Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - December 18, 2020, Winnipeg, Manitoba C M Y K PAGE A7 THINK TANK PERSPECTIVES EDITOR: BRAD OSWALD 204-697-7269 ? BRAD.OSWALD@FREEPRESS.MB.CA ? WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM A7 FRIDAY DECEMBER 18, 2020 Ideas, Issues, Insights WARNER BROS. PICTURES / TNS With most movie theatres still shuttered, the much-anticipated feature Wonder Woman 1984 will be given a direct-to-streaming release on Christmas Day. Hollywood must support vaccine campaign F OR too long, the entertainment industry has tolerated stars who used their platforms to stoke vaccine skepticism, even as declin- ing childhood vaccination rates contributed to a resurgence of measles and tetanus. That compla- cency should have ended years ago; now, it must end immediately. Vaccines are the quickest way to end the coro- navirus pandemic - and, with it, the existential danger COVID-19 poses to the movie business. Hollywood should go big on a COVID-19 vaccina- tion campaign, both in its own self-interest and because it's the right thing to do. Before the global pandemic, Hollywood seemed to tolerate anti-scientific attitudes as an unpleas- ant eccentricity rather than as the serious threat to public health they are. See: comedian Jenny McCarthy and legendary actor Robert De Niro pushing non-existent links between vaccination and childhood autism. Or, more recently, Black Panther and Small Axe star Letitia Wright shar- ing a video from an anti-LGBTTQ+ channel fea- turing British commentator Tomi Arayomi spout- ing conspiracy theories about COVID-19 vaccines because, she said in a tweet she later deleted, the clip "raised my concerns with what the vaccine contains and what we are putting in our bodies." Even stars who haven't charged into battle against scientific evidence and traditional medi- cine (or those lifestyle entrepreneurs such as Gwyneth Paltrow who peddle dubious and some- times potentially harmful "wellness" products) weren't likely to feel the consequences of these attitudes: what's a measles outbreak when you have access to a concierge doctor and a palatial vacation home to quarantine in? But, suddenly, anti-science attitudes aren't so good for Tinseltown's business. Movie-going, imperiled before the pandemic by the rise of streaming video, has been forced into hibernation by public-health measures. Last year, Americans spent US$11.3 billion on movie tickets. Through last Friday, this year's box-office take at U.S. theatres is just over US$2 billion, with most of that spent in January and February. With the release of Dune rescheduled to 2021 and Wonder Woman 1984 and Soul going straight to streaming, no dramatic, last-minute turnaround is in the offing. Even more challenging than COVID-19-driven theatre closures and occupancy limits are the changes in audiences' habits, which long shut- downs have only accelerated. According to a report earlier this year from the Deloitte Center for Technology, Media & Telecom- munications, 22 per cent of American consumers have paid to watch a new movie at home during the pandemic, and 90 per cent of them said they would do so again. Some 42 per cent of survey respondents in a subsequent Deloitte report said that even after the pandemic ends, they would definitely or probably prefer to see new movies at home if offered a choice between streaming a movie or seeing it in a theatre at the same price on the same weekend. Just 35 per cent said they would definitely or probably prefer going to a theatre. As the pandemic drags on, movie lovers may get hooked on their new streaming subscriptions or get used to paying $20 or $30 fees for new releases that, while expensive, are not as costly as buying movie theatre tickets for a family of four. The Deloitte researchers' assessment is grim: "After the pandemic is over, it is unclear what role movie theatres will play in consumer entertainment." If Hollywood and theatre owners want the big- screen experience to remain enticing, they need to remind audiences that there are communal and artistic pleasures to movie-going that they can't get from the comfort of their couches. And the quickest way to get theatres open again - and to get audiences confident enough to return to them - is prompt mass vaccination. Vaccinations would allow film and television productions to ramp back up, getting people across the industry back to work, ending costly shutdowns and concluding awkward debates over whether the movie industry counts as "essential." It shouldn't take a global pandemic and an existential threat to its core business model to convince a supposedly liberal industry such as Hollywood to stamp out - or at least step up to - the pernicious falsehoods that animate anti- vaccine sentiments. To be sure, some stars, such as Ice T, are doing their part to recruit participants to clinical trials. It's astonishing, though, that the industry hasn't mobilized a pro-vaccine campaign. There's a model for this, including the role Elvis Presley played in polio vaccination efforts. It's also a lot easier to record public service announcements from people's living rooms than it is to stand up and staff an operation such as the Hollywood Can- teen, the social club for service members that the industry operated during the Second World War as both a public service and public-relations tool. Complacency toward vaccine skepticism should have ended years ago. The industry owes it to the public, and to everyone who creates movies, to make up for lost time by telling the truth about vaccines as loudly and as often as possible. - The Washington Post Half-measures won't slow pandemic spread BY October's end, Manitoba's COVID-19 