Masks Mandatory In ALL Indoor Public Places In Edmonton

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Canada aggressive? The borders were left open long after the virus was discovered, we still let in many, many temporary foreign workers, we let people gather by the thousands to protest, and we gave away most of our masks and equipment early on. I don't consider that aggressive at all. The only aggressive action by our federal government, was to try and bypass parliament. Our federal government failed miserably, even though the provinces did take action to slow the spread.

If you think we are doing bad, just look at the covid cesspool to the south of us for a bit of a reality check. They've already lost a minimum of 160,000 people in 6 months, whereas they lost 600,000 throughout the entire 2 years of the Spanish flu pandemic.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

I look at it this way. I have a husband who has serious heart/lung issues. I want to wear a mask and take precautions because I love him dearly. Anyone who has ever seen someone die from Lung disease (like I have) will know about the suffering of what they go thru before merciful death comes. I'm not gonna be the wife trying to sneak in the hospital to be by my dying husband's side as he breathes his last gasp.

I am not going to take a chance like that. I care about my loved ones, I'm going to wear a mask. Not because of political or who so and so says about their rights.

I'm doing it for him. Period. Doing it for love.

And that's perfect. Good on you for doing it

[sk270]

Originally Posted by obsessed1

do.You have actual proof? He died by car crash with covid..covid death. Example. # are largely screwed
Would be interesting to compare deaths to date against last year and so on. I don't for a second believe covid has killed as many as we are led to believe

Actual proof is an interesting concept. Do you have actual proof that I exist? How do I know that you exist? Maybe the posts headed "obsessed1" are being written by a form of artificial intelligence constructed by the Republican Party of the US or maybe by the People's Republic of China in order to sow dissension and social upheaval in the Prairie Provinces of Canada.

Maybe I'll go back to contemplating the doctrine of original sin vs the evolution of human altruism. and gone.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Scott h

You seem to be able to do math much better than many on here.

Heres some math for you Scott:

Covid 19 stats in alberta

Population: 4.3 million
Deaths: 196

97% of deaths had underlying health condition

Chances of dying from the vid in Alberta: 0.000045

Chances of dying if you have no underlying health condition:0.00000144
(6 so far)

Average age of death: 84 years old





Why do you repeatedly ignore it? And ignore my questions related to said math?
Doesn't fit your agenda? The narrative you've swallowed up?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Scott h

If you think we are doing bad, just look at the covid cesspool to the south of us for a bit of a reality check. They've already lost a minimum of 160,000 people in 6 months, whereas they lost 600,000 throughout the entire 2 years of the Spanish flu pandemic.

And how many people died in Canada, that wouldn't have, if our federal government had taken the pandemic seriously, and closed our borders, and stopped international flights? How many deaths do you think we would have suffered, if we had the same population as the USA, and the same population density as the USA? And no, you can't just adjust the numbers to reflect the population difference, because that doesn't take into account population density, which makes it easier to transfer the virus.

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

Heres some math for you Scott:

Covid 19 stats in alberta

Population: 4.3 million
Deaths: 196

97% of deaths had underlying health condition

Chances of dying from the vid in Alberta: 0.000045

Chances of dying if you have no underlying health condition:0.00000144
(6 so far)

Average age of death: 84 years old





Why do you repeatedly ignore it? And ignore my questions related to said math?
Doesn't fit your agenda? The narrative you've swallowed up?

I read it 3 times but it doesn't make anymore sense than it did the first time.
The virus has been in Canada for about 7 months. During that time the country has been virtually shut down. No school, closed restaurants and bars, borders closed, etc. Of course there was little spread. A good job was done by many. Now the job is to get all those closures reversed if it can be done in a safe way. Fighting anti science/maskers is slowing the whole reopening procedure and compromises are being made, leaving areas open to get infections started again. Wouldn't it be stupid to go through all of this and then let things flare up again?

