Vincent J. Curtis
2 Apr 21
RE: Ford’s Lockdown Restrictions
Doug Ford’s latest assault on science civil and liberties includes the following restrictions on activities outdoors:
-
Outdoor gatherings limited to
five people, regardless of space available (raising the question, what if six
people are present simultaneously in Buchanan Park?[a park in Hamilton of 33
acres]);
-
Funerals and weddings are not
limited in size of a gathering provided proper spacing is maintained (what is “proper”
spacing. 1 m [3 feet] is the “proper”
distance in the EU.);
-
Salons and personal care
services are closed, despite not a single contact tracing showing these are
sources of spread;
-
Outdoor fitness classes are
closed, regardless of spacing;
-
Outdoor restaurants services
are closes, regardless of spacing;
-
All golf course are closed,
regardless of space available and group size limited to four (and four is less
than five);
-
Drive-in theatres are closed.
A scientific analysis of the above indicates that Fat Dougie has a hate on for fitness and recreation. He dislikes people being entertained and happy. But so far as science of prevention goes, there is nothing consistent or even sensible in these restrictions.
The aim is to avoid breathe another person’s air. Being alone, outdoors, meets that aim. Separation, outdoors, meets that aim; but these restrictions go absurdly beyond that aim.
There isn’t a single enterprising reporter to ask Ford where is the science in these restrictions? Where are your studies showing that being cooped up in your apartment is better than exercising outdoors? How will golfing alone, watching a movie alone, exercising alone, eating alone and outdoors spread a disease person to person?
How far separated do people have to be to be considered ‘alone’?
Stanford University concluded that heavy-handed lockdowns do nothing to halt the spread. The W.H.O. recommend against lockdowns.
Where are their studies? Waving one’s hand and saying “it’s obvious
that if you don’t golf, you can’t get the virus while golfing.” That golfer is going to be breathing
somewhere else, and that somewhere else is more likely to cause him to breathe
someone else’s air than on a golf course.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment