The Pensioner and the Pandemic

This is the post I was going to write before I was rudely interrupted and told to lock myself in my room.

I may indeed be the least affected person on the planet by this pandemic, and the only one that it seems to be not such a big deal, simply because it simply has not had a huge impact on my daily life.

Health-wise, although technically in a higher risk group by age, I am in the lowest risk group by perhaps the most important metric, economic status. I am not living in a long term care facility or living with a pre-existing condition that puts me at greater risk and I am relatively healthy with a strong immune system. As long as I follow the recommended precautions regarding mask wearing, physical distancing and avoiding crowded indoor gatherings I feel completely safe.

As a retired pensioner I do not have to worry about either being out of work and out of income or conversely having to work in an environment that may expose me to the virus. This is a huge issue for many people, especially those in lower income occupations, many of whom are in the highly praised but underpaid “front line” occupations we hear so much about now and who will no doubt go back to being ignored when this is all over.

Most importantly my daily lifestyle has been impacted very little. The biggest inconvenience has been having to wear a mask when grocery shopping. My daily routine of outdoor exercise, primarily cycling with some hiking, has had little impact other than having to be somewhat more aware of keeping as much distance as possible when passing people.

Yes, we have not been able to eat out at restaurants but we only did that once every two or three months anyway, and that is a luxury many live their wholes lives without being able to afford.

We have not been able to travel outside the country for the past year, but then most people are not in a position to undertake foreign travel on an annual basis, and we have not done any recreational travel within the province for the last year, again something that many do not have the economic means to do regularly.

We saw investments in equities fall significantly (but they have now recovered) but our concerns about economic effects should be saved for those living from paycheck to pay check rather than for those that can afford to invest in the stock market.

I really have no reason to feel hard done by due to the pandemic.

The Pensioner and the Pandemic and ...

The Government Wants to Lock Me in My Room

Well this blog post is taking somewhat of a change of direction from that planned, which was to focus on the benefits of being a retired pensioner at this time, since the Ontario government is telling me that I will suddenly be at risk for COVOD-19 on my birthday in a few days and should (or must, depending on the source) self-isolate for 14 days after which I will be fine again (or maybe not, depending on the source).

This puts me in a strange position as someone who has been critical of those who do not listen to the experts and health authorities on the verge of engaging in civil disobedience by ignoring them. I am put in a position where they want me to change my healthy lifestyle and lock myself in a room for two weeks (or longer) presumably because of a statistical relationship between age and a presumed greater degree of risk COVID-19.

From the Ontario government website.

Self-isolating means staying at home and avoiding contact with other people to help prevent the spread of disease to others in your home and your community.

All persons over 70 years of age and individuals who are immunocompromised are advised to self-isolate for a period of 14 days. This means that you should only leave your home or see other people for essential reasons. Where possible, you should seek services over the phone or internet or ask for help from friends, family or neighbours with essential errands. (The 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) | Ontario.ca)

From the results page for the COVID-19 self-assessment with all questions answered in the negative except for age over 70. (Coronavirus (COVID-19) self-assessment)

Self-assessment result

You must self-isolate at home and monitor your health because you are part of an at-risk group.

You are in an at-risk group because you said one of the following applies to you:

• are over 70 years of age

You must self-isolate, which means:

• only leave your home or see other people for critical reasons (like a medical emergency)
• seek services over the phone or online or ask for help from friends, family or neighbours
• do not go into a hospital or clinic to get a COVID-19 test unless you are asked to by a health care provider

The first thing one notices if one reads carefully is that the first references uses “advised” and “for a period of 14 days” and the second reference uses “must” and has no reference to a time period.

And the latest, as reported by CTV News refers to “strongly recommending”.

TORONTO -- Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of Health (Dr. David Williams ) is now recommending that all people over the age of 70 self-isolate given the elevated risk of "severe outcomes" should they contract COVID-19.

"Given the greater risk of severe outcomes to Ontarians who are elderly, I am also strongly recommending that individuals over 70 years of age self-isolate," Williams wrote. "This means only leaving home or seeing other people for essential reasons. Where possible, you should seek services over the phone or internet or ask for help from friends, family or neighbours with essential errands."

Meanwhile people over 70 comprise only 14% of COVID-19 cases in Canada as reported in this Ottawa Citizen article: "New data: Middle-aged Canadians most likely to catch COVID-19, so far". The percentage of Canadians over 65 was 14% in 2010 and growing (Statistics Canada) making it clear that the percentage of COVID-19 cases among those over 70 today is clearly below that of the general population. We are at less risk statistically not more risk.

But that really is not the point. There clearly is a subset of older Canadians with health concerns that require them to be more cautious and take more precautions, as there are within all age groups, in particular those that are immunocompromised and those that smoke or vape, due to the respiratory nature of the disease.

A blanket policy based on age discrimination does not seem to be the way to deal with health concerns that are specific to individuals and is not going to sit well with my comrades in this generation.

Fortunately there has been no indication that the province will use legal instruments to enforce this which is probably a good thing because we are a generation that grew up with civil disobedience.

COVID-19 and Poverty/Inequality

At the same time another important factor of this pandemic is one that has almost entirely been ignored by the establishment press, or mainstream media as it is sometimes called, and that is economic status.

When it comes to underlying health factors that make individuals more susceptible to the virus and less able to combat it economic status is a big determinant. It determines the quality of nutrition, as well as housing conditions (overcrowding, etc.) and other lifestyle factors, as well as the quality of health care one has access to. This is not just on an individual basis but also on a societal one with poorer countries in a much more difficult position to fight off the pandemic. Yet we see very little written about that in the media.

As we see with the rapid response to COVID-19, compared with the feeble response to climate change, governments are much better at reacting to acute crisis than to chronic problems. We see this as governments quickly jump in to deal with symptoms of climate change like flooding or hurricanes while their response to the real problem is feeble.

COVID-19 has brought with it not just a health crisis but an economic one, one that has affected the group governments claim to care most about, the middle class. Governments are scrambling to deal with the loss of jobs and income while also trying to deal with a major health crisis.

But what if they had taken inequality seriously. What if we had a guaranteed basic income (such as that proposed by Conservative Hugh Segal) in place. The government would not have had to scramble and stumble into implementing make shift programs. The solution for those displaced from employment and income would already have been in place

Postscript: The Great Outdoors is Closed

And apparently now the outdoors is closed in Ontario.

In a news release on Monday night, Ford announced a new emergency order under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. The order closes all outdoor recreational amenities, such as sports fields and playgrounds, effective immediately.

He said the extension of the declared emergency and the new emergency order are based on the advice of Dr. David Williams, Ontario's chief medical officer of health.

According to the news release, the new order closes all communal or shared, public or private, outdoor recreational amenities in Ontario. These include playgrounds, sports fields, basketball and tennis courts, off-leash dog parks, beaches, skateboard and BMX parks, picnic areas, outdoor community gardens, park shelters, outdoor exercise equipment, condo parks and gardens, and other outdoor recreational amenities.

Green spaces in parks, trails, ravines and conservation areas that aren't closed are to remain open for people to walk through, but people must maintain a distance of at least two metres apart. Ontario's provincial parks and conservation reserves remain closed. (Ontario extends state of emergency by 2 weeks as number of COVID-19 cases now 1,706 | CBC News)

Healthy lifestyles are what will create a population most resilient to health challenges such as COVID-19. Being out in nature and exercising contribute greatly to this. At a time when we are encouraging, indeed requiring, physical distancing (previously referred to as social distancing) it seems counterproductive to close those areas that provide the space for people to practice physical distancing without locking themselves up in their homes in fear.

Final Words

None of this is to say that we should not take this seriously and listen to the health experts when they tell us to practice physical distancing to reduce the spread of the disease.

Background

Coronavirus - Wikipedia

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) - Wikipedia

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) - Wikipedia

Why Does Canada Participate in the Olympics Anyway

I took this screenshot (CBC website) of the standings yesterday showing Germany in first place with 8 medals, Canada second with 10 medals and Norway in third place with 12 medals.

Yes, that's right, because only being the very best in the world (well best at that particular place at that particular time) counts, the rest are all losers, so it seems.

Why do we rate the Olympics that way. The way we rate Olympic success should relate to what we want to accomplish, and the way we rate Olympics can have far reaching effects on how we fund sports and recreation in this country. We have already seen, at least in the past, funding shifted from less popular sports to sports that we have a better chance of winning Olympic medals in.

But what if we measured Olympic success by a points system that included all top ten finishes (tenth best in the world is pretty damn good by most peoples standards) with 10 points for first and one point for tenth.

We would get a much better picture of the depth and breadth of our elite athletes than just counting those in the top three. It would even give us a better measure of how we are progressing towards more medals in the future. And we could start doing it now retroactively using the records of past Olympics.

But is that even the point. Is it really justified to spend all this money on a “pissing contest” to prove we (well actually our elite athletes) are better than the rest of the world. What public policy goal does that serve.

We can only justify spending all this money on the Olympics if it serves some public benefit beyond giving Canadian another excuse to spend more time watching TV (while waving the flag) for two weeks every two years.

We can only justify spending this money if it benefits Canadians beyond the elite athletes that participate. We have to be able to show that the funding benefits a broad range of Canadians by funding sports and recreation for more than just elite athletes and by actually encouraging more Canadians to get involved in sports and recreation. That way we will see results in fitter and healthier Canadians with more balanced lifestyles and even reduced health care costs.

We won't know that if we measure the wrong things. Ultimately what we want to be able to measure is whether Olympic programs increase the participation of Canadians in sport and recreation ultimately leading to more balanced lifestyles and improving their fitness and health.

Knowing that we had the greatest percentage of citizens participating in sports and recreational activities would make me a lot more prouder than knowing that a small group of elite Canadian athletes were the best in the world. Now that is a goal to strive for.

Boycott Hypocrisy Hour - Become Enlightened

We already have Environment Week and Earth Day and numerous other Environmental Events.

We do not need another token 60 minutes to think about the environment before going back to our normal overconsuming energy wasting daily life.

On March 29, 2008 at 9:00 PM in our home the Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs) will be on, as necessary, the Energy Star appliances will be running, if needed, the single compact energy efficient car will be in the garage, with the snowblower (nobody’s perfect) waiting for it to be replaced with the push mower, and the bikes and kayaks will be waiting to replace the skis and snowshoes.

There is a lot that you can do everyday to reduce your energy consumption and your environmental footprint that will have a lot more impact than spending one hour a year in the dark.

We like to blame the big corporate polluters And they are at fault. And the tar sands are an environmental crime against humanity. But even their development is driven by our insatiable lust for fossil fuels.

The automobile is the first thing to cut down on. Cut down on the number - everyone in the family does not need their own car, and cut down on the use. When we had four drivers living at home we had one car, which was not used for driving to work - that is what public transit is for. With a few exceptions the vast majority of urban and suburban workers do not need to use a car to go to work. And nobody living in the city needs a Hummer (status does not count as a need) or any gas guzzling vehicle,

Improve the energy efficiency of your home. It does not cost a lot to change your light bulbs and appliances can be upgraded when replaced. We replaced our inefficient freezer earlier than necessary but the energy savings will eventually pay for the cost of the new one. Don’t waste water. We think of water as free, or at least we used to - the costs of cheap water are now catching up with us and prices are increasing to maintain the infrastructure that we let deteriorate.

Start to live a more environmentally conscious lifestyle. Do you really need to drive to the corner store. Walk or bike - don’t drive everywhere. After awhile you will be amazed at just how far you can walk or bike and you will enjoy it. It will be good for your health and good for the planet. Get out in the bush, on foot or on a bike and start to enjoy the wonders of nature. Once you start to appreciate it you will have a real incentive to protect it.

Become enlightened - being in the dark is not going to accomplish anything.

Are Gyms and Fitness Clubs a Sign of an Unhealthy Lifestyle

Is going to the gym the epitome of a healthy lifestyle or is it just another example of a compartmentalized life. For how many people, is going to the gym the one hour a week or day set aside for fitness, where they get in the SUV drive to the gym and put in their allotted fitness time and get back to their compartmentalized lives.

Lifestyle is not about allotting time. It is about doing what comes naturally. In primitive time a healthy active lifestyle was not only natural but necessary for survival. We had to hunt to eat. Even after the agricultural and industrial revolutions most people where active in their jobs with farm or industrial labour being dominant.

The word activity implies being active but for the majority in today’s information society work and other activities now rarely involve actually being active so we slot the gym or fitness club into our schedule as our healthy lifestyle time.

A true healthy lifestyle does not involve setting aside time for “healthy things” because you have too. A true healthy lifestyle involves doing things you love because you enjoy them. The health and fitness benefits are a side effect. A true healthy lifestyle is not compartmentalized but naturally built into all your daily activities