I am in total agreement with two things Dai
says. We will not be able to get rid of Covid , and it is way
too soon to give up on masking, vaccinations, quarantines,
contact tracing, etc. But the two points are connected.
To the first point: the only human disease we have been able to eradicate is small pox. (coincidentally the first vaccine we had).
We have learned to live with Polio, measles,
whooping cough, and all other infectious diseases. The trick is
to learn to live with them, rather than to die from them.
Polio is no less scary than it was in 1950,
but we are not so scared of it because we got it down to a few
hundred cases a year worldwide.
Measles is more infectious than Covid-19 and
occasionally there are outbreaks. What we do is vaccinate,
require vaccinations in high-risk contexts (schools),
quarantine, contact-trace etc.
Our first task with every infectious disease
is to get the level of incidence to a trickle.
So I agree that we will have to figure out how to live with Covid. But given that we know how to prevent its spread and what to do when there is an outbreak, it is hard to see why there is a question about how we should learn to live with it. We should do the same thing we have done that drove child mortality from 300 per thousand to .6 in the 20th century: prevention through vaccines and public health measures. And, if we find it, treatment.
Like they say about communism, this well-known
solution has not been tried with Covid anywhere that I am aware
of. Countries that went hard at it with public health measures
like New Zealand and Australia, failed to vaccinate on time.
Countries that vaccinated with dispatch, stopped pushing
vaccines too soon and relaxed public health measures (UK,
Israel, Iceland, USA).
We know perfectly well what to do to learn to live with Covid: hit it hard with public health measures and vaccinate all but a fraction of the population. But we seem to lack the political will to do it.
"We probably would still have polio in this country if we had the
kind of false information that's being spread now." Dr. Fauci.
Martin
PS.The case is strikingly different from
influenza. It is a much less serious disease and the vaccines
we've had for it have not been very effective. So it has been
hard to get get enough of the population vaccinated. But what
with the advent of MRNA vaccines, we might get better vaccines
soon. And, as Cynthia points our, the Covid pandemic has made
masks and other public health measures more acceptable. So there
is hope there too.
I have been following this discussion with interest. This is a hard tine and emotions are running high. Some of our discussion has been focused on coarse grained points about the infectiousness of the delta variant. And some of our discussion has been focused on very fine grained questions about the particular circumstances that individuals are in.
Perhaps a better way to focus ourselves on the salient issue is to ask ourselves this: what does the end of the pandemic emergency look like to you?
The vast majority of public health experts I’ve heard from believe that Covid will be endemic. If eradication is genuinely off the table, then it is important to sk ourselves how we envision living in a Covid world from here on out.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting that this is the moment to return to a pre-Covid set of behavioural standards. I’m in support of a vaccine mandate for everyone present on the SFU campuses. And I’m willing to accept that other restrictions and compromises may be necessary in the short term.
But, in the end, unless we are willing to live in a cycle of emergencies in perpetuity, we need to grapple with this: what is an acceptable level of Covid risk?
I don’t think our conversation so far has genuinely dealt with this question. And it’s a fraught question for obvious reasons, not least of which is that public health considerations must abstract from some facts about individuals. Nevertheless, this is almost certainly the question that we are going to have to answer. So it’s worth our consideration.
DH
***************Dr. Dai HeideSenior LecturerDept. of PhilosophySimon Fraser University
On Aug 11, 2021, at 11:40 PM, Steve DiPaola <sdipaola@sfu.ca> wrote:
I didn't mean to offend, I guess I was affected by your comparison and got a bit emotional in my response. We are talking about children. Still facts are facts. As I am following the data closely on all parts of this, and now seeing the significant uptick in young children that can not be vaccinated, getting COVID from ANY source ( see ** below) and thinking now of SFU faculty and students with young children in their households, is a significant issue. I DO NOT think the situation is different here than the US or anywhere else - the science is the same. Children are getting severe COVID at an increasing rate. The only difference is the statistical amounts and where a place is on a time curve. Young un-vaccinated children will get covid and some severely here just like anywhere, just 'currently' less of them. But we protect our children from known harms, this is one. Many of us following the data, were exactly worried about this and now it is here. Some of this is even worse because we learned recently that those who are fully vaccinated, while having probability of going to ICU or dying is well under 1% ( lower for those under 60) , their chances of getting COVID are way higher (5% - 20%) and the way way more scary new finding - ** that fully vaccinated people who get COVID can transmit COVID to others ( like our young children). So a fully vaccinated faculty/student/staff can come into SFU, get Covid and give it to their children (a child that does not have the protection from severe illness like their parent). The best way to protect that situation is mandatory masks. The 2nd best way of preventing that (that is because it has longer time curve, so 1st way must be in place) is bringing down the viral load in a population over time (it takes about 2 months or more to be fully protected via vaccination) by getting the everyone vaccinated, including like almost all companies ( except Apple for some reason) by mandating it at work and institutions and government offices ( and restaurant chains ... and countries).
