Fourth wave discussion thread

Covid related topics that are connected to travel or the aviation industry.
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by altiplano »

That's correct, these vaccines are under Interim Order Authorization, not full approval as set out in the Food and Drug Regulations. Emergency use because they're in a hurry. Fair enough, but I'm not in a hurry.

Whereas the Minister of Health believes that immediate action is required to deal with a significant risk, direct or indirect, to health, safety or the environment;

Therefore, the Minister of Health, pursuant to subsection 30.1 makes the annexed Interim Order Respecting Clinical Trials for Medical Devices and Drugs Relating to COVID-19.

Minister of Health
Patricia Hajdu
---------- ADS -----------
 
montado
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by montado »

altiplano wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:02 am That's correct, these vaccines are under Interim Order Authorization, not full approval as set out in the Food and Drug Regulations. Emergency use because they're in a hurry. Fair enough, but I'm not in a hurry.

Whereas the Minister of Health believes that immediate action is required to deal with a significant risk, direct or indirect, to health, safety or the environment;

Therefore, the Minister of Health, pursuant to subsection 30.1 makes the annexed Interim Order Respecting Clinical Trials for Medical Devices and Drugs Relating to COVID-19.

Minister of Health
Patricia Hajdu
Makes me why Seneca college is threatening that the vaccine will be mandatory. Also on the radio the employment lawyer said employers can make the vaccine mandatory. I asked why the flu vaccine can’t be mandatory… his answer, “the flu doesn’t cause lockdowns”

What an idiot. Covid doesn’t cause lockdowns, the government decided to lockdown. This guy claims your can make this mandatory, and then says “nothing has been to court for it to be decided” but his advice is that it’s okay to enforce mandatory vaccines. I call BS. What’s really happening is people are making verbal assumptions about things not on paper. I’ll put 10 bucks that Seneca says vaccine is mandatory but when push comes to shove if you don’t get the shots you can still attend. They will have a way of making exemptions. This is all just trying to guilt and fear people into a vaccine. People will just get the shot to live more simply. Not because they actually want the shot.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by CpnCrunch »

BTD wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 6:13 am

They still do not fall under approved, just authorized for use. I’m not saying that it makes a difference in terms of safety or efficacy, but they are not technically “approved”.
They are approved according to the health canada website, as photofly and I pointed out above. Don't make me write another fucking rant or screenshot the damn website for you! I believe you're an airline pilot so this stuff shouldn't be difficult...
---------- ADS -----------
 
montado
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by montado »

The younger age group accounts for over 19 percent of the cases, and has 14 deaths. (19 percent of Canada's 1.42 million confirmed cases.

This makes a case fatality at 0.005 percent. The IFR would be lower. This is deaths vs confirmed cases!

My God do people see how idiotic this is to say vaccines should be mandatory for kids to go to school. The CFR is lower than the IFR for the flu!

On the other hand, those 80 plus CFR is 25 percent! Quite alarming? Well if you make it to 80 you have reached above the average age of death. So I don't know if this should be surprising. IFR is probably down in the 5 percent for this age group.
Screenshot_20210714-122228.png
Screenshot_20210714-122228.png (138.67 KiB) Viewed 1870 times
Screenshot_20210714-122245.png
Screenshot_20210714-122245.png (167.06 KiB) Viewed 1870 times
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by photofly »

montado wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:29 am
On the other hand, those 80 plus CFR is 25 percent! Quite alarming? Well if you make it to 80 you have reached above the average age of death. So I don't know if this should be surprising.
It should be surprising: the life expectancy of the average eighty year old in Canada is 9.8 years, that is, with the regular array of illness and disease that affects the elderly, an 80 year old can expect to live to 90. If you don’t understand how that can be when the average life expectancy in Canada is 82, you need to improve your understanding of statistics.

When an 80 year old person die of COVID, that’s bad, not expected.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
montado
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by montado »

photofly wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:40 am
montado wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:29 am
On the other hand, those 80 plus CFR is 25 percent! Quite alarming? Well if you make it to 80 you have reached above the average age of death. So I don't know if this should be surprising.
It should be surprising: the life expectancy of the average eighty year old in Canada is 9.8 years, that is, with the regular array of illness and disease that affects the elderly, an 80 year old can expect to live to 90. If you don’t understand how that can be when the average life expectancy in Canada is 82, you need to improve your understanding of statistics.

