Live data from Hacker News

Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

cbc.ca

91–100 of 163 posts

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#91
post #42
post #9

It's likely because of the election. Trudeau is calling for an election in the next few weeks. By announcing this now, he dares the opposition to say it's the wrong move, so that he can say he's protecting Canadians and the conservatives won't. Keep me in charge to stay safe. Only 10% of Canadians are opposed to vaccines, so it won't be an unpopular choice. And if the opposition says it's the right move, he can say "…

At least in quebec vaccine passports are seen in a super bad light (at least to most people i have interacted with). But yeah it's for sure an election tactic, hiding more important discussion like how they threw away their promise to reform the electoral system (EDIT: Probably because it makes them lose [1]) [1] https://theconversation.com/what-the-canadian-election-resul...

[deleted]

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#92
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have clear scientific consensus on the fact that vaccines reduce the negative effects of getting COVID, and reduce the likelihood of getting COVID in the first place. So declaring that vaccine mandates won't affect populations 'because you can still get it' is effectively twisting the truth. Or at least applying some really bad logic. The link you provided is unfortunately not helpful. Again, there is overwhelming…

I don't doubt the vaccines are effective at reducing negative effects on the vaccinated individual. Nothing in my comment above was intended to imply that. The specific point I was trying to make is that there is conflicting evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission. Since governments around the world pushed vaccines for everyone partly on the hypothesis that it should reduce spread, this is a big problem. The t…

The consensus has shifted to the point wherein the preponderance of evidence points to reduced transmission.

Here is Nature in Feb [1]

Here is Nature now [2]

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00450-z

[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02054-z

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If ADE happens with future strains, then it won’t matter if you are vaccinated or not, because unvaccinated individuals are absolutely guaranteed to get Covid eventually. Covid is never going away at this point, and it’s transmission levels are as high as just about any disease we’ve encountered. Short of completely retreating from society and building a survival bunker in the woods, you won’t escape ADE if it become…

Natural immunity (which I already have) provides a much more generic defense because it targets all parts of the spike protein, and presumably other parts of the virus itself, many of which hardly mutate. Vaccinal immunity targets only the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein. The RBD is, in fact, the most rapidly mutating part of the virus. Therefore it is highly feasible that ADE will only affect the vaccin…

None of what you stated indicates any increased likelihood of ADE. In fact, there are concerns that natural immunity may be more susceptible to antigenic sin, precisely because the immunity is more generic and not focused to the spike protein. This would increase the odds of individuals with just natural immunity of developing a malformed immune response to future variants.

> Hensley worries, though, that people whose immunity to the virus comes from infection, not vaccination, might have more difficulty handling variant viruses because of imprinting effects.

> David Topham, an immunologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center and director of the New York Influenza Center of Excellence, also envisages that possibility.

> He noted that, in the earliest stages of SARS-2 infection, the immune system mounts a response to a portion of the spike protein called S2. Later, the immune system focuses its attention on other parts of the spike, notably the part of the protein that attaches the virus to cells it invades, known as the receptor binding domain.

> It’s not yet known if the early focus on S2 — which doesn’t change much from virus to virus — will blind the immune system to the changes elsewhere in the spike protein, the changes updated vaccines would be trying to teach the immune system to respond to, Topham said.

> Topham doesn’t think this will be a problem in vaccinated people, because of the way the vaccines in use have been designed. The spike proteins they trigger production of appear to hide the S2 region, he said. The immune system can’t fixate on something it doesn’t see. [0]

There’s also doubt as to if COVID even could cause ADE, both because it has yet to be seen across millions of cases, but also because the known mechanisms of ADE don’t apply to Covid [1][2].

Also recent studies have shown that the rate of mutation in a country is inversely correlated with vaccine coverage for Covid. [3]

[0] https://www.statnews.com/2021/04/16/next-generation-covid-19...

[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/macroliter/status/142157887960985...

[2] https://mobile.twitter.com/macroliter/status/142157887960985...

[3] https://mobile.twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/14254499058...

