Coronavirus

[d4rktrooper788]

I wasn't suggesting a free-for-all. There are reasonable restrictions to be had. In the GTA we've been rolled back beyond what's reasonable IMO. Especially when the province/city didn't even care to enforce their own rules in phase 3 anyways.

When this all blows over they are going to find that more people died due to depression, substance abuse, and other preventable causes. Think about how many cancer screenings aren't happening right now because it's "not essential", or people who are in pain waiting for "non-essential" surgeries. This virus is inevitable, and isn't magically going to go away even with a vaccine. We can't just throw away our economy or society because of it. If you're vulnerable, stay home! If you're in a low-risk group, exercise good judgment. The government should be cracking down on the individuals breaking the rules, not putting entire sectors of the economy out of business due to the bad behaviour of a few. That's not a recipe for success.

 

[Trials]

What's this if you are vulnerable stay home, you just isolated a huge group of people that don't even have it and you're letting the infected ones roam free. If you are sick or contagious stay home, that selfless act might actually help curb the spread of the thing, you are going to tell me to stay home because I'm old!
.... ok I can do that.

 

[Brian P]

So, how many new cases and deaths per day would you consider to be acceptable? What rate of increase would you consider to be acceptable? (hint with that latter question: go back to the first question a week later, a month later)

 

[jc100]

I wasn't suggesting a free-for-all. There are reasonable restrictions to be had. In the GTA we've been rolled back beyond what's reasonable IMO. Especially when the province/city didn't even care to enforce their own rules in phase 3 anyways.

When this all blows over they are going to find that more people died due to depression, substance abuse, and other preventable causes. Think about how many cancer screenings aren't happening right now because it's "not essential", or people who are in pain waiting for "non-essential" surgeries. This virus is inevitable, and isn't magically going to go away even with a vaccine. We can't just throw away our economy or society because of it. If you're vulnerable, stay home! If you're in a low-risk group, exercise good judgment. The government should be cracking down on the individuals breaking the rules, not putting entire sectors of the economy out of business due to the bad behaviour of a few. That's not a recipe for success.

How do you know if you’re a low risk group when we keep finding out about long term effects from Covid.

 

[Mad Mike]

I wasn't suggesting a free-for-all. There are reasonable restrictions to be had. In the GTA we've been rolled back beyond what's reasonable IMO. Especially when the province/city didn't even care to enforce their own rules in phase 3 anyways.

When this all blows over they are going to find that more people died due to depression, substance abuse, and other preventable causes. Think about how many cancer screenings aren't happening right now because it's "not essential", or people who are in pain waiting for "non-essential" surgeries. This virus is inevitable, and isn't magically going to go away even with a vaccine. We can't just throw away our economy or society because of it. If you're vulnerable, stay home! If you're in a low-risk group, exercise good judgment. The government should be cracking down on the individuals breaking the rules, not putting entire sectors of the economy out of business due to the bad behaviour of a few. That's not a recipe for success.

The problem is bad behavior is not counted as a 'few'. Stuffed gyms, spinning rooms, University gatherings, beaches in the summer, impromptu car meets, underground house parties and weddings all seem to regularly draw those few bad behavers you speak of. Many of them are traced to 'spreading events'.

Sure, you can try to step up enforcement and that might be a deterrent to some, most likely it drives behaviour underground.

I think you let the provincial daily count be the determining factor. Start with small restrictions at 250/day, escalate them if the count rises, at 1000/day bring down the hammer to flatten the curve. I think this approach is reasonable as it does place the onus on citizens -- do your part together and you will be free to carry on, behave with risk and gov't steps in to protect all.

 

[mimico_polak]

The problem is bad behavior is not counted as a 'few'. Stuffed gyms, spinning rooms, University gatherings, beaches in the summer, impromptu car meets, underground house parties and weddings all seem to regularly draw those few bad behavers you speak of. Many of them are traced to 'spreading events'.

Sure, you can try to step up enforcement and that might be a deterrent to some, most likely it drives behaviour underground.

I think you let the provincial daily count be the determining factor. Start with small restrictions at 250/day, escalate them if the count rises, at 1000/day bring down the hammer to flatten the curve. I think this approach is reasonable as it does place the onus on citizens -- do your part together and you will be free to carry on, behave with risk and gov't steps in to protect all.