Me personally: Surely I would be for an SFU employee/student mask mandate and an SFU employee/student vaccine mandate. But for the later - I would amend the mandate to 1 vaccine to enter school in Sept and 2 vaccines by Nov. I would do this because right now, both international students (or Candians who were abroad over the summer) are now coming back to Canada (many on planes this week) and possibly could not get a vaccine where they came from - so I still would allow them to start school with 1 vaccine and of course the 2nd typically is 7 weeks later ( + 2 more weeks for it to take full effect) so by Nov.
I reiterate though, that the only difference with our situation and the US south - well we are both now in a situation where unvaccinated children will get severe Covid from others at increasing rates - just in the US south that number and where they are on a time curve is higher.
- Prof: Sch of Interactive Arts & Technology (SIAT);- Past Director: Cognitive Science Program;- - Simon Fraser University - - -research site: ivizlab.sfu.caart work site: www.dipaola.org/art/our book on: AI and Cognitive Virtual Characters
At Simon Fraser University, we live and work on the unceded traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples of the xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish), and Səl̓ílwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) Nations.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 10:12 PM James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca> wrote:
Steve, I must say that I find your comment somewhat intemperate, and scarcely apropos to my last. I have been very clearly pro-vaccination. Our public health situation in BC, and in Canada generally, thank goodness, differs very significantly from those that obtain in the US states you mention. I am not aware of evidence that any Covid variant has attained vaccine escape. In this, it seems, I am in agreement with our public health authorities. I stand by the thought-experiment at the end of my previous contribution to the current discussion. And I certainly would be grateful for reasoned responses to it. Best wishes, JDF
From: Steve DiPaola <sdipaola@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 11, 2021 9:01:46 PM
To: James Fleming
Cc: Martin Hahn; Lucas Herrenbrueck; academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: freedom and masking ethicsJames what are you comparing? Your arguments seem weak given current/upcoming realities. Did you know that in Florida and Texas, which simply might be a precursor to here and the world, especially if using your and others suggestions of freedom ( free choice not to mask or vaccine), now have cancelled major surgeries (which will deeply harm others) and more so, there is a exponential uptick of ICU and deaths among children under 12. This is directly because of the supposed individual freedom of the unvaccinated / unmasked. So freedom to kill or cause severe illness in other people's children does not seem even remotely close to what you have labelled freedom to be "unhygienic " or this is like the flu now. It instead is one of the most extreme examples of needing to be regulated for public good, similar to other regulations we already have in other areas less harmful. (ie. the extreme example of killing other people's children through your recklessness, right up there or higher than, say heavy drinking and driving near a grade school) . "Then is not now" you say - we had no Delta then ( or the next variant which will also be caused by the unvaccinated and the heavy reproduction of the virus). It is worse now - children that can not get vaccinated are dying. I will repeat, children that have no way to get vaccinated are dying in ever increasing numbers, because of the covid spread of others. I do not want students returning to SFU (without mandates) to be part of killing their younger siblings and other peoples children. Just news search: children spike covid, and read any one of the many articles here are some excerpts:
CNN this week : ( "Florida children's hospitals are overwhelmed with...")
In Florida, which has the second-highest rate of new cases per capita after Louisiana, children's hospitals and staff are "overwhelmed," said Dr. Aileen Marty, an infectious disease expert at Florida International University.
"The numbers of cases in our hospitals in children and our children's hospitals are completely overwhelmed," Marty told CNN's Jim Sciutto on Friday evening."Our pediatricians, the nursing, the staff are exhausted, and the children are suffering. And it is absolutely devastating ... our children are very much affected. We've never seen numbers like this before," she said. ...
In Texas, ... "We have not seen kids pile into pediatric ICUs across the South like we're seeing right now," Dr. Peter Hotez, at Baylor College of Medicine, told CNN on Friday. ... Returning to schools safely is possible if mitigation efforts, including wearing masks, are implemented, said Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who heads the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"The places where you see kids in the hospital, the places where you see footage of kids in the hospital, are all places that are not taking mitigation strategies to keep our children safe," Walensky said Friday.