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by obsessed1

do.You have actual proof? He died by car crash with covid..covid death. Example. # are largely screwed
Would be interesting to compare deaths to date against last year and so on. I don't for a second believe covid has killed as many as we are led to believe

Good thinking and it's already been followed. It's called excess deaths.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2767980

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Scott h

Good thinking and it's already been followed. It's called excess deaths.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2767980

And not all deaths are the ditrect result of covid 19, even though covid 19 may have been a contributing factor.

https://academic.oup.com/qjmed/advan...caa202/5857612

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Canada aggressive? The borders were left open long after the virus was discovered, we still let in many, many temporary foreign workers, we let people gather by the thousands to protest, and we gave away most of our masks and equipment early on. I don't consider that aggressive at all. The only aggressive action by our federal government, was to try and bypass parliament. Our federal government failed miserably, even though the provinces did take action to slow the spread. And then provinces imposed huge fines on people for being in parks, while they took no actions against thousands of idiots, including our PM for ignoring social distancing and public gathering restrictions, while they protested.

Compared to the US (which has double our per capita death rate) we have been aggressive.
You have your opinion... others have there’s.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

Compared to the US (which has double our per capita death rate) we have been aggressive.
You have your opinion... others have there’s.

The USA also has a population density of around 9 times that of Canada, and population density definitely effects the spread of the virus.

[W921]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

I look at it this way. I have a husband who has serious heart/lung issues. I want to wear a mask and take precautions because I love him dearly. Anyone who has ever seen someone die from Lung disease (like I have) will know about the suffering of what they go thru before merciful death comes.

I am not going to take a chance like that. I care about my loved ones, I'm going to wear a mask. Not because of political or who so and so says about their rights.

I'm doing it for him. Period. Doing it for love.

I wish the government would concentrate its resources on people like your husband who is at risk.

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by sk270

Actual proof is an interesting concept. Do you have actual proof that I exist? How do I know that you exist? Maybe the posts headed "obsessed1" are being written by a form of artificial intelligence constructed by the Republican Party of the US or maybe by the People's Republic of China in order to sow dissension and social upheaval in the Prairie Provinces of Canada.

Maybe I'll go back to contemplating the doctrine of original sin vs the evolution of human altruism. and gone.

Obsessed often states ‘facts’, yet seldom, if ever does he provide any reputable links supporting his facts.
I guess to some, if you dream it, it becomes a fact 😬

[tbiddy]

Starting August 12, masks will will be mandatory at all Wal-Marts across Canada.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Scott h

I read it 3 times but it doesn't make anymore sense than it did the first time.
The virus has been in Canada for about 7 months. During that time the country has been virtually shut down. No school, closed restaurants and bars, borders closed, etc. Of course there was little spread. A good job was done by many. Now the job is to get all those closures reversed if it can be done in a safe way. Fighting anti science/maskers is slowing the whole reopening procedure and compromises are being made, leaving areas open to get infections started again. Wouldn't it be stupid to go through all of this and then let things flare up again?

You've read it 3 times, it makes no sense to you, and yet you insinuate there are a few posters that are bad at math? Hmmm......lol

I was never in Calgary or Edmonton when a lot of things closed down, but I can say Red Deer sure never seemed to slow down much aside from schools, restaurants, and some smaller services shutting down. Streets were busy as always along with many of the stores.
Small towns were pretty much business as usual, even busier in many cases with all the city dwellers flocking to these small towns in search of TP and hamburger.
Things have been chugging right along here for some time now. Still no big flare ups. With the crowds that have been...well.....everywhere, it's looking just fine.

Anti science/maskers.....that's funny
Strap on a mask, don the gloves and goggles and carry on if that's what you feel is the right thing to do. Makes no difference to me

[obsessed1]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

Obsessed often states ‘facts’, yet seldom, if ever does he provide any reputable links supporting his facts.
I guess to some, if you dream it, it becomes a fact 😬

Your probably as good or better with the Google fu as I am so your capable of looking into any of the info I reference yourself. I use my phone to post and am not too techy so posting links is a pia.

[obsessed1]

Originally Posted by Scott h

Good thinking and it's already been followed. It's called excess deaths.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2767980

So how many excess deaths in Canada? Alberta?

[BackPackHunter]

Mask are great . Makes it easy to pick out the sheeple to laugh at .
You can only catch stupid once ....
Common sense is the farthest thing from common these days .

It’s fake .
This is a IQ year, n you are failing !

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Just another reason to stay out of Edmonton.

All Wallmarts as of Aug. 12 , I just learned.

Grizz

[BackPackHunter]

I love waiting n line at a store n a cashier with a mask will say I can help you here
No thanks , I’ll wait for someone not stupid !
Don’t wanna catch your fear !


Let the Karen’s flame away......


Listen to her ..... listen to her !

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The USA also has a population density of around 9 times that of Canada, and population density definitely effects the spread of the virus.

How about then comparing the US with other countries with much higher population densities and much lower rates of infection? The bottom line is the US is the poster child for how to screw up a pandemic.....

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by bessiedog

So many people upset and betrayed by science......

Cause it didn’t give them a hard truth....

You guys don’t really get science do ya?

Originally Posted by bessiedog

Do you guys get how science actually sciences.....????

You don’t do you..... you just wanted ‘solid truth’...

Come on Bessie we all know how science works. When I call out somebody because they want to use science and politics to prop up their opinion and cast insults of weak minds I’m gonna call them out.

So stop taking your hang-over aggression out on me. I know you’re just lashing out because the oilers are out of the playoffs. Well not technically, but I think you know it in your heart. 😀

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by sk270

Really? I know that politicians select the science or statistics that they like. You said "the politicians then use the statisticians to relate the science to fit their agenda" and I was asking you to explain what that meant. Please do so. Thanks.

Your second paragraph indicates that you don't understand how science works. I never, of course, said that science is infallible. Science is constantly changing as new information, new explanations, new theories and hypotheses arise. Scientists question all the time, but they believe that the scientific method, so called, is the best route to objective truth. Scientists, ideally at least, do not assume that a theory or hypothesis will remain unchanged.

There is nothing wrong with skepticism in pursuit of the truth and I did not say that there was.

Well after the scientist delivers the scientific data of it wasn’t a biased process to begin with, somebody looks at the data. Then they look at what parts to hide and what parts to communicate. Then they can use the numbers hey choose to use to make stats to scare you with. Maybe statistician was a poor choice of word; but literally everyone reading this thread knew exactly what I meant. Except you, the strong-minded. Interesting......

I fully understand how science works. You are the one that tried to hide behind scientists and politicians to cast veiled-insults and prop up your own opinion. When I showed you that your science doesn’t support your opinion then you try to tell me how I don’t understand. Then you go from those that doubt science are weak-minded, to skepticism is OK and science is always changing. Hahahahahah. I think I know where the weak-minded, weak-willed, invertebrates are.

So when Tam and Hinshaw told us masks were ineffective what study were they citing? Why had they changed their mind from the invention of the mask? Or is it that the mask is quite ineffective in the use of the average Joe? Or was there a study released in the last 2 weeks stating masks are good after all? If this is airborne as Scott H has posted your mask is totally ineffective. So what then? Like I said masks have some effectiveness but way less than many people believe. Why hasn’t the government passed laws on washing hands. I guarantee that’s 100 times more effective than masks except in extreme conditions like in a Covid ward.

[bessiedog]

Lead my hung over brain on how you are calling people out on it.....

Please...?


And the only hard truth out there is the oil will dominate.


.... and booze is Satans drink... bad bad.. (or at least it’s that way until I do lil more research into the matter..

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by bessiedog

Lead my hung over brain on how you are calling people out on it.....

Please...?


And the only hard truth out there is the oil will dominate.


.... and booze is Satans drink... bad bad.. (or at least it’s that way until I do lil more research into the matter..

When people state that anyone who disagrees with scientists and politicians are weak-minded and I argue the point that having a healthy capacity of critical thought and being able to think for myself is not a sign of a weak-mind.

If you choose to blindly follow every piece of info told you as “science” good for you. Some of us don’t always believe what we are told. There is a reason I built up my stockpile of P100 filters while Tam and her science told us that they were ineffective. Were you wearing a mask while the science told you they were ineffective? If you were, it apparently means you were weak-minded. Get it now?

What exactly is the oil gonna dominate? Jagare Ridge perhaps? 😀
Not to worry though, the flames will deal with those blackhawks.

Good luck on your testing of booze. Evans cherries are getting into season. One part frozen cherries, one part ice, splash of grenadine, a good couple gurgles of vodka. That should have the blender carafe full. Quickly blend and enjoy.