Too much logic there @Mad Mike .... I like the suggestion though....here are the rules, if you’re too stupid to follow and adhere to them we will enforce restrictions because you can’t.

 

[GreyGhost]

Too much logic there @Mad Mike .... I like the suggestion though....here are the rules, if you’re too stupid to follow and adhere to them we will enforce restrictions because you can’t.

On a micro-level, it might be worthwhile to slap businesses with outbreaks (above a certain size, not two staff members) with a 30 day closure order. There seem to be a lot of businesses playing fast and loose with the guidelines or not ass-whooping patrons that will not comply (a la Oosterhoof party). If the survival of the business is on the line, the vast majority will be much more rigid in their enforcement actions. In Oosterhoff case, restaurant apparently told them to behave many times during the party and were ignored. At that point, they should be required to call cops/bylaw to hand out tickets to all at the party. With the call the business did their duty and is not subject to shut down, no call and they are subject to an ass kicking as well.

 

[d4rktrooper788]

So, how many new cases and deaths per day would you consider to be acceptable? What rate of increase would you consider to be acceptable? (hint with that latter question: go back to the first question a week later, a month later)

Case counts are irrelevant if the people recover on their own and don't end up in the hospital. We have a higher case count now than we did in April/May, yet hospitalizations and ICU are at roughly 1/6 of what they were in April/May. This is probably because the people catching it are not in the at-risk group.

How do you know if you’re a low risk group when we keep finding out about long term effects from Covid.

If that were the case we'd see hospitals full of people young people with long term issues due to COVID. The data doesn't seem to support that. All the cases of long term effect that I've read of had some other contributing factor (diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, etc.)

The problem is bad behavior is not counted as a 'few'. Stuffed gyms, spinning rooms, University gatherings, beaches in the summer, impromptu car meets, underground house parties and weddings all seem to regularly draw those few bad behavers you speak of. Many of them are traced to 'spreading events'.

Sure, you can try to step up enforcement and that might be a deterrent to some, most likely it drives behaviour underground.

I think you let the provincial daily count be the determining factor. Start with small restrictions at 250/day, escalate them if the count rises, at 1000/day bring down the hammer to flatten the curve. I think this approach is reasonable as it does place the onus on citizens -- do your part together and you will be free to carry on, behave with risk and gov't steps in to protect all.

We had double digit case counts for most of the summer, so most of those outdoor events (car meets, beaches, university gatherings) are fine (assuming case counts matter, which IMO they don't). As for the underground house parties and weddings, well I don't see how closing restaurants and gyms is going to affect that. People already breaking the rules will continue to do so.

Speaking of gyms -- AFAIK the only known super-spreader event tied to gyms is a spinning studio in Hamilton. In Toronto there were very few cases associated with gyms at all. Why should I not be allowed to lift weights because of some spin studio in Hamilton? Why should restaurants be forced out of business because people in Peel go to huge illegal weddings/parties? If we keep up these restrictions we will be feeling the economic impact from these lockdowns for years and years to come.

It's interesting that people on a motorcycle forum are so averse to risk all of a sudden. We engage in a hobby that kills/maims many every year, which is a burden on the healthcare system by the way. Maybe we should ban motorcycles all together? It's non-essential after all. Maybe we should ban sport bikes? Too many squids riding dirty causing accidents, it's got to go.

And before you say it, I know that motorcycle crashes aren't contagious like a virus. But we handled the first wave fine, and the second wave doesn't seem as bad as the first, at least from a hospitalizations POV. So why are we rolling back to more restrictions? It's not a question of "oh I need to stay inside for longer", there are people literally losing their life savings/businesses over this who have done nothing wrong, no associated COVID cases with their businesses, etc.

 

[GreyGhost]

And before you say it, I know that motorcycle crashes aren't contagious like a virus.

Have you been on many GTAM rides? On some of them, crashes are clearly contagious. Not as bad as the Benny Hill Grom video, but way too many people pile in.

Video obviously not Corona related but still hilarious.

Or if you prefer with the Benny Hill music.

Benny Hilli THIS!

bennyhillthis.com

 

[jc100]

Case counts are irrelevant if the people recover on their own and don't end up in the hospital. We have a higher case count now than we did in April/May, yet hospitalizations and ICU are at roughly 1/6 of what they were in April/May. This is probably because the people catching it are not in the at-risk group.



If that were the case we'd see hospitals full of people young people with long term issues due to COVID. The data doesn't seem to support that. All the cases of long term effect that I've read of had some other contributing factor (diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, etc.)



We had double digit case counts for most of the summer, so most of those outdoor events (car meets, beaches, university gatherings) are fine (assuming case counts matter, which IMO they don't). As for the underground house parties and weddings, well I don't see how closing restaurants and gyms is going to affect that. People already breaking the rules will continue to do so.

Speaking of gyms -- AFAIK the only known super-spreader event tied to gyms is a spinning studio in Hamilton. In Toronto there were very few cases associated with gyms at all. Why should I not be allowed to lift weights because of some spin studio in Hamilton? Why should restaurants be forced out of business because people in Peel go to huge illegal weddings/parties? If we keep up these restrictions we will be feeling the economic impact from these lockdowns for years and years to come.

It's interesting that people on a motorcycle forum are so averse to risk all of a sudden. We engage in a hobby that kills/maims many every year, which is a burden on the healthcare system by the way. Maybe we should ban motorcycles all together? It's non-essential after all. Maybe we should ban sport bikes? Too many squids riding dirty causing accidents, it's got to go.

And before you say it, I know that motorcycle crashes aren't contagious like a virus. But we handled the first wave fine, and the second wave doesn't seem as bad as the first, at least from a hospitalizations POV. So why are we rolling back to more restrictions? It's not a question of "oh I need to stay inside for longer", there are people literally losing their life savings/businesses over this who have done nothing wrong, no associated COVID cases with their businesses, etc.

Your analogy of risk outlines why you don’t really get this.....motorcyclists don’t generally “infect“ others when we have a crash. It’s a selfish pursuit in that you assume your own risk and it generally doesn’t affect others around you.

This is a community issue, not a selfish solo issue. That’s the nature of a pandemic.

Why shouldn’t you be able to do what you want? Because it either impacts others directly or indirectly.

As for hospitals not being packed with young people....long term means long term...not now.

We can see that for communities that did follow the rules you can get back to normal.

 

[Evoex]

Case counts are irrelevant if the people recover on their own and don't end up in the hospital. We have a higher case count now than we did in April/May, yet hospitalizations and ICU are at roughly 1/6 of what they were in April/May. This is probably because the people catching it are not in the at-risk group.



If that were the case we'd see hospitals full of people young people with long term issues due to COVID. The data doesn't seem to support that. All the cases of long term effect that I've read of had some other contributing factor (diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, etc.)



We had double digit case counts for most of the summer, so most of those outdoor events (car meets, beaches, university gatherings) are fine (assuming case counts matter, which IMO they don't). As for the underground house parties and weddings, well I don't see how closing restaurants and gyms is going to affect that. People already breaking the rules will continue to do so.

Speaking of gyms -- AFAIK the only known super-spreader event tied to gyms is a spinning studio in Hamilton. In Toronto there were very few cases associated with gyms at all. Why should I not be allowed to lift weights because of some spin studio in Hamilton? Why should restaurants be forced out of business because people in Peel go to huge illegal weddings/parties? If we keep up these restrictions we will be feeling the economic impact from these lockdowns for years and years to come.

It's interesting that people on a motorcycle forum are so averse to risk all of a sudden. We engage in a hobby that kills/maims many every year, which is a burden on the healthcare system by the way. Maybe we should ban motorcycles all together? It's non-essential after all. Maybe we should ban sport bikes? Too many squids riding dirty causing accidents, it's got to go.

And before you say it, I know that motorcycle crashes aren't contagious like a virus. But we handled the first wave fine, and the second wave doesn't seem as bad as the first, at least from a hospitalizations POV. So why are we rolling back to more restrictions? It's not a question of "oh I need to stay inside for longer", there are people literally losing their life savings/businesses over this who have done nothing wrong, no associated COVID cases with their businesses, etc.

i don't think you quite understand what 'long term' really means.

