Home Blog Page 224

Driving high is a thrill you don’t want to chase

By
Peak Web
-
0
shot of a highway or a busy road
PHOTO: Amirul Anirban / The Peak

By: Nercya Kalino, Staff Writer

Content warning: mentions of car accidents

No parent, guardian, friend, partner, or sibling wants to receive a car accident phone call. People die horrifically from car accidents, and if not, there are typically still traumatic repercussions for everyone involved. Driving high might cost someone’s life — if not the driver, it could be the passenger, or another road user. I hate that this is even a conversation we’re having, but we need to address it. 

Driving is a privileged activity regardless of how many years of experience you have. Driving high is unjustifiable — there’s no reason why you should get behind the wheel and put others at risk for your own decisions. It’s an inconsiderate action towards your own safety and those that share the road with you. Some might justify their behaviour by arguing that driving high is “safer” than driving drunk, but drivers under the influence of marijuana are still almost twice as likely to be in a fatal crash as sober drivers.

UBC’s Faculty of Medicine conducted a study at four hospitals in BC that found blood THC levels above 2 nanograms/ml in twice as many injured drivers between 2013–2020. An article about the study stated that while low THC concentrations don’t always indicate impairment, there’s a big risk with higher THC levels. The number of injured drivers with blood THC levels above 5 nanograms/ml, which is considered enough for significant impairment, rose from 1.1 to 3.5 percent after legalization.

To contextualize this with federal law under Bill C-46, it’s the nanograms that matter when it comes to the legality of driving after using cannabis. Between 2–5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood within two hours of driving is a summary conviction. Having a blood alcohol concentration of over “50 milligrams (mg) of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, combined with a THC level greater than 2.5 ng per ml of blood” is a hybrid offense which leads to a $1,000 fine, and up to 10 years in prison for repeat offenders. 

This is something to think about when you decide to drive high. One brief moment of poor decision making isn’t worth the DUI, or the lives it could take. Many of us come from countries where cannabis is looked down upon, and in Canada it’s recognized for its legality. However, if you drive high, be aware that your life is not just your own — think about all those that would be hurt if something happened to you.  

That road accident phone call could be about you if you’re not cautious enough. Just because other people are driving high, doesn’t mean you need to parade along. Don’t get in the car if someone is driving high, because they might cost you your life. Driving high, or being present with someone driving high, could take something from you. Set safety boundaries for yourself, and your future self with thank you.

The ownership mess of AI-generated art

By
Peak Web
-
0
pixelated sketchy illustration of a face
ILLUSTRATION: Youngin Cho / The Peak

By: Daniel Salcedo Rubio, Features Editor

Artificial intelligence (AI) is slowly being adapted into our everyday lives. We see it used for relatively simple things, like the Netflix recommendation engine, digital assistants like Siri and Cortana, and image generators. These generators use programming called “deep learning” — the gist is that the software mimics a biological brain. Its developer gives the AI a set of images to learn patterns from, so if you give it a set of landscape photos, it will eventually recognize what sky and mountains are, and use this knowledge to create entirely new images. While this might sound groundbreaking, the current state of image generator AIs is controversial as it puts existing human artists at risk.

I like to consider myself an artist on the side, and I’m protective of the pieces I’ve created. I know this isn’t an isolated concern: look at what happened to artist Tuesday Bassen. Fashion retailer Zara allegedly stole her artwork for their merchandise and profited off her designs. Artwork theft and copyright infringement will likely only get worse with increasing use of AI. Artists have legal ownership over the work they create. Image generators like DALL-E-2 can’t violate this right, no matter how innovative they may be.

Since AIs need a data set to learn and recognize patterns, one major worry artists have is that their artwork is being used for AI learning, raising concerns of copyright infringement. Yes, artists use similar imitation strategies to learn and polish their skills. I myself have a Pinterest account full of reference material from other artists. However, there’s a huge difference between someone referencing other artists’ work to build their own skills, and an AI mixing-and-matching copyrighted material to create a “new” piece of art. Developers must ensure the data set they’re using for deep learning is free from copyright. 