When an 80 year old person die of COVID, that’s bad, not expected.
What did you just write? Lmao. So confused... The average life expectancy of an eighty year old is 9.8?

Just because you hit 80 that's not a free pass to 90. This is some unicorn thing you just wrote here. Dare I ask for a source? Lol

The 80 plus category includes 90 year olds and 89.8 year olds. I'm really not clear on what you are saying.

Here's a question. pre covid, what's was the breakdown of cause of death for those over 80? Now with covid how has that changed? You know in LTC flu outbreaks were common and the flu killed many elderly.
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by photofly »

montado wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:46 am
photofly wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:40 am
montado wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:29 am
On the other hand, those 80 plus CFR is 25 percent! Quite alarming? Well if you make it to 80 you have reached above the average age of death. So I don't know if this should be surprising.
It should be surprising: the life expectancy of the average eighty year old in Canada is 9.8 years, that is, with the regular array of illness and disease that affects the elderly, an 80 year old can expect to live to 90. If you don’t understand how that can be when the average life expectancy in Canada is 82, you need to improve your understanding of statistics.

When an 80 year old person die of COVID, that’s bad, not expected.

What did you just write? Lmao. So confused... The average life expectancy of an eighty year old is 9.8?

Just because you hit 80 that's not a free pass to 90. This is some unicorn thing you just wrote here. Dare I ask for a source? Lol

The 80 plus category includes 90 year olds and 89.8 year olds. I'm really not clear on what you are saying.

Here's a question. pre covid, what's was the breakdown of cause of death for those over 80? Now with covid how has that changed? You know in LTC flu outbreaks were common and the flu killed many elderly.
What I’m saying is that today’s cohort of 80 year olds will on average live another 9 years.
9.0 years, actually, on this Statistics Canada page:

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en ... 1310013401

If that’s confusing to you, I don’t think your grasp of statistics is as strong as you think it is.

No, it’s not a free pass to 90, but when an 80 year old is killed by a preventable disease, that’s on average 9 years of life they’ve been denied. Yes, nine years. Not 2 years, and it’s not “expected”.

The breakdown of the cause of death isn’t relevant to the statistics. The statistics are not that they’d live on average to 90 only if they don’t get sick - the 9 years life expectancy includes all causes of death. Those that don’t get “sick” by your understanding of “sick” have a life expectancy well in excess of 90.

This may be surprising to you, but 80 year olds are not on the verge of death. A disease that kills a high proportion of 80 year old people whom it infects is a very very bad thing.

The life expectancy of the average 90 year old in Canada is another 5 years.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
montado
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by montado »

For all you know 90 percent of the 80 plus category of deaths could have been 90 year olds. The question should be did covid change the stats you posted? With covid times, do 80 year olds still average another 9 years? Do we have that answer?

Everyone has this way of trying to manipulate stats to sound like a narrative. I simply just posted the facts. 80 plus CFR is 25 percent. It's also important to know what the IFR is...but that is only a guess. We also know dying with covid is different than dying from it.

Im not trying to minimize lives with these death statistics. But the government certainly has minimized the lives of the living. We are owed an explanation as to why. Why do these restrictions make sense? Why would a vaccine be mandatory for a person under 18? I don't know what Kool-Aid you would have to be drinking to not see things don't add up.

Do you understand why the stat you posted has zero relevance in your argument? You can't even tell anyone here if the stat changed with covid happening.
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by photofly »

What I posted was the refutation to your comment that since average life expectancy in Canada is 82, an eighty-something person dying of COVID is “expected”, normal, or acceptable. It isn’t.

When an eighty-something person dies of COVID that’s a life cut short by on average between 9 (for those at 80) and five (for those about to turn 90) years.

I’m not manipulating any statistics. Those are facts.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
User avatar
BTD
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1610
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by BTD »

CpnCrunch wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:54 am
BTD wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 6:13 am

They still do not fall under approved, just authorized for use. I’m not saying that it makes a difference in terms of safety or efficacy, but they are not technically “approved”.
They are approved according to the health canada website, as photofly and I pointed out above. Don't make me write another fucking rant or screenshot the damn website for you! I believe you're an airline pilot so this stuff shouldn't be difficult...
:goodman:

Yes it isn’t difficult. If you look up in the drug product data base. It doesn’t appear as an approved vaccine. It only shows as marketable

And I’ve taken a screenshot of the health Canada website where the vaccine authorization is listed. And it states that they are authorized for use with terms and conditions.

