It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Friday, September 17, 2021
Former Liberal MP Sohi aspires to be Edmonton’s next mayor
Edmonton mayoral candidate Amarjeet Sohi, a former Liberal MP, outside a coffee shop on Aug. 26 (Jeff Labine/iPolitics)
Amarjeet Sohi doesn’t miss federal politics.
The 57-year-old former bus driver is one of 10 candidates vying to succeed Edmonton Mayor Don Iveson in the municipal election on Oct. 18.
Sohi served two terms as a city councillor after getting elected for the first time in 2007.
In 2015, he won as the Liberal candidate for Edmonton—Mill Woods. He played a key role in Justin Trudeau’s government by taking on the portfolios of Infrastructure and Communities, and Natural Resources.
Sohi would only serve one term in the House of Commons after losing to Conservative MP Tim Uppal in 2019.
Sohi said little about his next political move until last May, when he announced his mayoral campaign.
With a federal election underway, Sohi said his sights are set solely on Edmonton.
“I honestly don’t miss being part of partisan politics,” he told iPolitics. “I really enjoyed working as a member of Parliament, as a minister, … but I did not enjoy the lifestyle of going back and forth (to Ottawa) and travelling throughout the country.”
Sohi’s return to municipal politics comes during significant changes in both Edmonton and Calgary.
Iveson and Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi, both seen as progressive mayors, won’t be running again. Iveson made his decision public in November last year, and Nenshi made his intentions known in April.
The mayors of Alberta’s largest cities often butted heads with Jason Kenney’s provincial government.
A significant point of contention was the United Conservative Party’s decision to reduce Edmonton and Calgary’s base funding of $500 million per year, which is split between the two, by $45 million, thus ending years of negotiations to give the two cities more say in how they spend their money, according to a CBC report.
“We had no sense that the city-charter fiscal framework was going to be ripped up today,” Iveson told reporters afterward.
When asked how he’d handle the situation, Sohi said he’d start by making sure Edmontonians understand what’s at stake.
“If city-infrastructure funding is being cut back, that means you’re going to see cracks in roads, traffic is going to see gridlock, transit systems will not be expanded,” he said. “Those are the kinds of conversations I want to have with Edmontonians and the province. (I want to) find commonalities around those issues.”
If elected, Sohi said he’d try to collaborate with all the city’s partners, including the provincial government.
“From an Indigenous perspective, when we are confronting the climate crisis we are inherently confronting the systems of colonization and white supremacy as well,” said Dallas Goldtooth of Indigenous Environmental Network. “In order to do that, you have to reevaluate how you relate to the world around you and define what your obligations are to the world around you. It’s more than just stopping fracking development and pipelines and it’s more than just developing clean energy, it’s about actually fundamentally changing how we see the world itself.” https://grist.org/.../indigenous-resistance-has-cut-u-s.../
Zawgyi are legendary semi-immortal beings believed to be both mystics and alchemists. They figure prominently in the mythology and folklore of the Myanmar people. The word is believed to be derived from the Indian word “yogi” and similarly the Zawgyi is credited with many supernatural talents.
The reason for their red appearance is attributed to mercury; from the anatomy of an ordinary human being, they transformed into a Zawgyi. As a Zawgyi, they are believed to have 5 supernatural powers – the ability to fly, travel beneath the earth and oceans, perform various forms of divination, necromancy and resurrection as well.
Legend have them living alone in an invisible mythical forest set deep in Himalaya Mountains. Here, the Zawgi forage herbs for magical purposes. After an ardous and extensive search, they obtain the mythical Philosopher's stone and thus gain the status of Zawgyi.
To satisfy their desires, it is said that by touching the Nariphon (Tuyaung Fruit Trees) with their magical wands, they are able to bring to life illusory females" (Thuyaung-mèý) as these trees will bear female-shaped fruits. They spend their lives searching for various herbs to treat pain, suffering, illness, and other forms of ailments brought on by magical spells.
The magic wands are used primarily to grind the medicinal herbs and roots, although these wands also double up as walking sticks, especially in negotiating very rugged footpaths.
The Zawgyi Dance reproduces many aspects of the legend; the red clothing, the magical wand, the journey through the forest among other significant characteristics.
