staff not knowing what the fuck they want and constantly "amending" the scope of the work
... is pretty darn common across the board. I've never done any government contracting but I find it hard to imagine that it could be worse than the private sector.
I can't find it in their show notes, so maybe I misremembered the source. Sorry.
In a more wide ranging search (flu and COVID same arm), I found this. As far as I can tell, at least an inch apart will help distinguish between local reactions, separate arms might lead to stiffness in both arms which might be more desirable than completely taking one arm out of commission. The only mention of a downside to same arm is that "high dose" flu shot in the same arm as COVID might produce more discomfort than just a "doubling up".
Everything seems to be in agreement that effectiveness is not helped or hurt either way.
Again, my apologies for not getting this right.
On the plus side, now you have an excuse to subscribe to TWIV and browse their back catalogue. It really is a great podcast.
That seems to be the common thinking. However an episode of TWIV (This Week In Virology) covered a study showing that there is no difference between "one arm" and "two arm" effectiveness.
So am I 😉
Singapore is nonsensical, because that's a completely different jurisdiction.
For Ottawa-specific laws, there is probably no real choice but to stay in Ottawa. For provincial and federal laws, there are options. I don't necessarily agree that change of venue should be a given, but it is a commonly accepted means of trying to ensure impartiality. I'm not sure that there is anywhere in Canada where this trial could be conducted without the spectre of bias, but, whether we like it or not, change of venue is one of the tools available.
It's not yet the law, because it hasn't even been introduced, because the legislature isn't even sitting.
The premier is directing that policy be changed in anticipation of forthcoming legislation, when that legislation hasn't even been put forward.
The premier is taking on the role of absolute dictator by directing people to act without first getting legislation in place. The judge is doing no more than upholding the rights of the citizens to be not bossed around without supporting legislation.
Really, it's not all that complicated. No regulation without legislation.
I'm well aware. I was responding to what seems to be your opinion that justice is always best served by keeping the trial in the community in which the offense occurred.
Just so you know, judges are specifically not to look to the will of the people but to the law.
Legislators are the ones who are supposed to consider the will of the people.
If the will of the people really is to have a law like this, then the Sask Party is doing it's job in bringing forward the legislation. That, of course, assumes that our provincial government has appropriate jurisdiction over everything the law covers.
And that gets us to the injunction. An injunction is not about "no you can't do that" but about "hang on there, it doesn't look like you've covered all the bases".
Why would this be any different than any other crime? Yes, there is generally a preference for trying cases in the community in which the offense occurred, but this wouldn't be the first time that a trial was moved somewhere else in order to improve the chances of an impartial judgement.
They say it takes around 1.5 acres to sustain a person. Farmland rents for around $300 per acre here, so $450 for the year to access the land you need for food. The food itself just kind of grows from that ground and sinks carbon to boot, so that's cool. A human emits carbon, so that's not exactly great for the climate, but you're probably going to do that regardless so we'll consider that a wash.
I don't know when you last tried growing a balanced diet, but I can tell you that growing anything as a crop is quite a way off "just kind of growing itself."
I think that it's possible for essentially random people to be honoured shows just how bad things are being run.
Does nobody do even the slightest bit of checking out who is being honoured? The whole thing makes me think that people are just running on empty, doing whatever pops into their heads without the slightest bit of actual thought.
Glorified Roombas, the lot of them, and that might be an insult to Roomba.
Who, precisely, did they consult with? All I got from my letter to the premier was a form response that it has been forwarded to the appropriate minister.
Well, I did get spam asking me if I support the Sask Party. Not on any issue, just in general. Does that count?