Oases News - USA & CANADA

Coronavirus: Canada's response hits a turning point

Monday, 23 March 2020 08:44 Written by theconversation

A health-care worker prepares for the opening of the COVID-19 Assessment Centre in Ottawa, during a media tour on March 13, 2020. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang)

COVID-19 is an emerging risk for which the consequences are still unknown. That the virus could have potentially catastrophic health and economic consequences means that we must adopt a precautionary approach. Thus far, public health officials have focused on learning about the virus and containing it as best as they can.

As we learned in our study of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, part of the danger in addressing a pandemic is that we can become lodged in a prolonged state of learning.

Due to the speed at which COVID-19 spreads, we need to move beyond learning about the risk and start putting an operational plan in place to address the possible outcomes. This operational phase marks a different stage in the process.

Intervention

Those operational plans have started to emerge, prompted partly by warnings from the United States government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

At the end of February, the CDC warned that the virus will likely spread across the U.S., which will result in large numbers of people needing medical care at the same time. The CDC noted that schools, child-care centres and critical service providers, as well as common workplaces and public gatherings, may also be affected by large-scale absenteeism.

The Public Health Agency of Canada has advised that social distancing measures, which are recommended to fight the spread of COVID-19, may have wide-ranging effects on individuals, communities and businesses.

On March 16, the government of Canada announced that international flights will soon be funnelled into a handful of airports. The previous week, Canadians abroad were advised to return home.

An electron microscope image issued by U.S. National Institutes of Health in February 2020 showing the novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV, the virus that causes COVID-19. (NIAID-RML via AP)

Intervention makes a difference. China has been able to slow the spread of the disease, but not without dramatic government actions of forced quarantine and isolation. These kinds of interventions are considered more difficult to achieve in a democratic state. Increasingly, Canadians are being asked to self-quarantine. Time will tell if the strategy is effective.

Co-ordinating a response is a complex task. Timely information is important when responding to, and trying to contain, communicable diseases. Information gathering and sharing, however, represents only one aspect of controlling a threat.

We need to know that health-care service providers and other owners and operators of critical infrastructure are adopting appropriate standards and behaviours to address the circumstances as described by the CDC. These standards and behaviours need to be adopted equally across similar jurisdictions. This common action reduces confusion and doubt.

Lessons from H1N1

Notwithstanding government efforts, experience suggests it is reasonable to adopt a degree of skepticism about our collective readiness. When seemingly healthy 13-year-old Evan Frustaglio died suddenly of H1N1 in 2009, the emotionally charged event drove up demand for the vaccine across the country practically overnight. The health-care system was caught off-guard by the surge, despite months of planning.

Government pointed to the role that an anxious media had played in amplifying the risk. In our study of H1N1, we noted only 14 per cent of H1N1 articles referred to Frustaglio in the 30 days following his death; many articles included criticisms of government operations following the surge in demand.

Efforts to blame the media only underscore the fact that a pandemic plan needs to take media reporting into account. The government needs to think about how to use the media to communicate its message and respond to emotionally charged coverage when it occurs.

When vulnerable populations like children become ill, we are at risk of dramatic media coverage. The public can be volatile; how people feel today may not give us an indication of how they will react tomorrow. This can have an impact on our operational plans as it did in 2009.

Response planning

Increased demand for health services needs to be addressed with an effective response that meets public expectations, which will change over time and will be shaped by numerous sources including media, government and lived experiences.

Achieving such a response requires that plans emphasize transparency, not strictly in what we know about the spread of the disease but also in the operations that are in place to address community needs. Warnings about the spread of a disease must be communicated in appropriate context, such as providing probability data (if possible), as well as in absolute numbers, and with advice about actions people can take to address the risk.

People line up outside of the COVID-19 Assessment Centre in Ottawa, 45 minutes after its scheduled opening on March 13, 2020. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

Communications must almost always be led by experts with responsibility; scientific experts are particularly trusted. Politicians are there to provide democratic leadership. At times, decisions will be political, especially in discussions between jurisdictions and with opposition parties, and when there are difficult trade-offs to make. Still, the government is right to move forward on the basis of the best expert advice, a theme the prime minister refers to regularly.

Public agencies will have to show adaptive and surge capacity, as well as diverse means to accomplish mission-critical tasks as new and unexpected conditions emerge. This is a lesson not just for the health sector but for all critical sectors, such as manufacturing, transportation, education, and water and power supply, the operations of which may be affected by the virus.

Mistakes are also likely to occur from time to time. Public agencies will have to be honest; the public will have to be reasonable.

COVID-19 may not be a devastating event; the point is that no one knows when it comes to these types of risks. Whether or not it is serious, the impact of planning is already starting to be felt. It is now incumbent upon the government and those who deliver key services to plan for reasonable worst-case scenarios — cases that are known to have happened in other Western jurisdictions or during pandemics.

Adaptive capacity does not come naturally to bureaucracies; we value them for their stability, not their capacity to change. Frontline health-care services are under pressure already during the influenza season. It is not realistic to think this service in particular can cope with a wide-scale health emergency without more resources and creative thinking, or without planned responses to different magnitudes of such an event.

Kevin Quigley, Scholarly Director of the MacEachen Institute for Public Policy and Governance, Dalhousie University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Published in USA & CANADA

Canada's changing coronavirus border policy exposes international students' precarious status

Monday, 23 March 2020 03:31 Written by theconversation

Canada’s announcements about its border have not left international students with a sense of security. (Shutterstock)

Carlo Handy Charles, McMaster University

Canada’s border closure announcements have thrown international students and other foreign nationals on a roller coaster of anxiety that jeopardizes many people’s sense of wellness and security.

Since U.S. President Donald Trump’s travel ban on citizens of countries with substantial Muslim populations in 2017, Canada has strengthened its position as a welcoming country for international students. In 2017, there were close to 500,000 international students studying in Canada.

However, on March 16, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that Canada will take aggressive measures to limit the spread of COVID-19. He said Canada would deny “entry to Canada to people who are not Canadian citizens or permanent residents,” except Americans.

This announcement raised concerns about why Canada chose to keep its border open to Americans since the United States is Canada’s top source of international tourists: in 2015 more than 22 million Americans vacationed in Canada.

Then, two days later, on March 18, Trudeau announced that U.S. travellers will no longer be permitted to cross the border for “recreation and tourism,” saying that in both countries, citizens are encouraged to stay home.

Amid a flurry of ensuing anxious social media posts from foreign residents, including many international students, Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said international students, workers with visas and temporary foreign workers will be allowed to enter Canada but will need to self-isolate for 14 days.

But both in the short term, as officials at many levels respond to changing circumstances and messaging, and over the longer term, as our society adapts to the pandemic, it’s far from clear that Canada’s announcements will provide international students or temporary foreign workers with a sense of security.

Some international students or temporary residents at the border were blocked from coming back to Canada on Monday, Radio Canada reported.

And, on March 18, the Government of Canada officially published a list of people who are exempted from this measure. However, this list does not explicitly mention whether international students or temporary foreign workers are allowed to return to Canada if they are currently abroad.

Key concerns remain unaddressed. How effectively has, or will, Canada communicate its border decisions about international students and temporary foreign workers to border officials, airlines and the students themselves? Do these changing messages in a short time signal that international students should be concerned for the future of their mobility and their studies? How is the well-being of international students and other temporary residents in Canada impacted by wondering if the border could be closed to them?

Potential consequences

It is important to understand how temporary residents — those without permanent residency — such as international students, temporary foreign workers and other precarious status foreigners who have been legally living, studying and working in Canada for months or years — have been affected by these announcements.

Research conducted in Ontario shows that it is important to pay particular attention to how living with precarious legal status may impact the well-being and feelings of belonging and social support of children and families.

Living with precarious status, particularly as news and messaging changes, may impact the well-being of children and families. (Shutterstock)

Will international students, foreign workers or the Canadian public now be wondering whether temporary residents have become disposable foreigners amid COVID-19 pandemic? Indeed, as they were not addressed in Trudeau’s initial announcement, they may be wondering whether their temporary resident status is worthy of Canadian state consideration and protection or it is an item that can be disposed of in times of crisis.

It is understandable that the federal government’s aggressive measures aim to protect Canadians and permanents residents of Canada. It is also clear that “we are in a fairly critical period” to slow the spread of COVID-19, as Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam said.

And it’s more than clear that we should follow the federal government’s recommendations of social distancing to limit the spread of the virus.

However, talking about closing the border to those who have lived, studied and worked in Canada for months or years raises concerns about how we should help each other amid the COVID-19 pandemic while respecting human rights and dignity.

Respecting human rights

As the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees recommended, states are of course entitled to take measures to ascertain and manage risks to public health, including risks that could arise in connection with non-nationals arriving at their borders. Such measures must be non-discriminatory as well as necessary, proportionate and reasonable with the aim of protecting public health.

Canada’s border closure contradicts WHO’s recommendations, which urge all countries to “strike a fine balance between protecting health, minimizing economic and social disruption and respecting human rights.”

South Korea, for example, has been recognized for implementing efficient testing, quarantine and tracking measures to slow the spread of COVID-19 without implementing a lockdown.

Relief measures?

What protection and relief measures can international students and temporary foreign workers expect from the federal government as conditions surrounding the pandemic change?

The federal government has, after all, announced that no Canadian should be worried about rent payments, groceries and additional child care because it will help Canadians financially during the COVID-19 pandemic.