How can we define the ownership of an AI-created piece? Is the person who gives the program its prompts the owner of this “new” creation? Should ownership go to the developer who built the AI? Or, should there be a type of communal ownership by the artists whose work was used for AI learning? There’s technically no right answer to any of these questions; each person involved is a key player in the creation of AI art. And it’s precisely because there’s no right answer that AI image generator users and developers should tread carefully in this new arena. 

Defining ownership is a required step before existing artwork can be used for financial gain. As it stands right now, image generators pose a significant threat to the livelihood of photographers, artists, and anyone involved in image generation. Businesses can use these open image generators to create free content for their own financial gain. In a world where you can create whatever image you can possibly imagine, what’s the financial justification to hire an artist? Not only that, but this also hurts the artists whose work was used to develop the AI. Their personal style which likely took years to create is now in the hands of corporate entities.

AI image generators are a fascinating new development. They’re an entire new tool for artists to work with, and will eventually open new opportunities for the artistic community. But, as is the case with many technological developments, image generators are moving at a faster pace than what society can regulate. We need a distinct  legal definition of ownership for AI generated artwork, and full transparency of the data sets used to develop the AI as soon as possible.

Gaining a new sense of self through therapy

By
Features
-
0
Photo of a building with a painting on the side asking "How are you, really?"
Don’t wait for life to get bad to ask for help.

by Hannah Kazemi

In July 2019, I had the single worst emotional breakdown I have ever experienced, driving down the highway at 2:00 a.m. on the way back from the drive-in movie theatre. I was crying about the zoo.

Yes, you read that correctly. The Greater Vancouver Zoo led to my big breakdown moment. The one that happens to movie characters when they go through something really awful. Usually, this is followed by the character deciding to overhaul their life by going to yoga classes or something. Except, I didn’t choose yoga; I chose therapy and it was the best decision I’ve ever made.

I was always the “mature for my age” kid in elementary and high school. I’m also the oldest daughter in a family with divorced parents, which meant I took on a lot of responsibility from a young age. I learned to always put others before myself, even if it meant I suffered or lacked support in return. But I didn’t quite realize this until I reached a turning point.

All of the stress, anxiety, and weight that came with being the oldest daughter culminated in a loud, messy, uncontrollable release of emotion. All because I said I liked the zoo.

We were driving past it when I made a comment about how I loved going there when I was younger and looking at all of the different animals. My mom was surprised when I said that, despite being the one who had taken my sisters and me to the zoo when we were young. I never shared anything with her when I was a kid — she didn’t know when I was sad, when I was happy, or even when I was feeling sick because I kept it all inside. I didn’t want to be a burden, especially having two younger sisters that also required care and attention. I took on the role of mom #2. It was my mom’s shock and genuine confusion at my statement about loving the zoo as a kid that made me realize just how deeply I was hurting, and that I needed to do something about it. I had been keeping everything inside for years of my life, and eventually, all of that sadness and anger and frustration manifested as stress and anxiety.

So I started to go to therapy and it helped immensely. Talking to an unbiased third party whose job is to help you talk through your problems actually works, in case you were still doubtful.

I went to a few sessions over the summer before I started university and worked through some of the things that were bothering and affecting me the most. Summer came to an end and I started my first semester at SFU feeling like I was a new person, like I had a sense of control and an understanding of myself that I had never felt before. I felt like I was being heard: I had a safe space where I could speak freely and openly about my life and feelings without fear of judgement. I also finally realized why I had increasingly been experiencing anxiety as I got older. I figured out that the stomach aches I had been getting during moments of extreme stress, or times when I felt like I had to hide my feelings and emotions, were linked to that anxiety. I had been making myself physically sick.

I stopped booking sessions when I felt well-equipped to handle bouts of anxiety and insecurity on my own using the mental tools I gained from therapy. I was okay for a long time after that: I became more comfortable being vulnerable and expressing when something was wrong or making me feel a certain way. As a result, my relationships with my family strengthened, I became closer with my friends, and opened myself up to new relationships. The anxiety-induced stomach aches started to dissipate, and most importantly, I felt like I had finally started to heal the child inside of me who hadn’t felt heard, safe, or understood for so many years. I now pride myself on my ability to be open and honest about my feelings with others, and therapy is to thank for that.