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#94
post #9

It's likely because of the election. Trudeau is calling for an election in the next few weeks. By announcing this now, he dares the opposition to say it's the wrong move, so that he can say he's protecting Canadians and the conservatives won't. Keep me in charge to stay safe. Only 10% of Canadians are opposed to vaccines, so it won't be an unpopular choice. And if the opposition says it's the right move, he can say "…

You're probably right. There's also a push to make the vaccine mandatory for federal and healthcare workers. Somehow it rubs me the wrong way for a not fully approved vaccine to be made mandatory though. Don't get me wrong, I'm doubly vaccinated and I believe everyone should be. But should we force people? In a country where 82%/72% (1) of eligible people are already vaccinated once/twice?

(1) https://covid19tracker.ca/vaccinationtracker.html

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#95
post #85
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in quebec vaccine passports are seen in a super bad light (at least to most people i have interacted with). But yeah it's for sure an election tactic, hiding more important discussion like how they threw away their promise to reform the electoral system (EDIT: Probably because it makes them lose [1]) [1] https://theconversation.com/what-the-canadian-election-resul...

Do you hang out in an antivax crowd? Vaccine passport are enormously popular in Canada. https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/majority-support-vacc... I couldn’t find Quebec specific data, but I live here and haven’t seen anything to suggest people view them differently.

I'm not sure of their vaccination status, and to be fair my sample size is small because it's been announced recently and there's only so much people you can interact with. That said, we've had a protest here on day 1 and the people I have spoken to are more against a perceived overreach than of the vaccine, although I am young and most non-vaccinated people are in my age group (because of the side effects afai can tell).

I'm weary of polls, especially those paid for by news networks, but even then this was done in may, before the variants became well know/transmission more understood/efficiency more know.

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#96
post #3

Germany is now giving the dozes away as there's low demand. I wonder if the same rules will be in place in Europe.

We've got a vaccine passport in France and it boosted vaccination substantially. Italy is the same, AFAIK.

The doses were always "free". Testing used to be as well, now it's 15€ I think.

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#97
post #90
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legal is what the government of a given country says is legal. My understanding is that New Zealand for example allows returning travelers but they have to stay in designated quarantine hotels and those are basically unavailable.

I meant the scenario where a Canadian resident but non-citizen wants to return to his country, but he's not vaccinated. Is the Canadian government going to prevent him from boarding a plane?

I would think almost certainly. And that's an issue they'll probably have to take up with their embassy if the airline can't make an exception.

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If ADE happens with future strains, then it won’t matter if you are vaccinated or not, because unvaccinated individuals are absolutely guaranteed to get Covid eventually. Covid is never going away at this point, and it’s transmission levels are as high as just about any disease we’ve encountered. Short of completely retreating from society and building a survival bunker in the woods, you won’t escape ADE if it become…

Natural immunity (which I already have) provides a much more generic defense because it targets all parts of the spike protein, and presumably other parts of the virus itself, many of which hardly mutate. Vaccinal immunity targets only the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein. The RBD is, in fact, the most rapidly mutating part of the virus. Therefore it is highly feasible that ADE will only affect the vaccin…

The vaccine prevents serious illness in many cases so I think this is a good argument in favour of vaccination. People can go around and catch covid, build up more natural immunity while not running all the risks from the start of the pandemic.

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#99
Here are some reasons I think this is a very bad idea:

1. The risk/benefit analysis for people under 40 is not as clear as is claimed. "Clot risk to 18-39s from AstraZeneca vaccine is twice as high as Covid death risk, Euro study finds" [0]. That's just clots; not myocarditis, or pericarditis, GBS, CFS, lingering numbness, Bell's palsy, missing periods, and more. Yes, there are some young people who have died with Corona - the vast majority of them had comorbidities.

2. This goes against human rights. Many civil liberties and privacy groups are against "vaccine passports", including the WHO special envoy on COVID-19. If you're response to that is "well I had to take a shot to go to France", well, that's not quite the same as using a train, or keeping your job and career.

3. "But the herd immunity" - No. Herd immunity is not realistically possible with these leaky vaccines. That's even ignoring animal reservoirs and variants; such as could come from deer, mice, rats, cats, dogs, ferrets, mink, monkeys etc - all of which have been shown to be capable of catching Corona and spreading it among themselves.

4. In the past hundred years there are countless examples of governments and pharmaceutical companies performing horrific acts, and covering them up. This goes double for the poor and minorities. Can you really blame native people in Canada for distrusting government?

5. The same mistrust can be understandably applied to the mainstream media who sell us more war, anxiety, fear and distrust every year. Mandating, or "soft" mandating vaccines will mostly achieve riots. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that politicians are heavily invested in tear-gas and riot gear manufacturers.

6. These vaccines are for-profit, yet were provided on condition of full legal indemnity. How can it inspire confidence in people to claim a vaccine is so safe that it can be mandated, while at the same time saying that absolutely no responsibility for any symptom or side-effect whatsoever will be taken by the manufacturers? Pick one! These companies have already made tens of billions of dollars, using research that has taxpayer money behind it on multiple levels.

7. These vaccines are not traditional vaccines. Yes, they have been studied for many years, but also, there is no long term data. The side effects which we know of are poorly understood, i.e., GBS and CFS.

8. Many governments seem to be more interested in bringing in "vaccine passports", and "soft" mandatory vaccinations than actually hiring / training more nurses & building more ICU units. Making good use of subsidised antigen tests, or implementing effective, privacy sensitive contact tracing, seem even lower on the agenda. I don't know how many ICU beds or nurses Canada has hired, or how they are testing, but I suspect there are the same shortcomings there as elsewhere. That's not just bad policy, and bad health management, it's eyebrow raising.

9. Better vaccines - by all accounts, ie Novavax - are on the horizon. Cures and treatments could be coming too. Burning people's career for standing up for their right to determine what concoction is shot directly into their blood right now seems short sighted at best.

[0] - https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40328123.html *

* Note that Moderna and Pfizer have similar clot profiles to AZ: https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/07/29/astrazeneca-covid-1...

Re: Canada to require vaccinations for air and train passengers

#100
post #50
post #9

It's likely because of the election. Trudeau is calling for an election in the next few weeks. By announcing this now, he dares the opposition to say it's the wrong move, so that he can say he's protecting Canadians and the conservatives won't. Keep me in charge to stay safe. Only 10% of Canadians are opposed to vaccines, so it won't be an unpopular choice. And if the opposition says it's the right move, he can say "…

> Only 10% of Canadians are opposed to vaccines, so it won't be an unpopular choice. What does “opposed to vaccines” even mean? Vaccines for anybody? Vaccines for themselves? Mandatory vaccines? I sincerely doubt 10% of even Canada is in favor of mandating everyone be vaccinated to live what was once a normal life. EDIT: I meant that last sentence in reverse, ie doubt that only 10% is against mandatory vaccinations.…

Exactly this. I keep seeing so much discussion lately where support for vaccination in general (or for oneself) is being conflated with support for mandatory vaccination (for everyone). These are not the same thing! This all-or-nothing "with us or against us" discourse is really not helpful, and it often serves to shut down any healthy debate about the merits (or drawbacks) of two related but still separate items.

And this kind of extreme binary categorization seems to be everywhere lately...

- Against some policies of some country's authoritarian regime? You're a racist!

- Vote for team blue (red)? You must despise everyone who votes for team red (blue)!

- For bike lanes? You're anti-car!

- Pro-carbon tax? You hate the economy!

- Concerned about men's issues? You must hate women!

It's almost as if holding any nuanced view and ability to debate about the many complex situations we face in life means you're more than likely to find yourself despised by those in either of the extreme camps on any given issue, which unfortunately seem to be growing to include more and more people as time goes on. As this unfolds, we're less likely to be able and willing to find compromises, have empathy for, and better understand one another. How are we going to come together to work on solving some very hard problems of the future when we're all just shouting past each other, thinking that anyone who doesn't hold the exact same set of viewpoints as one does on so many varied issues is an idiot?

Post reply on HN