WSJ: Facebook knows Instagram is toxic for teen girls
New York (CNN)All week long, The Wall Street Journal's "Facebook Files" series has invited comparisons of the social media platform to tobacco companies. The Journal relied on internal company documents it obtained to show Facebook (FB) knows, "in acute detail," about the problems with its platforms. The assorted harms to users are well-documented. But, in the words of the Journal, Facebook "hasn't fixed" the flaws. So: Social platforms are addictive and often harmful. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, told the Journal "Facebook seems to be taking a page from the textbook of Big Tobacco — targeting teens with potentially dangerous products while masking the science in public." U.S. Rep. Ken Buck, a Republican, tweeted "Big Tech has become the new Big Tobacco. Facebook is lying about how their product harms teens."
The series matters because it comes with evidence."Time and again, the documents show, Facebook's researchers have identified the platform's ill effects," the Journal says. "Time and again, despite congressional hearings, its own pledges and numerous media exposés, the company didn't fix them. The documents offer perhaps the clearest picture thus far of how broadly Facebook's problems are known inside the company, up to the chief executive himself."
Here's where to get caught up on the entire series.
This was a very big week for the Journal. Is there more reporting work to do? Definitely. My sense is the series has given the newsroom a jolt of inspiration, and this may not be the Journal's last word on the Facebook Files.
Facebook's new response
The company's response to the five-part series was measured during the workweek. Facebook could have deployed spokespeople and surrogates onto TV shows, for example, but it did not. I noticed Joe Scarborough on MSNBC saying "Facebook reminds me of big tobacco," because "they know their product is damaging to people."
There was no rebuttal from the company on his show.
But on Saturday, Facebook vice president of global affairs Nick Clegg issued a seven-paragraph blog post, objecting to some parts of the Journal series.
"At the heart of this series is an allegation that is just plain false: that Facebook conducts research and then systematically and willfully ignores it if the findings are inconvenient for the company. This impugns the motives and hard work of thousands of researchers, policy experts and engineers at Facebook who strive to improve the quality of our products, and to understand their wider (positive and negative) impact," Clegg said.
Clegg deplored what he called the "impugning" of Facebook's motives. Perhaps responding to some observers' concerns the company will stop doing internal research since some of it was leaked to the Journal, Clegg said, "We will continue to invest in research into these serious and complex issues. We will continue to ask ourselves the hard questions. And we will continue to improve our products and services as a result."
He also seemed to address the comparisons of Facebook to Big Tobacco. "The truth is that research into the impact social media has on people is still relatively nascent and evolving, and social media itself is changing rapidly," he said. FB disinformation doesn't happen in a vacuum
Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz, who has earned many plaudits this week, tweeted Friday "some Facebook folks have told me we should pay more attention to how the interplay between social media and cable TV news affected the public discussion of Covid vaccines, including on the company's platforms." He agreed with that assessment, he said.
Former Twitter and Facebook executive Nu Wexler said he also concurred: "If we're measuring reach/engagement of health misinfo on FB, we need a way to compare it to Hannity's nightly audience or the impact of a governor/senator saying the same things IRL." Further reading and listening
-- "There's a lot to unpack" from the "Facebook Files," CNN's Allison Morrow writes. "But one thing that stands out is just how blatantly Facebook's problems are documented, using the kind of simple, observational prose not often found in internal communications at multinational corporations." -- Washington Post columnist Will Oremus says he sees a pattern emerging: "Facebook keeps researching its own harms -- and burying the findings."
-- Friday's "Files" story describes a gathering of Facebook leadership in and around its Menlo Park HQ early this month at which "the tone from some participants was, 'We created the machine and we can't control the machine,' one of the people said."
-- David Kirkpatrick, who wrote a "generally positive" (his words) book about FB a decade ago, says "the Journal series may bespeak a major shift, even for those who are jaded and expect little other than evasion and apathy from this shockingly-powerful company. The articles suggest it may start to be seen widely as an outlaw enterprise."
-- The Atlantic's Derek Thompson says the Journal series underscores that social media is "attention alcohol:" Like booze, he says, "social media seems to offer an intoxicating cocktail of dopamine, disorientation, and, for some, dependency."
-- On Monday the Journal will hold a live Q&A with several reporters about the "Facebook Files" findings. There is also a companion podcast series on Spotify.