 

[Trials]

i don't think you quite understand what 'long term' really means.

forever

 

[Mad Mike]

Case counts are irrelevant if the people recover on their own and don't end up in the hospital. We have a higher case count now than we did in April/May, yet hospitalizations and ICU are at roughly 1/6 of what they were in April/May. This is probably because the people catching it are not in the at-risk group.

That's because the older folks know more now, they don't want to be in hospital so they are taking extra precautions. They shouldn't be expected to hide just because you want to play.

If that were the case we'd see hospitals full of people young people with long term issues due to COVID. The data doesn't seem to support that. All the cases of long term effect that I've read of had some other contributing factor (diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, etc.)

You may not understand the question - we don't know if that 20 something who is asymptomatic will suffer long term health risks. HIV, Hepatitis, Shingles all take years to present a nasty post dated offer.

 

[Mad Mike]

It's interesting that people on a motorcycle forum are so averse to risk all of a sudden. We engage in a hobby that kills/maims many every year, which is a burden on the healthcare system by the way. Maybe we should ban motorcycles all together? It's non-essential after all. Maybe we should ban sport bikes? Too many squids riding dirty causing accidents, it's got to go.

And before you say it, I know that motorcycle crashes aren't contagious like a virus. But we handled the first wave fine, and the second wave doesn't seem as bad as the first, at least from a hospitalizations POV. So why are we rolling back to more restrictions? It's not a question of "oh I need to stay inside for longer", there are people literally losing their life savings/businesses over this who have done nothing wrong, no associated COVID cases with their businesses, etc.

Motorcycles are certainly averse to risk -- but that are also very good at and keenly aware of how to minimize and mitigate risk. If motorcyclists drove like they were in a car, most would not outlive their first bike.

 

[FullMotoJacket]

Have you been on many GTAM rides? On some of them, crashes are clearly contagious. Not as bad as the Benny Hill Grom video, but way too many people pile in.

Video obviously not Corona related but still hilarious.

Or if you prefer with the Benny Hill music.

Benny Hilli THIS!

bennyhillthis.com

Spodefest

 

[GreyGhost]

Spodefest

Can you imagine the carnage if they were on fast bikes? Lots of poor decisions were made there (in fact, it appears that the majority of the riders were making poor decisions). Some people should not ride bikes.

 

[Mad Mike]

Can you imagine the carnage if they were on fast bikes? Lots of poor decisions were made there (in fact, it appears that the majority of the riders were making poor decisions). Some people should not ride bikes.

This actually happened on a group ride - a BMW scooter went down an embankment, another followe, than a Harley joined them at the bottom of the hill. They were doing about 30kmh around a rising sharp corner before rolling down the embankment. They were all OK, I had to hold back laughing when I looked down a 20' bush filled embankment and saw 3 puzzled faces looking up at us. The BMW scooters were scraped but otherwise good, the Harley lost a bag and the batwing needed some duct tape for the return trip.

 

[Evoex]

Can you imagine the carnage if they were on fast bikes? Lots of poor decisions were made there (in fact, it appears that the majority of the riders were making poor decisions). Some people should not ride bikes.

want to see something gloious? watch this

i wouldn't ride anywhere near this guy.

 

[Trials]

You are suppose to say are you alright? and if they say yes you can laugh your head off

 

[GreyGhost]

This actually happened on a group ride - a BMW scooter went down an embankment, another followe, than a Harley joined them at the bottom of the hill. They were doing about 30kmh around a rising sharp corner before rolling down the embankment. They were all OK, I had to hold back laughing when I looked down a 20' bush filled embankment and saw 3 puzzled faces looking up at us. The BMW scooters were scraped but otherwise good, the Harley lost a bag and the batwing needed some duct tape for the return trip.

I blew a corner on a sled once and ended up buried in a ditch. I was starting to clear snow from around it to get it back onto the trail amd there was a strange bump. Another sled had target fixated and crashed into the back of me. Luckily slowly so it was just a broken taillight and cracked hood. Later in the same trip, that guy whiskey throttled in a stand of trees and put a real hurting on his sled. I think that trip was the retirement adventure for that poor sled.