The COVID-19 pandemic

[danbrotherston]

Even I am not in favour of true mandatory vaccination. Really, the police are going to arrest people and hold them down while they get their needle? That’s what truly mandatory vaccination would mean, by definition; anything less isn’t mandatory. It’s not a good look and it just isn’t appropriate.

That being said, I’d be totally fine with reserving Covid medical care to vaccinated people and people who are medically unable to be vaccinated. We can only go so far to protect people from themselves. It’s not really a question of ethics, but of what is possible; and it’s looking like providing all the medical care we want to provide just isn’t in the cards, so something has to go, and the obvious thing is extensive treatment for Covid patients who should have gotten themselves vaccinated.

"mandatory" vs. "not mandatory" suggests a dichotomy that doesn't exist in reality.

Everything is a grey scale. It is not physically "mandatory" to drive sober, but driving drunk carries extremely serious consequences, the least of which is jail time.

So mandatory is always a question of where on a spectrum. Temporary vaccine passports for restaurants being very low on the spectrum, mandatory school vaccines being higher.

Now, I'll admit that usually we use the word mandatory in a sensible way, driving sober is mandatory because we as a society don't consider it acceptable under any circumstances to drive drunk.

So, is it acceptable under any circumstances not to be vaccinated (outside of legitimate medical exemptions)? I'd say no.

So then it's a question of enforcement of that "mandatory" idea.

I certainly agree that literally holding people down and forcing a needle into them is unacceptable in our society, but there are so many other options that this suggestion is basically just a bad faith argument.

I'm strongly in favour of requiring vaccines for schools, at this point.

I'd be in favour of fines (you know, like, a healthcare premium) for those who don't get vaccinated.

I might even be in favour of a triage policy which limits unvaccinated people's access to hospital and ICU beds in times of triage.

All of these are forms of "mandatory", none of them are even remotely as inflammatory as the straw man argument of the gestapo forcing a needle into your arm.

[Lebronj23]

Even I am not in favour of true mandatory vaccination. Really, the police are going to arrest people and hold them down while they get their needle? That’s what truly mandatory vaccination would mean, by definition; anything less isn’t mandatory. It’s not a good look and it just isn’t appropriate.

That being said, I’d be totally fine with reserving Covid medical care to vaccinated people and people who are medically unable to be vaccinated. We can only go so far to protect people from themselves. It’s not really a question of ethics, but of what is possible; and it’s looking like providing all the medical care we want to provide just isn’t in the cards, so something has to go, and the obvious thing is extensive treatment for Covid patients who should have gotten themselves vaccinated.

"mandatory" vs. "not mandatory" suggests a dichotomy that doesn't exist in reality.

Everything is a grey scale. It is not physically "mandatory" to drive sober, but driving drunk carries extremely serious consequences, the least of which is jail time.

So mandatory is always a question of where on a spectrum. Temporary vaccine passports for restaurants being very low on the spectrum, mandatory school vaccines being higher.

Now, I'll admit that usually we use the word mandatory in a sensible way, driving sober is mandatory because we as a society don't consider it acceptable under any circumstances to drive drunk.

So, is it acceptable under any circumstances not to be vaccinated (outside of legitimate medical exemptions)? I'd say no.

So then it's a question of enforcement of that "mandatory" idea.

I certainly agree that literally holding people down and forcing a needle into them is unacceptable in our society, but there are so many other options that this suggestion is basically just a bad faith argument.

I'm strongly in favour of requiring vaccines for schools, at this point.

I'd be in favour of fines (you know, like, a healthcare premium) for those who don't get vaccinated.

I might even be in favour of a triage policy which limits unvaccinated people's access to hospital and ICU beds in times of triage.

All of these are forms of "mandatory", none of them are even remotely as inflammatory as the straw man argument of the gestapo forcing a needle into your arm.

By that logic though we would also have to treat people who smoke, are obese, engage in extreme sports, etc with fines and a triage policy because they made those choices, and they statistally bog down the health care system as well. No?

[danbrotherston]

"mandatory" vs. "not mandatory" suggests a dichotomy that doesn't exist in reality.

Everything is a grey scale. It is not physically "mandatory" to drive sober, but driving drunk carries extremely serious consequences, the least of which is jail time.

So mandatory is always a question of where on a spectrum. Temporary vaccine passports for restaurants being very low on the spectrum, mandatory school vaccines being higher.

Now, I'll admit that usually we use the word mandatory in a sensible way, driving sober is mandatory because we as a society don't consider it acceptable under any circumstances to drive drunk.

So, is it acceptable under any circumstances not to be vaccinated (outside of legitimate medical exemptions)? I'd say no.

So then it's a question of enforcement of that "mandatory" idea.

I certainly agree that literally holding people down and forcing a needle into them is unacceptable in our society, but there are so many other options that this suggestion is basically just a bad faith argument.

I'm strongly in favour of requiring vaccines for schools, at this point.

I'd be in favour of fines (you know, like, a healthcare premium) for those who don't get vaccinated.

I might even be in favour of a triage policy which limits unvaccinated people's access to hospital and ICU beds in times of triage.

All of these are forms of "mandatory", none of them are even remotely as inflammatory as the straw man argument of the gestapo forcing a needle into your arm.

By that logic though we would also have to treat people who smoke, are obese, engage in extreme sports, etc with fines and a triage policy because they made those choices, and they statistally bog down the health care system as well. No?

That's a false comparison, there is no public health emergency triage situation being caused by people who do extreme sports or are obese. "statistically bogging downt he health care system" isn't a real thing, on the other hand, our healthcare system is actually cancelling surgeries right now as a result of unvaccinated covid patients.

[jeffster]

By that logic though we would also have to treat people who smoke, are obese, engage in extreme sports, etc with fines and a triage policy because they made those choices, and they statistally bog down the health care system as well. No?

That's a false comparison, there is no public health emergency triage situation being caused by people who do extreme sports or are obese. "statistically bogging downt he health care system" isn't a real thing, on the other hand, our healthcare system is actually cancelling surgeries right now as a result of unvaccinated covid patients.

I don't think it's a false comparison. Rather, quite opposite. People who take care of their health -- exercise, eat healthy, don't smoke, drink moderately, are highly unlikely to end up in the hospital (let alone ICU) due to covid. At the same time, people who don't exercise, eat junk food all day, smoke regularly, drink heavy, quite often end up in the hospital, regardless of Covid, and vaccination status.

Right now, we have 319 people in the ICU due to Covid, 87 are fully vaccinated. Should we take into account their lifestyle if we penalize their other 232?

As it stands, about 75% of people in the ICU are not there because of Covid. Many times they are there due to lifestyle choices.

Bottom line, one can argue that those who smoke, those who are obese, those who take extreme risks, are the real reason why our hospitals are at the breaking point. Our system was never built to handle a pandemic. It was built to take care of those (as mentioned) and not much more.

Don't get me wrong, I think everyone should get vaccinated if they can. But everyone should have the right to decide if they want to get a medical procedure done, especially one with limited testing and limited success. My kid ended up in the hospital and almost died due to his vaccine (Moderna) -- luckily, at least for those under 30, Moderna won't be offered. But these vaccines aren't without risk. And for someone like my 19 year old, fit and healthy, doesn't do drug, alcohol or smoke, being unvaccinated would probably not have put him in the hospital. But that's not the narrative of our PHAC and PHU's -- as rarely do they encourage people to take care of their health.

To add: those who are fully vaccinated and hanging out with family and friends and spreading the disease and clogging our hospitals are also just a guilty as the unvaccinated. While a lot of the blame goes to our stupid politicians and healthcare experts with spreading falsehoods with the efficacy of the vaccine, we have known for some time that being vaccinated doesn't give you immunity, nor does it prevent you from becoming a carrier and spreading the virus to others -- so do we likewise treat those people the same as unvaccinated?

And I say that, because my family has sacrificed having friends over, from seeing family, etc. Yet I know some that are out and about every moment they have. They are just as much as a problem, 100%.

[danbrotherston]

That's a false comparison, there is no public health emergency triage situation being caused by people who do extreme sports or are obese. "statistically bogging downt he health care system" isn't a real thing, on the other hand, our healthcare system is actually cancelling surgeries right now as a result of unvaccinated covid patients.

I don't think it's a false comparison. Rather, quite opposite. People who take care of their health -- exercise, eat healthy, don't smoke, drink moderately, are highly unlikely to end up in the hospital (let alone ICU) due to covid. At the same time, people who don't exercise, eat junk food all day, smoke regularly, drink heavy, quite often end up in the hospital, regardless of Covid, and vaccination status.

Right now, we have 319 people in the ICU due to Covid, 87 are fully vaccinated. Should we take into account their lifestyle if we penalize their other 232?

As it stands, about 75% of people in the ICU are not there because of Covid. Many times they are there due to lifestyle choices.

Bottom line, one can argue that those who smoke, those who are obese, those who take extreme risks, are the real reason why our hospitals are at the breaking point. Our system was never built to handle a pandemic. It was built to take care of those (as mentioned) and not much more.

Don't get me wrong, I think everyone should get vaccinated if they can. But everyone should have the right to decide if they want to get a medical procedure done, especially one with limited testing and limited success. My kid ended up in the hospital and almost died due to his vaccine (Moderna) -- luckily, at least for those under 30, Moderna won't be offered. But these vaccines aren't without risk. And for someone like my 19 year old, fit and healthy, doesn't do drug, alcohol or smoke, being unvaccinated would probably not have put him in the hospital. But that's not the narrative of our PHAC and PHU's -- as rarely do they encourage people to take care of their health.

To add: those who are fully vaccinated and hanging out with family and friends and spreading the disease and clogging our hospitals are also just a guilty as the unvaccinated. While a lot of the blame goes to our stupid politicians and healthcare experts with spreading falsehoods with the efficacy of the vaccine, we have known for some time that being vaccinated doesn't give you immunity, nor does it prevent you from becoming a carrier and spreading the virus to others -- so do we likewise treat those people the same as unvaccinated?

And I say that, because my family has sacrificed having friends over, from seeing family, etc. Yet I know some that are out and about every moment they have. They are just as much as a problem, 100%.

Why do you feel it is a fair comparison.

When have we cancelled surgeries because of people who smoke?  We are cancelling surgeries because of covid. That is the ONLY reason.

You are welcome to disagree, and argue that we should triage exclusively on survivability if you want, or even that triage should always consider behaviour. That's an opinion. But to argue that it's the same thing as other lifestyle choices I feel is denying the situation.

I know our healthcare system is intentionally incapable of handling a pandemic like this (and that systemically we have chosen not to manage the situation to stabilize healthcare), but that doesn't change the fact that we are in a triage situation and are cancelling surgeries as a result of the pandemic.

It isn't the same situation as smoking or any other lifestyle choices.

The only examples where it is the same case, they DO in fact triage based on lifestyle choices. If I am a drinker, I won't be getting a liver transplant. If I'm a smoker, I won't be getting a lung transplant. In these cases, the availability of treatment is extremely limited, and lifestyle choices contribute to a massive number of people needing treatment for that particular malady, so in those select examples, treatment *IS* triaged based on behaviour.

As an aside, I'd also argue that anti-vaxxers are the only ones who are clearly making a personal choice which harms people. Others who are vaccinated might get sick because they're being reckless, but they might also get sick because their employer is being reckless, or because some anti-vaxxer is being reckless, there is no way to know which. But no Canadian has not had the opportunity to get vaccinated, failing to do so is a choice. (If you also want to triage the assholes who publicly documented themselves being reckless on the Mexico flight, be my guest).

[ijmorlan]

I certainly agree that literally holding people down and forcing a needle into them is unacceptable in our society, but there are so many other options that this suggestion is basically just a bad faith argument.

You should know me well enough by now to know I’m not saying anything in bad faith.

But that being said, you make a valid point: there is as you say a wide range of what “mandatory” could mean. For example, making everybody who isn’t vaccinated by a specific date subject to a $25 fine would be an extremely mild form of “mandatory” but since it would legally be a requirement it would count as mandatory.

In fact, for precisely that reason, it occurs to me we should be cautious of what a politician means by mandatory: do they just want to be able to say that they’re instituting mandatory vaccination? That $25 fine would do basically nothing for vaccination rates but would allow somebody to claim that they had made vaccination “mandatory”. I’d be more impressed with a politician who comes up with a way that actually works of increasing vaccination rates.

[ijmorlan]

(If you also want to triage the assholes who publicly documented themselves being reckless on the Mexico flight, be my guest).

Well, until those people figure out how to get back to Canada, they’re not going to be a problem for our health care system regardless!

[jamincan]

I don't think it's a false comparison. Rather, quite opposite. People who take care of their health -- exercise, eat healthy, don't smoke, drink moderately, are highly unlikely to end up in the hospital (let alone ICU) due to covid. At the same time, people who don't exercise, eat junk food all day, smoke regularly, drink heavy, quite often end up in the hospital, regardless of Covid, and vaccination status.

Right now, we have 319 people in the ICU due to Covid, 87 are fully vaccinated. Should we take into account their lifestyle if we penalize their other 232?

As it stands, about 75% of people in the ICU are not there because of Covid. Many times they are there due to lifestyle choices.

Bottom line, one can argue that those who smoke, those who are obese, those who take extreme risks, are the real reason why our hospitals are at the breaking point. Our system was never built to handle a pandemic. It was built to take care of those (as mentioned) and not much more.

Don't get me wrong, I think everyone should get vaccinated if they can. But everyone should have the right to decide if they want to get a medical procedure done, especially one with limited testing and limited success. My kid ended up in the hospital and almost died due to his vaccine (Moderna) -- luckily, at least for those under 30, Moderna won't be offered. But these vaccines aren't without risk. And for someone like my 19 year old, fit and healthy, doesn't do drug, alcohol or smoke, being unvaccinated would probably not have put him in the hospital. But that's not the narrative of our PHAC and PHU's -- as rarely do they encourage people to take care of their health.

To add: those who are fully vaccinated and hanging out with family and friends and spreading the disease and clogging our hospitals are also just a guilty as the unvaccinated. While a lot of the blame goes to our stupid politicians and healthcare experts with spreading falsehoods with the efficacy of the vaccine, we have known for some time that being vaccinated doesn't give you immunity, nor does it prevent you from becoming a carrier and spreading the virus to others -- so do we likewise treat those people the same as unvaccinated?

And I say that, because my family has sacrificed having friends over, from seeing family, etc. Yet I know some that are out and about every moment they have. They are just as much as a problem, 100%.

Why do you feel it is a fair comparison.

When have we cancelled surgeries because of people who smoke?  We are cancelling surgeries because of covid. That is the ONLY reason.

That's only because Covid is new. If we had been dealing with it for the past 50-100 years like smoking and obesity, we wouldn't be cancelling surgeries.

We have been living in a flu epidemic for the past 100 years. We accept a certain number of people being hospitalized and dying because of the flu. Our health care system is built to handle this. We don't discriminate based on flu vaccination status.

I don't think that the fact that Covid is a *new* virus should be sufficient reason to change how we treat people in our medical system.

[danbrotherston]

I certainly agree that literally holding people down and forcing a needle into them is unacceptable in our society, but there are so many other options that this suggestion is basically just a bad faith argument.

You should know me well enough by now to know I’m not saying anything in bad faith.

But that being said, you make a valid point: there is as you say a wide range of what “mandatory” could mean. For example, making everybody who isn’t vaccinated by a specific date subject to a $25 fine would be an extremely mild form of “mandatory” but since it would legally be a requirement it would count as mandatory.

In fact, for precisely that reason, it occurs to me we should be cautious of what a politician means by mandatory: do they just want to be able to say that they’re instituting mandatory vaccination? That $25 fine would do basically nothing for vaccination rates but would allow somebody to claim that they had made vaccination “mandatory”. I’d be more impressed with a politician who comes up with a way that actually works of increasing vaccination rates.

Fair point, I don't think you're making a bad faith argument, perhaps it's better to say it's a straw man argument...but maybe then I'm accusing you of being fooled by it.

Either way, I think we're on the same page.

FWIW...I wouldn't discount a 25 dollar fine, I think that would influence a lot of less...erm...proudly stupid anti-vaxxers.  I'm actually more worried about the politician who makes the vaccine "mandatory" with exceptions including "I don't want to"...you know, kinda like has already happened.

(If you also want to triage the assholes who publicly documented themselves being reckless on the Mexico flight, be my guest).

Well, until those people figure out how to get back to Canada, they’re not going to be a problem for our health care system regardless!   

Yeah, I must admit I am enjoying a significant amount of schadenfreude about those folks. Apparently a significant portion of them now have COVID to boot.

[danbrotherston]

Why do you feel it is a fair comparison.

When have we cancelled surgeries because of people who smoke?  We are cancelling surgeries because of covid. That is the ONLY reason.

That's only because Covid is new. If we had been dealing with it for the past 50-100 years like smoking and obesity, we wouldn't be cancelling surgeries.

We have been living in a flu epidemic for the past 100 years. We accept a certain number of people being hospitalized and dying because of the flu. Our health care system is built to handle this. We don't discriminate based on flu vaccination status.

I don't think that the fact that Covid is a *new* virus should be sufficient reason to change how we treat people in our medical system.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting? This is a novel situation, how do you think that isn't justification to change how we treat people?

And COVID isn't new, we have a vaccine for it, that's the whole point. People are making a choice to cause our healthcare system to collapse. *I* and people I love shouldn't suffer for their choices.

This isn't like other forms of discrimination, the failure to vaccinate is a DIRECT cause of this suffering.

[jeffster]

Current 7-day Covid-19 cases per 100k

• Eastern Ontario Health Unit 918.5
• Lambton Public Health 811.7
• City of Hamilton Public Health Services 728.2
• York Region Public Health 727.3
• Halton Region Public Health 717.2
• Peel Public Health 716.8
• Durham Region Health Department 690.5
• Toronto Public Health 689.6
• Middlesex-London Health Unit 686.7

• Region of Waterloo Public Health and Emergency Services 674.4

• Windsor-Essex County Health Unit 659.8
• Hastings Prince Edward Public Health 617.2
• Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit 609.9
• Ottawa Public Health 607.2
• Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Public Health 605.9
• Brant County Health Unit 590.2
• Haldimand-Norfolk Health Unit 584.7
• Niagara Region Public Health 570.0
• Porcupine Health Unit 541.7
• Northwestern Health Unit 540.6
• Kingston, Frontenac and Lennox & Addington Public Health 535.9
• Southwestern Public Health 534.8
• Chatham-Kent Public Health 519.2
• Peterborough Public Health 517.0
• Huron Perth Public Health 507.3
• Leeds, Grenville & Lanark District Health Unit 493.7
• Public Health Sudbury & Districts 492.4
• Renfrew County and District Health Unit 478.7
• Grey Bruce Health Unit 478.0
• Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge District Health Unit 471.1
• Thunder Bay District Health Unit 397.4
• Algoma Public Health 373.1
• Timiskaming Health Unit 357.9
• North Bay Parry Sound District Health Unit 307.5

• TOTAL ONTARIO 652.0

Current stats:

Vaccinated people are about 1.2x more likely to contract Covid than non-vaccinated
Unvaccinated people are 2x more likely to be admitted into the hospital
Unvaccinated people are 7x more likely to be admitted into the ICU

Currently, approximately 91% of Ontarian's aged 12 and up are vaccinate. That was a number I didn't think we'd achieve.

Older Zoomers and Millennials are least likely to get vaccinated - and this same group, with university or college education, are less likely to be vaccinated than those with high school or less.

In many 6 Nations reserves, less than 50% of the eligible population is vaccinated. They don't trust the government. This would also apply to many different immigrant groups. There seems to be two reason for immigrants: many don't trust government and many simply aren't aware of what is happening, and/or how to go about doing something about it.

[jeffster]

You should know me well enough by now to know I’m not saying anything in bad faith.

But that being said, you make a valid point: there is as you say a wide range of what “mandatory” could mean. For example, making everybody who isn’t vaccinated by a specific date subject to a $25 fine would be an extremely mild form of “mandatory” but since it would legally be a requirement it would count as mandatory.

In fact, for precisely that reason, it occurs to me we should be cautious of what a politician means by mandatory: do they just want to be able to say that they’re instituting mandatory vaccination? That $25 fine would do basically nothing for vaccination rates but would allow somebody to claim that they had made vaccination “mandatory”. I’d be more impressed with a politician who comes up with a way that actually works of increasing vaccination rates.

Fair point, I don't think you're making a bad faith argument, perhaps it's better to say it's a straw man argument...but maybe then I'm accusing you of being fooled by it.

Either way, I think we're on the same page.

FWIW...I wouldn't discount a 25 dollar fine, I think that would influence a lot of less...erm...proudly stupid anti-vaxxers.  I'm actually more worried about the politician who makes the vaccine "mandatory" with exceptions including "I don't want to"...you know, kinda like has already happened.

Well, until those people figure out how to get back to Canada, they’re not going to be a problem for our health care system regardless!   

Yeah, I must admit I am enjoying a significant amount of schadenfreude about those folks. Apparently a significant portion of them now have COVID to boot.

If we implement fines, who do you think gets hit hard the quickest? Here is a quick rundown of the unvaccinated..

1) Native Canadians -- they don't trust the government, especially Trudeau, as his father and their party had a huge part in the residential schools.  Not to mention their slow action when dealing with compensation.
2) New(ish) Canadians -- again, some trust issues. But also they may not understand the system. I said newish, because my 'aunt in law' was sitting at a McDonalds back in September, got approached by management to show vaccination proof, and she had zero clue what they were talking about. It's an issue -- gov't and PHU's suck at getting the information out.
3) Homeless and those with addiction issues, and mental health issues. To be frank, PHU doesn't care about these people and neither does most of society (except people like Dan) -- but either way, they shouldn't have to pay a fine if they need help. Gov't needs to do a better job at connecting with these folks, and ensure that the police are no where present.
4) Anti-vax folks. There are a lot of these freaks. That said, many of these so-called anti-vax people, showing up on your TV screen during dinner, are vaxxed. They talk the talk, but don't do the walk. They vax to keep their job, to see their parents, etc. I know a couple of them and it's like "my job forced me to get the vax". Oh-righty-then.
5) Anti-vax holdouts. I have seen several of these people...they all had one thing in common - they were in university.

6) The real anti-vax folks. You can picture them in your head. There seem to be a lot of them. But I believe they make up a very small percent of people that were unvaccinated. Maybe 1 or 2%.

So for those points 1) you will not be able to force a vaccine on a native Canadian 2) you need to communicate and make it easier for these folks to get their shot and to earn some trust with them. Absolutely no police contact.  3) Should be self-explanatory. Find them, offer blankets and shoes and clean clothing, free meal and a warm drink -- and no police around 4) These anti-vax crown -- big bark, no bite. They'll do the right thing. 5) Universities need to communicate better with these students and 6) You can't change them.

EDIT: Need to proofread .... sorry folks.

[jamincan]

Vaccinated people are about 1.2x more likely to contract Covid than non-vaccinated
Unvaccinated people are 2x more likely to be admitted into the hospital
Unvaccinated people are 7x more likely to be admitted into the ICU

You had raised the question earlier on why it seems vaccinated people are more likely to contract it than unvaccinated, and I think it's a hard question to answer as there are too many variables that call into question the premise (are testing rates equal for vaccinated and unvaccinated people, for example), but it occurs to me that with the severity of omicron and the long lines of people in massive vaccination centres, that it could potentially be spreading there. I know when I got vaccinated, I was waiting in line for well over an hour, for example. This is purely speculation, but the move to the hockey hub model at Pinebush seems like a good one with this in mind.

[ac3r]

Vaccinated people are about 1.2x more likely to contract Covid than non-vaccinated

It'd be interesting to understand why this is. Is it because we've barred unvaccinated people from most parts of society now, so they don't have much interaction with the public outside of friends/essential shopping? Regardless, although vaccinated are more likely to catch this virus, if we're staying out of the hospitals it's working exactly as intended...although the unvaccinated will double down on their rhetoric and say "see, the vaccine doesn't work".

Also, the poor vaccination rates in the Indigenous community is alarming but not surprising. I'm Indigenous myself and maybe it's because most fellow Indigenous people I know are urban and university or college educated, but we're all vaccinated and understand the necessity for it. But so many others do, indeed, have poor faith in the government. Our leaders (Indigenous leaders, not the provincial/federal politicians) need to be doing more to spread the message out there. It's particularly bad up in Northern Canada - Nunavut is having a serious outbreak right now due to the close living quarters and longer winter nights which are keeping more people indoors. Considering we tend to have poorer health than whites or other people of colour, we should be doing everything we can to reach people.

[danbrotherston]

Vaccinated people are about 1.2x more likely to contract Covid than non-vaccinated

It'd be interesting to understand why this is. Is it because we've barred unvaccinated people from most parts of society now, so they don't have much interaction with the public outside of friends/essential shopping? Regardless, although vaccinated are more likely to catch this virus, if we're staying out of the hospitals it's working exactly as intended...although the unvaccinated will double down on their rhetoric and say "see, the vaccine doesn't work".

Also, the poor vaccination rates in the Indigenous community is alarming but not surprising. I'm Indigenous myself and maybe it's because most fellow Indigenous people I know are urban and university or college educated, but we're all vaccinated and understand the necessity for it. But so many others do, indeed, have poor faith in the government. Our leaders (Indigenous leaders, not the provincial/federal politicians) need to be doing more to spread the message out there. It's particularly bad up in Northern Canada - Nunavut is having a serious outbreak right now due to the close living quarters and longer winter nights which are keeping more people indoors. Considering we tend to have poorer health than whites or other people of colour, we should be doing everything we can to reach people.

What parts of society exactly are unvaxxed people barred from? There are a handful of workplaces, and restaurants, bars, and gyms (which are now closed to everyone) where unvaxxed people were barred from.

That isn't "most" of society by any measure.