Conservative leadership candidate Erin O'Toole, left, speaks as Maxime Bernier listens during the Conservative leadership debate in Saskatoon, Wednesday, November 9, 2016. (Liam Richards/Canadian Press)
At a recent campaign event, Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole couldn't quite bring himself to say the name of the man who could end up thwarting his shot at power.
People's Party of Canada (PPC) Leader Maxime Bernier has gone from leading a small fringe group with tepid support to heading up a right-wing party that, according to the CBC Poll Tracker, could have the fourth-highest share of the vote on Sept. 20.
After the last election campaign, a CBC News analysis showed that — even with its rather dismal level of support — the PPC likely cost the Conservatives seven seats in the House of Commons by splitting the vote (six seats went to the Liberals, one to the NDP). With polls suggesting PPC support is now well above the 1.6 per cent of the vote it got last time, its impact could be even greater in 2021.
When asked by CBC News recently what he plans to do to blunt Bernier's momentum and prevent a vote-splitting scenario that could hand Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau another term, O'Toole didn't say much — and never mentioned Bernier by name.
O'Toole was asked three questions about the former Conservative cabinet minister-turned PPC leader at a Sunday press conference and ducked every one of them.
"I remind Canadians, if you're tired of a Liberal government that's constantly in scandal, corrupt at its core with Mr. Trudeau's constant ethics investigations, there's one team and one leader that can replace him — Canada's Conservatives," O'Toole finally said when pressed.
His party's campaign material insists Canadians only have four choices in this election. "If you don't care about creating Canadian jobs and standing up to the Chinese Communist Party, you have three parties to choose from. If you do, you only have one choice – Canada's Conservatives," reads a recent press release.
While polls suggest some PPC support is coming from first-time or infrequent voters, there's no question the PPC is drawing at least some support from former Conservative voters.
"The Conservative party is no longer a conservative party," Craig Mostat, an-ex Conservative supporter of the PPC from Edmonton, told CBC News.
"They are bending over backwards to do everything the Liberals are doing," he said, referring to the party's more moderate brand of conservatism under O'Toole.
An outgoing Conservative MP, David Yurdiga, is backing Bernier and Shawn McDonald, the local PPC candidate in his Fort McMurray, Alta. riding.
"We're the true conservatives. We're bringing people home," McDonald told the conservative online media outlet True North.
Some pollsters — notably those using more anonymous collection methods, like interactive voice response (IVR) — show higher levels of PPC support than those firms using live telephone agents or an online forum to survey the public on their voting choices.
While the country's major polling firms can't agree on just how much support the PPC enjoys, it's clear that the party is much more of a force now than it was in the 2019 campaign
"There's definitely a lot more people jumping on the PPC train even compared to two months ago. It's definitely getting bigger," said Rodolpho Menjivar, an infrequent Alberta voter who has voted Liberal in the past but plans to pick the PPC this time.
"People are looking for another option because they don't like what everyone else is doing."
Philippe Fournier, a polls analyst with 338Canada, said the PPC's strength could spell trouble for the Conservatives in close races in Prairie cities like Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg. In 2019, the party only narrowly won seats like Manitoba's Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley and Alberta's Edmonton Centre over the Liberals.
"The PPC could get more votes than the Bloc Quebecois in this election, which was unfathomable only one year ago," Fournier said. "We can say with confidence that many of their supporters used to vote Conservative."
Failure to launch — then a sudden resurgence
Bernier's dramatic break from the Conservative party in 2018 was a troubling development for some Conservative operatives who feared a fractured right-centre vote would guarantee Liberal victories for years to come.
At the time, however, most Conservative insiders — especially those who knew him from his time as a Harper-era cabinet minister — were dismissive of Bernier's potential political impact.
They feared a splintered vote but they didn't think Bernier was well-equipped to get a new party off the ground and compete meaningfully in enough ridings to make much of a difference.
The PPC's poor showing in 2019 — Bernier lost the Beauce seat he'd held for years — bolstered the naysayers.
But the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a political realignment, breathing new life into a party that looked all but dead.
Public health measures like lockdowns slowed the spread of the virus — and likely saved lives — but they also prompted anger and frustration among some Canadians who saw their livelihoods destroyed as economic and social life ground to a halt.
