• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

All Things CAF and Covid/ Covid Vaccine [merged]

Quirky

Sr. Member
Reaction score
619
Points
940
And during that time the unvaccinated take more of their share of hospital beds, we burn our ressources out (materiel and human).

Yes that will be a problem, sort term. The faster this thing rips through the population the better. Enough of this theatre.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,316
Points
1,260
It’s called triage. They would get the boot for other emergencies.
Or...and stay with me here...we try not to overburden the system so that this triage isn't needed.

Remember the whole point of the masks, vaccines, etc? It originally was to slow the curve, so the healthcare system doesn't get overwhelmed.

Yes that will be a problem, sort term. The faster this thing rips through the population the better. Enough of this theatre.
We said that about the OG Covid, Delta, and now this. What's to say that another variant won't come up and we have this conversation again in 6 months?
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
1,084
Points
1,110
Why is this even a discussion?? Of course they should be gone.....I was shocked a few years ago being at Petawawa Point and seeing some of the lard asses. Frig, I remember back in the early 80's RSM Flanagan actually noticed I got a little bigger, [from the 30 waist size I'd had since school to a 32] and suggested " to step away from the dinner table".
Not all trades need to be in tip top shape. I would argue many trades don’t need to be and future trades certainly won’t need to be (cyber operators for example). No need to release productive people on the basis of weight.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
1,084
Points
1,110
Since you still believe the vaccine stops transmission: How many CAF members are still working full time hours that are so sick or immunocompromised that they're at risk for severe COVID complications even though they're under the age of 60? If you're going to count all the morbidly obese people, I'd suggest the solution is release them, not someone who was never going to get really sick from COVID anyways. What are we going to do with those people when we admit COVID is endemic and we're working full time sans masks and distancing? They're still at risk and all we've accomplished is skirting ordering people to take a vaccine by ordering them to disclose medical information.
People that have gone through cancer treatment, people with diagnosed high blood pressure, diabetes. Yes, there are people with medical issues within the CAF.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
586
Points
1,260
No need to release productive people on the basis of weight.

No need for "fat-shaming".

But, based on our "Fat troops in street" mega-threads, perhaps encourage some to lose weight.

I think the taxpayers have more confidence in an organization when their women and men in uniform look good.

It originally was to slow the curve, so the healthcare system doesn't get overwhelmed.

Hopefully, "flatten the curve". As opposed to, "Let 'er rip!"
 

ModlrMike

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
788
Points
960
Britain intends to rescind Covid measures effective next thursday, so we'll soon have some data on how effective that strategy is.
 

Blackadder1916

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
969
Points
1,060
It’s called triage. They would get the boot for other emergencies.

No, that's not triage. That's denial of service.

I could provide links (again . . . I've done so already in other threads) to a few of the provincial pandemic triage protocols that, while most have been updated to account for the experience of Covid-19, have been in existence long before this current situation. However my expectation is 1. you won't read them, 2. you wouldn't care about the distinctions even if you did read them and 3. you'll still be the same selfish arsehole.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,527
Points
1,140
We said that about the OG Covid, Delta, and now this. What's to say that another variant won't come up and we have this conversation again in 6 months?
Since COVID 19 (original flavour) made it's debut, we've had two well publicized variants. We've seen the slightly more contagious and somewhat deadlier DELTA and the highly contagious and considerably milder OMICRON, against which current vaccines are not as effective as originally thought. What we haven't seen yet is the highly contagious, deadly "hold my beer and watch this!" variant that may surface as the virus evolves to avoid the vaccines in use today.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
9,162
Points
1,160
Since COVID 19 (original flavour) made it's debut, we've had two well publicized variants. We've seen the slightly more contagious and somewhat deadlier DELTA and the highly contagious and considerably milder OMICRON, against which current vaccines are not as effective as originally thought. What we haven't seen yet is the highly contagious, deadly "hold my beer and watch this!" variant that may surface as the virus evolves to avoid the vaccines in use today.

Speak of the Devil....

Be Quiet Cut It Out GIF
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,217
Points
1,040
Britain intends to rescind Covid measures effective next thursday, so we'll soon have some data on how effective that strategy is.

Which really has nothing to do with calls for the PM to resign for being a lying bugger who totally didn't have parties at 10 Downing st during the full lockdowns, and is definitely not a distraction tactic to save his job (at the cost of British lives). Also, pay no attention to the brexit impacts crippling a number of export business, nothing to see there!
 

Bluebulldog

Full Member
Reaction score
54
Points
430
Not all trades need to be in tip top shape. I would argue many trades don’t need to be and future trades certainly won’t need to be (cyber operators for example). No need to release productive people on the basis of weight.

Thus endeth universality of service.

Good luck with that.

