at6
1st Sergeant
I hope that your picture is up to date.
Covid-19 reports
- Thread starter Vincenzo
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
No, I don't.
33k in the air
Staff Sergeant
- 1,355
- Jan 31, 2021
Following up on this point, the "news" media has been pushing hard for a COVID passport scheme. The latest has the regional public health officers all supposedly on board with the idea, and some have publicly mused that they will implement their own localized passport system if a provincial one isn't brought in --- whether such localized schemes would even be legal and survive court challenge is an open question.
Friday will see the release of the latest national numbers for Canada, so it'll be something of a data dump day.
33k in the air
Staff Sergeant
- 1,355
- Jan 31, 2021
A further follow-up. It appears the Ontario government may be trying to backdoor COVID passports. The provincial government, with no announcement or legislative session, quietly changed the legislation regarding businesses having to follow the rules set out by their local public health officers. This effectively grants the power to local health officers to implement a passport scheme and businesses in that area will have to follow those rules; it no longer has to come from the province itself.
It would appear the Ford government doesn't want to take the potential public hit from directly mandating a passport scheme, and is passing the buck to local public health officers, allowing the government to say it's not its fault for such passport measures, even though it wouldn't have been possible without the change in the emergency legislation.
At least the premiers of Manitoba and Quebec stood up directly for COVID passport schemes, as much as I may think the policy wholly unacceptable. Doug Ford and the provincial Conservatives, on the other hand, are abject underhanded cowards.
33k in the air
I remember there were huge protests in the UK and France over passports like this. While this is a bit more transparent, it doesn't seem like something that's ungraspable.
And we have a no politics rule in this forum.
One of my earliest memories is being vaccinated for polio, a sugar cube covered in a very bitter syrup. A guy who I worked with many times was born in the next town (Middlesbrough), Luigi didnt get the vaccination because his dad was an Italian POW and he took his son back to Italy for a few years and made many other trips later. Luigi contracted polio and had a withered arm because of it. When I worked in Italy there were many people my age or older who had contracted polio at that time. Maybe the problem is that Covid doesnt leave people alive and disfigured or wipe out the young. I see elderly protesters older than me with dogs, they have certainly been vaccinated for polio and TB (which was done when I was in my teens) and their dogs have all been jabbed.
at6
1st Sergeant
You got a sugar cube? We had to endure needles but at least we didn't get Polio.
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
I do not know if I should post this, but here goes. It is not intended as political in nature, but as informative of history and the law, in particular relative to the US.
For those of you not already aware of this, in the US there is not now - nor has there ever been - a constitutionally granted right to create un-necessary risk to others where communicable disease is concerned. Federal, State, and local law is quite clear on this in general concept, and has been clear since the founding of our country. In fact, today's laws concerning this matter are the least draconian and lax since such laws were first put into effect (in the US).
The laws are also quite specific (for the most part) as to what may and may not be done to the individual person in order to reduce or remove the risk to others.
Basically:
The state may impose requirements and behaviors conducive to the prevention of the spread of disease (human-to-human communicable or otherwise) commensurate with the dangers presented by the disease.
If a person is not a child, or an adult ward of the state (ie incarcerated or of unsound mind), the person in question may not be forced to accept any medical treatment. The ability to refuse any or all medical treatment is considered a basic right of any autonomous US citizen when within the US boundary. A child may be forced to accept treatment, as can an incarcerated person or a person of unsound mind, if the stated considers it necessary for the individual's or the public's welfare. The only exception to the above is if there is a clear religious violation, or clear increased risk to health of the individual. Any person not accepting treatment, for any reason, will be considered non-compliant (voluntarily or involuntarily).
If the state deems it necessary in order to ensure the health of the public, due to the hazard presented by the non-compliant person, said non-compliant person may be detained and/or isolated (or in the case of a recent legal immigrant or an illegal immigrant - detained and/or isolated and/or deported) until the perceived health risk posed by the individual no longer exists.
All of the above is clear in laws set by the courts and communities, sometimes enacted during health emergencies, sometimes enacted after the health emergencies are over, and sometimes enacted based on medical and scientific advice.