The CDC recommends that everyone -- students, teachers, staff and visitors -- wear masks in schools.NBC News this week: ("Kids sick with Covid are filling up children's hospitals in areas seeing spikes"):
Children’s hospitals in areas seeing a surge in Covid cases are experiencing the same pattern: More children are coming in with Covid symptoms just ahead of the start of the school year. Bed shortages and overworked doctors and nurses in children’s hospitals are becoming commonplace. ...
At Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston, Covid positivity rates have risen from around 3 percent to above 10 percent among kids.
In one Hospital New Orleans Hospital, ... 13 children with severe COVID including six under the age of 2. Four children are in the ICU, including a 3-month-old boy, a 23-month-old girl, an 8-year-old girl and a 17-year-old boy.
"Children in Louisiana have died of Covid and more unfortunately will die," said Dr. John Vanchiere, a pediatric infectious disease specialist, as he stood next to Bel Edwards at a news conference last week. "This is not a time for politics, for fighting or threatening lawsuits about masks. Masks save lives. And if you're a pro-life Louisiana resident like I am, wear your mask."
-steve
- Prof: Sch of Interactive Arts & Technology (SIAT);- Past Director: Cognitive Science Program;- - Simon Fraser University - - -research site: ivizlab.sfu.caart work site: www.dipaola.org/art/our book on: AI and Cognitive Virtual Characters
At Simon Fraser University, we live and work on the unceded traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples of the xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish), and Səl̓ílwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) Nations.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 7:54 PM James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca> wrote:
Hi Martin, indeed: And that was precisely the case 18 months ago. Viz.: preventing death and illness by wearing a piece of cloth--over one's face, while participating in society, which one tried not to do.
But then is not now. Due to vaccination, which I strongly support (and with which I and mine have eagerly complied).
Of course one can always argue that, in its residuum, a free society is always and by definition unhygienic and irresponsible.
But--if one prefers that kind of society--one needs in my opinion to be alive to the point at which such arguments become specious.
Every winter, for example, we are beset by a wave of influenza that threatens a small but significant portion of our people with grievous suffering and even death. We have reason to think that a universal and eternal masking mandate would mitigate flu.
Should we therefore implement one?
JDF
Professor, Department of English
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby/Vancouver,
British Columbia,
Canada.
A grateful mind / By owing owes not
-- Paradise Lost
From: Martin Hahn <mhahn@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 10, 2021 9:54 AM
To: Lucas Herrenbrueck; James Fleming
Cc: academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: freedom and masking ethicsAmen to that. There is one thing that James has right, though. Covid19 is not restricting our freedoms. We are choosing to restrict them in response to the pandemic.
But we make such choices routinely, I am not allowed to drive on the left, to do so without a seatbelt, to throw objects out of the widow as I drive (especially lit cigarettes) Some of these restrictions are purely paternalistic as they only prevent harm to the would-be violator (seatbelt laws), some for public safety (lit cigarettes), some for coordination (driving on the right) some to solve prisoner's dilemma situations where the rational decision of each individual would lead to a worse outcome (littering laws). These are choices, not circumstances.
Covid vaccine and mask mandates are partly paternalistic, but mostly public safety decisions. But there is nothing wrong with restricting freedoms for a good reason. Every law and regulation does this. The idea that a law would be unconstitutional simply because it restricts our freedom will not fly. To complete the argument, James needs to show that the public good that comes from these mandates is not worth the restriction on freedom. When the good is preventing death and illness and the cost wearing a piece of cloth for a few months, or getting a shot which also protects you, I just don't see the argument.
Like Lucas, I don't know what SFU is allowed to do, but am pretty sure the Ministry of Health could allow it to do what needs to be done, or even make it do this.
Martin
On 8/10/2021 9:26 AM, Lucas Herrenbrueck wrote:
Hi James,
Thanks for getting such an important discussion started!
I leave the legal question to others. David MacAlister and Steve DiPaola's emails have me convinced that a university mask mandate would be perfectly legal. But if you're not sure, James, you can sue and then we'll find out.
I want to talk about the ethics of a mask mandate here. (I'm not an ethics expert, but maybe you guys want to chime in?) Nobody will disagree that a mask mandate is a restriction on freedom. I'll also be the first to concede that seeing each other's faces is quite an important component of human interaction, and it definitely sucks not to have that (indoors) right now.