death toll was 69. In November, Manitoba tragically lost 243 people. Most of these deaths were avoidable. Manitoba's December COVID-19 fatalities will be worse; in just the fi rst two weeks, the province lost 188 to COVID-19. Some suggest this disaster started in October, when poor adherence to Code Orange public- health orders failed to slow case growth. Others have implied that the public's bad behaviour is driving COVID-19 spread. While everyone's actions count, Manitoba's second wave was predictable. COVID-19 came late to Manitoba, and officials here had ample opportunity to learn from other jurisdictions and plan accordingly. Worldwide, there are only three successful pre- vaccine strategies for suppressing COVID-19. The first creates a geographic bubble so life inside can continue almost normally. Anyone entering the bubble must isolate for two weeks until con- firmed healthy. New Zealand effectively eliminat- ed COVID-19 using a bubble. In Canada, Prince Edward Island has relied on similar tactics. The second strategy allows movement across borders, but strictly enforces social distancing under aggressive COVID-19 surveillance, includ- ing extensive asymptomatic testing, positive case isolation and contact tracing. Japan, Korea, Ger- many and British Columbia follow this strategy. The final strategy is lockdown, confining all but essential workers to their homes. The more extreme the limitation, the more effective the CO- VID-19 suppression will be. This is a last resort, because lockdowns damage economies. Manitoba's first-wave response used all three approaches. Movement across borders and to northern Manitoba was reduced to essential trav- el. Public health implemented social distancing, testing and contact tracing. All in-person, non- essential business was closed, including schools. This combination drove Manitoba's COVID-19 numbers to near-zero by July. The serious errors came as the Pallister govern- ment hurried to reopen the economy. Manitobans were reminded to observe "fundamentals" of prop- er hygiene, but the province followed no single proven public-health strategy, adopting a hybrid hodgepodge rather than sustaining one model. With the U.S. border closed, Manitoba's leaders opened interprovincial borders to travellers without mandatory isolation. The Restart Manitoba campaign invited tourism. The bubble collapsed and re-seeded Manitoba with COVID-19. Strategy one: compromised. Last summer, Manitoba could have built CO- VID-19 testing capacity, hired and trained contact tracers and staged field hospitals. Manitoba Health could have identified nurses ready to help and offered refresher courses in critical care. Instead, our leaders disbanded the pandemic response com- mittee and seemingly went to the cottage. Some planning and supply acquisition occurred. Dynacare was contracted to increase testing capaci- ty. But when the second wave came, Manitoba Health scrambled. There weren't enough nurses or contact tracers. Critical PPE shortages were widespread. Even with Dynacare, Manitoba (population 1.35 million) has a daily testing capacity that is roughly half of Cornell University's, which ef- fectively serves 35,000 students and employees. Our officials say they can't begin asymptomatic COVID-19 testing to contain community spread because they lack testing capacity and reagents. Strategy two: compromised. With low summer case-counts, the government suspended the lockdown. People left home and gathered. Essential-business-only transitioned into something like business-as-usual. When CO- VID-19 cases increased, geographically targeted restrictions were imposed slowly. With schools closed, an August lockdown in Brandon squelched an outbreak. This fall, lock- downs in Steinbach and Winnipeg with schools open haven't produced similar results. Steinbach schools only closed when test positivity rates approached 40 per cent, while Winnipeg schools remain open with 13-14 per cent test positivity. Chief provincial public health officer Dr. Brent Roussin claims there's no evidence of widespread COVID-19 transmission in schools, but no one has tested Manitoba's children to document the frequency of infected but asymptomatic stu- dents. Recent research from Australia suggests schoolchildren may be important virus reser- voirs, which then allows infection to escape into the broader population. Most Manitoba schools remain open. Strategy three: compromised. Premier Brian Pallister and Dr. Roussin repeat that the current infection rates and hospitaliza- tions are unsustainable. We are berated for fail- ing "Team Manitoba." But, the players aren't the problem; the fault lies with the coaches' strategy. Despite the arrival this week of the Pfizer BioN- Tech vaccine, we may not have widespread CO- VID-19 vaccination until autumn 2021. Manitoba needs public-health strategies that will effectively control this virus now. Manitoba's leadership must be bold. Close the bor- ders and keep them closed until 70 per cent of Mani- tobans are vaccinated. Half-measures don't work. We need a full lockdown, closing most manufacturing, construction and schools. Manitobans must prepare for the lockdown to last. Victoria, Australia, needed 113 lockdown days to overcome its second wave. To do this, the province must provide eco- nomic and social supports to protect vulnerable populations, small business owners and laid-off workers. Our education system must provide high-quality remote education, with face-to-face instruction only for essential workers' children and those at high risk. Build additional capacity required for testing, contact tracing, critical and long-term care, and vaccination. This all will be expensive, but the alternative is mass casualties due to systemic health-care collapse. The sooner we act, the better off Manitoba will be. The only thing worse than hundreds of premature deaths is thousands of them. Jeffrey Marcus is a professor in the department of biological sciences at the University of Manitoba. Joanne Seiff is a Winnipeg-based freelance writer and the author of three books. Five years later, Paris Agreement still urgent COVID-19 has dramatically changed how we live our lives, reducing air travel and auto- mobile use. But even these signifi cant socio- economic changes are not the long-term chan- ges needed to address climate change. We are still set to overshoot Paris Agreement target to keep the global temperature rise this century to below 2 C and to pursue a limit of 1.5 C. Bigger lifestyle, technology and land-use changes must be adopted if we are to meet the target. And while the technology exists, the imagination necessary to achieve success may be lacking. Five years ago, the Paris Agreement united countries around the world, each making indi- vidual pledges, called Nationally Determined Contributions, to lower carbon emissions. But these pledges haven't been enough. "The window of opportunity, the period when significant change can be made, for limiting climate change within tolerable boundaries is rap- idly narrowing," the authors of the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land wrote in 2019. The world's remaining carbon budget - the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that can be released and keep the world below its 2 C threshold - could be depleted by 2028 unless thoughtful decarbonization of the economy occurs with post-COVID-19 recovery. At this point, if the world does not begin to reduce the amount of carbon being released into our atmosphere, we will likely be unable to meet our Paris Agreement commitments. This means in five years we must be close to achieving net-zero carbon emissions. It is clear urgent action is required - a combination of new technology (clean and renewable), energy efficiency and societal change. Stated policies only get us part way there, and more measures are required, including valuing nature's contribution to peo- ple, rainwater harvesting, ensuring conserva- tion easements, afforestation and reforesta- tion, and protecting soils and wetlands. The majority of climate change scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement rely on technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or prevent it from being emitted. Planting trees, using biochar (a charcoal- like substance) to store carbon in agricultural soils, capturing carbon directly from the atmosphere, burning organic materials such as switchgrass or loblolly pine to produce energy and capturing the carbon emissions, and other negative emission technologies can help keep the carbon budget in check. Carbon dioxide removal also occurs with agricultural best management practices that increase soil organic carbon content, reduce soil erosion, salinization and compaction. There is no one single policy solution to climate change. Instead we need a system or suite of policy portfolios. Economists prefer a carbon tax for its economic efficiency and because it is technology-neutral and allows producers and consumers to make choices. Climate accountability frameworks, such as those legislated in Manitoba, British Colum- bia, New Zealand and the U.K., break long- term targets into interim milestones and hold governments to account. President-elect Joe Biden's planned changes to U.S. climate policy, including rejoining the Paris Agreement, will address some of these issues and bodes well for Canada's advancing climate policy. The World Economic Forum has created an Energy Transition Index to help policy-mak- ers and businesses plot a course for a success- ful energy transition. Several countries such as Sweden, the U.K. and France have done well at reducing energy subsidies, achiev- ing gains in energy intensity of GDP, and increasing the level of political commitment to pursuing aggressive energy transition and climate change targets. But Canada's score has worsened between 2015 to 2020. Business is changing. Planning for the financial quarter or year end has become obsolete. As airlines realized during CO- VID-19, governments and funders are reticent to bail out an industry whose massive profits over the years have been paid to shareholders and used to buy back stocks, thereby making the companies less resilient. Business is now considering the long term. A large number of global organizations have also declared carbon-neutral targets, especially those with end-consumer-facing business models (including Amazon, Google, Apple, Cenovus Energy, TELUS and Maple Leaf Foods). Our youth recognize the inter- generational injustice of worsening future climate change impacts include storms, fires, droughts and floods. Seventy per cent of young people consider the speed of energy transition to be either stagnant or too slow, and they are willing to pay for it and accept the lifestyle changes required. The Paris Agreement unified the world in setting a target of limiting global warming. The door is closing on achieving this target. The next five years are the years for ensur- ing through meaningful policy and action that this target is achieved. Margot Hurlbert is Canada Research Chair in climate change, energy and sustainability at the University of Regina. This article has been edited for length; the full version can be seen at winnipegfreepress.com or theconversation.com/ca. ALYSSA ROSENBERG JEFFREY MARCUS AND JOANNE SEIFF MARGOT HURLBERT A_07_Dec-18-20_FP_01.indd A7 12/17/20 6:09 PM ;