For those who know me, I have been a Liberal supporter for some time now. However, I am not a Liberal supporter no matter what. I was brought up in a Conservative household since my father was a Conservative MPP in Ontario just after the war. But that was when the Conservatives were closer to the political centre. Since those days I have voted for 4 different political parties in Federal/Provincial elections. Sometimes I voted strategically and sometimes I simply voted for the best person.
As for this election, I am one of many Canadians who felt that an election now was not absolutely necessary and that calling an early election was a risky strategy for the Liberals. It is risky for a couple of key reasons: First, Canadians seem to be happy with the existing minority government and do not see a compelling reason to change it now. Second, Erin O’Toole is probably more broadly likeable than any Conservative leader in the recent past. He is trying to move the party towards the centre which will appeal to many. Given that background, I have already voted and I voted for my Liberal candidate in Guelph, Lloyd Longfield. Lloyd has done well for Guelph and is clearly a front runner here. In spite of my angst at the Liberals for calling an early election, here are my reasons for continuing to support them. I also feel that all Canadians should at least consider these reasons before making their final decision to vote. First, I start with two BIG issues which are most important for Canada now and long into the future. Climate Change and the Environment By far the most important issue for Canada, and the world, is Climate Change and the Environment. If the world does not act even more aggressively than it already is, the costs in terms of the economy and lives will dwarf anything we have seen or can even contemplate. A large number of economists, academics, business leaders, and environmentalists all agree that the Liberals have a more effective approach to tackle climate change. Many argue that none of the parties are doing enough so let's support the best we have now and push for more. Many other nations are also adopting a similar approach to the Liberals. For the sake of your children and grandchildren and probably many generations of your descendants, that alone should be sufficient reason to vote Liberal. If you research nothing else in any detail, this issue deserves your attention. Investing in Our Youth While the Provinces have responsibility for education and childcare, the Federal Government can do a lot to drive the high level agenda. The Liberal $10 per day Early Learning and Child Care program is one example. It will make a substantial change for the children of our country. Quebec already has such a program and the benefits have been clearly demonstrated. Big issues such as climate change, deteriorating social behaviours, and disruptive technologies will need generations of smart, well educated, socially responsible future generations to tackle these problems. The Liberal plan is just a start but they have the right idea, at least more so than other parties. If we get just these two BIG issues right, then Canada can emerge as a prosperous world leader. Other Platform Details For sure there are many other important issues and each party has released their platform to tackle them. These platforms are “being reviewed by Canada’s parliamentary budget office (PBO).” The PBO doesn’t cost an entire platform, just what promises parties send to the office. The proposal must be “specific and sufficiently detailed” in order for the PBO to analyze. Once the PBO has costed a proposal, it is returned to the party — which then decides if, when, and how to release it. To date, the Liberal Platform gets higher marks from those rating them including the PBO. As for other platform comparisons, Bloomberg has a good Platform Tracker for each party. Here is the link https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/2021-federal-election-platform-tracker-where-each-party-stands-so-far-1.1639592 While Erin O’Toole is a refreshing face on the Conservative Party, and it is appealing that he is trying to move the party more towards the political centre, we cannot lose sight of the fact that many in his own party do not support that push toward the political centre. He will have an extremely hard time making good on many of his promises. He undoubtedly will have to make significant concessions to those forces within his own party. At the Conservative National Convention earlier this year, delegates at the party's policy convention voted to reject adding green-friendly statements to the party’s policy book — including a line that would have stated the party believes "climate change is real" and is "willing to act." Canada cannot afford to elect a party so divided on such an important issue. They have much work to do before they deserve a chance at governing Canada .
3 Comments
Many people in Canada are caught in a poverty trap and/or a debit trap and do not know how to get out of that trap.
As a society we do not help these people get out of the trap. Kids are not taught how money works - they don’t know how to budget, they don’t understand the true cost of borrowing (of debit), they don’t know how to save, they don’t know how to spend wisely, they don’t know how to plan, etc It is not surprising we have poverty problems. This is an idea that could help many Canadians. This could break the poverty/debit cycle for many. The government of Canada will work with all those institutions who issue credit and debit cards to incentivize or require them to issue a special Better Life Debit/Credit Card to anyone who wants to sign up for a Better Life. These special cards will have a phone companion app. Here’s how Better Life works.
Better Life can be life changing for many Canadians who are perpetually caught in a poverty / debit trap. This program could even be beneficial for many people who are not officially in poverty or have huge debts, but are living paycheque to paycheque. This program will help Make Canada a Better Place to Live. If these people learn to save, they will contribute more to society over the long term and have better retirement prospects. There are many social benefits to breaking the poverty cycle. Here is a link to the Canadian Government “Dimensions of Poverty” https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/topics-start/poverty It is estimated that 3.7 million Canadians live below the poverty line. That is 10% of the population. Not all will choose to participate in the program. Costs
However, there could be a huge payback involved in reducing poverty and all the social costs of poverty. Also, as people are lifted out of poverty, they will pay more taxes. Over time, Better Life will more than pay for itself. Recently I was forwarded an article by an anti-vaxxer written by far right-wing conspiracy theorist Mike Adams. Here is my response which I have yet to decide to share with the person involved since logic is seldom effective in such situations. Thanks for sharing the article by Mike Adams. Whenever I get new information, I try to assess the validity of the source. It appears that Mike Adams does not believe in the scientific method. I do, so right away we have a difference in our world view. None-the-less, I try to understand those who have a different world view than myself. The scientific method states that any research results are always subject to further investigation/research as experimental procedures improve. This iterative process can validate existing results or prove them false. It is a process of continuous improvement. So let’s look at vaccines. First of all, it is correct to say that vaccines kill people. But then so do all medications, even something as widely used and common as Aspirin.
By the end of 7 May 2021, about 1.4 billion people worldwide have had at least one Covid vaccination. To date, only a few thousand cases of blood clots have been reported by those taking vaccines and not all of those resulted in deaths. Scientific research is continuing. Mike Adams, and others, cleverly refer to legitimate scientific papers. I agree with all his quotes from the Salk Institute. He also provides a link to a Circulation Research paper and I agree with the quotes he uses from that paper. The Salk paper explains how the virus spike proteins damage the vascular system. Adams incorrectly asserts that vaccines which contains the spike protein or ruminants of the spike protein will do the same thing and will eventually kill millions. Unless you read the scientific papers closely, it is easy to feel that Adams assertion is correct. And that is the slippery technique that conspiracy theorists use. They use real scientific papers to establish an air of legitimacy, but slip in a small assertion that seems logical but in fact is incorrect. This is where Mike Adams smoothly veers away from science into conspiracy theory. Vaccines contain attenuated viruses or mRNA fragments of the spike protein both of which cannot replicate. It is important to understand this point. Vaccines do not replicate, indeed, by design, they cannot replicate. Once injected they attach to human cells and just remain there until the body produces antibodies and destroys them. The real Covid-19 virus can replicate and spread throughout the body. The body also develops antibodies for the real Covid-19 virus however in some cases the virus replicates so fast that it overwhelms the natural body defenses causing severe illness and death. The Salk paper and subsequent Circulation Research does not support Adams assertion. In fact, Circulation Research explicitly says the opposite, but Adams does not share those quotes. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318902 A quote from the end of this article that Mike Adams fails to point out.. “This conclusion suggests that vaccination-generated antibody and/or exogenous antibody against S protein not only protects the host from SARS-CoV-2 infectivity but also inhibits S protein-imposed endothelial injury.” Details (not essential to understanding the conclusions below) So here is a more detailed explanation of the difference between Covid-19 spike protein (and the pseudovirus used in the Salk research). https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/04/spike-protein-behavior Quote from a CNet article by Jackson Ryan. (The CNet media bias rating is Center.) https://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-some-covid-vaccines-may-cause-blood-clots-and-what-scientists-are-doing-about-it/ “Scientists are quick to point out that about a third of patients with COVID-19 also present with blood clots and that the risk of blood clots post-vaccination is lower than with the contraceptive pill.” Thus, the risk of a blood clot after an AZ vaccine is far less than from Covid-19 itself. There are also well developed protocols for screening, diagnosing and treating blood clots. “So I’ve been getting questions about what this means for vaccination: if we’re causing people to express Spike protein via mRNA or adenovirus vectors, are we damaging them just as if they’d been infected with coronavirus? Fortunately, the answer definitely seems to be “no” – in fact, the pseudovirus paper notes near the end that the antibody response generated by vaccination against the Spike protein will be beneficial in two ways, against infection and against the Spike-mediated endothelial damage as well. There are several reasons why the situation is different.” “Now we get to a key difference: when a cell gets the effect of an mRNA nanoparticle or an adenovirus vector, it of course starts to express the Spike protein. But instead of that being assembled into more infectious viral particles, as would happen in a real coronavirus infection, this protein gets moved up to the surface of the cell, where it stays. That’s where it’s presented to the immune system, as an abnormal intruding protein on a cell surface. The Spike protein is not released to wander freely through the bloodstream by itself, because it has a transmembrane anchor region that (as the name implies) leaves it stuck. That’s how it sits in the virus itself, and it does the same in human cells.” So now let’s look at the facts logically. Yes, Covid vaccinations introduce spike proteins into our bodies. But so does catching Covid-19. The difference is as expressed above: “Now we get to a key difference: when a cell gets the effect of an mRNA nanoparticle or an adenovirus vector, it of course starts to express the Spike protein. But instead of that being assembled into more infectious viral particles, as would happen in a real coronavirus infection, this protein gets moved up to the surface of the cell, where it stays.” One is planned inoculation with a vaccine that extremely rarely causes deaths. The other (catching Covid) is natural inoculation which causes millions of deaths . The body produces antigens towards the virus in both cases. The Covid-19 virus has an estimated real mortality rate of about 0.2%. Calculating mortality rates has been fraught with uncertainties at this point in time. To date worldwide, 157,826,379 cases have been reported with 3,288,154 deaths (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/). That is a mortality rate of 2.083%. But it is estimated that 10 times the reported cases have actually occurred (most with no or mild symptoms). So the resulting estimated mortality is much lower at 0.2%. This is a conservative estimate according to the link below. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/ Of the Covid vaccines given currently, only Astra Zenica and Johnson & Johnson have causally linked blood clots. https://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-some-covid-vaccines-may-cause-blood-clots-and-what-scientists-are-doing-about-it/ With 317 million AZ doses administered to-date worldwide, the causally linked blood clots rate is 0.001%. https://thrombosiscanada.ca/covid-19-vaccines-and-blood-clots-faqs/ Of those who have been diagnosed with blood clots the reported fatality rate ranges from 19% to 40%. (Canadian data so far is around 19%). Thus, the blood clot data to date for AZ is:
Thus to date, the AZ vaccine alone saved 634,000 minus 1268 (blood clot deaths) = 632,732 lives to-date. Not to mention the numerous “long-Covid” medical issues that are continuing to occur and may occur for years to come for those who actually catch Covid-19. Vaccines save lives, but admittedly not at zero risk. It appears that other vaccines’ blood clot rates are no higher than AZ, and with some vaccines such as mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, etc), the blood clot rate is much lower than AZ. If we scale the results globally: (Conservatively assuming all vaccines have the same blood clot rate as AZ)
Globally, Covid-19 vaccines could conservatively save 16,169,400 lives. But the world is not perfect. It took time to develop vaccines and it will take time to vaccinate everyone. We have already lost 3,295,950 lives and will lose many more before vaccines can be rolled out around the world. We could lose another 5,000,000 lives before everyone can get a vaccine. And of course due to various conscientious objections some will not get vaccinated. And sadly many misinformed people (up to 30% of the US population) will not get vaccinated contributing many more deaths. Conclusions One might argue that people have the right to refuse a vaccine but here is the downside to that decision. As long as a significant number of people do not get vaccinated, Covid-19 will continue to circulate, AND, as all viruses do, it will continue to mutate. The risk then is that more virulent and deadly varieties of the virus will occur, killing millions more people. Not to mention the economic damage and crushing debt that future generations will have to bear. I personally feel an obligation to those millions of people and future generations. That, in addition to my own protection, is the main reason I choose to get vaccinated. For everyone, including those of a religious persuasion, it seems like the right thing to do , in spite of any personal reservations about the vaccine that you might have. No vaccine or medication is zero risk. Vaccines however have been proven to be extremely safe, safer than most medications. Globally other vaccines save 4 to 5 million lives per year (mostly children) according to WHO (https://www.who.int/news-room/facts-in-pictures/detail/immunization) Since vaccines were first used, it is estimated that 180,000,000 lives have been saved. This is how I see things. In Sept 2020 I predicted that Trump would win the election or at least still be in office in Sept 2021. I was wrong and happy to say so. But it is worrying that it came so close to happening.
At least now we can focus on the other existential issues - the pandemic and climate change. There are encouraging signs on both these fronts although we must not become complacent. In order to be successful in tackling both of these issues, we must find ways to co-operate more on a global level. Certainly the global cooperation on the pandemic front shows that it can be done. However, there also remains some very nationalistic and inward thinking, especially with vaccinations, so the task ahead is not an easy one. The world is waiting for leadership in this and it is not entirely apparent that Biden, although much improved from Trump, is going to be that leader. Biden has many bridges to mend in the US not to mention the rest of the globe. Britain is much too preoccupied dealing with the various ramifications of Brexit to be effective leaders. Also, their current Prime Minister is not included or even qualified to be a world leader. With Merkel stepping down, there will be a power vacuum in the EU. That and the drag of Brexit could keep them out of the game for some time. China, while powerful, is not inclined to take on the role of bringing the world together, nor would they likely be accepted in such a role by most other nations at this time. Also they are currently too focused on world economic domination. Trudeau does have an opportunity to show global leadership but may soon be caught up in an election and thus will be very inward focused. Even if he were to step up, Canada does not have the political weight to single handedly provide that leadership. At best we can be facilitators. I encourage Trudeau to be that facilitator. Maybe that leadership will not come from the political realm but from corporations and other non-profit organizations. There are signs that they are realizing that they do have that power and even obligation to do so. They have a long way to go to gain the trust of people. Capitalism does not currently have a very good reputation in the public's mind. As individuals we have an obligation to be pushing for the leadership that the world so desperately needs now. With continued push from individuals in all spheres - political and corporate, a leader might emerge. Let's hope so. Or at least he will still be President a year from now.I recently watched some of the Republican presidential nomination convention (didn't have the stomach to watch the whole thing), and was impressed with how slick the convention was. They have put together a convincing story for those who want to believe. If the Democrats had a strong leader, then even such a slick story would not swing the election for Trump. Sadly the Democrats do not have a strong contender in Joe Biden. The one wild card is Kamala Harris and how much she can emerge as a strong leader. For some time now, the presidential elections have not been about changing the opinion of dedicated Republicans or Democrats. They are intractably polarized. The elections are all about the undecided and for them the Republicans have put together a fairly compelling story. Throughout history, leaders who face defeat in an upcoming election often create an external enemy. Patriotic voters then rally behind the leader to help fight that enemy. Trump has been trying to make China the enemy, however, China does not want Trump as President so will not likely play that game to the extent that it could swing the election. Russia does want Trump as President since they see him as most likely allowing them to continue with their quest to reform the former Soviet Union. Watch out for more Russian interference (although perhaps in a more subtle manner this time). The EU and UK are not likely enemies since they are both in survival mode and cannot afford to get embroiled in any controversies with the US. And that leaves Canada, but we are not big enough and bad enough to become real enemies in American eyes. Trump will however attempt to light fires between Canada and the US so be prepared for some rocky days ahead. So who is left to become the enemy? Well it seems it is the American people themselves. Trump will likely continue fanning the flames of racial discontent and rioting just so he can be the President of "Law and Order". If people become fearful enough about such rioting, they will support someone who they see as the strongest to deal with the situation. If the above plays out even to some extent, then the election could easily be close. And we already know that Trump has established enough doubt about the legitimacy of some votes to contest the results. It could even go to the courts and there is none better at playing the legal system than Trump. Another factor which could help Trump is the development of a Covid-19 vaccine and/or treatment. There are some encouraging developments with both vaccines and treatments and while they may not be ready by November, you can bet that Trump will leverage every bit of good news. Business activity and stock markets are likely to respond favourably to such news as well. If Trump does win or "hang on", then the only thing that will save America is the Democrats controlling both the house and the senate after the elections. And that is not a sure thing for all of the reasons above. I hope I'm wrong. Canada has done reasonably well by global standards, but there have been many missed opportunities to do better. What's worse, it is my belief that we are not preparing properly for a probable second wave.