Almost three years later, sometime during Spring 2022, I started to feel myself slip into old patterns that I thought I had broken. For a while, I couldn’t quite place what I was feeling, just that I was finding it harder to be myself again in certain spaces and to figure out what I needed emotionally. I started isolating myself from my family, shutting down emotionally, and dismissing comments about how I “seemed off” lately. I felt like I could truly be myself only when I was out of the house and around my friends or boyfriend. I was still feeling fulfilled in most of my relationships and I didn’t doubt my ability to eventually bounce back, but I quickly realized that I required a little bit of extra support to navigate the emotional changes. The tools and skills I learned three years ago became more difficult to put into action. I decided to go back to therapy.

I knew from the get–go that I wouldn’t need many sessions because I identified the problem before it got too difficult to manage, but the fact that I advocated for my own needs made me really proud. I don’t think I would have been able to come to this conclusion had I not gone to therapy three years before. Recognizing when you need help takes a lot of self-awareness and reflection, which can be difficult when your mind is consumed with other things.

I just started going again recently. I reached out to someone I felt comfortable sharing with, and let them know that I was feeling the need to go back. They pointed me in the direction of SFU’s Health and Counselling services and I started the intake process. I’ve only had one session since that initial ask for help, but it has been the single most beneficial session that I’ve had since I first went to therapy. I’m booked in for more sessions and am really excited to keep taking steps to better myself and feel more confident and secure in my relationships.

I think that everyone should go to therapy at some point, even if they don’t think they need it — it’s changed the way I view myself, and it’s certainly changed my relationship with my family and other people around me. You don’t need something to be “bad” or “wrong” in your life to make the decision to talk to someone about it. Rather than feeling like you’ve lost yourself, try therapy — you might gain something from it.

Responsible ways to donate used clothing

By
Peak Web
-
0
Person browsing colorful clothing on a clothing rack
PHOTO: Becca McHaffie / Unsplash

By: Petra Chase, Arts & Culture Editor

Thrifting has long been co-opted by large commercial entities like Value Village and become increasingly unaffordable for low-income people. Instead of donating to large corporations, here are a few ways to donate or trade used clothing.

Donate
Especially as temperatures dip and winter clothing is urgently needed for houseless and low-income folks, one of the best ways to help is by donating to organizations that are built to provide resources to those in need.

The Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre is a trans-inclusive organization which is always accepting toiletries, bedding, and clothing donations for at-risk women and non-binary adults. Check their wishlist page for an updated list of desired donations and drop-in hours. Items include sanitary pads, underwear, winter items, and bedding.

WISH is another organization accepting clothing and hygiene items, with a specified list on their website. This is a trans-inclusive drop-in centre for Vancouver’s street-based sex workers, and they request that their items are clean, in good condition, and preferably donated in plastic bags. Masks are encouraged and staff wear masks when receiving donations.

Miscellany Finds is a second-hand store and Black-owned social enterprise, which means they invest their profits back into their community for social and environmental change. They also lead programs that empower women and youth to transition into the workforce. Located on Commercial Drive, they welcome clothing and household donations. They require donations to be made in cardboard and plastic bins, and quarantine items for three days before handling. Find more information on their website.

Join your local Buy Nothing group
A Buy Nothing is a social movement and online gift-economy community where people give away and receive items free-of-cost within a neighborhood proximity. It’s usually hosted on Facebook, where you can look up “Buy Nothing” followed by the name of your neighbourhood. Give away almost anything by posting your item(s) in the group and arranging a pick-up or drop-off through private messages. Most of the time, these exchanges will be contactless porch pick-ups or drop-offs, but you can also arrange a meet-up in a public place if that feels safer. What I love about Buy Nothing is the community; if someone is in-need of something specific, they can make a request in the group and get personalized offers from neighbours. As a member, I’ve also received generous gifts, such as a flourishing monstera plant and a puzzle. If your neighborhood doesn’t have a Buy Nothing group, consider starting one!

Participate in a clothing exchange
A clothing swap is a great way to give away and receive clothing, all for free. Most clothing swaps that I have participated in have been hosted by community members in their backyards, and arranged in Facebook community groups. Ignited Mothers Coalition is hosting two clothing exchanges on November 18 and December 16 in North Vancouver. They are an organization built to support mothers and caregivers, with events that aim to build a safe support network. All leftover clothing from the events will be donated to MSUC Thrift Shop.