It should also be noted that the legal precedent described above was already in practice in the 13 Colonies during the US revolutionary war period, as evidenced by the handling of the contemporary smallpox epidemic of 1775-1782. Entire towns and communities were quarantined (sometimes voluntarily and sometimes involuntarily), with individuals sometimes being beaten or killed to prevent them leaving quarantine. People were given the choice of vaccination (yes, you read it right, there was already a vaccination for Smallpox in the late-1700s) or voluntary isolation/quarantine. Individuals refusing to be vaccinated or accept voluntary isolation/quarantine, were forcibly isolated/quarantined - either by being sent of to remote communities for the duration, or quarantined in place, under the watchful eyes of the local authorities. (Note that the specific methods and laws of 1775-1796 were set by the individual States - until the Constitution was enacted in 1796, when the States voluntarily ceded authority to the Federal government.)
Similar measures occurred in most of the serious epidemics/pandemics throughout US history. The latest examples (prior to COVID) occurred during the Polio epidemics of the 1920s through the early-1950s, when entire communities/neighborhoods were forcibly quarantined, along with individuals. Earlier examples include Smallpox (first US epidemic 1775-1782), Plague (first outbreak after the Constitution was enacted 1900), Cholera (first outbreak in 1832), Influenza (1918), to name some(most?) of them. In some of the outbreaks/epidemics listed, 'passports' were required that indicated the ships or individuals did not originate from/had not recently traveled through known centers of disease - or in the case of Smallpox had been vaccinated. Imposed isolation/quarantine after arriving at the destination was common. After it was realized that the (bubonic) plague had made it to the West Coast in 1900, many states threatened to quarantine the entire state of California.
There were also sometimes other behaviors mandated, such as the shutting down of businesses, schools, churches, etc.
For those of you not already aware of this, in the US there is not now - nor has there ever been - a constitutionally granted right to create un-necessary risk to others where communicable disease is concerned. Federal, State, and local law is quite clear on this in general concept, and has been clear since the founding of our country. In fact, today's laws concerning this matter are the least draconian and lax since such laws were first put into effect (in the US).
The laws are also quite specific (for the most part) as to what may and may not be done to the individual person in order to reduce or remove the risk to others.
Basically:
The state may impose requirements and behaviors conducive to the prevention of the spread of disease (human-to-human communicable or otherwise) commensurate with the dangers presented by the disease.
If a person is not a child, or an adult ward of the state (ie incarcerated or of unsound mind), the person in question may not be forced to accept any medical treatment. The ability to refuse any or all medical treatment is considered a basic right of any autonomous US citizen when within the US boundary. A child may be forced to accept treatment, as can an incarcerated person or a person of unsound mind, if the stated considers it necessary for the individual's or the public's welfare. The only exception to the above is if there is a clear religious violation, or clear increased risk to health of the individual. Any person not accepting treatment, for any reason, will be considered non-compliant (voluntarily or involuntarily).
If the state deems it necessary in order to ensure the health of the public, due to the hazard presented by the non-compliant person, said non-compliant person may be detained and/or isolated (or in the case of a recent legal immigrant or an illegal immigrant - detained and/or isolated and/or deported) until the perceived health risk posed by the individual no longer exists.
All of the above is clear in laws set by the courts and communities, sometimes enacted during health emergencies, sometimes enacted after the health emergencies are over, and sometimes enacted based on medical and scientific advice.
It should also be noted that the legal precedent described above was already in practice in the 13 Colonies during the US revolutionary war period, as evidenced by the handling of the contemporary smallpox epidemic of 1775-1782. Entire towns and communities were quarantined (sometimes voluntarily and sometimes involuntarily), with individuals sometimes being beaten or killed to prevent them leaving quarantine. People were given the choice of vaccination (yes, you read it right, there was already a vaccination for Smallpox in the late-1700s) or voluntary isolation/quarantine. Individuals refusing to be vaccinated or accept voluntary isolation/quarantine, were forcibly isolated/quarantined - either by being sent of to remote communities for the duration, or quarantined in place, under the watchful eyes of the local authorities. (Note that the specific methods and laws of 1775-1796 were set by the individual States - until the Constitution was enacted in 1796, when the States voluntarily ceded authority to the Federal government.)
Similar measures occurred in most of the serious epidemics/pandemics throughout US history. The latest examples (prior to COVID) occurred during the Polio epidemics of the 1920s through the early-1950s, when entire communities/neighborhoods were forcibly quarantined, along with individuals. Earlier examples include Smallpox (first US epidemic 1775-1782), Plague (first outbreak after the Constitution was enacted 1900), Cholera (first outbreak in 1832), Influenza (1918), to name some(most?) of them. In some of the outbreaks/epidemics listed, 'passports' were required that indicated the ships or individuals did not originate from/had not recently traveled through known centers of disease - or in the case of Smallpox had been vaccinated. Imposed isolation/quarantine after arriving at the destination was common. After it was realized that the (bubonic) plague had made it to the West Coast in 1900, many states threatened to quarantine the entire state of California.