[Glion]

Originally Posted by Scott h

If you think we are doing bad, just look at the covid cesspool to the south of us for a bit of a reality check. They've already lost a minimum of 160,000 people in 6 months, whereas they lost 600,000 throughout the entire 2 years of the Spanish flu pandemic.

So extrapolating that they would have 640,000 deaths in 2 years with how many more million people?
Interesting enough but the US actually has a higher mask wearing compliance rate than Canada. Also if you follow the trends in statistics there is basically no variation in curves when masks are made mandatory or not.
Example of California was the chart I had seen.
Also Germany which has an extremely high mask compliance rate is getting a major uptick in cases whereas Sweden which approx 14% report they wear masks has been on a decline for the last 100 days.
Saying all that I don't care if you wear a mask.
I think if we would have just protected the vulnerable with 10% of the money we have blown away and kept it all open we would be much further ahead.
Not sure if you saw the Cbc article that talked about Quebec estimating they actually had 120,000 cases? Which means the fatality rate would be even lower.

[sk270]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

Well after the scientist delivers the scientific data of it wasn’t a biased process to begin with, somebody looks at the data. Then they look at what parts to hide and what parts to communicate. Then they can use the numbers hey choose to use to make stats to scare you with. Maybe statistician was a poor choice of word; but literally everyone reading this thread knew exactly what I meant. Except you, the strong-minded. Interesting......

I fully understand how science works. You are the one that tried to hide behind scientists and politicians to cast veiled-insults and prop up your own opinion. When I showed you that your science doesn’t support your opinion then you try to tell me how I don’t understand. Then you go from those that doubt science are weak-minded, to skepticism is OK and science is always changing. Hahahahahah. I think I know where the weak-minded, weak-willed, invertebrates are.

So when Tam and Hinshaw told us masks were ineffective what study were they citing? Why had they changed their mind from the invention of the mask? Or is it that the mask is quite ineffective in the use of the average Joe? Or was there a study released in the last 2 weeks stating masks are good after all? If this is airborne as Scott H has posted your mask is totally ineffective. So what then? Like I said masks have some effectiveness but way less than many people believe.

I don't think everyone reading this could figure out what you meant by "statistician", etc. Words and their meaning matter. You can't just use a noun and then turn around later and say you should have picked a different one without an explanation.

Do you know what "literally" means?

Your description of what scientists do shows me that you don't know what they really do. Scientists include their statistics in their published papers. The majority of scientists do not write their papers to scare people. Just to help me out, cite the last five papers you read about masks and Covid-19.

If citing published studies is hiding behind science, then it is true that is what I do. That's better than unsupported anecdotal evidence that many on here seem to prefer.

I gather from your comments about Tam and Hinshaw and mask wearing that you don't follow the literature. There have been plenty of studies about mask wearing, going back much further than two weeks. They show that masks are far from "totally ineffective". Again, you are making unsupported statements as if they were fact.

Do you realize that you said that masks are "totally ineffective" and they "have some effectiveness" in different paragraphs? Both these things cannot be true. Which is it?

If you decide to stop the insults and use words with the correct meaning, and stop contradicting yourself, I might engage again. Otherwise, I'm sure you will be able to amuse yourself trolling other people on here.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Scott h

How about then comparing the US with other countries with much higher population densities and much lower rates of infection? The bottom line is the US is the poster child for how to screw up a pandemic.....

So you go from comparing deaths to infection rates? You can only compare infection rates if the rate of testing in the same. If a country tests a higher percentage of the population, they will report more infections.

[bessiedog]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

When people state that anyone who disagrees with scientists and politicians are weak-minded and I argue the point that having a healthy capacity of critical thought and being able to think for myself is not a sign of a weak-mind.

If you choose to blindly follow every piece of info told you as “science” good for you. Some of us don’t always believe what we are told. There is a reason I built up my stockpile of P100 filters while Tam and her science told us that they were ineffective. Were you wearing a mask while the science told you they were ineffective? If you were, it apparently means you were weak-minded. Get it now?

What exactly is the oil gonna dominate? Jagare Ridge perhaps? 😀
Not to worry though, the flames will deal with those blackhawks.