The PPC becomes the no-lockdowns party
The federal Conservative Party and some of its provincial counterparts, like the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, were generally deferential to public health officials who called for restrictions — a sensible position during a pandemic but one that also generated backlash from people who bristle at limits on their freedoms.
The PPC welcomed those voters with open arms. A party promising a radically smaller government with fewer regulations was suddenly embraced by people who saw government as an oppressive force.
Bernier, a libertarian who has long railed against government overreach, became a champion of the "no more lockdowns" crowd, routinely appearing at well-attended protests against these restrictions.
Anti-lockdown and anti-mask protesters take part in a rally outside the Alberta Legislature in Edmonton on Monday, April 12, 2021. (Jason Franson/The Canadian Press)
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau's push for a vaccine mandate for federal public servants and the travelling public has also given Bernier another cause as he warns of what he calls Canada's descent into "tyranny."
"We are the only national political party against vaccine passports. We believe in freedom of choice — everyone must be able to decide for themselves," Bernier said a recent rally.
O'Toole is opposed to Trudeau's proposed vaccine mandate but has said he'd let provinces introduce their own vaccine passport programs.
Bernier's pitch to voters also includes a plan to "defund" the CBC, balance the budget quickly, cut all foreign aid, "say no to the UN" — a body he calls "a dysfunctional organization" — and pull out of the Paris climate accord.
"More and more people are coming on our side. You can count on us," Bernier said.
But it's Bernier's strident opposition to the idea of vaccine passports — credentials people vaccinated against COVID-19 can show to businesses to make everyday activities safer — that attracted Menjivar.
"The particular thing I like about them is that they're a no to vaccine passports and mask mandates. I don't believe in mandatory stuff forced on people and not being able to go places if I don't have a vaccine," he said.
"People just want to be left alone and not be called the bad guy for not getting their vaccine. We just want to live and be able to do everything we did two years ago."
Fournier said the polls suggest it's Bernier's anti-vaccination passport rhetoric driving the party's rise.
"We know from polls before the election that anti-vaxxers were about eight to 10 per cent of the Canadian population," Fournier said. "He is taking his message to new heights to appeal to these people.
"And if he goes from 1.6 per cent in 2019 to seven or eight or more per cent in this election, it would be an incredible achievement."
Conservative Party of Canada Leader Erin O'Toole has indicated his party's emissions target is not Canada's current target of a 40 to 45 per cent reduction compared to 2005 by 2030, but the 30 per cent target set under Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper.
(Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
If the Conservatives are elected as Canada's government this fall, they've indicated they won't meet Canada's current greenhouse gas emissions targets under the Paris Agreement.
What does that mean? And what could the consequences be? Here's a closer look. What kinds of targets do countries set under the Paris Agreement?
As part of the United Nations treaty, which is legally binding, countries are required to submit plans and targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions called nationally determined contributions (NDCs) in order to reach the global target as soon as possible. What are Canada's Paris Agreement targets — and why have they changed?
Canada's original NDC, submitted by Stephen Harper's Conservative government, committed to cutting annual emissions 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, from 732 megatonnes to 513 megatonnes.
However, under the Paris Agreement, countries submit new, "increasingly ambitious" NDCs every five years, and were required to send new ones in by 2020, according to the United Nations.
But wait, didn't Erin O'Toole say the Conservatives will meet the Paris objectives?
Yes, the Conservative leader has said that throughout the election campaign. He clarified on Aug. 27, "We will meet the Paris objectives that were actually set by the tail end of the Conservative government and signed onto by the Liberal government" — that is, the outdated 30 per cent emissions cut, rather than Canada's current commitment of 40 per cent.
Kathryn Harrison, a political science professor at the University of British Columbia, said she thinks O'Toole's claim is misleading. "In fact, that's not Canada's Paris Agreement target anymore."
O'Toole told undecided voters this week that he is not going to try to out-target his opponents just to get elected, but was proposing a plan that he felt his government could hit without damaging the economy.
"What we have to do is make sure we deliver," he said.
Can the new commitment be changed or withdrawn?
Yes. "A Party may at any time adjust its existing nationally determined contribution," the Paris Agreement says, "with a view to enhancing its level of ambition." That is, while changes are allowed, downgrading is against the spirit of the agreement.
