Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2020

The AIH Transcript for March 11, 2020

Hosts: Dave Seglins and Chris Howden

Prologue

DAVE SEGLINS: Hello. I'm Dave Seglins, sitting in for Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening. I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

CH: Tonight:

DS: A lack of care. Just a few days ago, the Lynn Valley Care Centre was the site of Canada's first coronavirus fatality. Now, a woman whose father is there tells us how the residents and their families are coping with the crisis.

CH: On guard. The National Guard is on its way to a New York suburb, the epicenter of that state's coronavirus outbreak -- we will reach a local restaurant owner who says the community is, among other things, confused.

DS: Roll credits. When Harvey Weinstein was sentenced to 23 years in prison today, he told the court that he's remorseful but confused. A journalist who was there says the scene was surreal.

CH: Taking silly, seriously. Some things are hard to measure, like, say, the wackiness of one's walk. Well, have no fear, two researchers have proposed a new way to fairly judge a jaunt.

DS: A British MP is in self-isolation after a meeting last week with a government health minister who has tested positive for the coronavirus. She says for now, it's no time to shut down parliament.

CH: And an archaeologist has discovered tiny beads made from ostrich egg shells were used tens of thousands of years ago, the way we use Facebook like button today. As It Happens. The Wednesday Edition. Radio that wouldn't mind shelling out for a little social capital.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Family says they had to step in after COVID-19 leaves B.C. care home understaffed

Coronavirus: B.C. care

Guest: Deanna Harlow

CH: The global coronavirus outbreak is officially a pandemic. As you heard on the news, the World Health Organization made the declaration earlier today. In Canada, the Deputy Prime Minister called on Canadians to work together to slow the spread.

SOUNDCLIP

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: The effort of all of us should be, and I think there's even a social media hashtag about this, to flatten the curve. So we do know that it is very likely to get worse before it gets better. What we want to try to do and what we can do if we work hard on this as we are, is try to avoid a sharp peak, which would be a real strain on our health care system.

CH: That was Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland on CBC's Power and Politics this afternoon. In British Columbia, a care home for seniors is the site of a small outbreak. An elderly man living at the Linn Valley Care Centre died a few days ago. It was the country's first fatality. And several staff members have also been diagnosed with the virus. Deanna Harlow's father is a resident at the Linn Valley Care Centre. We reached her earlier today in North Vancouver, B.C..

DS: Ms. Harlow, how's your father doing?

DEANNA HARLOW: He's not doing too badly. He was quite agitated on Sunday, which was kind of the first day that everything kicked off. You see, he's doing pretty well now. We've been looking after him as well as we can.

DS: How worried are you that he might become infected?

DH: I feel pretty good about what we've been doing to protect him. We've been keeping him in his room. He hasn't been doing any co-mingling with other residents at this point.

DS: And what's that been like for him?

DH: So far, so good. He's actually been doing a lot of sleeping.

DS: You've been visiting him pretty much every day. How is the care home handling this outbreak? What precautions are they taking?

DH: The care home hasn't been handling it well at all. We haven't seen the plan of action that was promised at a family town hall meeting last Saturday. They were promising that staffing levels would be normal, and that the building would be thoroughly cleaned and disinfected three times a day. And that just hasn't been happening. We were told there would be a team of people that would come in and clean the building on a regular basis. And that's just not happening.

DS: So you as a family, what are you doing?

DH: Well we are complaining, and it seems like every time we complain about something we get a little bit of action. But it's the follow up just hasn't been there, and it's not consistent.

DS: Now four staff have contracted covered 19, what impact is that having on the services being provided?

DH: Well, the staffing since Sunday has been abysmal. I went in there on Sunday, and there were only two staff members on -- this was about 10:30 in the morning -- and a third was just arriving as I got there. But these were the only people who were present throughout the whole day. So they haven't maintained their staffing levels. The meals are being delivered late. So the families are all pitching in to try and deliver meals. We've got people who were just lying in bed wet. A lot of people, residents are calling out for help incessantly. But of course they know the people who are working are being just run off their feet and they can't get to everyone right away. It's been a little crazy.

DS: In terms of staffing, the B.C. Health Ministry has said that there were, quote, "some initial challenges, but that we are confident we have the right resources now to move forward." Is that what you're seeing at the care centre?

DH: No, absolutely not. I know I saw Mr. Dix say that the other day, and he's being misinformed. This is not what's happening. They've been very slow to implement proper staffing levels. And we were assured, as I said on Saturday, that the staffing levels would be present throughout. And it's just not happening.

DS: Can you understand the fear among some of the workers who are not reporting for work?

DH: Oh absolutely. I understand that completely. When I want to put myself in their position, I would be wondering if I should be turning up to work. I have a family -- and if I'm going to work in a situation like this, I'm putting them, you know, possibly at risk. But, you know, the situation we're seeing is that the staff hasn't been properly educated. You know, I would have thought that the facility would huddle with all its workers and come up with a solid plan of action to attack the situation and develop the rota and just make sure that all the staffing levels are there from day one. And it just is not happening. It's been very very slowly implemented. And it's putting the residents in danger right now because they're not being properly fed. They're not being properly cared for.

DS: You've said that you and your sister and other families are going in there giving extra care for your loved ones. How are you feeling about going into the home, given the fact that a number of workers to residents contracted covered?

DH: Well, Dave, it is what it is. You know, there is a possibility this may happen. We're doing everything we can to protect ourselves: washing our hands all day long. I mean, my hands are raw -- they've been washed so many times. And we're just carrying on knowing that there's the possibility that we could contract this virus. But I just can't imagine not being there, especially with my father, with the care that he needs. And I just can't...I can't leave my father out there twisting in the wind. And let alone the workers who do show up, we just don't want to leave them alone, just twisting in the wind, trying to get things done. We're attacking it every day.

DS: What more do you want to see done to protect your father and the other residents?

DH: Well, I want them to get the staffing levels up to where they need to be and possibly have a couple of extras to maybe just direct towards the residents who do have the virus to dedicate them to those people so that the other workers can just carry on with their workday as normal and care for the residents who aren't infected. Everybody's being put in danger right now because the staffing levels are not there.

DS: So what's your message for those who are responsible for the facility?

DH: To do as they promised that they would do and to make sure that there is a proper plan of action.

DS: Miss Harlow, hang in there and good luck for your father.

DH: Okay. Thank you Dave. I really appreciate this.

DS: Thank you.

CH: Deanna Harlow's, 96 year old father, is a resident at the Linn Valley Care Centre. We reached her earlier today in North Vancouver, B.C.. And you can find that interview on our website: cbc.ca/aih. We reached out to the Lynn Valley Care Centre for comment and didn't hear back before we went to air. But a statement on the care centre's website reads in part, We are taking every action and precaution necessary to ensure the virus is contained.

