Right in the centre - Listening to the information - Part 2


By Ken Waddell

Neepawa Banner & Press

Here is another batch of comments and information that I have received in response to a request I put out two weeks ago for readers to share their experiences with health care and especially with COVID-19

• I agree that the casualty numbers, as presented by the government, are misleading and manipulative. Even more concerning (for me, anyway) is the trend in the reporting of these numbers. First, let me say that I mean no disrespect to those who have lost a loved one during this time– for any reason. My issue is not with the loss, it is with the deceitful reporting of the net cause.

While there appears to be a net 99 additional deaths over last year, we must remember a couple of things:

     - The annual death rate can vary from year to year for a vast number of reasons. A nasty winter or a bad flu season can change the numbers. A nasty flu season(s) is really akin to what we have here;

     - A net difference of 99 deaths above 11,120 is statistically irrelevant (0.8 per cent). From the beginning, the Doctor and Head Nurse have said that there is no “excess morbidity” in the context of annual deaths;

     - Calling these deaths “due to” COVID-19 is a poor misrepresentation of the truth. I corrected them on this and since then they have changed the wording to “deaths of people with” COVID-19. I can’t take credit for it, but at least that was a more positive admission of fact. You’ll notice that there is no distinction in the reporting of deaths in persons with great ages or underlying health issues. Apparently, no one dies of old age anymore and there is no identification of relevant co-morbidities. Not to be insensitive, but we expect a certain number of deaths among young and/or otherwise healthy people– it’s a fact of life. Same goes that we expect a certain number of deaths among the elderly. A death of a man in his 100s is not shocking– and certainly not lockdown-worthy;

     - There is no clear distinction or accounting for deaths that have occurred due to inadequate care in personal care homes and other places where the residents were unnecessarily put at risk because of poor on-site management and care or government policy lacking in oversight and control and died as a result. Same goes for patients who were exposed to C0VID-19 while already in hospital. Collectively, these deaths are literally blood on the hands of our government. So, the question is: Were there at least 99 such cases? I’ll bet there were– or more!


• My wife and I separately can visit my mother-in-law, but if we take her out to our place, she would have to self isolate for 14 days. However, if I take her to the dentist in Minnedosa, where she will contact at least two total strangers, she can return to the facility without self isolating. Makes no sense.


• I’m writing in response to the article you wrote. I have a very positive story to share in relation to my parents-in-law’s battle with COVID-19. Dad-in-law, at 80 years old, and mom-in-law, at 83, are happy survivors! How I wish that my fellow Canadians and others around the world could have the freedom and great privilege to care for their elderly loved ones like we do here in Mexico, where we live. When my in-laws became sick with COVID-19 symptoms, one of my sisters-in-law immediately offered to be their full time nurse. We got oxygen tanks around and administered the medications our doctor prescribed. When dehydration became an issue, the red cross workers came to in-laws’ house to help with IVs for a small fee. Total home care was possible in a loving, relaxing family atmosphere. I believe that the fearless, loving care was a major factor in their rapid recovery. Above all, we praise our heavenly Father who answered ours prayers for healing.