International students are clearly concerned about their precarious situations. Will Canada offer any official relief measures or supports for international students too, like rent relief?

Many international students are feeling anxious about the future of their studies in Canada. (Shutterstock)

Precarious status and well-being

The prime minister’s announcement of Canada’s border closure to all foreigners may have had a significant impact on the mental and physical health of international students who are temporary residents in Canada, and have been living and working in the country.

Students’ health and wellness may have been affected by knowing that if they leave the country, they will not be able to come back to continue their studies, research or work. This may also impact the Canadian economy.

In 2015 and 2016, respectively, international students in Canada spent about $12.8 billion and $15.5 billion on tuition, accommodation and discretionary spending. How will the federal government’s changing messaging on the Canadian welcome to international students affect the Canadian economy in the future?

Canadian compassion

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Canada has shown compassion to the most vulnerable people. For instance, the federal government halted deportations of precarious status foreigners with the exception of serious criminal cases.

However, Canada’s initial lack of consideration for international students and other temporary residents when it announced it was closing the border seems jarringly ill-conceived and insensitive given the country’s constant effort to recruit international students to continue enhancing Canada’s national economy and international reputation.

Even though it was corrected two days later, Canada’s decisions and messaging prompt us to reflect on how we should apply measures of social distancing that are not harmful to others and that still protect human dignity — and to consider how we should account for and help each other in times of crisis. We’re also prompted to think about how we should address popular concerns while remaining caring, thoughtful and welcoming to others.

Carlo Handy Charles, Teaching and Research Assistant and Joint Ph.D. Student in Sociology and Geography, McMaster University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Published in USA & CANADA

How An American Writer Predicted Coronavirus In 1981

Monday, 23 March 2020 03:06 Written by THENATION

An American author is said to have predicted the rampaging coronavirus outbreak as far back as 1981.

coronavirus

File photo

An extract from a book by an American writer circulating on the social media suggests that the outbreak of Coronavirus, otherwise known as Covid-19, in Wuhan, China was accurately predicted as far back as 1981.

The book by Dean Koontz, number one bestselling author according to The New York Times, appropriately titled the “Eyes of Darkness”, states that a Chinese scientist Li Chen made the revelation when he defected to the United States, carrying a diskette record of China’s most important biological weapon.

Koontz states: ” They call the stuff ‘Wuhan-400’ because it was developed at their RDNA labs outside the city of Wuhan, and it was the four-hundredth viable strain of man-made microorganism created at that research centre.”

Wuhan-400, he adds, is a perfect weapon because it afflicts only human beings.

Koontz states categorically on page 412: “In around 2020, a severe pneumonia-like illness will spread throughout the globe, attacking the lungs and the bronchial tubes and resisting all known treatments. Almost more baffling than the illness itself will be the fact that it will suddenly vanish as quickly as it arrived, attacking again 10 years later, and then disappear completely.”

But the claim has been described as partly false because there is no proof that the new coronavirus was created in a lab. The virus is believed to have originated last year in a food market in Wuhan that was illegally selling wildlife.

Experts believe it may have originated in bats and then passed to humans, possibly via another species. “The symptoms described by Koontz are different to Covid-19,” such experts insist.

***

Via The Nation

Published in USA & CANADA

New US visa rules set off 'panic wave' in immigrant communities

Sunday, 08 March 2020 16:37 Written by aljazeera.

Sorrow and outrage is spreading across some immigrant communities as Trump's travel ban goes into effect.

Iranian man holding a sign outside of the US Supreme Court after President Trump's travel ban was upheld in Washington, DC [Leah Millis/Reuters]

After nearly a dozen years moving through the United States visa system, Sai Kyaw's brother and sister and their families were at the finish line: a final interview before they could leave Myanmar to join him in Massachusetts and work at his restaurant.

Then a dramatic turn in US immigration policy halted their plans. The interview was postponed, and it is not clear when, or whether, it will be rescheduled.

"It's terrible," Kyaw said. "There's nothing we can really do except pray. They've been waiting 12 years. If they have to wait another 12 years, they will."

His is just one of many stories of confusion, sorrow and outrage spreading across some immigrant communities after the announcement of a Trump administration policy that is expected to all but shut down family-based immigration from Myanmar, also known as Burma, as well as Nigeria, Kyrgyzstan and Eritrea.

The policy also restricts visas from Sudan and Tanzania.

"There's a panic wave going through the community," said Grace Mobosi-Enwensi, president of the Minnesota Institute for Nigerian Development, a nonprofit group.

In signing a proclamation last month that takes effect on Friday, President Donald Trump said those countries failed to meet minimum security standards. It was his latest crackdown on his signature issue of immigration.