Coronavirus: British MP

Guest: Rachael Maskell

CH: In the United Kingdom. The number of COVID-19 cases has jumped significantly in recent days. It's now over 450. And Nadine Dorries is on that list. She's a junior health minister. And she's now self-isolating. Ms. Dorries has said health officials have a list of everyone she's been in contact with. And one of the people she saw recently was fellow MP Rachael Maskell. Ms. Maskell is also in self-isolation. We reached her at her home in London.

DS: Ms. Maskell, how are things going for you at home right now? How are you feeling?

RACHAEL MASKELL: I'm absolutely fine. I'm not showing any symptoms of coronavirus at the moment. I've just had contact with somebody who has been diagnosed with coronavirus. So the instruction that I've received is that I just need to self-isolate for 14 days to make sure that I'm not at risk myself and I don't pass on that risk to somebody else.

DS: Have you spoken with Ms. Dorries? How's she doing?

RM: I haven't. I understand that she's had a bit of a rough weekend, but I wish a speedy recovery.

DS: Now, according to the BBC, the Department of Health has looked into the risk to Ms. Dorries close contacts, and it says that only those with symptoms actually need to go into isolation. So why are you self-isolating if you don't have symptoms?

RM: Well, I contacted Public Health England and their phone line, which they've put. Dorries they recommended that I self-isolated. I've subsequently been contacted by Public Health England who have told me that because of the meeting I had with her that I needed to spend till the 19th of March away from other people. So the advice has been confirmed today that I am to self-isolate until the 14th.

DS: What concern is there for other people that Ms. Dorries came in contact with? And I'm thinking people in government.

RM: Well, obviously, everyone must seek advice. That's the most important thing. We have a whole public health system in place to deal with the coronavirus outbreak. And they are giving advice to what, according to the circumstances, they must seek advice and then follow that advice. So, of course, being parliamentarians, we are very active across the parliamentary state and in our constituencies. And therefore, if people have had contact, they should dial into this phone line where the advice is given. Also contact tracing to anyone that Ms. Dorries has had contact with, they are following that through to then assess the situation comprehensively. So we've got a very good system here in place.

DS: But so much of politics involves meetings and handshakes and public events. I mean, what does the situation do for your ability to do your job as a lawmaker, an elected politician?

RM: Well, clearly, I'm not able to be in parliament at the moment, which is a frustration. Today was budget day. And I would have wanted to be putting questions to the government. But it's amazing how much you can do online. So all the meetings I had in my diary we were setting up phone calls to address those meetings. Of course, I won't be out and about my constituency, but I'll still be representing my constituents. We can submit questions for ministers online. And at the moment we've got a committee looking at what happens if parliament does need to scale back its activities. So it's really important that we obviously have our democracy still functioning. As a member of the shadow cabinet, I've been contributing to the debate about coronavirus and how we can improve the situation. I deal with employment rights and therefore look at things like statutory sick pay. So our roles are still very important. And I've been continuing to work throughout the day feeding in to our team.

DS: Now, your House Speaker has said that there is currently no plan to shut down parliament right now. Do you think that's the right call?

RM: I know that the Speaker of the House of Commons is in close liaison with the health authorities, monitoring the situation. Obviously, every day we're seeing a new number of cases being announced and that whole situation is being followed extremely closely. So if people do not have any symptoms, there is no reason at this stage why parliament should shut down. But everything must be kept under review. This is a globally developing situation. We're just following the advice which has been that we shouldn't shut everything down immediately, that we should wait to see because there is a challenged that there could be fatigue if things all shut down and nobody feels any symptoms and then they come out of isolation and then the virus may spread. So Public Health England -- we've got a chief medical officer leaning on the research, the science and following that clear medical advice that's really important.

DS: With this consideration of how parliament could or couldn't operate, some people have raised the idea of running a virtual parliament online from home. What do you make of that? Do you think the parliament could continue if it's necessary to shut down the actual meeting and people attending it physically in person?

RM: Well, I think that the function of being able to still, particularly at this time, call the government to account is really important to scrutinise the work they're doing because we all need to work together on this. And there has been a lot of cross-party collaboration in making the case of the changes that need to be made to create the greatest kind of biosecurity wall that we can achieve. There are a few gaps, I would say, in the government's agenda at the moment. As the opposition, we're leading and pushing for those gaps to be closed. So we've got a vital role to play in keeping our communities safe. So I think it's important that we use the technology that is available and we find innovative ways of being able to ensure that we make our country as safe as possible. The big focus which there is complete agreement on is that we need to contain the virus and then delay its spread. And that's what our whole strategy is about here in the UK.

DS: You're no doubt watching the calendar for the end of your self-isolation. Good luck and thank you for speaking with us.

RM: Thank you very much.

CH: We reached British Labour MP Rachael Maskell earlier today in London.

[Music]

Weinstein sentencing

Guest: Elizabeth Wagmeister

CH: Harvey Weinstein was behind some of Hollywood's biggest movies. An influential producer with friends in very high places. Now he could spend the rest of his life behind bars. Today, a New York judge sentenced Mr. Weinstein to 23 years in prison on charges of sexual assault and third-degree rape. After which Mr. Weinstein's lawyer, Donna Rotunno, spoke outside the courthouse.

SOUNDCLIP

DONNA ROTUNNO: That number was obnoxious. There are murderers who will get out of court faster than Harvey Weinstein will. That number spoke to the pressure of movements in the public. That number did not speak to evidence, nor did it speak to justice. I think the judge caved, just as I believe the jury caved. And I am not happy.

CH: Harvey Weinstein's lawyer, Donna Rotunno, speaking today after the former movie producer was sentenced to 23 years in prison. Elizabeth Wagmeister is the senior correspondent for Variety magazine. We reached her in New York.

DS: Elizabeth, what was the reaction inside the court today as Harvey Weinstein was sentenced?

ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER: Pure shock. I mean, I think everybody who walked into that courtroom today was not expecting for Harvey Weinstein to get off lightly. But still, when you hear the judge say, 23 years, that is a large sentence. That's a heavy sentencing. My jaw dropped. I literally gasped

DS: How did Harvey Weinstein respond?

EW: You know, Harvey Weinstein -- he was almost emotionless. But it seemed like he was thinking just from looking at him that he was in disbelief. He can't believe this is happening. And I do believe that throughout the trial, he had every reason to hold onto hope. So did his defense. Today when you hear 23 years, and you know that you potentially have another trial coming up in Los Angeles, that's a scary thing for anyone.

DS: And what was the reaction from the six women who testified against him?

EW: You know, what was so interesting is the six women actually had testified separately on different days. None of these women knew each other. None of these women came from the same place. So today was actually the first time these six women ever met each other. So just seeing them walk in together, that was a powerful moment. As the sentencing was happening, you could tell they were definitely sitting on pins and needles. And afterwards it was immediate tears. They were crying, they were hugging, they were embracing. And when they exited, there were cheers in the hallway. You know, it was definitely a surreal moment for them.

DS: Now, the defense was asking for the minimum: five years. Prosecutors wanted the max: 29. How did the judge, Justice James Burke, explain this sentence of 23 years?

EW: He really didn't, to tell you the truth. He just said it. You know, he first started by telling Harvey Weinstein that he has evidence of sexual offenses that he has committed so that he will have to register as a sex offender. He actually spent more time explaining that to Harvey Weinstein than he did on the sentencing. He basically said on this charge of a sexual criminal act, 20 years. And then he went to the next one, rape in the third degree, three years. So there was no explanation.

DS: Mr. Weinstein didn't speak or testify throughout his trial, but he did speak before the sentencing. He addressed the courtroom. What did he say?

EW: That was one of the most shocking moments. Because, as exactly what you said, he had never spoken before. I certainly wasn't expecting him to make a statement today. And he did. It was a lengthy statement. He was going in many different directions. He started by saying that he is remorseful. He didn't say he was sorry. He did use the word "remorseful." But then he quickly took a turn and said, I'm confused and I think a lot of other men are confused -- thousands of people have been losing their jobs because we're losing due process. He really started talking about the MeToo movement and indicated that he did not think it was fair. He said, you know, what's happening in America is not good. He said he is concerned for the state of the country. This isn't the America that, you know, he believes in. And then one of the most shocking moments to me is he said at one point he didn't have any special power in the entertainment industry. He said, even when Miramax, my former company, was at the height of Miramax, we were still a small company in comparison to Disney and to Sony and to Paramount. So he said that he couldn't have blackballed anyone because he had the power to do that. I mean, that's just not true. Everybody knew how much power Harvey Weinstein had. You know, yesterday, the court, they released unsealed documents and you saw that he was directly emailing Jeff Bezos, and Tim Cook of Apple, and Mike Bloomberg. So Harvey Weinstein, the notion that he didn't have any special power is just not true.

DS: I'm glad you mentioned those court documents, because as the sentencing wraps, the evidence is now becoming unsealed. You've had a chance to look through some of the court documents. What do they say? What insights do you take from them?

EW: You know, there were tons of emails that he sent to his -- I don't know if you want to call them friends, but certainly peers, that were desperate. I mean, he even used the word "desperate" in a lot of them. He said, I need you to write a private letter of support, you don't have to make a public statement, but I really need to have your support because my board is thinking of firing me. And you can tell that this was a man who realized that part of his world could be crumbling, but still thought that he could salvage his life and his career. And then one of the most bizarre documents that we got our hands on was a response to a reporter from The National Enquirer who a few years ago was reaching out for an allegation which is false, by the way, about Jennifer Aniston. And Harvey Weinstein's reaction, what he wrote in the email was Jennifer Aniston should be killed.

DS: To a reporter?

EW: Well, actually, the email was to his spokesperson who is dealing with the reporter. But to say this person should be killed, that really proves and showcases that he always had anger issues and a reputation that followed him long before the allegations came out.

DS: You mentioned that Harvey Weinstein and his defense team appear to be lining themselves up for an appeal. There are also more criminal charges against him in California. So this clearly isn't the end of his time in the spotlight and before the courts. But as someone who has been in that courtroom over the past many months, what's it been like for you to watch this trial take place?

EW: You know, it's been very surreal because this is the first case of the MeToo movement to make it into a criminal courtroom. You know, someone like Matt Lauer lost his job. Someone like Charlie Rose lost his job. But now we're seeing somebody go to prison and be sentenced behind bars for 23 years -- so you realize what an impact this case will have potentially on the culture and the workplace in Hollywood and beyond.

DS: Elizabeth, thank you for telling us what happened today in the court.

EW: Absolutely. Thank you for having me.

CH: Elizabeth Wagmeister is the senior correspondent for Variety magazine. We reached her in New York.

[Music]

Silly Walk

CH: We know intuitively that the silly walks are silly. And yet until now, we've struggled to quantify the definitive level of silliness. In the Monty Python sketch "The Ministry of Silly Walks" we see Mr. Teabag, played by John Cleese, walking to his office. If someone asked how silly his walk was, we would say pretty silly all right. But if pressed to be more precise, we would say "I find that difficult to evaluate." Or "Why don't you shut up?" Well, in the latest edition of the journal "Gait and Posture" two researchers from Dartmouth College in New Hampshire have done the math for us. Now, as you may know, the main action of the sketch involves a man named Mr. Pudey visiting Mr. Teabag with a request.

SOUNDCLIP

[Crowd laughs]

VOICE 1: I have a silly walk and I'd like to obtain a government grant to help me develop it.

VOICE 2: I see. May I see your silly walk?

VOICE 1: Yes, certainly. Yes.

CH: At this point, Mr. Pudey demonstrates his silly walk. And then Mr. Teabag delivers his verdict.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: That's it? Is it?

VOICE 2: Yes, that's it. Yes.

VOICE 1: It's not particularly silly, is it?

VOICE 2: I mean, the right leg isn't silly at all. And the left leg merely does a forward aerial half turn every alternate step. I think with government backing up, I could make it very silly.

VOICE 1: Mr. Pudey, the very real problem is [Audience laughter].

CH: Well, now we've seen both men walk sillily. But exactly how sillily? Well, the Dartmouth researchers write, quote, "We measured knee flexion in the sagittal plane of motion and calculated the Gait Variable Score (GVS) for three gate cycles. Those of the minister and Mr. Pudey." Now, incorporating this GVS, they conclude that Mr. Pudey's silly walk is 3.3 times sillier than the average walk. But that largely due to his wildly irregular knee flexion, 110 degrees versus the typical 20 degrees, Mr. Teabag's silly walk is a remarkable 6.7 times sillier than typical walking. Finally, some real numbers. We've made great, silly strides here. There's still much work to be done. But remember, the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single ridiculous step.

[Music]

Part 2: 30,000 years ago, hunter-gatherers didn't need Facebook — they had ostrich egg beads

Coronavirus: New Rochelle

Guest: Josh Berkowitz

CH: First there was Wuhan. Then, Iran. And Italy. Now more than 100 countries around the world are dealing with COVID-19 cases. And the suburb of New Rochelle, New York, is one of many new epicenters. Just 20 miles from Manhattan, Westchester County, where New Rochelle is located, now accounts for more than half of New York State's 212 infections. The outbreak there appears to have originated with a local attorney who attended a local synagogue. Now, all large gatherings are prohibited. And the National Guard is on its way. New Rochelle Mayor Noam Bramson says as alarming as that may sound, the community is not under lockdown.

SOUNDCLIP

NOAM BRAMSON: It is very important to clarify that this is not an exclusion or quarantine zone. No one is prohibited from entering or leaving the area. This does not affect individual homeowners or families or businesses. It is purely a prohibition on large gatherings in order to make sure that the spread of the virus is mitigated to the greatest degree possible.

CH: Noam Bramson is the mayor of New Rochelle, New York. He's doing his best to explain a new containment zone to local residents. But Josh Berkowitz says he's still confused. Mr. Berkowitz owns the Eden Wok Chinese Restaurant in New Rochelle, and that's where we reached him.

DS: Mr. Berkowitz, when you hear the Mayor of New Rochelle say that the containment zone there is not a quarantine zone, are you at all reassured?

