One man motivated by greed, the other by power.

Both feeding on the ignorance and anger of a largely hateful population.

Is this what our southern neighbours have evolved into?

I wish I could turn my back and ignore their fall into mayhem, but I can’t.

In Canada, we are seeing the same exploitative tactics from politicians, such as Pierre Poilievre, who pander to angry mobs like the so-called freedom convoy.

As his popularity amongst Conservatives seems to rise, it begs the question: Are we falling into the same abyss as the Americans?

Are we going to let hate and ignorance be our guiding beacons?

We need to pay attention to what is happening down south. Or else we are doomed to fall prey to the same fate.

Maurice Sacco, Toronto 

UPDATED: About Freedom

Although I read and write a fair amount, I clearly am not an expert in the affairs of the world. I can merely observe, report and comment on the things that interest, hearten or outrage me. An armchair (or is it keyboard?) pundit am I.

Nonetheless, there are certain realities that seem to me irrefutable, global heating being the most pressing, in my view. And that's why I find Pierre Poilievre's political pontifications about making Canada the freest nation on earth both absurd and disturbing. 

At the heart of  Poilievre's corrupted vision is that personal freedom (the truck convoy being an egregious example) trumps all else, that the mythical and ogre-like 'gatekeepers' are the only impediments to becoming truly actualized individuals. 

Therein lies the sweet lie.

Anyone who believes such an idealized state is possible is clearly deluded; anyone who advocates for it is being disingenuous, manipulative and mendacious.

The reason is fairly straightforward and, I think, obvious. Freedom without responsibility is a recipe for chaos, made worse by the fact that if we to have any chance (admittedly slim) of  avoiding the worst effects of climate change, co-operation, not the rhetoric of absolute freedom, will carry the day. 

Co-operation, the working with others toward common goals, is of course the complete opposite of the reckless rhetoric espoused by Mr. Poilievre, and clearly anathema to his political posturing. His divide-and-conquer strategy is a clear abdication of political leadership, one doubtlessly appealing to those given more to reaction than reflection.

Pierre reminds me of a student I taught many years ago named Jason. A most disruptive and mean-spirited lad, he was a definite taint on the atmosphere of the Grade 10 general level class I was teaching. It was the same year that asbestos was discovered in the west wing of the school where I taught, a discovery that required moving all staff and students to classrooms in the east wing. Imagine my surprise while watching the evening news to see Jason, who professed concern for his fellow students, leading a march on school grounds protesting the 'unsafe conditions' under which they were being instructed. Jason, a most indifferent student, to put it politely, felt that the conditions and asbestos threat were not conducive to learning, and something had to be done about it.

In many ways, Pierre reminds me of Jason. He exploits discontent for his own aggrandizement, the angry and disenchanted amongst us mere props to facilitate his political goals. Sincerity and genuine concern for the country are absent.

Will Poilievre succeed? I guess it depends upon how you define success. He will undoubtedly succeed in nurturing and expanding his constituency of the aggrieved, guaranteeing victory in his leadership quest. I very much doubt he will become Canada's next prime minister. 

Of course, that will ultimately be determined by those who rouse themselves to vote in the next election, won't it?

UPDATE: Moudakis's latest is just too rich and spot-on not to add to this post:

A Sunday Reflection

 

H/t Annie

Ripped From The Headlines?

There are days while I scroll through Twitter that I come upon a headline that seems to be ripped from a satirical source, such as The Onion or The Beaverton. Today was one such day.

RON DESANTIS’S NEW CIVICS INITIATIVE INVOLVES TEACHING KIDS SLAVERY IN AMERICA WASN’T THAT BAD

Sadly, the source for this headline is Vanity Fair, and is yet another potent reminder of the steady, seemingly inexorable, decline of the United States, where lies are truth and truth are lies.

Lest young people come to see their country in a less than favourable light (i.e., as the rest of the world sees them), the Florida governor is acting with resolve and dispatch, leaving teachers attending Florida Department of Education conferences this summer stunned.

Tatiana Ahlbum, a 12th-grade government and economics teacher at Fort Lauderdale High, said it was stressed that the majority of enslaved people in America had been born into slavery, that the colonies bought fewer enslaved people from the transatlantic slave trade than has been previously portrayed, and that less than 4% of enslaved people worldwide lived in America, without noting that that percentage still constituted millions of people. 