There were also sometimes other behaviors mandated, such as the shutting down of businesses, schools, churches, etc.
There were controversies about vaccines even then, before I was born. The polio vaccine was a version of the virus that gave immunity without the symptoms. As I read it, polio has always been with us, improvements in knowledge of disease and improvements in sanitation actually led to epidemics. Up to the mid 1800s people were surrounded by polio and if you are infected young enough it does no harm. As people got better sanitation, used more soap and didnt live surrounded by human waste more and more populations hadnt been exposed to it and so were vulnerable. I had a few injections as a child but many blood tests, needles didnt bother me at all but I can still remember the taste that vaccine fffing awful.
33k in the air
Staff Sergeant
- 1,355
- Jan 31, 2021
Another follow-up.
After the Prime Minister basically offered to pay all the costs of the development of a COVID passport system for interested provinces, it appears Premier Ford in Ontario will go back on his comments of earlier this year disparaging the idea of such passport schemes, and will go ahead and implement one. This is expected to be announced early next week. Apparently the offer to pay for it (some might call it a bribe) was enough for Ford to change his mind (and principles).
The vaccine passport schemes are supposedly just public health measures. So technically that means they are not political matters.
Another follow-up.
After the Prime Minister basically offered to pay all the costs of the development of a COVID passport system for interested provinces, it appears Premier Ford in Ontario will go back on his comments of earlier this year disparaging the idea of such passport schemes, and will go ahead and implement one. This is expected to be announced early next week. Apparently the offer to pay for it (some might call it a bribe) was enough for Ford to change his mind (and principles).
The vaccine passport schemes are supposedly just public health measures. So technically that means they are not political matters.
Yet it is being made political…
Correct. If I recall, and I'm not sure if this was an international agreement or an American only one, but there was some decision made around 1984 that stated that it was preferable to minimize the degree to which quarantines were to be used. From what I recall, the idea was to use the minimum degree to achieve the necessary public safety.Basically:
The state may impose requirements and behaviors conducive to the prevention of the spread of disease (human-to-human communicable or otherwise) commensurate with the dangers presented by the disease.
If a person is not a child, or an adult ward of the state (ie incarcerated or of unsound mind), the person in question may not be forced to accept any medical treatment. The ability to refuse any or all medical treatment is considered a basic right of any autonomous US citizen when within the US boundary. A child may be forced to accept treatment, as can an incarcerated person or a person of unsound mind, if the stated considers it necessary for the individual's or the public's welfare. The only exception to the above is if there is a clear religious violation, or clear increased risk to health of the individual. Any person not accepting treatment, for any reason, will be considered non-compliant (voluntarily or involuntarily).
If the state deems it necessary in order to ensure the health of the public, due to the hazard presented by the non-compliant person, said non-compliant person may be detained and/or isolated (or in the case of a recent legal immigrant or an illegal immigrant - detained and/or isolated and/or deported) until the perceived health risk posed by the individual no longer exists.
All of the above is clear in laws set by the courts and communities, sometimes enacted during health emergencies, sometimes enacted after the health emergencies are over, and sometimes enacted based on medical and scientific advice.
It should also be noted that the legal precedent described above was already in practice in the 13 Colonies during the US revolutionary war period, as evidenced by the handling of the contemporary smallpox epidemic of 1775-1782. Entire towns and communities were quarantined (sometimes voluntarily and sometimes involuntarily), with individuals sometimes being beaten or killed to prevent them leaving quarantine. People were given the choice of vaccination (yes, you read it right, there was already a vaccination for Smallpox in the late-1700s) or voluntary isolation/quarantine. Individuals refusing to be vaccinated or accept voluntary isolation/quarantine, were forcibly isolated/quarantined - either by being sent of to remote communities for the duration, or quarantined in place, under the watchful eyes of the local authorities. (Note that the specific methods and laws of 1775-1796 were set by the individual States - until the Constitution was enacted in 1796, when the States voluntarily ceded authority to the Federal government.)