Good luck on your testing of booze. Evans cherries are getting into season. One part frozen cherries, one part ice, splash of grenadine, a good couple gurgles of vodka. That should have the blender carafe full. Quickly blend and enjoy.

Thanks for that.

I never called you weak minded.

And yes..... I actually bought 30N95s on Jan 10th.... and got them.

I think at that time (if you looked).... there was plenty of credible research that talked about how useful masks are.

My problem (not so much with you.... (Cept that you are decrepit scoundrally Shames fan.) Is people refusing to give SOME credit/credence to science ideas that are largely confirmed by large credible scientific bodies.

Cause really that’s just hubris..... nothing less....’I know better cause I’m me’

My other bigger problem are the sillies on here and elsewhere that believe if they find ONE or TWO studies that callls the majority idea ion doubt... they claim it’s a huge fraud and people are deliberately deceiving us.

You may well be an excellent critical thinker....... if you are then you know that YOU decision on this, or any other policy matter may indeed be wrong and should be honestly open to genuinely considering alternate ideas for the most part.


And yea.... we had a beauty cherry tree in our yard when I was a kid. We used to do:

Alternating layers of cherries and sugar.... till the jar was full.

Pour moonshine in till jar full.... let sit for three weeks.

Cherries shrivel... liquor is amazing.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by sk270

I don't think everyone reading this could figure out what you meant by "statistician", etc. Words and their meaning matter. You can't just use a noun and then turn around later and say you should have picked a different one without an explanation.

Do you know what "literally" means?

Your description of what scientists do shows me that you don't know what they really do. Scientists include their statistics in their published papers. The majority of scientists do not write their papers to scare people. Just to help me out, cite the last five papers you read about masks and Covid-19.

If citing published studies is hiding behind science, then it is true that is what I do. That's better than unsupported anecdotal evidence that many on here seem to prefer.

I gather from your comments about Tam and Hinshaw and mask wearing that you don't follow the literature. There have been plenty of studies about mask wearing, going back much further than two weeks. They show that masks are far from "totally ineffective". Again, you are making unsupported statements as if they were fact.

Do you realize that you said that masks are "totally ineffective" and they "have some effectiveness" in different paragraphs? Both these things cannot be true. Which is it?

If you decide to stop the insults and use words with the correct meaning, and stop contradicting yourself, I might engage again. Otherwise, I'm sure you will be able to amuse yourself trolling other people on here.

Trolls should not cast the first troll stone. Quit giving us saskboys a bad name. You started the insults and trolling by basically saying that anyone who disagrees with you is dumb or weak-minded.

I said that masks have some effectiveness. I stand by that. I will not make an estimate of the effectiveness however. When I stated that masks are totally ineffective was when I referenced that this may be airborne. If it is airborne, it’s true, your mask is totally ineffective. I see you are extrapolating my words like a politician. Good for you.

Please refer to me 5 scientific journals that the government has used to make their decisions. Nevermind what I have read.

Nobody else seemed to have a hard time understanding what I meant by statistician. You knew what I meant too, but tried to turn this into a grammar lesson over any true debate. (This after trying to say that doubt and skepticism are different, yeeesh) No government releases studies from journals. They use 3 excerpts from a study that fits their agenda and they move on.

All studies aside. The manufacturers of an N95 maks state it only filters 95% of particulate. If the mask is perfectly fit, sealed and clean it can only be 95% effective. Why aren’t you wearing a P100 full face respirator? If 5% of each breath is unfiltered how many breaths do you need to take to hit the corona jackpot?

I wear a mask when I deem it necessary. I know it offers protection. I don’t believe it offers anywhere near the protection you put in it.

But back to the real reason we are into this. You see I like to read and cast my own thoughts and conclusions on things. You know, weak minded. Were you wearing a mask when Tam told us it was ineffective? The science told us it was ineffective that day. Were you wearing a mask? Were you weak-minded science denier? It’s a yes or no question there Justin.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by bessiedog

You may well be an excellent critical thinker....... if you are then you know that YOU decision on this, or any other policy matter may indeed be wrong and should be honestly open to genuinely considering alternate ideas for the most part.

If people could even realize this to say 5% of their total thought process the world would be significantly better. So few can balance views and see good info from both sides of a spectrum.