JOSH BERKOWITZ: No, not really. Because once people hear the word "contamination" they feel like they shouldn't go anywhere near the area.

DS: Well, I think he said containment, not contamination.

JB: People have been translating in their heads, containment to contamination.

DS: Contamination?

JB: Yes. They are fearful of coming to New Rochelle because the National Guard is coming in. And even though it's a containment zone, people are, as I said before, thinking containment just rule it contamination zone. No one wants to go near here. It's like a bubble with a black cloud over it.

DS: Now, you're right inside this zone. What is life like there right now?

JB: It is very quiet. It's not a ghost town, but it's pretty close to it. People are very scared. People are scared of the unknown.

DS: Are you scared?

JB: I am scared. I'm scared for them. I'm scared for myself. Scared for everyone right now.

DS: So what are officials telling you about the rules for this containment zone?

JB: So Governor Cuomo had a press conference yesterday. Unfortunately, the business owners or anyone, you know, in my circle were not notified that there was a press conference or anything or what the story was. I got a phone call from a family member informing me as to "Josh, did you hear about this? "I said, no, what are you talking about? And this family member proceeded to tell me exactly what happened in the press conference.

DS: So what's your understanding of the rules?

JB: My understanding of the rules are that any large houses of worship or large gathering facilities are going to be shut down and cleaned by the National Guard. That does not include restaurants or businesses or supermarkets.

DS: Now, they're set to arrive tomorrow to begin this, whether it's cleaning or even delivering food. How are you feeling about the prospect of seeing the National Guard in New Rochelle?

JB: I'm fearful because if people aren't worried about the containment zone, as this thing is called, anyone that hears that the National Guard is being brought in, is a hundred percent going to stay away because the National Guard does not come in for a happy occasion.

DS: Now, people are still allowed to come and go from this area, to be clear. But what about those individuals who are actually under quarantine?

JB: They are not allowed to leave their houses. So we are doing deliveries to them. I've coined the phrase "the drop and dash" where you see they're looking out the window because they know that we're coming and we will drop the food and we will proceed to our vehicle in order for, as I said before, they want us to be safe and we want them to be safe.

DS: And what do you say to people who are concerned that New Rochelle residents, you know, still have easy access to Manhattan by car, by train?

JB: There's nothing wrong with their New Rochelle. The people that are quarantined are quarantined, and they are staying quarantine. People that are not quarantined, they're coming and going as they please because there's no reason for them to be quarantined if they weren't in this area when this, you know, coronavirus started spreading. So people can come and go as they please.

DS: Now, you say that these rules, this containment zone, is creating fear, but do you not see it as necessary, given the numbers and the spike in COVID-19 cases there?

JB: I do think it is necessary. But if there is a quarantine down -- I spoke to a friend of mine, we'll call him Peter -- and I was talking to him when I was out for delivery. And I said, Peter, I just passed your house for the second time and I saw a car pull into your driveway. He said yeah because I'm quarantined but my wife is not quarantine. So I said, Peter, not getting personal, are you and your wife living in the same room? He said yeah, what's wrong with that? We called the health department, they said, it's fine. To me, a quarantine is: I'm in one section of the house and I have no connection at all with anyone else. So why would someone's spouse -- not to punish them -- but shouldn't everyone be quarantined in order that the germs do not spread to the outside?

DS: This sounds like a very difficult situation.

JB: It definitely is.

DS: Now, last week, your restaurant was the site of a press conference in New Rochelle. But that was before this containment zone was announced. What was the press conference all about?

JB: So the reason that the mayor and the county executive had a press conference at my restaurant was because unfortunately there is an uptick in anti-Asian relations as well as anti-Semitic. I actually did receive last week a death threat, I'm guessing because of this whole situation that's going on right now.

DS: A death threat?

JB: That is correct. The death threat via email. And the New Rochelle Police Department is working on it. They held a news conference by me because I am Jewish and I do own a Chinese restaurant. So I do check off two of those boxes. And that's why they felt it was apropos to have the press conference by me to sort of, you know, tell people, listen, the county executive, the Mayor of New Rochelle, Councilwoman, are all eating lunch. They wouldn't go to a place where they feared for their safety if they didn't feel comfortable participating in the lunch.

DS: Now, the World Health Organization called this a "pandemic" for the first time today. Do you think it's just a matter of time before we are all facing these kinds of restrictions in other communities?

JB: I'm not sure. People have to be sensible. People have to be smart. I think they're a lot more cases than anyone wants to admit. And therefore, the containment zone is a good idea. But I don't know that it's sustainable. How long could you keep people in their houses, you know, on quarantine?

DS: How long do you think this can last?

JB: I don't know. Unfortunately, it might be reality that it's here to stay, which is very scary.

DS: Mr. Berkowitz, thank you.

JB: Thank you.

CH: Josh Berkowitz owns a restaurant inside a one mile containment zone that's been established in New Rochelle, New York. The region around New Rochelle is currently home to about half of New York State's 212 coronavirus cases.

[Music]

Paid sick leave

CH: As we told you earlier, the W.H.O. has now officially declared the coronavirus "pandemic." And all over the world, health officials are telling people to stay home if they're sick. But Alberta Federation of Labour President Gil McGowan says that is easier said than done, especially for a large portion of Alberta's workforce who won't get paid if they have to self-isolate. Here he is telling CBC's Edmonton AM his solution to that problem.

SOUNDCLIP

GIL MCGOWAN: Paid sick leave. Public health officials are telling us that self-isolation and staying home for work are some of the best ways to stop the spread of COVID-19. But, and this is a big but, as it stands right now a very significant portion of the Alberta workforce does not have access to paid sick leave from their employers. And that's particularly true for people working in lower wage jobs and in the service sector. And for these workers, you know, they're being asked to stay home and self-isolate to help stop the spread of COVID-19. But they're being asked to do that without pay. And in many cases, even without guarantees that their jobs will be there for them. And, you know, if staying home means that these people will lose their jobs or may lose their jobs and they won't be able to pay their bills, frankly -- and this has been played out by experience, many people will decide to have no choice but to go to work even if they're sick. So what we're seeing from the labour movement is that if the Kenney government is serious about addressing COVID-19, then they also need to get serious about making it possible for Albertans to stay home from work when they're sick. And that means we need to make sure that all Albertans have access to paid sick leave, not just the lucky few.

CH: That was Alberta Federation of Labour President Gill McGowan speaking on Edmonton AM this morning. He delivered a letter to Alberta Premier Jason Kenney's office today, making the case for paid sick leave for all workers.

[Music]

Ostrich beads

Guest: Brian Stewart

CH: Tens of thousands of years ago, hunters and gatherers in sub-Saharan Africa had their own version of Facebook likes. Only they were a lot less fleeting because they were solid -- beads made out of ostrich jigs. This kind of gift giving is still used today in some parts of the continent. But a new study has found that 30,000 years ago, these beads were being sent very long distances and that they were imperative for survival. The beads in question were found in the Lesotho, an independent state surrounded by South Africa. Brian Stewart is an archaeologist and an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Michigan. We reached him in Ann Arbor.