Here is letter I am about to sent to various MP's and MPP's. I am writing to express concern about Canada’s preparedness for a second wave of Covid-19. Another countrywide lockdown can be avoided. We have already mortgaged the future of the next 3 generations, and we need not, indeed must not, make that worse. Abstract: Another countrywide lockdown can be avoided. We know that wearing masks is essential to controlling the spread of the virus.
Detailed Discussion: If you are working on these concerns as expressed below, that is good news, but then my primary concern becomes one about communications. There appears to be a lack of Federal leadership other than your readiness to throw money at the issue. I agree that each province needs to apply approaches specific to the situation in their province, but that process should not be leaderless. There are fundamental elements of the response that should apply consistently across provinces. There has been and continues to be confusion because of provincial differences and even regional differences within provinces. A major factor in support of the consistency across all provinces is that Canadians will want to have Canadian vacations more than any time in the past. We should be doing everything possible to support and grow this trend. That will put billions of dollars into the Canadian tourist industry that could otherwise go elsewhere. A culture of vacationing in Canada could last for decades. A confusing mix of approaches and cross provincial border travel restrictions could waste this opportunity. Here are the key issues that require strong leadership at all levels of government: Medical and Scientific Advice
We know that wearing masks is essential to controlling the spread of the virus.
We know that robust contact tracing is essential to controlling the spread of the virus.
We know that robust testing is essential to controlling the spread of the virus. This applies both to identifying those currently with Covid-19 and those with antibodies who have had Covid-19.
We know that travellers are a significant factor in the spread of Covid-19.
In all of the above, we need strong leadership at all levels of government, especially at the Federal level. We need best practices for Canada applied in a way that takes into account regional and local nuances. Let’s at least all start from the same playbook. If lockdown conditions arise, any lockdowns should be applied locally and regionally as testing indicates. If we do all of the above, Canada should NOT need another national lockdown. By-the-way, we are already seeing that there could be long lasting mental and physical health consequences to lockdowns. This will only be magnified by further lockdowns. We have not even begun to calculate the long term costs associated with these negative health outcomes. If lockdown conditions arise, have you considered the approach advocated by Uri Alon, Professor and Systems Biologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science? If we have to have another Canada-wide lockdown and associated financial bailouts, confidence in federal and provincial governments will drop dramatically. On the other hand, strong coordinated leadership will save lives, save huge costs, and probably save your governments. From a concerned citizen, Julian Sale This article by Garrett M. Graff helps to show us that the US, indeed the entire world, has very little "resilience". All of our systems are moving the world toward less and less resilience and THAT is a problem - not just for pandemics (yes there will be more) but also for the much bigger issue of Climate Change. My hope is that this pandemic will be a wake-up call for the world and that we start thinking about and acting on Climate Change issues with the same urgency as we now are with the pandemic. Although I'm not holding my breath on that one.