If we want to progress more as a society, we should ditch individualism

By
Peak Web
-
0
someone wearing a mask against a dark background
PHOTO: engin akyurt / Unsplash

By: Nercya Kalino, Staff Writer

Individualism, at its best, asks people to lead a self-reliant life and function within society as their own entity. It appeals to those who seek achievements and personal growth in various aspects of life. However, in Africa, the idea of individualism is not as widespread. Back at home, we believe in ubuntu instead, which means “to exist is to coexist.”

When I first moved to Canada to pursue education, I was met with this idea of individualistic output. There was a clear class separation made more apparent by differences in politics, gender, and access to resources. This wasn’t something I felt willing to adapt to, but contrary to life back home, it seemed necessary.

It’s become apparent in western society that our views separating individuals and social groups do not benefit us enough. We all saw COVID-19 impact everyone and anyone, with no exceptions. Many felt alone and powerless while our governments tried to control the outbreak. There were consequences ranging from job losses and small businesses shutting down, to people being victims of hate crimes. All these outcomes, I believe, were rooted in the idea of individualism. Take our current COVID-19 response for example, where masking has become the responsibility of individuals — rather than a collective effort to try and reduce community transmission. 

This is where I see African culture thriving more than western society, more specifically, Canada. While some African countries are embracing collectivism in the midst of wars, xenophobia, and COVID-19, Canada is still overlooking the importance of addressing our collective suffering as a community.

In Africa, we would rather suffer or rise up together than leave people behind. In North America, people are still fighting against racial discrimination, not just for Black lives but for all people of colour that sought a life in North America. One might think these are problems our government needs to resolve, not the people. While I agree, what sort of government could embody the idea of ubuntu without being guided towards it by public opinion? We know democratic governments are supposed to be for the people, by the people, but to what extent has this actually been practiced over the past three years? The pandemic perpetuated the dystopia of individualism, as some countries banned specific citizens from entering, rather than implementing a collective approach to disease control. Others willingly offered support to those left stranded in their country. 

It may seem like a small feat to question whether individualism, on a personal and social level, actually helps communities reach great heights. But, with the extent of global conflict nowadays, governments need to take a step back from individualistic leadership. Currently, it’s apparent we need to guide those few people with control and good intentions. How we decipher these leaders from the rest will be the hardest quest to accomplish, as we must first re-evaluate why leaders with the ubuntu mentality need to exist. 

Civil organizations voice concerns on Canada’s Bill C-26 for cybersecurity

By
News
-
0
This photo is of a security camera built-into a lamppost outside
PHOTO: Michał Jakubowski / Unsplash

By: Pranjali J Mann, News Writer

Canada’s Bill C-26 on cybersecurity is raising concerns of privacy and lack of government accountability among citizens and civil organizations. Seven of the major associations of cybersecurity including Canadian Civil Liberties Association, OpenMedia, and Ligue des droits et libertés have written a letter underlining the worries. The joint open letter was addressed to the Canadian minister of public safety, Marco E. L. Mendicino. 

The federal bill was introduced on June 14, 2022. According to the Government of Canada’s website, “This proposed legislation will protect Canadians and bolster cybersecurity across the financial, telecommunications, energy, and transportation sectors.” Moreover, it aimed to “add security as a policy objective,” which gives the government authority to monitor Canadian companies’ activity and suppliers. 

With this bill, if the government suspects a threat of cyberattacks or manipulation it can force telecommunication service providers to remove or suspend services to said person. This bill also requires the service providers to form security plans.  

Considering cyberspace as “Canada’s critical infrastructure,” the legislation is meant to provide increased security for both private individuals and companies. This offers the government additional authority to “mandate any necessary action to secure Canada’s telecommunications system.”

However, the civil society organizations have stated this bill “grants the government sweeping new powers not only over vast swathes of the Canadian economy, but also to intrude on the private lives of Canadians.” 