DS: Professor Stewart, can you describe these beads that you found in Lesotho?

BRIAN STEWART: Yeah, they're exceptionally tiny. You know, everyone's familiar with the breakfast cereal, Cheerios. Well, you know, from the photos, they look like they're about the size of a cheerio. But actually, these beads mostly would fit into the hole of a cheerio. So there, you know, between three and five millimetres in diameter. So they're just tiny, tiny little things.

DS: So you've described these beads saying that they're akin to a Facebook like -- what do you mean by that?

BS: So what I mean is basically these beads are effectively a social currency. They have no monetary value. But what they do is they allow you to accrue social capital. They're exchanged in these friendship networks. They're exchanged over very close kin, for instance, or friends within your campsite or within your group. And then, you know, most people also have exchange partners that are located at various distances, including really far distances. And so these things are basically advertising to people, your relationships, your social relationships. And the more bead work you have and the more lavish and beautiful it is now, the more people like you basically, you know, and that's what that's saying. So in some ways, it's similar to a Facebook like. And it resonates with Facebook and social media because as I said, a lot of these beads we know from our study we're moving really quite long distances and they do certainly in modern times. And so you've got that kind of long distance networking angle as well.

DS: Now, these beads, they're not entirely new. And you say that they're still used today. So what is so special about where these specific beads were found?

BS: So ostriches, we know, occur all throughout Africa, except for a couple areas, you know, densely forested areas like in Central Africa, high mountain areas like Ethiopia, or where I work in listened to in Lesotho in southern Africa. So when we found these beads there, you know, this is a place where ostriches would not typically live. And so it became kind of immediately clear to us that these beads were probably coming from far away. And that's what we were trying to test.

DS: And what kind of conclusion have you come to as to how far these beads have traveled?

BS: Well, it looks from their chemical signature, which we tried to match to the regional geology, like the ostriches that laid the eggs from which these beads were made, were living at distances, which were really quite stunning. I mean, we're talking about, you know, at least 80 percent of our sample was coming from over 100 kilometres away. And 20 percent was coming from even further than that, including a fraction of about 10 percent, which was coming from over 325 kilometres away. And that's a minimum. It's possible -- and we need to do more work -- but it's possible that these were coming from as far away as a thousand kilometres away.

DS: So how did they get to Lesotho?

BS: So with these kind of distances and considering they are beads, I think we can probably conclude that these were exchanged between groups. And it's not like, you know, somebody from one group was walking 400 kilometres and exchanging with someone from another group. I mean, that could have happened. But what you're probably getting and again, you see this in the modern Kalahari, you're probably getting down the line exchange where people have exchange partners located at different groups. A bead goes to another group, let's say 50 kilometres away or 40 kilometers away -- that person has, you know, keeps it for a while and then re-gift's it to somebody else that's even further away and so on and so forth down the chain.

DS: So what does all of this tell you about how important it would have been thousands of years ago for people to have this kind of connection and social currency from one group to another?

BS: These things basically guarantee you access to your exchange partner's territory in case your own territory has some kind of a problem ecologically. If there's a big drought or some other issue and you suddenly don't have food, you can take your family and you can move into the territory, even if it's very far away, of your trading partner. And so what that does is create this kind of blanket or web of insurance networks, insurance policies that spread across the landscape and allows habitation of really volatile, difficult environments.

DS: And what was happening in the world at the time of these beads that would make this kind of system important?

BS: Yeah, I mean, that's another big aspect of the study. We know during that particular stage between about 60,000 and about 25,000 years ago, that the climate was excessively volatile. It was moving all over the place, much more volatile than it is now. And you know, to the point where whole biomes were coming and going. So places that, you know, would have been forested could become desert and back again in the space of several generations. So this would have been very difficult for people to deal with as they tried to make a living to sustain themselves in terms of food, in terms of finding mates for reproducing, and doing all the things that you need to do to be a human and survive. So these kind of networks would have created much needed information transfer systems to get up to date information on other environments where you could possibly move on social relationships and on the status of potential marriage partners across the landscape.

DS: So by looking at all of this and these beads, what are the lessons for today?

BS: [Chuckles] That's a great question. I think. I think we should never underestimate how ingenious we are as a species at being environmentally adaptable. And that's great. But you know we have to, at the same time, be very careful and not sit back on our laurels and, for instance, let the planet go to hell in terms of climate change, because we're no longer highly mobile hunter-gatherers who can just pack up and go somewhere else when things go south. So on the one hand, it's encouraging. And on the other hand, I think it's a warning that, you know, we need to be a little more careful with our planet.

DS: Professor Stewart, thanks for chatting with us.

BS: Thanks so much.

CH: Brian Stewart is an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Michigan. We reached him in Ann Arbor. And you can see a photo of the beads and find more on Professor Stewart's study on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Pizza Reaction

CH: A Montreal pizza joint was simply trying to settle a debate. Instead, it set off a firestorm. Yesterday, we spoke to Tomasso Mulé, the owner of Bàcaro Pizzeria, who pulled Hawaiian Pizza off his menu. He held a referendum with his Quebec customers who delivered a near deadlock result. In the end, though, the results were in: Pineapple has to separate from Bacaro. Naturally, you had opinions.

DS: Joan Miles heard that interview with Tomasso from her kitchen. Quote, "I was cutting up a nice fresh pineapple with which to garnish my homemade vegetarian pizza. I hope other pizza parlors won't bow to patron pressure to banish this beloved fruit from its menus."

CH: Martin Wiltsey on Twitter wondered whether Tomasso's plan would backfire. He writes, "If customers want a Hawaiian pizza, they will now have to go to Bacaro's competitors. Maybe he should leave the Hawaiian pizza off the menu, but let it be known that he will make them on the down low."

DS: And Chris Patrick Carolan thinks the Hawaiian haters should chill. He tweeted, "Do people know that they have the option to, you know, not order a pizza that has pineapple on it? If it's an anathema to them?"

CH: And Gavin Blair wonders if pizza lovers have lost their sense of adventure. "At Christmas, there were ads for turkey dinner, pizza with gravy. You can get poutine, Caesar salad, chicken teriyaki. But pineapple is a bridge too far? Come on. I like pepperoni, but you can have whatever you want." Thanks Gavin. And listeners, please continue to share your controversial pizza opinions with us. Our email is aih@cbc.ca. And our Twitter handle is @CBCAsItHappens.

[Music]

Bernie Sanders

CH: It's essentially down to two candidates, but the most important name in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination isn't Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders, it's Donald Trump. Last night, Mr Biden won four more states in the on-going primary battle. Now it will be very difficult for Mr. Sanders to win. But today the Vermont Senator told the media he won't drop out, and that people seem less concerned about policy than they are about the president.

SOUNDCLIP

BERNIE SANDERS: While our campaign has won the ideological debate, we are losing the debate over electability. I cannot tell you how many people our campaign has spoken to who have said, and I quote, "I like what your campaign stands for. I agree with what your campaign stands for. But I'm going to vote for Joe Biden because I think Joe is the best candidate to defeat Donald Trump." End of quote. We have heard that statement all over this country. Needless to say, I strongly disagree with that assertion. But that is what millions of Democrats and independents today believe. On Sunday, I very much look forward to the debate in Arizona with my friend Joe Biden.

CH: Mr. Sanders went on to list issues he plans to press Mr. Biden on, including health care, tuition, incarceration rates, and immigration. And he ended this way.

SOUNDCLIP

BERNIE SANDERS: So let me conclude, the way I began, Donald Trump must be defeated and I will do everything in my power to make that happen. On Sunday night, in the first one on one debate of this campaign, the American people will have the opportunity to see which candidate is best positioned to accomplish that goal. Thank you all very much.

CH: Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders speaking earlier today.

[Music]

Part 3: Science trial bias

Science trial bias

Guest: Raegan Durant

CH: Before a new cancer drug can come to market, it needs to be tested. And clinical trials are a big part of that. But a new paper is raising questions about the recruiting process for those cancer trials. Researchers interviewed dozens of health care professionals in the U.S. and those conversations revealed that there's racial bias and stereotyping among those doing the recruiting. Dr. Raegan Durant is the senior author of the paper published in the journal Cancer. We reached him in Birmingham, Alabama.

DS: Dr. Durant, what are some of the themes that emerged in your study after interviewing these health care providers?

RAEGAN DURANT: Things ranging from the fact that recruitment interactions with minority participants are perceived by many to be challenging. We also heard from some that minority participants were not perceived to be ideal steady candidates. We also heard from some that race was actually perceived as irrelevant when screening and recruiting minority participants for clinical trials. So we really saw a wide spectrum of responses from the folks that were interviewed.

DS: Race is not relevant. What do you make of hearing that?

RD: That was one thing that was somewhat interesting to us. But at the same time, perhaps a little bit troubling. Most of the folks who express this notion of race neutrality in their approach when recruiting patients to clinical trials I think were well-intentioned in the sense that they felt like the most effective way to avoid bias was to essentially ignore race. However, the reason that was troubling for us is because there is a fairly robust literature that demonstrates that to recruit minority participants in the clinical trials, effectively the health care and research professionals need to consider certain cultural, behavioral, and environmental nuances that may be particular to certain groups, both whites and non-whites for that matter. And to ignore race is to ignore all of those nuances and therefore probably makes those folks less well positioned to effectively recruit minorities.

DS: So if there is bias here, what are the implications?

RD: So the implications are that while we did not measure whether or not this bias affects actual recruitment into clinical trials, it stands to reason that it certainly could increase the likelihood of reducing the number of racial and ethnic minorities who are invited to participate in clinical trials. If indeed that is a downstream effect of bias in the recruiting process, then the cancer clinical trials that are conducted will be less generalizable in many respects to those groups that are not adequately represented in the study populations. We will fall short of a societal goal of sharing equally and risk and benefits of trial participation. And in the context of cancer specifically, many life prolonging or lifesaving therapies are available only through experimental protocols or clinical trials. And if racial ethnic minorities are less likely to be invited to be in trials because of bias, then they are also not allowed equal access to some of those cutting edge therapies.

DS: Well, one of the limitations and you acknowledge this in your paper is that the study interviewed 91 people. With that small a number, can you know that the results are a reflection of the entire system across the U.S.?

RD: No, you cannot. However, the advantage of using this research methodology, namely conducting one on one interviews, is that it allows us to get the kind of in-depth information that includes some of the biases and stereotypes that were revealed. While it may not be definitive in proving that this is representative of the broader group of professionals, it does give us some insight into some areas that we probably should ask more questions and perhaps pursue additional investigations that would allow us to see how widespread some of these attitudes are.

DS: Your paper also notes that these interviews were conducted and the data was collected in 2010. So 10 years on, does it still hold or do you have any hope that things have changed?

RD: It was 10 years ago. And we don't have the ability to know definitively what's changed with this study population. Short of that, we're forced to sort of use somewhat some proxy measures for whether or not secular trends have led to improvement or changes in these attitudes. Certainly when we look at the literature on bias, in the clinical contexts, on bias expressed in the context of clinical care versus research studies where our focus was, we still see the similar attitudes being expressed in that context, even far more recently than 2010. Using that as a proxy, you know, we might assume that unfortunately, while there may be some shift in some of these attitudes, they're likely not significantly changed or completely eradicate.

DS: So what can be done to fix this, to make sure that cancer clinical trials are offered and better reflected to the entire population?

RD: One of the things that we think is a first step and what we've attempted to do it, quite frankly, is just identify it and acknowledge it. And helping health care and research professionals understand that this is indeed a real phenomenon. And the only way to begin to address it is sort of to acknowledge it, identify it, and then we can set about ways to try to figure out how to improve it. One of the ways that we think, quite frankly, would be helping these individuals who are involved in recruitment of patients for clinical trials understand and identify their own biases. And then there are a number of programs that have been successful in clinical context to help clinical providers, and many of these folks are clinical providers, to help clinical providers ameliorate some stereotypes and other biases that may negatively influence their decision making for patients in clinical contexts. We would hope that some of those programs would be adaptable to the research context and help these professionals understand their biases and then work on minimizing the impact of those biases in their decision making around clinical trial recruitment.

DS: Dr. Durant, interesting research. Thank you for sharing your findings.

RD: Thank you.

CH: That was Dr. Raegan Durant. He's an associate professor of medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

[Music]

Reading: Small Game Hunting at the Local Coward Gun Club

CH: CBC Radio's annual title fight gets underway next week. And the theme of this year's Canada Reads, panelists will be debating one book to bring Canada into focus -- warts and all. We'll be out of the last part. But it's exactly what YouTuber Alayna Fender says her chosen novel does. In her words, "Small Game Hunting at the Local Coward Gun Club is like a train that you know is going over a cliff, but you can't get off." The book shines a spotlight on the darker side of this country and of a province known for being friendly and welcoming, except when it isn't. It's set in Newfoundland. And it's the first novel by Megan Gail Coles. Here she is with an excerpt. And a warning: it's dark and there's a swearword.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Iris wakes clutching her dead cell phone in an outstretched hand. Her arm has grown heavy and numb. She has to lift and shake it with her other hand to revive circulation. It is insensate from the pressure of being her arm. She had folded herself into the recovery position on the couch with her full weight upon the one free texting hand. She is wearing a coat and boots. Apparently intent ongoing somewhere. She remembers, she had been upset, been drinking through the storm. This at all been bad enough before he had come over. He had not been drunk, of course. He is almost never drunk when she is drunk. Like the first time, Iris had been drinking cheap wine and sketching moose at home. It was a Wednesday evening. There had been no romantic lead up to the encounter on that particular day. In fact, Iris had been weaning herself from her phone. There was a new guy at work who made her laugh, and so she got to thinking that things could change if she changed them. This night was back when Iris still believe men and women could just be friends. She was busy being herself in her apartment, listening to Destroyer records, eating handfuls of dates from the open fridge, sticky fingertips upon her brushes, slow deliberate strokes, more dates. Another glass of Beaujolais, fingerprints on vinyl, antlers are tricky. They refuse to reveal themselves. But Iris was certain they would be hers. She was willing herself to see some pattern in her practice. She would keep after it into the night. This was her whole plan. And then I like smoking with you. The little box on her phone told her, and she smiled. Of course, it is a statement meant for a smiling. The intention is to curl a lip, and maybe a toe or two. An Iris's lips and toes were still capable of curling then. We could smoke cigarettes together in the snow. She should have said no. She had drunk a bottle of red on a half empty stomach and she should have said no. That night and every night that followed -- last night too. But Iris didn't want to seem shy or shitty or a silly girl. And he was so tall, handsome, smart. She had been. What was it? Hopeful. Though that hope is waning now.

CH: That's Megan Gail Coles reading from her Canada reads nominated novel "Small Game Hunting at the Local Coward Gun Club." Next week, her book's defender, Alyana Fender will be hunting for a win in this year's battle of the books. To find out more about the competition, visit cbcbooks.ca. And we'll have another reading later in the program.

[Music]

PTSD and Journalism

CH: Sheila MacVicar wanted to tell the stories, not to become one herself. Tonight in Ottawa, the veteran foreign correspondent is delivering Carleton University's annual Kesterton Lecture. It's a call to action for journalism schools and media outlets to take responsibility for the high rate of post-traumatic stress disorder amongst journalists themselves. This morning, CBC Ottawa's Robyn Bresnahan asked Sheila MacVicar what prompted her to go public with her own diagnosis.

SOUNDCLIP

SHEILA MACVICAR: My PTSD never rose to the level of some of my colleagues. I have colleagues who've been hospitalised on and off for years. I know combat vets and even some colleagues whose lives have become virtually...they aren't able to function. There are others who sink into deep depressions from which they cannot recover. My PTSD never reached that level of severity. But it did have a big impact on my life. And I want people to understand that even if you're functioning, even if you're going to work every day, even if you're able to carry out your job, you may still be carrying with you a load of symptoms and that can have a big impact on your life.

ROBYN BRESNAHAN: What does PTSD feel like?

SHEILA MACVICAR: You know, it's a continuum. It's not any one thing. It will depend on who you are. So what was my own PTSD like? I became increasingly anxious. I developed depression. For somebody whose number one ability to carry out the job is an ability to get on a plane, I became a very fearful flier. I remain a very fearful flier -- although effect treatment for PTSD. I was often in a state of hyper vigilance or high alert, which is something that I still struggle with. There is a conflict between the life that you live when you're in a conflict zone and the life you try to live normally at home. And that can become even more abrupt and more difficult.

ROBYN BRESNAHAN: I know you have a daughter who's a senior reporter for Vice, I think. And you said in the beginning of the interview that things still aren't great. I mean, what is it going to take for us to be able to stop saying that there's a stigma around PTSD, and for newsroom managers to be able to say, we're going to give you some help when you come back from a warzone because you've seen some horrible things?

SHEILA MACVICAR: It is good to take a culture shift. And as I said, you don't have to go to a warzone to have PTSD. You can be a survivor of an abusive childhood. You can be in an abusive marriage. You can be an E.R. nurse. You can be a journalist out covering a multi-car crash on some snowy highway. Covering an evacuation of a community that's going up in flames. All of those things can impact you. Not everyone is going to be impacted the same way. But what has to happen is that we have to get beyond the point of just paying lip service. And we have to get to the point where people both feel safe and secure and confident that their professional careers will not be disrupted if they come forward and say, I'm having trouble with this. Maybe even that they don't have to come forward to their employer. Maybe that there should be another system that's established that is protected, confidential, and where people are able to speak and speak with confidence.

CH: That was veteran foreign correspondent Sheila MacVicar speaking with CBC Ottawa's Robyn Bresnahan this morning.

[Music]

Cool California

Guest: Rosie Borba

CH: The small town of Cool, California, is facing a challenge to its sense of community and its name. The American budget retail store "Dollar General" which has historically targeted underserved markets, is planning to open a location in Cool. But a lot of people in town say they're worried a big box store could mean the end of local business, and they're small town way of life. Rosie Borba has lived in Cool, California, for over 20 years. She owns a local flower and gift shop in town. She's in Cool.

DS: Ms. Borba, why are you worried about a Dollar General retail store moving into your town?

ROSIE BORBA: Because it's going to put most of the small businesses out of business in this town. It will hurt the pharmacy, the small pharmacy, we have -- the grocery store that we have now, my gift and floral shop. Yeah. It will put the other businesses out of business.

DS: Now, Cool, California is a town of 4000 people?

RB: Just roughly around 4000 people.

DS: So describe what life is like in your town for folks who may not be familiar with it.

RB: This is a rural area. The lifestyle is a slower pace. It's an excellent place to raise children. We have no stoplights on the Georgetown divide. We have a blinking light in Cool, but no traffic lights here. It's just a rural, quiet, great community.

DS: Now, Cool, California is a big part of the appeal for the town its name?

RB: Yes. Yes.

DS: And how where does the Cool come from?

RB: We actually we were Cave Valley when it first started, but there was one in Southern California, so they needed to find a name for us. And we had a traveling preacher named Aaron Cool. And he would you used to travel the gold route and he would come through Cool. So when they were trying to pick a name, they figured Aaron Cool was the perfect person to name it after. So that's how we got our name.

DS: And that's pretty cool. [Chuckles] Now, your shop is right across the street from the site of this proposed Dollar General.

RB: Exactly right across the street.

DS: So what do you say to people who may argue, look, here's a business who wants to come to town, it'll hire people, It'll build a building, pay taxes and offer people a deal. Wouldn't this be a good thing?

RB: No, not for them. If you've ever been in a Dollar General store, you'll see exactly what I mean. I traveled to another small rural town up in Forest Hill just to see what their Dollar General like, because I figured if I'm going to fight them, I need to know what I'm fighting. Or am I going to say no -- I think it's a great thing to come in here. Their store was terribly messy. They hire one manager that comes from out of the area and they hire probably two to three part-time people to run their stores.

DS: But it seems to be in their business interests to expand to your town.

RB: It's in their interest to expand to any small town -- any small town. And you'll find people that are in small towns that have a Dollar General -- the majority said it is kills so many of the regular mom and pop small businesses around.

DS: And what would you say to people who say, well, that's capitalism?

RB: Well, you know, I'm all for capitalism. I'm all for growth as long as it's controlled. But I mean, we don't have the infrastructure here on what I call the Georgetown divide to have hundreds of thousands of people coming up and driving to our areas. We are a northern California town that has been prone to wildfires. You know, we don't have what could sustain something like that.

DS: So what have you heard from people in Cool who actually want a Dollar General store in town?