CBC News reached out to the Conservative Party of Canada to ask if they planned to change or withdraw their 30 per cent commitment, but they had not responded to the questions by Wednesday. (They did send a quote of Erin O'Toole talking in general terms about Conservative climate change policy).That said, they've indicated that any change would not increase Canada's level of ambition in cutting greenhouse gases. If a target is lowered, can a country be penalized?
No, not under the Paris Agreement itself.
Jutta Brunnée, professor and dean in the University of Toronto's faculty of law, said countries' legally binding obligation under the Paris Agreement is to prepare and communicate their climate targets and plans. That forces countries to be transparent about their climate action, or lack thereof.
But the targets and plans are not themselves legally binding. That means countries can technically downgrade their targets.
"They would not be violating an obligation under the Paris Agreement," Brunnée said, "but they would run counter to the entire normative architecture and the expectations that the agreement rests on."
What the reporting obligations do is make it clear to other countries if someone does set lower targets or fails to meet them.
"So it would become very public if a party went the opposite direction, so to speak," Brunnée said. "And that, I think, has actually proven to be a remarkably strong incentive, and also a kind of a mechanism to get parties to [do] their bit."
Is lowering the target worse than not meeting it?
"They're both equally bad," said Sébastien Jodoin, Canada Research Chair in human rights health and the environment at McGill University's faculty of law.
But they're also equally without penalties under the Paris Agreement.
A new report by the Pembina Institute suggests Canada isn’t on track to meet its climate change targets by 2030 and provinces need to take more responsibility in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 1:53
The lack of penalties for not fulfilling plans or meeting targets is, in fact, a key difference between the Paris Agreement and its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol. This was so the Paris Agreement would be adopted by more countries. In fact, the penalties were the reason Canada withdrew from Kyoto in 2011 under Stephen Harper's Conservative government — by not meeting its targets, it was going to be found in non-compliance and would have had to pay $14 billion. Could there be potential consequences outside the Paris Agreement itself?
Brunnée said governments could face a hit to their reputation domestically and internationally if they fail to meet the expectations of the Paris Agreement.
"I don't think that it looks good on any country," she said.
Lowering targets or explicitly failing to meet targets might also encourage other countries to follow suit, she said. "And if that were to happen, the entire edifice would potentially unravel… This would be something that the other parties [who signed the Paris Agreement] wouldn't take lightly."
To prevent or punish those who go against Paris Agreement expectations, other countries could impose carbon border adjustments, levies or tariffs, which would penalize trading partners that aren't reducing their emissions quickly enough, said Jason MacLean, assistant professor of law at the University of New Brunswick.
"So countries are still free to work either individually or in concert to try and put pressure on other countries [so] that they are living up to their pledges under the Paris Agreement."
Jodoin said Canada's approach to its Paris obligations could give activists extra ammunition: "You're exposing yourself to the possibility of constitutional litigation."
These charts show how much more often unvaccinated Albertans are being hospitalized and dying from COVID-19
Social Sharing
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Reddit
LinkedIn
Alberta Health data accounts for age, vaccination status and population size of each group
Kathryn Kazmerik, 32, receives her COVID-19 vaccine at the Telus Convention Centre mass-vaccination in Calgary on April 19, 2021. (Leah Hennel/AHS)
Recent rates of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death among unvaccinated Albertans have been at least eight times higher — and as much as 60 times higher — compared to the fully vaccinated population, depending on which age range you look at.
That's according to a new CBC News analysis of data published by the provincial government.
Data experts with Alberta Health reviewed the analysis and confirmed the methodology as an effective way to compare severe outcomes relative to both vaccination status and age — while also accounting for the population sizes of each group.
These types of comparisons can be tricky, because the risk of severe outcomes increases with age, but so too does the rate of vaccination. As such, population-wide comparisons don't tell the full story.
For example, it's often reported that unvaccinated Albertans make up just 32 per cent of the population but a whopping 74 per cent of the COVID-19 patients in hospital. But this actually under-represents the risk for unvaccinated adults, because a huge proportion of the unvaccinated population is made up of children who are both ineligible for the vaccine and unlikely to end up in hospital.
Breaking the data down by age helps to better understand how things compare among the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated.
"Age, in particular, really controls a few outcomes here in the province," said Craig Jenne, a professor in the Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Diseases at the University of Calgary.