Calls about the restrictions have flooded legal advocacy groups and lawyers' offices. A Boston-area Burmese church is trying to intervene to help congregants. The United African Organization has held legal clinics in Chicago to walk people through their options.

The rules are certain to face legal challenges, but in the meantime, activists have organised around #MuslimBan and #AfricaBan on social media and ramped up lobbying efforts to press Congress to pass the No Ban Act, which would limit the president's ability to restrict entry to the US.

Representative Ilhan Omar stands in front of 'NO BAN ACT' posters during a news conference by members of the US Congress in Washington, US [File: Jim Bourg/Reuters]

Roughly 10,000 people received immigration-based visas from Nigeria, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan and Myanmar in the 2018 fiscal year, according to federal data analysed by the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute. More than half were from Nigeria, the most populous African nation.

The ripple of emotion has been felt strongest among America's roughly 380,000 Nigerian immigrants and their children. They are one of the most educated immigrant groups. More than 60 percent of people with Nigerian ancestry who are at least 25 have a bachelor's degree or higher, which is more than twice the general US population rate of 29 percent, according to 2017 census data.

Tope Aladele, who is seeking a visa for his wife in Nigeria, has faint hope that she will be able to come to the US.

"I thought this year I could at least celebrate Christmas with her," said Aladele, a US citizen who works as a nursing assistant in the Chicago area. "I'm just hoping and praying."

Citizenship and Immigration Services officials declined to comment on the concerns of affected families, deferring to the Department of Homeland Security. Agency officials did not respond to emails seeking comment.

Unlike previous travel bans, the new rules are narrower. They stop immigrant visas from Nigeria, Eritrea, Myanmar and Kyrgystan, covering people who want to live in the US permanently and are sponsored by family members or employers. They also eliminate participation in a visa lottery programme in which a computer randomly selects up to 55,000 people for visas from underrepresented countries. Sudan and Tanzania will also be barred from the lottery.

The ban does not affect immigrants travelling to the US for a temporary stay, including tourists and students, or immigrants already in the US. There are also exceptions, including dual citizenship holders.

In Chicago, the United African Organization hosted dozens of people at legal clinics. Many had questions about their spouses and children. One was Osemeh Otoboh, 46, a Nigerian citizen with a green card who has applied for two of his teenage children from a previous marriage to come to the US.

Though their visas were recently approved, the suburban Chicago man married to a US citizen was worried. His children live in Lagos, and he wants them to pursue an education in the US.

"I don't even know how to explain it to them," Otoboh said of the restrictions.

Experts have questioned the administration's national security reasoning since there are no restrictions on tourist or student visas, which can take less time and vetting to acquire. Officials in at least one country, Nigeria, have said they are working to address security concerns, such as information sharing.

Activists said the restrictions amount to another travel ban like the one that was widely decried as targeting Muslims. The Supreme Court upheld that ban as lawful in 2018. It restricted travel from several Muslim-majority countries including Iran, Somalia and Syria.

Sudan and Kyrgyzstan are also majority-Muslim countries. Nigeria, the world's seventh-most populous nation, has a large Muslim population too.

"It's a continuation of this administration's racist and xenophobic immigration framework that they use," said Mustafa Jumale, a policy manager for the Black Alliance for Just Immigration.

People protest outside of the US Supreme Court after President Trump's travel ban was upheld by the Supreme Court in Washington, DC [Leah Millis/Reuters]

Muslim Advocates, along with other civil rights organisations in the US, said in a statement issued on Thursday that more than 25 percent of African would be barred from entering the US.

"America is a nation where people of all races and religions are entitled to equal protection under the law, yet the expanded Muslim Ban is another attack on the rights, the dignity and the identity of Black communities," the group said in a statement. "[M]ore Black families will needlessly suffer from a policy with no legitimate justification," according to the statement.

Some churches have also sprung into action.

At the Overseas Burmese Christian Fellowship in Boston, Pastor Clifford Maung says he has relayed the concerns of two families in his congregation to national Baptist church leaders and is prepared to appeal to the US government on their behalf.

"You hope for the best. We grew up under a similar situation in Burma with an oppressive government so this is something we are used to," he said. "But it shouldn't happen in America."

Maung says one of those affected is his cousin, whose wife has already been approved for a visa and is awaiting medical clearance, which was supposed to come as soon as this week.

Another affected family is that of S'Tha Sein, who arrived with his wife and youngest daughter in December. The 53-year-old Sein says his eldest daughter was also approved for a visa but tested positive for tuberculosis and was not allowed to travel with them.

The 21-year-old college student is slated to be reevaluated next month after receiving treatment, but Sein says the new restrictions throw uncertainty into the prolonged immigration process, which the family began in 2006.

"We've been praying that this law will change," Sein said after attending church services this past Sunday with his family, siblings and elderly parents. "We just want to be able to live together.
"

Published in USA & CANADA