It's not quite that simple unfortunately. You could equally say, why not simply say that if someone wants to transit across Canada to Alaska that they will simply have to follow the 14 day quarantine rule like any other traveller entering Canada has to do. That they are exempt from that quarantine should have you asking yourself 'how come'?Yup, tell them before they come into Canada they have 72 hrs to cross back into Alaska or it's a $10,000 fine. So if they come back from Alaska going home and they stayed more than 72 hrs in Canada they'd have to pay up before being allowed to cross again.
The transit isn't in question, rather the illegal tourist travel while inside Canada. So if you break the rules you get fined and/or denied future entry.The answer is because we have a long standing border agreement with the USA that permits Americans to transit Canada to Alaska. It's a law in other words.
If someone is "about to die", aren't they isolated in bed already and very, very unlikely to contact the virus?I didn't think the infection rate was so high that there is a huge cohort of people "about to die" that just happen to also have COVID... maybe someone has some actual stats on this.
The vast majority of people have no symptoms at all and you're talking about non-existent strokes?COVID doesn't actually kill someone, like a bullet to the heart. It is the symptoms of COVID that kills people.........pneumonia, strokes, etc.
I think it more likely whomeover looks after their Twitter feed screwed up the information.
Since the paper hasn't been published yet it's difficuly to say what the "proposed" risks are and how far they say it travels. Infection transfer via case tracking in MB doesn't support airbourne transfer.If the scientists are correct, this could mean that inside buildings (including schools and offices) the virus could remain a threat, with recirculated air.