Craig Jenne is an associate professor of microbiology, immunology and infectious diseases at the University of Calgary. (Jennifer Lee/CBC)
Jenne also reviewed the data analysis and says it illustrates how effective vaccination against COVID-19 has been in Alberta, so far.
"We see that there's huge protection offered by vaccines, and that's something I think gets missed in the daily updates when we simply see numbers or the percentage of people in hospital," he said.
Here's how it breaks down.
Hospitalizations
It's well known by now that older people are far more likely to end up in hospital than younger people, but looking at the data by both age and vaccination status reveals some stark comparisons.
For instance, it shows that unvaccinated Albertans in their 30s have been ending up in hospital with COVID-19 at roughly the same rate as fully vaccinated Albertans over the age of 80.
From mid-May to mid-September, 400 unvaccinated people in their 30s were admitted to hospital with COVID-19.
That works out to a rate of about 146 hospitalizations per 100,000 unvaccinated 30-somethings over that four-month span.
And that's almost identical to the rate of hospitalization among fully vaccinated Albertans aged 80 and up.
Meanwhile, among unvaccinated Albertans 80 and over, the rate was nine times higher — 1,271 hospitalizations per 100,000.
And the differences in ICU admissions were even starker.
Intensive care units
Just seven fully vaccinated Albertans in their 50s have been admitted to an intensive care unit with COVID-19 since mid-May.
That compares to 181 unvaccinated people of the same age — despite the fact that there are far fewer of them.
Fully vaccinated 50-somethings were admitted to ICU at a rate of less than 3 per 100,000.
The rate among the unvaccinated, by comparison, was 139 per 100,000.
It was a similar story among unvaccinated Albertans in their 60s and 70s, who were admitted to ICU at rates about 60 times higher than their fully vaccinated counterparts.
There were major differences among younger Albertans, as well.
Not a single fully vaccinated person under the age of 40 was admitted to ICU over the past four months.
That compares to 129 people under the age of 40 who were eligible for the vaccine but didn't get a shot.
One person in their 30s who was partially immunized, with a single dose of vaccine, did wind up in ICU during that time.
Deaths
Similar with ICU admissions, there was not a single death among fully vaccinated Albertans under the age of 40 in the past four months.
That compares to seven deaths among unvaccinated people of the same age.
When it comes to the most vulnerable age group — those 80 and over — there were 61 deaths among the unvaccinated, who represent a tiny proportion of the total population in that age range.
That translates to a rate of about 393 per 100,000.
The rate among fully vaccinated Albertans aged 80-plus, meanwhile, was 42 per 100,000.
Bottom line: Vaccinated versus unvaccinated
For Jenne, the infectious-disease expert with the University of Calgary, the implications of the data are clear.
"Vaccines are dramatically reducing loss of life, hospitalization and intensive-care-unit admissions across the province," he said.
This can be seen, he said, by directly comparing the rates of hospitalization, ICU admission and death among the fully vaccinated and the unvaccinated in each age range.
The second is the number of people in each age range who are fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated or unvaccinated. For the purposes of the analysis, the size of the fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated and unvaccinated population in each age range was calculated by taking an average of daily data over the past 120 days.
These population sizes were then used to calculate the rates of hospitalization, ICU admission and death per 100,000 fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated and unvaccinated people in each age range.
This method doesn't account exactly for the individual vaccination status of every person who was hospitalized, admitted to ICU or died of COVID-19, but officials with Alberta Health said "as an overall method this approach does make sense" as a means of making better comparisons between each of these sub-groups at an aggregate level.
One other caveat Alberta Health noted is that the data on hospitalization, ICU admission and death by vaccination status over the past 120 days defines a "fully vaccinated" person as someone who had their second dose at least two weeks earlier, and a "partially vaccinated" person as someone who had their first dose at least two weeks earlier. This differs from the vaccine-uptake data, in which the dates are "based strictly on receiving a dose."
Robson Fletcher's work for CBC Calgary focuses on data, analysis and investigative journalism. He joined CBC in 2015 after spending the previous decade working as a reporter and editor at newspapers in Alberta, British Columbia and Manitoba.
Edmonton mayoral candidate Amarjeet Sohi, a former Liberal MP, outside a coffee shop on Aug. 26 (Jeff Labine/iPolitics)