But the fact is that "freedom" is a lot of things, and the total amount of freedom is a finite resource. (As an economist, I do claim to be an expert on finite resources.) COVID-19 has reduced the total amount of freedom available to us, just like climate change has reduced the total amount of the ice pack in our glaciers. We want the freedom not to wear masks, we want the freedom to travel internationally, we want the freedom to see elderly relatives in care homes, and we want the freedom to go to work/class each week without being forced to isolate after a positive test (which we would have to do even if we feel fine, which a good portion of the infected indeed do).
We simply can't have all of these things right now.
So then the question is how to apportion the remaining freedom. What is the "fair" way of doing that? James says "get vaccinated and mask up if you want, but don't force others to". It's a good ethical argument. But my preferred ethical argument would be: let's try to apportion the loss of freedom as equally as we can. This means "prioritize immunocompromised people's ability to participate in society, prioritize people being able to travel to see loved ones, prioritize children to get in-person schooling, prioritize nobody needing to isolate for 2 weeks at a random time in the middle of the semester" - roughly in that order - and then prioritize "respect peoples' personal comfort zone around vaccinations and masking".
And right now, the epidemiology (not to mention the data) of Delta-COVID is screaming at us: we can't have all. We'll be lucky if we can have the first three or four even with universal vaccination and masking.
And, finally, if the law doesn't line up with the best combination of ethics and reality we can afford right now, let's change the damn law.
Lucas
PS: Just saw Nilima's email who makes a similar point about going for the "least invasive measure". Totally agree.
From: James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 10, 2021 8:44
To: Eirikur Palsson
Cc: academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableI would be interested to see the SFU policy that says "no nakedness." If there is one, I doubt it would survive a Charter challenge. (The convention of wearing clothes is a diffuse anthropological norm, not a legal mandate.)
Meanwhile, and more importantly: the notion that wearing a mask just to participate in the university is the same as wearing a shirt just to enter Shoppers Drug Mart--this I think is the kind of notion of which we need to beware.
Let's take a step back. Covid-19 had the potential to kill perhaps 1% of the world's population (~80 million people). A horrendous prospect. It was in order to prevent the latter that we accepted unprecedented restrictions on our bodies and our lives. Now, however, we are coming toward the completion of a vaccination program that is, by all accounts, extremely effective against this virus. Many of the hygienic practices people have taken on over the last 18 months, including widespread masking, will probably continue for a long time on an inertial basis. But I don't think there is a strong case for continuing to make them mandatory.
And, in any case--to come back to my original point--I question whether the university can even do that, on its own authority.
Compare a public library. Bonnie Henry says "no more masks." But the librarian, out of an abundance of caution, etc., says you still need a mask to enter the library. Somebody refuses to comply. Can the librarian bar the door? I doubt it. JDF
From: Eirikur Palsson <epalsson@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 9, 2021 10:19:35 PM
To: James Fleming
Cc: academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableYet you don’t seem to have any objection with the university requiring everyone to cover “sensitive” parts of their bodies. It seems banning people from walking around naked would also be a clear restriction of free movement and _expression_ (mostly for prudish reasons).
The bottom line is no society is completely free as lots of restriction are put on individuals to “protect” the rest of society, whether it be for health reasons, religious reasons or puritanical reasons.Even stores have policies that state “No shirt, no shoes, no service” or restaurants requiring ties and suits.
Eirikur
On Aug 9, 2021, at 8:14 PM, James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca> wrote:
Very good! But I wd answer: An obligation to cover one's face, not in specific contexts, but in general social movement, is a clear restriction of free movement and _expression_. Probably (as per my previous), governments, even those committed to the protection and conservation of such freedoms, can nonetheless validly restrict or suspend them under certain circumstances. But only governments can.
By that token: As long as government is saying "you guys don't have to wear masks all the time," I question whether SFU (e.g.) can legally say "you guys have to wear masks all the time." If not, then there is little point in calling on SFU to say that. JDF
From: Steve DiPaola <sdipaola@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 9, 2021 7:22:05 PM
To: James Fleming
Cc: Christopher Pavsek; academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableSurely you have a point - but my general pushback is your term "constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms" as opposed to basic university safety rules and regulations. Can you smoke within a classroom - no - why because of a safety regulation? Must you both be trained and use safety goggles and PPE in a univ. chemistry lab - yes - why because of a safety regulation. How different is it to be required to wear a mask during a pandemic to protect those around you? How different is a vaccine requirement than the current requirement for MMR (measles ...) vaccines to attend school? These are safety rules not "constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms" in my view - ones that are very similar to what we already require throughout the university. Surely requiring you to not smoke indoors because when you do dangerous secondhand smoke can move through the air and affect others, is so similar to you must wear a mask so COVID virus particles do not move through the air and affect others inside a building - they are about the same in my view. I do not see these requested requirements much different from what we do for safety now - except of course that we need to enact them quickly and temporarily for this X-months covid event.
- Prof: Sch of Interactive Arts & Technology (SIAT);- Past Director: Cognitive Science Program;- - Simon Fraser University - - -research site: ivizlab.sfu.caart work site: www.dipaola.org/art/our book on: AI and Cognitive Virtual Characters
At Simon Fraser University, we live and work on the unceded traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples of the xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish), and Səl̓ílwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) Nations.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 6:50 PM James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca> wrote:
A legal question (with preamble). Over the last 18 months, our society has broadly accepted restrictions on basic rights (notably of free movement, and association) that have, quite clearly, been constitutionally extraordinary. We have, I think, tacitly agreed that desperate times have called for desperate measures. To be sure, it has been disturbing that governments at both national and sub-national levels have temporarily suspended constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms *without,* as far as I am aware, any attempt to articulate a legislative basis for so doing. (Compare the War Measures Act in October 1970.) Nonetheless, they probably could have, if they had wanted to. Which is to say that the restrictions were legal, if they were, only and precisely because they were imposed by government.
Is it possible that a sub-governmental institution, such as a university, could legally impose, on its own authority, restrictions of constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms?
I struggle to see how.
JD Fleming
James Dougal Fleming
Professor, Department of English
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby/Vancouver,
British Columbia,
Canada.
A grateful mind / By owing owes not
-- Paradise Lost
From: Christopher Pavsek <cpavsek@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 9, 2021 2:39:22 PM
To: academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableHi All—I thought I’d share this. UBC’s fac. association has taken this stance:
https://www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/member_notice/message-president-update/
The salient point, in Rumsfeldian language: “In light of the known knowns, known unknowns, and the unknown unknowns, and in the absence of any risk analysis brought forward by the University, we now believe that a robustly precautionary approach is most appropriate. We therefore call upon UBC to adopt an indoor mask mandate in all its spaces and a vaccine mandate for all its employees and students (subject to the normal legal exemptions) in advance of the September reopening. This course of action will not only do the most to alleviate well-founded anxiety but will also allow the most secure planning of teaching and research activities.”
So it would seem that pressure around this issue in the province continues to rise.
Best,Chris
On Aug 4, 2021, at 2:25 PM, Martin Hahn <mhahn@sfu.ca> wrote:
That line: " you protect yourself by getting vaccinated" drives me bats! It shows such a profound misunderstanding of what vaccines are for in an epidemic.
How short is our memory? When Covid vaccines were being developed, epidemiologists were saying that anything over 60% effective would be really good. Why? For personal protection from disease, that is not much better than a coin-toss. But it is enough to do what vaccines really need to do: bring down the R0 - the rate of transmission
Protecting your kid from measles is not the main reason to get them vaxxed, it's to stop the spread of an incredibly contagious disease which, like polio before it, does not have a devastating effect on most people who get it, but is deadly to enough that letting it spread would be disastrous.
With Covid getting more transmissible, the percentage of fully vaccinated population needed to bring it under control keeps going up. Canada has some of the highest vaccination rates in the world. But it is not enough.
Making vaccines mandatory is probably too draconian, but the interim measure is to make the life of the unvaccinated not as free as of those who get the shot. Want to go to a cafe? Work at a certain company? Go to university? Get vaccinated. Even Andrew Coyne, surely a man with stellar libertarian credentials, thinks that is the way to go. US universities and companies are going that way and so are European countries.
But BC universities? Well, they are currently behind in their understanding, and more afraid of public backlash, not just than US universities and European governments. We have now fallen behind poultry processors in Arkansas!
Embarrassing.
Martin
On 8/4/2021 12:51 PM, Lyn Bartram wrote:
I asked a question in senate about the weakness of the plan, and the answer was “ you protect yourself by getting vaccinated”. But of course this is not the only answer - you protect others by getting vaccinated. I agree with universal masking. It may be the only achievable solution - except for residences. And a number of schools are already mandating it. It’s the least e should do.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 4, 2021, at 12:39 PM, Cynthia Patton <cindy_patton@sfu.ca> wrote:
Can I offer the simplicity of universal masking? The US CDC and others are back on that plate for medium term solutions.
Yes, something to work around in the context of lecturing, etc. but a few "Madonna" microphones (a mere $70 at your local London Drugs) could go some distance to mitigating the muffling. Masking would also provide a substantial degree of safety in small group activities.
Even with the small "break through" rate of fully vaccinate people, our students' age cohort are at very high risk because they tend not to realize they are sick unless they're very sick, and then they afraid to affect their grades by taking a day at home. Also given the relatively high number of our students who have their own (unvaccinated, off at day care) kiddies, I am really, really nervous about the kid-young adult vectors putting (grannie-aged) me in harms way.
I, too, wish I had confidence in our ventilation systems. But given that Dr. Bonnie and Health Canada denied that coronaviruses are airborne for a very very long time, all of our Universities are way behind any possibility of mitigating that aspect of the problem.
In long, we're far from out of the woods.
From: Bernhard Riecke <ber1@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 4, 2021 8:22:13 AM
To: Sam Black; Behraad Bahreyni; Lyn Bartram; Baharak Yousefi
Cc: Christopher Pavsek; academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableAn increasing amount of universities in Canada and beyond are requiring vaccinations (at least when living in dorms), e.g.,https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/universities-grappling-with-whether-to-require-mandatory-vaccines-for-students & https://www.fierceeducation.com/best-practices/many-universities-requiring-students-to-get-vaccinated
so it can't be completely impossible. It's indeed a tricky balance between "personal freedom" and "safety", but certainly worth pushing for a safe work environment (I'm already thinking of bringing my own HEPA air purifier to lectures to protect students and myself... something that imho SFU should more seriously consider providing)
cheers
Bernhard
On 2021-08-03 15:24, Sam Black wrote:
I too was puzzled by the response Chris received,
"there is no requirement for proof of immunization under the University Act, making it impossible for the university to establish such a mandate"
For the record, there is a requirement for proof of immunization -- but not for covid immunization -- for incoming students in many Canadian Medical schools, including UBC and the University of Ottawa:
http://www.calendar.ubc.ca/vancouver/index.cfm?tree=12,209,374,340
https://med.uottawa.ca/undergraduate/immunization-requirements
The University Act neither requires, nor prohibits schools from demanding proof of immunization. Under the University Act it is permitted for schools to demand proof of immunization: as UBC's Medical School has done. So I believe that the question of whether SFU should demand proof of immunization for covid should be debated on its merits by the SFU community. I very much doubt that debate is pre-empted by the jurisdictional argument Chris was given.
Best,
Sam
Sam Black
Assoc. Prof. Philosophy, SFU
I respectfully acknowledge that SFU is on the unceded ancestral and traditional territories of the səl̓ilw̓ətaʔɬ (Tsleil-Waututh), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish), xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam) and kʷikʷəƛ̓əm (Kwikwetlem) Nations.
From: Behraad Bahreyni <bba19@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 3, 2021 2:27:59 PM
To: Lyn Bartram; Baharak Yousefi
Cc: Christopher Pavsek; academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: RE: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableHere is another article on the same subject:__________________
Associate Professor, School of Mechatronic Systems Engineering
Associate Member, School of Engineering Science
SFU Simon Fraser University
Tel: +1 (778) 782-8694
Fax: +1 (778) 782-7514
Web: http://sense.fas.sfu.ca/
Burnaby campus: ASB 8855, 8888 University Dr, Burnaby, BC, CANADA V5A 1S6From: Lyn Bartram <lyn@sfu.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 2:20 PM
To: Baharak Yousefi <byousefi@sfu.ca>
Cc: Christopher Pavsek <cpavsek@sfu.ca>; academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableI think there is a lot of bafflegab here. We know other Canadian universities are requiring more stringent ,measures. And I foresee a lawsuit where someone pits the safe workplace requirement against being made to go back to campus.Sent from my iPad
On Aug 3, 2021, at 2:14 PM, Baharak Yousefi <byousefi@sfu.ca> wrote:
Hi Chris,
Thanks very much for following up on this and sharing the information with us.
What the Covid-19 Response Team at SFU is saying re the impossibility of a mandate seems to contradict what Dr. Henry said on July 27th:
“ . . . And universities are looking at what are the measures they need to take in their setting to make it as safe as possible . . . that may mean if you’re living in residence that you need to have proof of immunization.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It1afVleAqA
Part about post sec is at about 42:12 to 43:12.Thanks again,Baharak
_____________Baharak Yousefi (she/her)
Librarian for History, International Studies, Graduate Liberal Studies, & Political ScienceBelzberg Library | Simon Fraser University | 515 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, B.C. V6B 1G4Occupied Xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish) & Səl̓ílwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) Territories | #LandBack
From: Christopher Pavsek <cpavsek@sfu.ca>
Sent: August 3, 2021 1:54 PM
To: Baharak Yousefi
Cc: academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableHello--I was curious about this and queried the president's office/VPA. I specifically asked if the University or the Province had made the decision to forego a vaccine mandate.I got a response from the Covid-19 Response Team at SFU.This is what they said:"Regarding mandatory vaccinations, there is no requirement for proof of immunization under the University Act, making it impossible for the university to establish such a mandate, which would also be difficult to enforce. There are no universities in British Columbia currently requiring proof of immunization. All post-secondary institutions continue to monitor the advice of the province and will take the Provincial Health Officer’s direction on this."My reading of this is that the university could mandate more than the province is recommending--masks, or distancing, or other measures perhaps?--but not vaccines.I thought this might clarify things a bit.Chris
On Jul 29, 2021, at 11:28 AM, Baharak Yousefi <byousefi@sfu.ca> wrote:Hi Chris,My understanding is that yesterday Dr. Henry said it is up to each university/college to set their standards above and beyond provincial health orders.I didn't hear this myself, but here's the link to Liza Yuzda's reporting.Best,Baharak_________________Baharak Yousefi (she/her)
Librarian for History, International Studies, Graduate Liberal Studies, & Political ScienceBelzberg Library | Simon Fraser University | 515 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, B.C. V6B 1G4Occupied Xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish) & Səl̓ílwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) Territories | #LandBack
From: Christopher Pavsek <cpavsek@sfu.ca>
Sent: July 29, 2021 11:11 AM
To: academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: on another point: : Without mandatory vaccines, more campus shutdowns are inevitableRegarding frustration with the university's lack of a vaccine requirement: my understanding, which might be incorrect, is that SFU must follow provincial direction on any vaccine mandate. That direction comes from the Ministry of Health and the Min. of Adv. Education, or whatever it's called these days.Correct me if I'm wrong.So if faculty and staff want to pressure the university to implement a vaccine requirement, pressure would have to be applied to the university and to the relevant levels of government.Such requirements are common in the US.BestChris
On Jul 29, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Lyn Bartram <lyn@sfu.ca> wrote:Dr. Lyn Bartram
Professor, School of Interactive Arts and TechnologyDirector, Vancouver Institute of Visual AnalyticsSimon Fraser University | SRYC
250 – 13450 102nd Avenue, Surrey, B.C. V3T 0A3
v 778 782 7439 f 778 782 9422 m 604 908 9954http://www.sfu.uca/~lyn | Skype: drlynb<OutlookEmoji-15753042296078dab3b27-0b5a-41a0-b6d6-ebe6e14c0dc9.png>**************************************
Christopher Pavsek, Ph.D., MRM-Planning
Associate Professor of Film
Simon Fraser University
149 West Hastings Street
Vancouver, BC V6B 1H4
Canada
cpavsek@sfu.ca
I respectfully acknowledge that I work on the unceded traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations.**************************************
Christopher Pavsek, Ph.D., MRM-Planning
Associate Professor of Film
Simon Fraser University
149 West Hastings Street
Vancouver, BC V6B 1H4
Canada
cpavsek@sfu.ca
I respectfully acknowledge that I work on the unceded traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations.
--
Bernhard Riecke, PhD
Professor | School of Interactive Arts & Technology (SIAT)
Director of iSpace Lab | TEDxSFU license holder & speaker coach
My TEDx talk: "Could Virtual Reality make us more human?"
Simon Fraser University Surrey | 250 - 13450 102 Avenue, Surrey, BC V3T 0A3, Canada
Office: 2822 (Podium 2) | iSpaceLab.com/Riecke | SIAT homepage
E-mail: ber1@sfu.ca | skype: thebernie