To find out more about the bill and issues around it, The Peak interviewed SFU’s expert on cybersecurity, Darren Byler. Describing rationale behind the legislation, Byler noted, “It is ostensibly the government’s attempts to control new forms of spam and cyberattacks that are happening in Canadian society.” He also flagged the upward trend in spam and hacking attacks, on both individuals and corporations over the last decade. 

When asked if the timing of the bill had anything to do with cybersecurity concerns around the globe, he said, “That is a real concern I suppose. And that’s part of what this bill is also meant to address.” He elaborated, “The rise of sort of disinformation and misinformation that we see from national level actors like Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and others, I think [those] are at a national level a source of concern, especially when we know that some of those state actors are attempting to influence democratic processes — elections and so on. We’ve seen that in the case of the United States.” 

Byler explained that under the existing systems, cyberspace was monitored by broad privacy mechanisms, but this legislation enables the government “greater access to information, they’ll be able to track who’s doing the misinformation, who’s sending the ransomware,” said Byler. “It would untie their hands [and allow them] to intervene and do investigative work at scale,” said Byler. 

He also signaled the lack of transparency in Canadian legislation. He explained, “It basically is promoting a kind of secrecy, opacity for the government, so that citizens won’t know what the government knows and what it is doing. That brings a lot of risk to individuals and companies because they simply don’t know what’s being looked at all the time and their property is basically being invaded.”

He added, “There’s also the possibility that in the way that the bill is framed, that services could just be cut off to individuals in a sort of arbitrary way without individuals and companies, without them knowing.” 

In terms of possible loopholes in the bill, Byler noted the need for public advising and participation of societal groups to work together. He stated, “I think the framing that enables this to accentuate and intensify secrecy that it should be removed and instead it should be much more transparent in terms of like this is what the government is collecting. How it’s making decisions around [ . . . ] what constitutes harm and needs to be terminated as a service.” 

Acknowledging this as a challenging situation and stance for the government, he said, “I think building it in a way that’s democratic and allows input from society and at the very minimum, [and] transparency as to what’s being done would be the best way forward.”  

The Peak reached out to the ministry of public safety office, but didn’t receive a response by the publication deadline.

The ABCs of Fact Checking and Media Bias

By
Features
-
0
Photo of protesters marching, one of them is holding a sign that says "I can't believe we're marching for facts"

by Daniel Salcedo Rubio

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote an article about the importance of scientific communications and novel steps STEM creators have taken towards scientific dissemination. Well, today my dear reader, I’ve come to you with the ABCs of fact-checking. Because no matter how much informative content is posted on social media, Auntie Grace will probably keep sharing those sketchy links.

Question the Source

First things first, before even opening the article, make sure it’s coming from a serious news outlet, blog, or webpage. You have no idea the number of people (and news outlets) that share articles from satirical publications like The Onion or The Beaverton thinking it’s actually a serious piece.

Okay, so it’s not an article from The Onion, what next? We now have to ensure the publisher is a reputable source. This one is easier said than done. There are a couple of methodologies that might help you determine if a source is reliable or credible. Five Ws, SMART check, or the CRAAP test can all be useful tools. Some of the most important aspects to review in all three methodologies are:

  • Who is the author? Do they have a good or bad reputation?
  • What’s the purpose of this source? What’s the intent behind it?
  • Is it objective? Do they tend to use facts and studies, or do they write with emotion?
  • Is it current? Has this been disproven already?
  • Who is being interviewed? What ideas are being platformed?

This should help you build a strong case for or against the source. Before moving on, I want to give some notes when checking the author of the piece. Let’s remember everyone has some bias no matter how objective we try to be: it’s part of being a human. Getting to know who is writing the article or maybe even reading some of their previous articles can help you understand their point of view. Ask yourself questions. Is the author being objective? What’s their background? Is there a clear conflict of interest? Read the “About the Author” section if it’s available.

I don’t fully endorse that you put all your trust in Bias Charts, using them will definitely help you better understand and criticize the publisher. Bias Charts are a helpful tool to understand the tendency of a publisher or a media outlet towards a specific point of view or political affiliation, hence the name. Bias Charts are also made by humans, so bias in Bias Charts can still happen (I know, the irony). The organizations behind Bias Charts should be transparent on their methodology to rate and score each media outlet. There are a couple that I personally like to use, but my absolute favorite is the Ad Fontes chart. They are very open about the methodology behind each score they give.

Question the Article itself

Okay, first filter down, here’s where we actually begin to work on the article Auntie Grace sent us. Ask yourself if there’s anything too outrageous to be true and pay special attention to the headlines. Remember, people tend to only share articles after only reading the title, so it stands to reason that fake news will have impactful headlines made to catch peoples’ attention.

Ask yourself — Is the title written so it will get clicks, likes, or shares? If it is, then that’s your first red flag. Headlines can be exaggerated so people feel the need to share it, but usually, there’s nothing to sustain such claims. That being said, don’t be so quick as to dismiss an article for an outrageous headline, there are some pieces that are so impactful there’s no other way to write about them. Can you discern which headline is real and which one is fake?:

If you guessed that the spinach story was the fake one and the gorilla story was true, well, you would be in the wrong. Headlines are a good way to start, just don’t make any final assumptions solely based on them.

Now we move into the article’s content. Carefully read every section, and begin your questioning:

  • Are they making any hard affirmations?
  • Do they have any sources to support their claims? If so, which sources are they using?
  • Are they reputable?
  • Are they current?

This might seem like a never-ending story: to review one article you must check its sources, and it goes on and on. And while that might be slightly true, sources that support hard affirmations should come from official communications or organizations that have the capacity to give hard data. Official sources can be Health Canada, WHO, or The Government of Canada. Other reputable sources that aren’t official or government related could be The Associate Press (AP), Reuters, or the Wall Street Journal. Finally, we can also trust publishers like Nature, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, or the European Scientific Journal when it comes to science-related content. While all these sources are overall trustworthy, they aren’t exempt from bias either, so also read and use them with a critical eye. One tip I can give you is to cross-examine your sources. News articles are bound to be covered by multiple media outlets, are they all saying the same thing? Are they unclear with their conclusions or have they convoluted the facts?

You can also find support on third-party fact checkers, though I recommend using only those whose processes are well documented and available to the public. AP Fact Check is my personal favourite and I would actually encourage you to use it to make your life a bit easier.

Question Yourself (and maybe the person who shared it too)

Finally, you should always question yourself as well. We have talked a lot about bias and reputability in the media, but we are also subject to judging articles as truthful or fake based on our own personal bias. Our perception of the world is deeply affected by our own biases, and while analyzing them is well beyond the scope of this article, ask yourself (I know, you probably hate me by this point for making you question everything): Why am I making this judgement? Is my opinion supported in facts or in feelings? If the latter, what makes me feel this way? Is there something that would make me change my mind?

Fact-checking is not an easy thing to do, it takes time and effort to view the information we receive with a critical eye. We’ll be the next generation to lead society, so it’s important we acquire and train these skills. I hope that this short-and-sweet guide can help you better discern between accurate information and fake news.

How health officials have botched COVID-19 messaging

By
Features
-
0
Animation of a the COVID-19 virus.

By Olivia Visser, Opinions Editor

Everyone wants the pandemic to be over, but we can’t will the virus away. We won’t bring an end to COVID-19 by pretending cases and hospitalizations are low when, in reality, they’re rising again. I believe this is due in part to our government’s mixed messaging about the virus.

Something shifted the first time mask mandates were lifted. You know, when indoor mask regulations were lifted briefly in July 2021 before shortly returning again in August 2021. It’s hard to pinpoint what exactly changed after that, but I think a lot of people felt frustrated by being jerked around with false assurances about the state of the pandemic. Some felt they couldn’t trust our government. In a way, they were right.

Globally and nationally, COVID-19 messaging had a confusing start. The World Health Organization (WHO) initially claimed mask use “by healthy individuals could induce a false sense of security.” The statement came even after China, Vietnam, and other countries recommended the use of face masks as a preventive measure. This left many people in the west unsure about the efficacy of mask-wearing.

Fast forward one month, and Dr. Henry was telling the public that masks are “something that we should get used to.” We know that even just wearing a cloth mask can protect against 50–70% of fine respiratory droplets, which was how COVID-19 was primarily thought to spread in early 2020. Our COVID-19 knowledge changes and evolves alongside medical research, but health officials should have exercised more caution before impulsively reassuring the public with rapidly shifting data. These early pieces of information have stayed within the realm of public understanding, with many people tuning out new information. Health officials are supposed to be providing the public with new information, but instead they have only caused confusion and a false sense of security.

It took the WHO over two years to quietly recognize that airborne infection of COVID-19 was possible, despite being served epidemiology reports with proof of this beforehand. This delayed acknowledgement caused an inadequate response to implement measures to combat an airborne threat.

Many have exhaustively discussed masking’s importance since the start of the pandemic. Underlying most arguments is an emphasis on protecting those most vulnerable to serious illness and death from COVID-19: disabled and critically ill people, elderly people, and otherwise immunocompromised people. At the start of the pandemic, a healthy 12-year-old elementary schooler might have minimal symptoms, but they have the potential to spread the illness to those who risk death or complications from infection.

Capital Daily and The Burnaby Beacon conducted a joint investigation into claims made by Dr. Henry about COVID-19 transmission in schools. They found significant disparities between Henry’s public statements and her knowledge about the virus and pandemic conditions. Starting in September 2020, Henry began assuring the public that “the risk of transmission at schools was very low.” Even in April 2021, she maintained her position that “school transmission itself is not a major driver of community transmission.”

While teachers with lived experience expressed concern over her theory, BC did little to curb infection rates in schools. Some fell back on the faulty argument that even if kids do get sick, most of them probably won’t get severely ill, and that’s not to mention the increasing evidence of COVID-19 potentially wreaking havoc on children’s health. Further, COVID-19 often results in mild symptoms for younger age groups. This allows for easy transmission, since many people only test or isolate themselves for COVID-19 if they show significant signs of illness.

Dr. Henry knew this — leaked emails suggest she was aware of the widespread concern over school transmission. According to the investigation, one email she wrote reads: “Could you please give me some of the stats from your school assessments for the media brief today. We need to be able to give some data that supports what we keep saying transmission in schools is low.” Why was she so keen on selling the public a false sense of security? According to The Beacon, Henry based her information off a regularly updated report which “cautioned that the certainty of the evidence was low and that findings could change as more data became available.”

Meanwhile, Dr. Henry co-authored a recent study on COVID-19 transmission in BC, which found that “80% of kids and youth have had COVID-19.” According to The Vancouver Sun, the study also says only 60–70% of adults have been infected by comparison. This information directly contradicts Henry’s frequent claims that transmission rates in schools were low. It supports what teachers and healthcare professionals have been echoing all along: people were, and are, getting sick at high rates.

A publication in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found Canada was ahead of many countries for second vaccination dose rates. However, like many citizens, the government seems to have given up on fighting COVID-19. Only 50% of the Canadian population has received their third vaccination, and officials have backed down on their efforts to promote masks and vaccines. Public health has said little about fourth doses, leaving many confused about official health recommendations.

With mask and vaccine mandates being lifted in BC earlier this March, and all travel restrictions disappearing as of October, some might think the COVID-19 pandemic is finally coming to an end. While I’d like to believe this is true, I can’t help feeling as though we’ve learned nothing this entire time. Wanting the pandemic to be over won’t make it over; this is evident through all the mixed signals given to citizens and the fact that we’re still struggling to keep hospitalizations down. A CTV News article cited The Public Health Agency of Canada, saying hospitals had an average of 4,700 daily hospitalizations from COVID-19 between September 15–October 15. That’s more than twice the number from last year, which was 2,000.

Immunocompromised and at-risk people deserve to participate in society. They shouldn’t need to hide indoors forever to protect their health because we navigated this pandemic so poorly. As 2022 wraps up and we enter another year of uncertainty amid COVID-19, we still must act with at-risk groups in mind. This goes for individuals and our government: you can’t will the virus away.

Cryptid Spotlight: Tiny Tormenters

By
Peak Web
-
0
Illustrations of phantom crying babies around the Surrey campus
ILLUSTRATION: Hayeon Gil / The Peak

By: Nathan T, Peak Associate

As midterm week rolls around, so too do the trials and tribulations of SFU students. None more so than the poor engineering computer science and business students in the SFU Surrey campus. Uninformed Burnaby Mountain-only individuals will marvel at the fact that the SFU Surrey Campus sits on one of the busiest shopping malls in Surrey. Some might expect it to be a blessing but for many a keener student, this prime location serves only as a wellspring of torment and anguish.

There have been many unconfirmed reports (confirming would involve too much work) of screaming children and babies echoing from the mall. Babies of the phantom persuasion, that is. Student Quit Crying Wah was found in the campus library with his head buried in his hands. “I’ve got a midterm in, like, a month and I haven’t even done my optional pre-reading for next week’s guest lecture yet. Why is SFU built on top of a mall? I can’t afford to buy anything anyway.” 

Wah tried to go home to study but found that he was distracted by the lack of noise in his home. “It’s like the babies conditioned me to need noise when I’m studying,” he said mournfully. “But then if I hear crying, I can’t study because I wanna cry as well.” Wherever Wah would turn, he could almost hear the faint wah-ing of the toddlers scampering about campus.

Worse, Wah told stories of how the babies would cry during the most interesting part of his discrete mathematics lecture and ruin the magical world of set theory. “You can’t hear the prof,” Wah said. His set theory had been ruined by babies set on haunting his final exams. “And then as you’re trying to figure out all the math on the screen, you feel like crying too.”

Why do the children cry? Some say it is because they don’t get their way in the toy shops of the Central City mall, others suggest that the close proximity to SFU Surrey emits an aura of malevolent, yet, melancholy miasma which puts the tears to the eyes of those who might enter its gates as students one day. We strongly believe in this theory. The campus is certified spooky, like all of SFU’s esteemed campuses. Admirably, Wah sees this, too, as an obstacle to his grander ascent.

“I’m just gonna keep on trucking.” Wah says. “Every tear I cry brings me one step closer to graduation and when I will receive that piece of paper from the Supreme Chancellor of the SFU Senate or whatever the job title of that person is.”

Revenge of the Stomach: Digestive Boogaloo

By
Peak Web
-
0
Illustration of a grumpy, personified stomach.
ILLUSTRATION: Alyssa Umbal / The Peak

By: Olivia Visser, Opinions Editor

Ah, it’s you again. I’ll admit, your response to my last letter left me with a bit of hopeless optimism. You seemed receptive for once. No lashing out in anger, no irritable bowels. You really had me thinking for a moment that maybe you’re “just sensitive.” Alas, the peace of the stomach is short lived. 

I now know our last conversation was simply the calm before the storm. Had I known then, I wouldn’t have stuffed my face with a box of Halloween candy. I was testing the waters, and boy, was I in too deep. Waist deep in deliciously sweet chocolate wrappers. 

Since then, you’ve continued to attack everything I value in life; from my ability to enjoy desserts, to my functioning at work and school. All those missing assignments and days spent in bed rather than class. Yeah, that’s right. I’m blaming you for my struggles in school. Now it’s personal. I mean, you could argue it became personal the moment you began nagging me in public places. It’s not easy being brave when you have a tummy ache. Nay, it’s one of the most challenging feats a human can undertake.

I was out shopping for groceries the other day. While browsing the produce aisle, I found myself thinking: what would my digestive system want? Can you believe that!? All these years of mistreatment, and somehow I still find myself rushing to defend you.

I’m fighting back this time. I’ve gone back to my family doctor (again) with concerns, realizing that maybe this isn’t all just “in my head” like you’ve led me to believe. No, maybe you are the problem. I don’t want a compromise — I want my life (and stomach) back! 

Yes, our situation is a bit more complicated than most. I can’t just leave you, some might argue I need you. I’d say it’s not that simple. What do you have to say for yourself!?

Stricken with fear, Eunice the stomach picked up his pen and began fumbling a response. He never understood why criticism followed him everywhere he went.

“Bbbbrrrrrbbbrrrrrrr,” he wrote.

“GGRRBRBBBRGHHHGRGBB!” 

“I’m taking my life back,

Eunice”

1...223224225...1,431Page 224 of 1,431

Simon Fraser University’s independent student newspaper since 1965.

Contact us: [email protected]

© The Peak Publications Society 1965-2024

Simon Fraser University’s independent student newspaper since 1965.

Contact us:
[email protected]

© The Peak Publications Society 1965-2024