The article is very American centric and admittedly the impact of the pandemic could be worse in the US than most other countries of the world, from the number of deaths to the impact on the economy. How the rest of the world manages Covid-19 is going to be equally important as the US. Currently, I am vacillating from day to day from Optimism to Pessimism. One thing that can quickly change the entire trajectory of the pandemic is the speed with which the world develops and deploys an effective vaccine and /or treatment for Covid-19. There is an unprecedented amount of work going on now and there are many promising avenues of research. We could have a vaccine for Covid-19 developed and deployed faster than any vaccine in the history of modern medicine. If this happens, then things will bounce back pretty quickly. The longer before it happens, the slower the recovery. Bouncing back pretty quickly does not mean everything will go back to the way it was. There have been lots of dislocations, some of which will never recover. But there will be lots of new business opportunities that contribute significantly to the economy. Money is cheap and the US Feds could just print more money to bail out the States. Economists have said for years now that such debt is not sustainable and that we are eventually in for a day of reckoning. Most don't understand why we have not had one yet. So now they are starting to think that we can go on for a long time with the Feds funding everything with little or no short term consequences. Of course, if inflation kicks in, then we will have a financial collapse that will make 2007/2008 and the pandemic look like a picnic. No one seems to know why inflation has not kicked in long ago, especially when unemployment was below 4% in the US. I have done a lot of reading on Covid-19 and have concluded that the economy can get back to work pretty quickly under the following conditions:
People say that we do not have enough masks or resources for testing or tracing. My answer to that "bullshit". If we can shut down the economy and take on billions of dollars of new debt in Canada and trillions of dollars around the world, we can muster the resources to do these things very quickly at a fraction of the cost of shutting down the economy. I've been after the government (sending emails) for over a month to do #6 & 7 in particular. I do agree 100% with the last sentence in the article. However, if my assessment of the 7 steps needed to control Covid-19 while opening the economy is correct, then things could get going pretty quickly. And it is not just my assessment. There are now a lot of scientific studies that indicate that such steps can work if the approach is coordinated and everyone complies. Americans by nature will not comply easily and have this "do your own thing" attitude which is not conducive to a coordinated approach. Americans will have more difficulty with this than any other nation. On the other hand, Americans are some of the most inventive people on earth. They might get lucky and invent their way out of this. Yes, worst-case scenario, we could be in for a long and difficult time, and we each have to ask ourselves how we would handle that. How "resilient" are we? On the other hand, I read a lot about technology and there is a ton of good stuff happening or about to happen. Big technological breakthroughs in medicine, batteries, and solar panels to name just a few. On these and many other fronts I am optimistic. Actually technology and climate change are likely to disrupt the world much more than the pandemic. The difference is that the pandemic is immediate and the other two are more gradual. We are like the frog in a pot of water on the stove. Turn the heat up ever so slowly and the frog gets cooked. Turn the heat up quickly and the frog notices the change in temperature and jumps out of the pot. We are currently "reacting" with all sorts of things with the pandemic but we could well boil to death with climate and technological changes. Currently, the stock market seems to be ignoring bad news in the belief that the economy will be able to rebound pretty quickly as restrictions are lifted. I'm not convinced that the market is a good indicator of anything right at the moment - other than the usual mix of greed and fear. What should one do in such an environment? Well, that depends upon your timeframe and your objectives for that timeframe. There is no question that there is a greater degree of uncertainty about many things in the world today and this elevated degree of uncertainty is likely to continue for quite some time - possibly years. There will be winners and losers as there always are during times of uncertainty and change. Some people are excited about all the opportunities that periods of change create. Me, I am normally one of those excited about periods of change, but at 77 I have to start thinking differently. "Resiliency" and "flexibility" should become my new guiding principles. As a friend of similar age to myself recently said, "I have lived through many market cycles in my lifetime and have done well at the end of the day, but I'm not sure I will live long enough to see the end of this cycle". In spite of the challenges ahead, there will be lots of opportunities too. With a little bit more "resiliency and flexibility" in your lives, you will do well. Here is a link to the Washington Post article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/05/08/coronavirus-economic-recovery-disaster/?arc404=true The advantages of the pure Bluetooth Tracing App is that it does not collect personal info including location. It also is much more accurate at detecting close proximity to others.