That some public laymen section uses the term approved is irrelevant, the technical listings show authorized and not approved like most other drugs are. That shouldn’t be too difficult for you to figure out?

So go on your rant... I don’t care. My only point was that you called altiplanos post BS, while technically he is correct.

Here is health Canada’s website
BFC00A87-525D-4232-B12A-F7DBE58EF6CE.jpeg
BFC00A87-525D-4232-B12A-F7DBE58EF6CE.jpeg (609.08 KiB) Viewed 2317 times
---------- ADS -----------
 
montado
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by montado »

It is expected if you are above the average age of death you will be dying sooner rather than later. Death is a very normal thing in your 80s and 90s. Pre covid, 80 and 90 year olds were dying all the time.

What is there to refute? What is the CFR for influenza in 80 plus category? Do you consider influenza deaths abnormal too?
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by CpnCrunch »

deleted
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by CpnCrunch on Wed Jul 14, 2021 10:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by CpnCrunch »

BTD wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 10:22 am


Yes it isn’t difficult. If you look up in the drug product data base. It doesn’t appear as an approved vaccine. It only shows as marketable
It's a different page...sigh. The heading is "approved vaccines" and it shows a list of covid vaccines. Are you making me pull teeth here or what? Just fecking google health canada covid approved vaccines and I'm sure you'll find it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by altiplano »

Interim:

adjective

in or for the intervening period; provisional or temporary.

"an interim arrangement"

Similar:
provisional
temporary
pro tem
stopgap
short-term
fill-in
intervening
transitional
changeover
make-do
makeshift
improvised
impromptu
emergency
provisory
provisionary

Opposite:
permanent
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7928
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by pelmet »

Discussion about dying is mostly irrelevant. The bottom line is……are you willing to be a long hauler when it comes to covid. No energy, foggy brain, heart issues, etc. It varies. Seems like Lyme disease.

We all know most of us wont die and most of the older people have been vaccinated, so spreading it to them is less of an issue.

What would be nice to know is........what percent of us have long term effects. It might be quite large but no stats.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by pelmet on Wed Jul 14, 2021 3:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Inverted2
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by Inverted2 »

Image
---------- ADS -----------
 
DEI = Didn’t Earn It
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by photofly »

montado wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 10:25 am It is expected if you are above the average age of death you will be dying sooner rather than later. Death is a very normal thing in your 80s and 90s. Pre covid, 80 and 90 year olds were dying all the time.
Every single element of this is completely and entirely incorrect.

The average age of death for a newborn is 82. That absolutely doesn’t mean you lose any consideration and can expect to die the day after your 82nd birthday. An eighty year old can and should expect to live another 9 years, and death is not a normal thing, whatever your age.

The life expectancy of an eighty year old is nine years. It’s morally repugnant for you to write off the elderly.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
FL320
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by FL320 »

Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee on 10/22/20: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XTiL9rUpkg

He ACCIDENTALLY clicks on a slide. Then clicks away really fast.
This is the slide. They have known the side-effects.

Then you wonder why some people do not trust the “leaders”. Saying it is safe is exaggerated; but let’s get vaccinated to avoid the 4th wave.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Attachments
E3A69B03-E61B-4AE8-B4C3-F5D58921A461.jpeg
E3A69B03-E61B-4AE8-B4C3-F5D58921A461.jpeg (482.94 KiB) Viewed 2075 times
FL320
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by FL320 »

Worth reading:

Covid-19 vaccines: In the rush for regulatory approval, do we need more data?

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1244
---------- ADS -----------
 
Human Factor
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 11:55 pm
Location: Between a dock and a hard place.

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by Human Factor »

CpnCrunch wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 10:03 pm
Human Factor wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 10:01 pm Right off of Pfizer's own website:
This isn't the USA in case you haven't noticed, and Health Canada's website lists Pfizer, Moderna, J&J & AZ under "Approved vaccines". I'm not gong to post the link because this is a fucking stupid thread. Find it yourself if you give a shit. (I don't).
Wow, I ask for information and I get vitriol...