2.4 The principle of universality of service or "soldier first" principle holds that CAF members are liable to perform general military duties and common defence and security duties, not just the duties of their military occupation or occupational specification.

"Gee, I'd love to help, but I'm a lard a$$, maybe see if some of those jacked combat arms guys are around......"
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
663
Points
1,010
So it can only be political when reducing restrictions, but not the other way? But… if the executive was partying and ignoring restrictions, did they know something they weren’t sharing or were they just willing to take grave risks to laugh it up?
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,204
Points
1,060
So it can only be political when reducing restrictions, but not the other way? But… if the executive was partying and ignoring restrictions, did they know something they weren’t sharing or were they just willing to take grave risks to laugh it up?
Are you saying you trust what is coming out the UK government? Seems odd given your beliefs.

Or is their decision supporting your confirmation bias.

How does reopening support the hidden world agenda? Seems counterintuitive.

And what about Doug Ford and the Ontario plan to reopen? How does that fit into big pharma, big government and big media and their plan to keep this going?
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
663
Points
1,010
You’re so hostile Remius. What’s wrong?
 

btrudy

Jr. Member
Reaction score
104
Points
430
Thus endeth universality of service.

Good luck with that.

2.4 The principle of universality of service or "soldier first" principle holds that CAF members are liable to perform general military duties and common defence and security duties, not just the duties of their military occupation or occupational specification.

"Gee, I'd love to help, but I'm a lard a$$, maybe see if some of those jacked combat arms guys are around......"
Universality of service can be determined based upon the existing FORCE test. People were proposing adding an additional "no fat people" rule. As we can see, fat people can still meet universality of service as determined by the FORCE test.

I wouldn't be opposed to certain occupations that care a lot about fitness being allowed to determine their own fitness requirements (as determined by bone fide job requirements that can be above and beyond the requirements outlined for universality of service) and they can test themselves accordingly. But to propose kicking people out solely on the basis of aesthetics is rather asinine to me, especially considering that a lot of the occupations that would end up needlessly losing people when there isn't a bone fide job requirement above universality of service are also the ones who we're having some of the hardest times keeping people in.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,509
Points
940
Thus endeth universality of service.

Good luck with that.

2.4 The principle of universality of service or "soldier first" principle holds that CAF members are liable to perform general military duties and common defence and security duties, not just the duties of their military occupation or occupational specification.

"Gee, I'd love to help, but I'm a lard a$$, maybe see if some of those jacked combat arms guys are around......"

Lots of people that are obese in the medical definition can still serve well within the UoS requirements. I'm not seeing how we can draw a direction line between the 2; what is more important is Can they do their job IAW their Occ Specs can they pass the required fitness test can they deploy and perform in a theatre of ops, etc.

BMI is used in my trade medical requirements, but 'weight' and/or BMI aren't used solely to determine fitness for flight duties. As that is the case, I can't see making an argument for more stringent standards for Cyber, HRA, Supply....etc.

If you're suggesting that the Cbt Arms trades don't have any "not-quite-poster-child" physiques....I'm sure that myth can easily be debunked.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,509
Points
940
I wouldn't be opposed to certain occupations that care a lot about fitness being allowed to determine their own fitness requirements (as determined by bone fide job requirements that can be above and beyond the requirements outlined for universality of service) and they can test themselves accordingly.

SOF, SAR Tech, Fire Fighter....examples of trades that already have higher than standard fitness requirements/fitness test standards. There's no need to be opposed to it at all, it has been reality for....ever.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,204
Points
1,060
You’re so hostile Remius. What’s wrong?
Didn’t mean to intimidate you.

So any actual answers to those questions? Just trying to see how your new fondness with government decisions that you like, matches up with your belief system.

It’s pretty fascinating to be honest.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,217
Points
1,040
So it can only be political when reducing restrictions, but not the other way? But… if the executive was partying and ignoring restrictions, did they know something they weren’t sharing or were they just willing to take grave risks to laugh it up?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you aren't aware of the details.

For reference, their parties included when the entire country was in strict lockdown (including no contact outside your household). When Prince Philip died and the Queen was the only one in attendance at the state funeral due to COVID rules, you should probably not have booze up in the PM's house.

Massive arrogance on their part, but a lot of them are public school kids of the Eton type, so inbred into making up their own rules or otherwise don't feel bound by restrictions on the little people.

Weirdly all the tighttening of restrictions in the UK came from their scientist board recommendations; they've had zero info coming out on why they are loosening restrictions from the actual scientists, so yes, I'm sceptical this isn't political due to the total lack of data to support the move.

When absolute lying wankers in their own party are calling out the PM for being a lying wanker, not a lot of faith in their sudden announcement being anything but political. It'd be funny if they weren't such a disaster.
 
Top