The disadvantages are: It is dependent on a high degree of voluntary participation, it can be slow to flag hot spots, and it does not allow data analysis for predicting and warning people of hot spots. I have just learned about a Canadian development which is in effect a hybrid system. I don't know all the details since it is not commercial nor is there a similar commercial system anywhere in the world to my knowledge. It works similar to the Bluetooth system described previously but in addition to exchanging tokens, it also exchanges encrypted time and location info. This immediately raises privacy concerns for many people. They have a novel way of addressing the privacy aspect. The encrypted info is not collected into a centralized database as the pure GPS systems are. They use a mesh network of servers. The data is shuffled and handed off to another server which in turn shuffles the data and hands it off to yet another server repeatedly. In order to breach such a system, hackers would have to simultaneously hack several different servers, a virtually impossible task. And even then the data is still encrypted. The system would also continuously delete old info, say 30 days or so. The other novel and brilliant aspect is applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) to analyse the data to determine high-risk areas and movements of people. The system would not have to wait for someone to be diagnosed to get an alert. If someone was in high-risk areas for more than a certain amount of time, the AI system may alert certain individuals to self-isolate. Such a system would much more responsive to Covid-19 outbreaks and may even be smart enough to figure out high-risk areas where there may be asymptomatic individuals. Such a system could dramatically reduce the spread of Covid-19 or similar viruses. If the system actually does work the way I have described, I would be very comfortable using it. Indeed, I would consider it my civic duty to do so. There is a lot in the news lately about Tracking and Tracing Apps for your smartphone.
Most people seem to think they are essentially the same thing and that they mean "tracking" wherever you go. They are not the same at all. One tracks your location and one does not. One is centralized and one is decentralized. There are two different app technologies:
The Bluetooth Tracing app is the one being proposed in Canada.
It is so important for people to understand this difference between Tracking and Tracing. While no system is perfect, the Bluetooth app is MUCH more secure. It does rely on voluntary participation, however, once people understand that they are NOT being TRACKED with the app, they are much more likely to use it. Tracing Covid-19 in this way can dramatically decrease its spread and make it safer for everyone. This does not replace the manual tracing system but it can be a powerful additional tool in fighting Covid-19. As of this writing 19 Mar 2020, there are approximately 2.5 million COVID-19 cases worldwide and the death toll is just over 0.16 million. Below is an interesting graph listing worldwide deaths in 2017 from various causes. Approximately 56 million worldwide. Currently COVID-19 would rank very close to the bottom of the list. However, this COVID-19 pandemic is far from over. It is estimated that up to 80% of the cases are mild or without any symptoms at all, so it is extremely difficult to determine what the actual mortality rate is. Estimates are wide ranging. “We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this year,” says a March 26 report by the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team. With interventions it appears that the death toll could be 1.0 million or less in 2020. Of course, we continue to get waves of cases at least until an effective vaccine is developed and widely deployed around the world. New estimates published by the CDC on 13 Dec 2017 range from between 291,000 and 646,000 people worldwide die from seasonal influenza-related respiratory illnesses each year. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p1213-flu-death-estimate.html An interesting perspective is emerging from the Chinese data which indicates that more lives may have been saved from reduced pollution than actually died of COVID-19.
Here is another graphic showing the magnitudes of previous pandemics vs our current COVID-19 pandemic. Here is the link to VisualCapitalist.com for a higher resolution version of this History of Pandemics. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/history-of-pandemics-deadliest/ |
If you already have a feed reader set up, choose that reader and add this blog. Otherwise I suggest you select FeedBlitz to get email notifications of new blog posts.
AuthorRetired and loving life. Archives
February 2024
Categories
All
Link to my Climate Change blog: |