RB: I would say if you did a proposal on it, out of 10 people, 9 would say no. 1 would say yes.

DS: And for that one person, why do they want it?

RB: They figure that the prices will be cheaper. But when I went to check out that one store, the prices weren't necessarily cheaper. They had an eight ounce, hypothetically, can of beans for 89 cents. Well, we might pay a $1.10 but we have a 10 ounce can of beans. So you really need to compare apples to apples.

DS: Now, this is not the first time that a small town has fought a big box store coming to town. Is this a fight you think you can win?

RB: We're hoping we win it. We helped stop it in Georgetown, which is up the road from us. They got more publicity, hypothetically, because they're more of a gold rush town and they have a lot of mines and different things up there. Everybody's saying here that wants to put that in -- the developers are the people who want to do the work on the land over there...it's just there's nothing Cool. Why should you care about Cool? Well, we do care about the rural lifestyle. We value our way of life. That's why we moved here. I moved here 40 years ago for that. I raised my children here. My grandchildren went to school here and graduated from our local high school. We do care.

DS: Now what strikes me that some of your town's appeal is the name, that it's Cool. What makes Cool, cool?

RB: Because we're such a small rural town. We are just -- I mean it's just a sweet town. I guess that's all I can say.

DS: And do you think you can stay cool even if a Dollar General does come to town?

RB: No, no, no, no. We can't. Not if that comes to town. It's not going to bring the quality of people that we want or need to keep our community the way it is. We're right now going to lose our veterinarian that's been up here for 20 some years. So they've announced today or yesterday that at the end of the month they're gone. That's pretty sad.

DS: Now, Dollar General says they're going to be making a final decision on their shop in Cool later this year. If they decide that they are going to open up in your town, what will you do?

RB: I'll close my business. I won't fight them. I can't fight it. I'm 73 years old. I support my community, all of our small businesses. When a kid comes in from soccer or whatever, we donate so that those programs can stay alive up here. I really doubt if Dollar General -- if we lose five businesses here, they're not going to step up and do five different things that we do. They're not going to do that. But we all care because we like that rural lifestyle. We like to have our Grange Hall down the road. We like to have our community centres. We like that. That's why we're all here. And that's why we're fighting now.

DS: Ms. Borba, thank you and good luck.

RB: You have a good day.

CH: Rosie Borba is the owner of a local flower and gift shop in Cool, California.

[Music]

Bikini bottoms

CH: Like a lot of 12 year old girls, Ruby Alexander wants to wear a bikini to the beach. Ruby is trans. And for the most part, wearing a bikini wasn't a problem. But when the family started planning a trip to Panama, her father, Jamie, worried about his daughter's safety. The problem was there weren't any clothing lines out there that are designed with trans girls in mind. So Jamie decided to create his own called "Ruby's" -- after his daughter. And he just got his first shipment of bikini bottoms in. Jamie and Ruby spoke with Farrah Merali on CBC Toronto's Metro Morning today.

SOUNDCLIP

RUBY ALEXANDER: Well, they make me feel really confident and proud about who I am. And I really like how -- when I wear them, I don't feel like I'm just a trans girl. I feel like I'm just a regular girl who's wearing like the same bikini bottoms as all my other girlfriends.

FARRAH MERALI: And Jamie, you've actually brought a sample of the bikini bottom into studio. What are the special features? Jamie is holding a pink, sparkly pink pair of bikini bottoms. What are some of the special features of these bottoms?

JAMIE ALEXANDER: Yeah. So the important thing about the bottoms is really kind of compressing and flattening out the area. And so what we've done is by layering different layers of spandex and mesh to really achieve that flattening. And it took a number of iterations to come up with something that works. And, you know, it works for Ruby and a few other friends of hers in the community that we'd been able to test with. And now I'm actually shipping out to about 25 different families and we will really find out if it, you know, works for all different body shapes and sizes.

FARRAH MERALI: Ruby, what do you think about your dad designing this swimwear line, not just for you, but for other girls like you?

RUBY ALEXANDER: Well, I'm really grateful that he's doing this because I think there's a lot of trans kids, trans girls out there who when they wear like a bathing suit, they feel judged by like people who see them wearing it. And I'm just really really happy that my dad is making this because it's going to save a lot of trans girls. And I think they're going to feel more comfortable and happy.

CH: That was Ruby Alexander and her father, Jamie, speaking with Metro Morning today. Jamie has created a line of bikini bottoms for trans girls.

[Music]

Reading: We Have Always Been Here

CH: Amanda Brugel has already shown us a range as an actor in everything from Kim's Convenience to The Handmaid's Tale. But next week she's taking on a whole new challenge: appearing on Canada Reads. She'll be defending Samra Habib's memoir, "We Have Always Been Here." Which chronicles Ms. Habib's lifelong search for the safety to be herself as a queer Muslim woman. She grew up in Pakistan and came to Canada with her family as a refugee, only to face a whole new set of challenges, including the challenge of writing a memoir. But from a young age, she's known she wasn't alone. But there were other people like her who couldn't and wouldn't fit in. Here is Samra Habib with a reading from, "We Have Always Been Here."

SOUNDCLIP

SAMRA HABIB: We both had shaved heads. Although the reason for mine was that a week earlier my barber had discovered head lice before giving me my monthly bowl cut. I suspect her reason was more exciting. I couldn't have been older than 5 when I saw her. But I can still vividly recall her face. My eyes fixed on it as honking trucks zipped by and three different qawwalis blaring from the shops behind me. My mother likes to tell the story of how intently I would focus on the flickering television screen. The only one on our street in Lahore while she'd nursed me. She would turn me around in an attempt to protect my eyes. But I always manage to swivel my head toward the screen. She would be the first to tell you, I've always been drawn to action. My dad had parked the car in front the shops in Liberty Market as my parents search for last minute Eid dresses for my sister and me. I always hated the muted colours my mother chose. Gray is the colour of concrete. Or washed out browns that reminded me of Ovaltine. As I waited in the backseat, I found myself drawn to the woman with a shaved head. Something about the spontaneity of her movements and the ease with which she rested her hand on her matte black motorcycle, captivated me. She was probably closer in age to my mother, who was in her mid-20s at the time. But the similarities ended there. I had never seen a woman laugh so freely in public and be so comfortable in her skin while socializing with men and women as if that were a regular occurrence for women in Pakistan. Eventually, she noticed my little face interrogating her from afar, and smiled before shifting her attention back to a conversation with her friend. I seem to be the only one fascinated by her. My younger sister continue to talk to herself or maybe to me, who can say in the backseat. Soon, the woman was hiking up, her black shalwar and adjusting her dupatta, securing it tightly so that her breasts were modestly covered, almost like donning armor before entering battle. She sped off on her motorcycle and joined the busy night before Eid traffic.

CH: That's Samra Habib reading from her memoir "We Have Always Been Here." Actor Amanda Brugel will champion the book next week on Canada Reads. And for more on the annual battle of the books, go to cbcbooks.ca

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

March 11, 2020 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode