Ontario to enter four-week, province-wide Covid-19 shutdown on Saturday | Hacker News Reader

Ontario to enter four-week, province-wide Covid-19 shutdown on Saturday

cbc.ca

33 pointsnomy9948 comments

I'm not close enough to the data to know -- so am asking HN -- but why are schools being kept open? Is it because truly there is low risk on transmission that way (and this holds true for new variants too)? Or is this just to avoid the negative drag on worker productivity caused by kids staying home?

In other words - how political is the decision to keep schools open? Should concerned parents still keep their kids home anyways?

(Note - I don't have school-aged kids, so it's a theoretical question for me - but one that many friends are struggling with).

There was an article published not long ago that said there has been a huge increase in the number of reported mental health cases for school-aged children due to the lack of socialization from lockdowns.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-c...

keep schools open (the kids need to go to school/helps on a number of levels), that should be a chosen priority and that's it. drop everything else.

Problem is everyone wants it all, shopping and dining and schools. Can't have it all. Society needs to priortize the one thing and lockdown rest

I don't think we need much more data then what is already available, there are transmissions in children and they are happening at schools. In my local news there have already been several stories about outbreaks happening in schools and having to shut them down for periods of time. Even if kids are at lower risk they are still at risk so sending them to school is foolish if avoidable. I say if avoidable because not working for months on end and starving to death is also not good.

Could you please provide citations? My understanding is that most of that transmission is happening outside of school and documents like: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br... seem to back up the idea that transmission inside schools is pretty rare. There's also tons of studies showing online school has been devastating to children

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...

Schools are indeed quite safe. The younger the safer, but generally children get sick less and are vanishingly unlikely to end up in the hospital or die. There's also evidence that schools haven't been a big transmission sites for covid probably because while teacher to teacher transmission is as big a problem as anywhere teacher <-> student and student <-> student transmission isn't that likely. The other side is that closing schools has had big negative impacts on children especially poor children.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br... https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...

If I understand correctly there is some evidence this may be changing with the variants, but it's inconclusive.

I'm very skeptical that schools are quite safe.

See https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1346362159446577154

Some key quotes:

Here is a study carried out across >200 countries that showed that among all interventions studied, closing educational institutions was the 2nd most effective. Importantly, the impact on R was similar for pre-school, primary & secondary school settings.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0

Another study of >131 countries showed that among different interventions studied, one of the highest changes in R (R ratio) between introducing an intervention & lifting it was for school closures:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

There are more good quotes and citations in that thread, it's worth a read.

Anecdotally, the amount of times I've been sick since my daughter enrolled in public school has been mind-blowing. The notion that kids are somehow impervious to contracting this, or don't bring it home to vulnerable family members, would mean this virus behaves very differently from all the other upper respiratory diseases commonly seen out there. That's certainly possible, but based on what I've observed -- for example, I'm 99% certain the coronavirus vector that got me was a child -- it just doesn't pass the smell test with me.

(Edit: Moved this from downthread)

If we're going to be super sensitive about the almost non-existent threat of children wrt sars-cov-2 why aren't we also super sensitive about destroying any semblance of normality in children's lives?

Surely this damages children in their crucial developmental stages when they're deprived of social signalling, and effective teaching methods (sorry, Zoom doesn't cut it).

As science would inform us - humans have millions of years of evolution searing social interaction into our biology. Cutting this out will have profound effects.

If we're going to be super sensitive about the almost non-existent threat of children wrt sars-cov-2

According to the studies I linked above, closing schools during outbreaks saved many, many thousands of (mostly adult) lives. If those studies are correct, the threat is absolutely not "almost non-existent." If you have particular issues with those studies, please share them.

I think it's good to remember that the following can both be simultaneously true:

1. There can be significant mental (and maybe physical!) health risks to keeping your kids home from school.

2. There can be significant physical (and maybe mental!) health risks to sending your kids to school.[0]

Neither point makes the other any less valid.

Every family is different, so everyone's going to weigh those two risks differently, and we need to be generous, patient, and understanding in figuring out how to accommodate each other.

[0] I'm seeing more studies saying mental illness rates are ticking up in Covid survivors relative to other cohorts, so there seems to be a mental health risk that rides the coattails of risk of infection.

> According to the studies I linked above, closing schools during outbreaks saved many, many thousands of (mostly adult) lives.

How many millions of children have had a profound impact on their lives, essentially sacrificing crucial years that determine the rest of their lives?

Some people seem ok with sacrificing children to save (primarily) the elderly.

This whole thing has transcended any kind of logic, and there does not seem to be a rational way to discuss the tradeoffs with people. I think this is just the first "crisis" - actually the mildest thing that could happen and still be considered a global pandemic - to land in the milieu of social media and polarization that the world had become already, and this is the result. The pandemic is really just a fashion accessory for a lot of people, a way to talk about how they're doing their part, look down on others they perceive to be the cause, and add as a hashtag to their posts.

In an earlier, less connected world, there would be other more sensible jurisdictions to go to, and people to speak out and debate rationally about why the ridiculous overreaction we've seen is in nobody's interest. But these days, I think we're all fucked. I think we lost a war a long time ago without noticing, and this is what we're stuck with.

I personally know that the hospitals are empty no covid-19 patients I was there for many surgerys pass few years in and out weeks staying over night. The news claims it's full of virus patients I walked down that wing to find the lights off and no one around.

Boy, I didn't exactly mean to inspire quite this level of skepticism. There is like pretty solid evidence of some wards being awfully full of covid patients some of the time. You're one trip down one wing of a hospital and finding it empty doesn't change the fact that lots more people died in 2020 than the year before

Thanks for the links. I think an interesting and hard thing to communicate with this sort of thing, is that it will always be possible to pull out evidence from both sides and it is difficult for me to weigh where the center of gravity is. Both Trump's and Biden's CDC has recommended school reopening in a lot of cases. I agree that it can't be exactly like normal. Capacity will need reduced especial in highschool, but they obviously believe that the balance of evidence is for reopening. Studying this sort of thing is also really darn hard and I fully believe that numbers based on school reopening times between countries can easily be used to support either side depending on what you control for. I've for example totally heard studies saying that reopening schools was associated with no change in transmission. The author of the twitter thread also remarks on cases dropping during what I think is the summer break. Given the patterns we've seen in covid there might be you know some other explanations for that.

They also seem to be disputing the idea that children spread covid less. I'm not any sort of export, but I think this is a fact that's been pretty well established. It's a bit counter intuitive because yeah as you say children are usually a vector for diseases to get into households, but different diseases work differently and for covid it seems like young children especially are better at fighting it off. One epidemiologist who disagrees doesn't change the larger picture

FTA:

    In hotspot regions like Toronto, the new measures are very similar to restrictions that are already in place. At a news conference Thursday afternoon, Health Minister Christine Elliott said that the province did not issue a stay-at-home order like the one from the start of the year, because the last time officials saw that it had "tremendous ill effect on children and adults."

Many stores were already doing curbside pickup only, or already limiting capacity for in-store shopping, so this lockdown isn't really all that much of a difference than the current status quo. The meat of this order is to limit social gatherings, which has been a sort of Achilles heel in Ontario's policy IMHO.

At the end of day, the infection rates have started going up again, the vaccine rollout has been somewhat slow, and "something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done".

Hopefully it's enough.

The Achilles Heel in Ontario's policies have been a lack of mandated paid sick days, so people in warehouses are going in sick and at no point closing down large store or warehouse-type workplaces where the bulk of the transmission is happening.

This is nowhere near enough and is very much a token effort without making any meaningful change. The Ford government refuses to actually spend any money to ameliorate the effects of the pandemic.

I mean, I'm always all for better worker rights, but are you saying they had better sick leave policies mid last year?

Because my understanding is that that's roughly when social gatherings restarted and coincidentally when infection rates started to rise again. I'd argue that social distancing protocols at places of business are more strict now than they were then, and I'm not sure better sick leave policies necessarily would help, since a lot of transmission is asymptomatic, and I don't imagine anyone in their right mind is going to allow a visibly sick person to be up and about at a workplace regardless of sick pay.

No, but Ontario has no mandatory paid sick days and you would think that the pandemic might be a good opportunity to fix that situation, but no. The government continues to blame social gatherings when the incoming ICU patients are primarily essential workers. Also the government has abandoned contact tracing, so they're not event attempting to enact evidence-based policies. Just yo-yo lockdowns.

And yes, covid's delayed symptom onset does mean that sick days don't help a lot, but they'd help a little. For all we know people are going into warehouses to work while fully symptomatic.

The way at which we are opening up here in Washington State, you'd think that Covid was gone. But now here we are with double the cases we had when we originally shut down, and we're opening things back up. It's like we did all the previous shutdowns for nothing... like all that we did to isolate, work from home, etc was for nothing. It makes it feel like we were wrong to shut down before, and that it wasn't even necessary.

Sure we have a vaccine now, a vaccine that most people don't have. It's not any safer now than it has been. It makes it feel like the Republicans were partly right in that the shutdowns only caused unnecessary economic damage, and that isolation did nothing. I want to believe that's not true, but that's not the message that I'm getting now.

Do you know what is causing the vaccine delays in your state? I'm in Ohio and anyone can get a vaccine now by scheduling an appointment online. So much optimism now when there was none. Even if it is a little slower in your state don't give up hope, its coming soon

Florida vs California is telling. FL mostly stayed open and didn't do much worse than CA, despite Florida's much older population.

Per capita or overall?

Per capita. Florida did anomalously well given its seemingly poor handling of the situation. It's likely related to the fact that California has 3 of the 10 biggest cities in the US while Florida has 0, but that doesn't seem like enough to fully explain it.

Density and demographics are two interesting points.

SF and LA are pretty dense in some areas, and not very car-friendly.

Florida skews heavily toward relatively well-off retiree who might already be a little more socially distanced than the norm.

maybe, but in terms of density overall;

CA: 253.9 residents per square mile

FL: 397.2 residents per square mile

Large chunks of land in CA are completely deserted and uninhabitable.

What's more interesting is the local density; what does the distributions of residents per square miles looks like.

Should probably compare places where people live. Including the vast parts of CA that are empty desert skews this stat.

that would be helpful. is there a stat that does that? removing empty CA desert and empty FL swamp?

It's exactly the same here in Massachusetts, 7-day averages have been trending up from a low back at the beginning of March -- for both cases and hospitalizations, yet they're opening up more and more and we just got rid of our travel ban (quarantine order). FWIW, MA also doing fairly well compared to most states with vaccinations, although eligibility for the general population isn't until 4/19.

MA COVID Data 3/31: https://www.reddit.com/gallery/mhfxi4

(courtesy of /u/oldgrimalkin on /r/CoronavirusMA).

It's another pseudo lock down that won't accomplish anything. Ford has been putting in half measures and has lacked follow through. It has confused the population, and people are growing tired of his bullshit. This is resulting in people making up their own rules.

Vaccine roll out has also been a laugh. The older populations book their appointments early in the morning, so the vaccine clinic sit vacant throughout the day.

I'm deeply disappointed by our federal and provincial government. I'm also really disappointed in my fellow citizens.

We got so over confident from a strong start, but we have been fumbling along since we reopened too early last summer. We had an opportunity to drive cases down to single digit, but the province opened when we were just under 100 cases / day. We haven't recovered since.

Reading this upon just arriving home from finding one of my remaining Toronto staple restaurants boarded up after 30+ years in business. (The Rooster, piri piri chicken place at bloor/ossington)

I get the sense on the street that the credibility of these orders and the authority behind them is diminishing. It's been a year of data, analysis, effects, and now even vaccines/treatments for the minority of vulnerable people, and popular tolerance for policy that destroys livelihoods of many and the culture and opportunity for most, is wearing very thin.

Layer in the fact that it's not even a real lock down, so it will have minimal impact on the number of new cases.

If they need to lock us down (and in the process hurt business) fine, but actually lock us down. These half measures hurt people, businesses, and on top of it don't really do much to help the hardest hit cities.

Paris is also in a 4-week lockdown: https://thehill.com/policy/international/europe/543993-paris...

When has Paris not been in lockdown in the last 2 years? March 2019 France mass arrested boatloads of people. Tons of journalists and activists fled the country.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/09/france-thousa...

covid only gave them an excuse to go even further.

> No indoor and outdoor dining.

why no outdoor dining?

Probably because the last time they opened outdoor dining restaurants made "outdoor" tents with no ventilation that were practically equivalent to indoor dining. Unfortunately, government regulation is a blunt tool by nature.

The restaurant staff that enable outdoor dining work inside, in close proximity to each other & frequently can’t afford to take sick time.

The real question is what the province is going to do to help the workers & business owners in those industries.

Right, if they can't afford to take sick time they probably can't afford to not work for four weeks. Any idea if the government is helping these people at all? I didn't see any mention of businesses or employees in the article

Canada has a bunch of covid impact programs (https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/economic-respons...), as well as normal unemployment insurance. I can't speak on the experience of actually using them, but they are there.

Ontario won't do anything. The continuing case count is the direct consequence of the Ford government not spending the money they've been given by the Federal government.

So, does this mean America is ... doing better than Europe and Canada w/ covid? I mean I know we have aggressively rolled out vaccines, but we've never really been a "leader" since the pandemic started, except in cases and number of dead..

I'm not a Biden fan, but at least it feels like we've been more pro-active lately. If we could just mask-up and stay home as much as possible, and get vaccinated we could stay out of the news and go back to "new normal" by end of summer.

I didn't see anything the article about helping shut down businesses. Any small business that somehow survived the previous shutdowns is likely going to close their doors forever resulting in massive revenue losses for the province

I think that's part of the point. Initially I couldn't understand why ostensibly right wing premiers in Ontario and Quebec were to pro-lockdown. But when you see how much the interests of bigger businesses are being served, basically removing all their competitions, it makes more sense.

There are fewer lobbying efforts on behalf of smaller business (and none on behalf of people who just want quality of life) to the bigger businesses with a direct line to the government get the covid rules basically written for them.

The curfew rules some places have is interesting.

That type of policies wouldn't fly in America.

I can't believe people are accepting it in canada either. I'm hoping that people will start to push back more as restrictions move from temporary to systematic, but so far I see very little evidence of this. Possibly just because the media refuses to cover it.

> Possibly just because the media refuses to cover it.

You mean the government funded state medias? Yeah right...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com