Similar measures occurred in most of the serious epidemics/pandemics throughout US history. The latest examples (prior to COVID) occurred during the Polio epidemics of the 1920s through the early-1950s, when entire communities/neighborhoods were forcibly quarantined, along with individuals. Earlier examples include Smallpox (first US epidemic 1775-1782), Plague (first outbreak after the Constitution was enacted 1900), Cholera (first outbreak in 1832), Influenza (1918), to name some(most?) of them. In some of the outbreaks/epidemics listed, 'passports' were required that indicated the ships or individuals did not originate from/had not recently traveled through known centers of disease - or in the case of Smallpox had been vaccinated. Imposed isolation/quarantine after arriving at the destination was common. After it was realized that the (bubonic) plague had made it to the West Coast in 1900, many states threatened to quarantine the entire state of California.
There were also sometimes other behaviors mandated, such as the shutting down of businesses, schools, churches, etc.
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
Hey Zipper730,
Your are correct, although it was apparently 1981.
In 1951, the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted the International Sanitary Regulations (ISR), an evolution of the regulations sought by the nineteenth-century International Sanitary Conferences. The ISR were re-named the International Health Regulations (IHR) in 1969, and modified slightly in 1973 and 1981. The IHR are a legally-binding set of regulations adopted under the auspices of WHO as an international organization, and are one of the earliest multilateral regulatory mechanisms strictly focusing on global surveillance for communicable diseases. As of 1997, the IHR were legally binding on all WHO Member States except Australia.
Originally the IHR were a set of regulations for the control and sharing of epidemiological information on the transboundary spread of cholera, plague, and yellow fever; the fundamental principle is to ensure ''maximum security against the international spread of diseases with a minimum interference with world traffic''. To achieve this, the regulations provide for binding obligations on WHO Member States to notify WHO of any outbreaks of these three diseases in their territories. WHO then transmits this information to all the other Member States as part of its mandate on control and response to global outbreak and spread of infectious diseases.
The IHR list maximum public health measures applicable internationally during outbreaks and provide for rules applicable to international traffic and travel. These measures cover the requirements of health and vaccination certificates for travelers from areas infected by the three diseases covered to non-infected areas; de-ratting, de-insecting, and disinfecting of ships and aircraft, as well as detailed health measures at airports and seaports in the territories of WHO Member States. The maximum health measures allowed in outbreak situations are applied in order to protect the country that suffers an outbreak against the risk of unnecessary economic and other embargoes, which could be imposed by contiguous neighbors, trading partners, and other countries.
Note, by international agreement the WHO IHR only apply to interactions between countries, and do not mandate - or restrict - the actions taken within a country by said country's government. Measures taken by an individual nation state in order to control the spread of disease are upto the nation's government, except where any actions would constitute a Crime Against Humanity.
Some notes on the evolution of the IHR relative to new diseases.
In 1924 (before the WHO or UN existed), the Pan-American Sanitary Code provided for bi-weekly notification of ten specific diseases and any other diseases that the Pan-American Sanitary Bureau might add, and also for immediate notification of plague, cholera, yellow fever, smallpox, typhus, or any other dangerous contagion liable to spread through international commerce.
Originally the IHR covered only cholera, plague, and yellow fever. In 1995 the World Health Assembly adopted resolution WHA48.7 (Global health security: economic alert and response) which requested that the IHR be revised to take more effective account of the threat posed by the international spread of new and re-emerging diseases.
As of 2002 the diseases specifically covered were cholera, plague, yellow fever, smallpox, polio (wild variety), human influenza (of new subtypes), SARS-CoV-1, ebola, and any serious illnesses of unknown origin.
Since then MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2(COVID-19) have been added to the list.
PS. China (a WHO Member) failed to notify the WHO within the specified timeline allowed by the IHR. China has admitted this failure.
Your are correct, although it was apparently 1981.
In 1951, the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted the International Sanitary Regulations (ISR), an evolution of the regulations sought by the nineteenth-century International Sanitary Conferences. The ISR were re-named the International Health Regulations (IHR) in 1969, and modified slightly in 1973 and 1981. The IHR are a legally-binding set of regulations adopted under the auspices of WHO as an international organization, and are one of the earliest multilateral regulatory mechanisms strictly focusing on global surveillance for communicable diseases. As of 1997, the IHR were legally binding on all WHO Member States except Australia.
Originally the IHR were a set of regulations for the control and sharing of epidemiological information on the transboundary spread of cholera, plague, and yellow fever; the fundamental principle is to ensure ''maximum security against the international spread of diseases with a minimum interference with world traffic''. To achieve this, the regulations provide for binding obligations on WHO Member States to notify WHO of any outbreaks of these three diseases in their territories. WHO then transmits this information to all the other Member States as part of its mandate on control and response to global outbreak and spread of infectious diseases.
The IHR list maximum public health measures applicable internationally during outbreaks and provide for rules applicable to international traffic and travel. These measures cover the requirements of health and vaccination certificates for travelers from areas infected by the three diseases covered to non-infected areas; de-ratting, de-insecting, and disinfecting of ships and aircraft, as well as detailed health measures at airports and seaports in the territories of WHO Member States. The maximum health measures allowed in outbreak situations are applied in order to protect the country that suffers an outbreak against the risk of unnecessary economic and other embargoes, which could be imposed by contiguous neighbors, trading partners, and other countries.
Note, by international agreement the WHO IHR only apply to interactions between countries, and do not mandate - or restrict - the actions taken within a country by said country's government. Measures taken by an individual nation state in order to control the spread of disease are upto the nation's government, except where any actions would constitute a Crime Against Humanity.
Some notes on the evolution of the IHR relative to new diseases.
In 1924 (before the WHO or UN existed), the Pan-American Sanitary Code provided for bi-weekly notification of ten specific diseases and any other diseases that the Pan-American Sanitary Bureau might add, and also for immediate notification of plague, cholera, yellow fever, smallpox, typhus, or any other dangerous contagion liable to spread through international commerce.
Originally the IHR covered only cholera, plague, and yellow fever. In 1995 the World Health Assembly adopted resolution WHA48.7 (Global health security: economic alert and response) which requested that the IHR be revised to take more effective account of the threat posed by the international spread of new and re-emerging diseases.
As of 2002 the diseases specifically covered were cholera, plague, yellow fever, smallpox, polio (wild variety), human influenza (of new subtypes), SARS-CoV-1, ebola, and any serious illnesses of unknown origin.
Since then MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2(COVID-19) have been added to the list.
PS. China (a WHO Member) failed to notify the WHO within the specified timeline allowed by the IHR. China has admitted this failure.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #336
Italy report, 30th August, weekly change, from Monday to Monday
cases 4,534,499 +45,720, deaths 129,146 +351, recovered 4,263,960, +39,531, active cases 141,393, +5,838, tests 56,997,959, +633,895, people tested 32,474,220, +375,801, vaccines administered 77,323,138, +1,778,858, people full vaccinated 37,566,607, +1,076,700.
fatality rate 2.8% (-0.1)
mortality rate 2,141 per million (+6)
positive rate 14% (=)
vaccines on population 1,281,946 per million (+29,492)
people full vaccinated 622,820 per million (+17,851)
test rate this week 10,509 per million (+1,177)
positive rate this week 12.2% (-0.7)
new case rate this week 758 per million (+21)
new vaccines this week 29,492 per million (+3,168)
people full vaccinated this week 17,851 per million (+3,966)
cases 4,534,499 +45,720, deaths 129,146 +351, recovered 4,263,960, +39,531, active cases 141,393, +5,838, tests 56,997,959, +633,895, people tested 32,474,220, +375,801, vaccines administered 77,323,138, +1,778,858, people full vaccinated 37,566,607, +1,076,700.
fatality rate 2.8% (-0.1)
mortality rate 2,141 per million (+6)
positive rate 14% (=)
vaccines on population 1,281,946 per million (+29,492)
people full vaccinated 622,820 per million (+17,851)
test rate this week 10,509 per million (+1,177)
positive rate this week 12.2% (-0.7)
new case rate this week 758 per million (+21)
new vaccines this week 29,492 per million (+3,168)
people full vaccinated this week 17,851 per million (+3,966)
Back on March 3 2020 I went to the hospital at almost 80% O2 pneumonia in the left lung first in 50years.It took five weeks of antibodies with week #5 being a dedicated one for pneumonia as it was moving into my second lung it killed it(pneumonia) .This past Saturday I was again tested and positive but it was really mild 101.5 fever,aching back and a sore throat.The fever was broke by Saturday @10PM sore throat gone Monday actually felt I could go back to work Sunday but protocol says else wise.I am fine now they shot a steroid gave me 5 days of a cortisol with Zinc.It has been said if you had the original CV19 and catch Delta it's suppose to be mild I have had head colds last longer than this just my experience may not be all's,never been vax.60yrs old
at6
1st Sergeant
You feel better but you are most likely still highly infectious. I am fully vaxxed and I still observe protocols as if I weren't vaxxed at all. I'd rather be safe than sorry. Stay well my friend.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Same as above.
Me three.