Meanwhile, another slide reportedly quoted George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as saying they wanted to get rid of slavery, while crucially leaving out the fact that both men enslaved people, with the latter owning more than 600 in his lifetime and also famously raping at least one of them. Ahlbum added that few of the facts presented included cited sources. “We were not told which documents stated this or how to find them, just that they existed,” she said.

And that church and state separation thingy? 

The founding fathers didn‘t actually mean that. Incredibly, several slides reportedly stated that this is a major “misconception.” During a breakout session, presenters reportedly mentioned, more than once, “the influence Jesus Christ and the Bible had on the country’s foundation.” Richard Judd, a Nova High School social studies teacher, told the Times, “There was this Christian nationalism philosophy that was just baked into everything that was there.” He added that “ending school prayer was compared to upholding segregation.”

But perhaps DeSantis's heart is in the right place, He just doesn't want people to feel bad about themselves. 

The news of these conferences, which are voluntary, comes months after DeSantis signed a bill banning public schools and private businesses from making white people feel bad during lessons or training about discrimination.

Florida has traditionally been seen as the place old people go to die. It would seem that description can now be aptly applied to young minds as well. 

 

UPDATED: Live And Let Live?

I generally abide by a pretty simple philosophy: don't bother other people. By that, I don't mean  we should not be involved in other people's lives in a positive way; I simply mean that we should not feel compelled to share opinions that serve no constructive purpose. For example, if you don't care for the fact that some may have an orientation different from your own, or a skin colour that is not white, just keep it to yourself. The world really is not thirsting for your views.

Today, of course, thanks to the ubiquity of corrosive social media, far too many see it as their mission to criticize and denounce others who don't meet their 'standards'. For reasons known only to themselves, they believe they are in possession of the key that unlocks the door labelled Truth. It amazes me, for example, of how many claim to know the mind of the deity and take it upon themselves, with Taliban-like ferocity, to try to dictate standards of behaviour. One look at the furor that has ensued from the repeal of Roe Vs. Wade amply illustrates that fact.

But perhaps I digress. What has prompted this post is an ugly incident that occurred recently aboard a bus in Hamilton. The perpetrator, a man named Chris, is pictured below.

Although no longer available, I watched the entire video in which Chris, an obviously unhinged, intolerant hatemonger, unleashed a barrage of his bile on two young HSR passengers, and later made a racist suggestion to a young man of South Asian descent.

In the video, Chris is sitting on an HSR bus headed toward Gage Park's Festival of Friends. He had also livestreamed at the festival for the past few days.

"I don't know what this goofball, weird, transformer looking fool is laughing at," Chris says, pointing toward a passenger seated in front of him.

"Does anyone love you?" responds the rider, seemingly in defence. 

Chris could be heard mocking the people he is filming, asks the rider what their pronouns are and insults the rider some more.

"You're deflecting because nobody gives a s**t about you," the rider responds to Chris in the video.

Chris tells the rider to "get off the bus and say that to me" before threatening to hit the rider and making more transphobic comments.

"If you're a man, I'll smack you out," he says in the video.

Chris then starts to insult another rider for the next minute or so of the video.

He then looks at a third rider, who is a person of colour, and makes a racist comment, suggesting the rider "go back to Pakistan."

As Chris begins to exit the bus, he accuses one of the first two riders of kicking him.

"Do it again, motherf****r," he says as he holds a clenched fist to the face of one of the riders.

"I'll kick your f***ing head off," he says while exiting the bus and starts walking into Gage Park, swearing some more.

The video is hard to watch, but what especially bothered me, in addition to the vituperation, was that no one else on the bus (an older woman, a young woman and the South Asian) did anything to stop this attack. While one does not expect heroics, the very least they could have done was to inform the driver and insist that Chris be put off the bus. If that failed, I would have taken his picture and called the police after telling him to stop.

I am by no stretch a hero, but intervening in a situation like this should be our default position as responsible citizens. Full stop.

UPDATE: I am happy to cite a CBC report about an arrest being made by Hamilton Police in the above incident.

On Wednesday afternoon, the police service said officers arrested 41-year-old Christopher Pretula, charging him with assault and utter threat.

The police service is also applying to lay a hate crime charge.

"We recognize the impact hate has in our community.... We continue to encourage people to come forward to report in order for police to investigate and charge accordingly," police spokesperson Jackie Penman told CBC Hamilton.

"Reporting is an important step in addressing and rooting out hate in Hamilton."