• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

All things Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Mick

Member
Reaction score
123
Points
530
Canada science: vaccinate kids
Sweden science: not necessary to vaccinate kids.

Depends on which science you want to believe at this point.

I think you're confusing public policy with science.

The latter should (hopefully) inform the former, which, along with many other variables, will obviously result in varying policies between jurisdictions.
 

Mick

Member
Reaction score
123
Points
530
Mick, with the Canadian stance on vaccination for children being opposite to that taken by Sweden, then I suppose it is Canadian "science" that is being disbelieved? Or can opposite stances taken from the same data both be following science? ...but that would mean that our conclusions could not be defended by calling people "science deniers".


Perhaps it was not clear, but my use of quotations around, "believe in science", was to highlight the dogmatic approach that appears to have taken over the vaccination campaign in Canada.

Yes, the vaccination policies are different - but I don't believe it's a case of "Canadian Science" vs "Swedish Science".

Point taken re: apparent dogmatism though. I would agree that accusations of "science denier" is tossed out far too easily.
 

Quirky

Sr. Member
Reaction score
622
Points
940
I think you're confusing public policy with science.

The latter should (hopefully) inform the former, which, along with many other variables, will obviously result in varying policies between jurisdictions.
Id like to know what’s in Quebecs water, besides sewage from Montreal’s raw waste dumps into its rivers.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
738
Points
1,060

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
6,923
Points
1,360
He likes using the phrase "the science is settled." Science is never settled.
Yup, settled. As we know, SARS CoV-2 virus is spread via surface contact, so wash your hands and disinfect surfaces regularly…
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
738
Points
1,060
Yup, settled. As we know, SARS CoV-2 virus is spread via surface contact, so wash your hands and disinfect surfaces regularly…
First, we never stop learning.
Second, the scientific consensus is frequently wrong.
Third, scientists are just as capable of bias as anyone else

The topic of settled science is a complicated one. You see, science doesn’t deal in proofs (with the exception of mathematical proofs in certain areas of physics). Rather, it deals in probabilities. In other words, it tells us what is most likely true, but it does not tell us what is absolutely true. It is inherently incapable of proving anything with 100% certainty because we are inherently incapable of knowing everything, which means that we always have to acknowledge the possibility that there is some other piece of evidence which eludes us. Another way to think about this is that science tells us what is correct given the current evidence, but it cannot completely eliminate the possibility of unknown evidence. So in the strictest sense, there is no such thing as “settled science.” It is always possible that some new discovery will overturn previous ideas, but, and this is the really important part, that doesn’t give you the right the assume that other evidence is out there. In other words, the fact that something technically might be wrong, doesn’t mean that you can assume it is wrong (that would be logical blunder known as an argument from ignorance fallacy). Many things in science have been so thoroughly tested and so consistently make accurate predictions that it is almost inconceivable that they could be wrong. So even though we cannot be 100% certain that they are correct, we can be 99.9999999% sure, and that is good enough to consider them essentially “settled”.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,140
Points
1,060
Exactly how science should be....
That's the part about "science" politicians and policy makers don't want to hear or talk about. Science is a weird mix of collaborative and combativeness. Papers and theories are constantly being torn apart, or new science makes them totally redundant. "The Science" on any issue is only good for today, tomorrow might find it overturned or tossed into the dustbin.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,348
Points
1,260
That's the part about "science" politicians and policy makers don't want to hear or talk about. Science is a weird mix of collaborative and combativeness. Papers and theories are constantly being torn apart, or new science makes them totally redundant. "The Science" on any issue is only good for today, tomorrow might find it overturned or tossed into the dustbin.
And that's why using "science" (the static term) as a gotcha doesn't work.

Example: I trust the science that these vaccines work, and that while vax'ed people still get Covid and pass it, their effects are much less severe than unvax'ed people. If new peer-reviewed science (not some person on FB in ALL CAPS) shows that, in fact, that's not the case and someone says "look! We were wrong the entire time! Ha!", my response would be "oh cool...you're right" and go with that.

I guess it takes a bit of mental...flexibility (?) to accept that your views might be off or totally wrong, and be able to follow the current researched view. But, to others it would look like I was flip-flopping on the issue.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
6,923
Points
1,360
The scientific method is highly dependent on what your hypothesis is you seek to prove or disprove.
 

Rifleman62

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
70
Points
530
It is, as stated, very, very convenient that the sheltered Trudeau has been exposed to COVID (but tested negative). I which he was exposed as the worst PM ever. He is the coward of the city.


LILLEY: Intolerant Trudeau divides Canadians while O'Toole shows understanding - 27 Jan 22​


Extract: “The small fringe minority of people who are on their way to Ottawa, who are holding unacceptable views that they are expressing, do not represent the views of Canadians who have been there for each other, who know that following the science and stepping up to protect each other is the best way to ensure our rights, our freedoms, our values as a country,” Trudeau said Wednesday.
 

winds_13

Member
Reaction score
79
Points
450
Whatever. ;)

No mandate = Let it rip.

Pick one.
What about other measures? ...masks, distancing, reducing contacts, providing negative tests, and so on.

How did you come to the conclusion that not enforcing punitive mandates on unvaccinated indiciduals is the same as "let it rip"? Why is it now that the virus (now predominately the Omicron variant) is about half as dangerous with similar rates of infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals that our only way out of this is to strong arm any vaccine holdouts... we already have a 90% vaccination rate amongst adults, at what point is it enough?

This is not the position that is being taken in many other Western nations. Just look at the U.K., Denmark, Sweden.

We are supposed to be living in a Liberal Democracy, where the rights of the individual are paramount. That comes at a cost, such as affording rights to those whose decisions you disagree with and the consequences (such as cancelled surgeries). The current measures placed on unvacvinated individuals are a major leap towards authoritarian collectivism. The primacy of individual rights and civil liberties is not a right-wing political philosophy, it is the definition of Liberalism... why is it that the "right-wing" political parties in Canada are the only ones promoting "left-wing" Liberalism, the principle that The Liberal Party of Canada was founded around.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,537
Points
1,010
The scientific method is highly dependent on what your hypothesis is you seek to prove or disprove.

"Scientific method" is independent. It is basically another variation of a decision loop. Strictly speaking, "disproof" is not sought (first you'd have to theorize what might constitute disproof, but then it would just be part of the hypothesis - "X" can't exist - and you'd seek evidence of "X"). Hypotheses have consequences which yield predictions, and people look for confirmation of predictions. If something predicted is not found, or something is found which contradicts the hypothesis, the hypothesis must be modified.

The problem with most debates over science and policy is that the hypotheses are often statistical in nature and convenient evidence is misused as a cover for ideological preferences and plain emotions.
 

winds_13

Member
Reaction score
79
Points
450
I say that because when they were firing unvaccinated city employees by the hundreds in October, I don't recall any protests against the mayor.

99% got their shots, and kept their jobs.

Was not an option. Yet, I recall no protests against the mayor.
What do you mean by other measures "were not an option". They were not options offered by many governments in Canada (Federal, municipal) but yhe option of regular testing for unvaccinated individuals was offered in other jurisdictions. Biden's failed workplace mandate included the option of testing.
 

Furniture

Sr. Member
Reaction score
951
Points
910
I mean what I said.

In the town I live, and worked,


City employees not double-vaxxed were put on unpaid leave as of 31 Oct.

Fired on 5 Jan.
That kind of goes back to what people who are against mandates are talking about... It's not the vaccine that is the problem, it's that governments are forcing people to choose between employment and vaccines that is the issue.
 

Rifleman62

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
70
Points
530
Coward of the nation.
Staff Edit: Lets stop with the name calling lest we slip into places other lesser forums go. Consider this a wrist slap and next time just explain your position of why you think this.
Bruce



FIRST READING: Trudeau's very odd COVID isolation​

First Reading is a daily newsletter keeping you posted on the travails of Canadian politicos, all curated by the National Post’s own Tristin Hopper. To get an early version sent direct to your inbox every Monday to Thursday at 6 p.m. ET (and 9 a.m. on Sundays), sign up here.


Just as hundreds of truckers converge on Ottawa to protest COVID mandates, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that he is entering isolation for five days after coming into contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19 . “I feel fine and will be working from home,” Trudeau wrote on Twitter.

It’s a weird thing to do at this stage of the pandemic , given that many health authorities are now explicitly telling Canadians not to bother isolating if they’re asymptomatic. With Omicron spreading so widely, epidemiologists are generally working from the premise that almost everyone has been exposed to COVID-19 at some point, and to take precautions only in special circumstances. Ontario’s official public health guidelines advise people in Trudeau’s situation to continue living their lives, but to avoid “high-risk settings” such as senior’s homes. Trudeau claims he is following the guidelines of Ottawa Health, but the health authority’s public guidelines only advise a five day isolation period in the case that someone is unvaccinated. Not only is Trudeau thrice-vaccinated, but a rapid test that he took after the alleged exposure turned up negative.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,928
Points
1,260
We haven't reached the kind of crisis that should limit individual rights.
So you ARE saying all of the measures society took alleviated us from "that" type of crisis,......thanks for coming around.
 
Top