The question I asked is if these four vaccines were only authorized for emergency use in Canada and the emergency has officially been lifted, then anyone now receiving the shots are part of the vaccine trial(s). If that's actually the case then it will affect your medical:
Untitled.jpeg
Untitled.jpeg (190.75 KiB) Viewed 1953 times
https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/medica ... te-holders
---------- ADS -----------
 
Will fix airplanes for food.
notwhoyouthinkIam
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:49 am

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by notwhoyouthinkIam »

Human Factor wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 5:22 pm
Wow, I ask for information and I get vitriol...

The question I asked is if these four vaccines were only authorized for emergency use in Canada and the emergency has officially been lifted, then anyone now receiving the shots are part of the vaccine trial(s). If that's actually the case then it will affect your medical:
Untitled.jpeg
https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/medica ... te-holders
Sure, ignore the first half of the text you posted and twist one line to support your argument.

I recommend that you read up on the expert's recommendations instead of a pencil pusher's report from the transportation regulator.

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac- ... nes-en.pdf
---------- ADS -----------
 
TG
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2102
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Around

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by TG »

montado wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 10:25 am It is expected if you are above the average age of death you will be dying sooner rather than later. Death is a very normal thing in your 80s and 90s. Pre covid, 80 and 90 year olds were dying all the time.

What is there to refute? What is the CFR for influenza in 80 plus category? Do you consider influenza deaths abnormal too?
If you cannot even gasp the concept of life expectancy how can you pretend to know any better than scientists/virologists?
And the idea of getting the young cohort vaccinated is to prevent circulation and more importantly, mutations of this virus which could make vaccins less effective.


This virus doesn’t need to kill you to wreak your life by the way (ref: Long Covid)
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by altiplano »

FL320 wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:01 pm Worth reading:

Covid-19 vaccines: In the rush for regulatory approval, do we need more data?

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1244
Very informative article detailing the differences in approved vs. emergency use authorization and more.

Doshi has also written other articles on the rushed roll out of the vaccines and the questionable way they determined the 95% efficacy claims by Pfizer/Moderna that counted only severe outcomes for an illness that actually has relatively very few severe outcomes, ie. cough and positive PCR test doesn't count, vaccine effective.

Or is the Assistant Professor Pharmaceutical Health Research University Maryland uninformed? BMJ is a peer reviewed medical journal.

I suppose that you can't go back after taking the blue pill though...
---------- ADS -----------
 
TG
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2102
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Around

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by TG »

You should be happy you live in Canada and that they went on the emergency use authorization route then.
With what it "seems" proper mesures to minimise the effect of this pandemic (Even if you don't believe it)

It's getting a bit of a mess in places like Namibia.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-57748119
Namibia, which has a population of 2.5 million, currently has the world's highest death rate, at 22 per million people, according to Our World in Data. Tunisia has the second worst rate at 13 and Suriname the third at 10.
To help cope with the continuing rise in cases, the government has built makeshift hospitals to accommodate patients. But even with those, health facilities and healthcare workers cannot keep up.
Not only are the number of sick Namibians rising, but so are the number who need to be treated in hospital.
---
Namibia was unprepared for the third wave, due to a perfect storm of government complacency, misinformation regarding vaccines and a deep case of fatigue with measures to control the spread of the virus.
Social media has been flooded with fake posts criticising the safety and efficacy of the vaccines.
Those who do want to get a vaccine, do not know if and when it will be available to them because of shortages, and the government has been changing its stance on how it should be distributed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
montado
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Fourth wave discussion thread

Post by montado »

I wonder why Canada is pushing to vaccinate the young people here when other countries clearly need it more.

Senca college wants to vaccinate and age group that has about a 2 in 100k fatality ratio of dying from covid. Heck it's nearly the same as some vaccines out there. What was AZ one in 60k gets a blood clot?

Kind of crazy we are pushing to vaccinate the young. Send the vaccine to Namibia!

60 plus vaccinate them
30 plus if you have health condition vaccinate.
under 30 no need to vaccinate.

My expert opinion.

Look at the UK cases are back wayyyyy up. We can't vaccinate out of this so it's time to do what we should have done from the beginning. Live with it, protect the vulnerable. Hard to believe the vaccine works when you look at this chart. Looks like the UK could reach new all time highs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Attachments
Screenshot_20210715-091924.png
Screenshot_20210715-091924.png (229.81 KiB) Viewed 1780 times
Post Reply

Return to “Covid”