Blogger, Artist, Social Media, Web Designer, Photographer- I blog about nouns-people, places and things, even when it's negative I try to put a positive spin on it. @tinawinterlikfb https://tinawinterlik.blogspot.com
Premier David Eby, Government of British Columbia
Email: david.eby.MLA@leg.bc.ca / premier@gov.bc.ca
Constituency Office: 2909 West Broadway, Vancouver, BC V6K 2G6
MLA for Vancouver – Point Grey: David Eby (BC NDP, Premier)
Phone: 604‑660‑1297
MLA for Surrey South: Brent Chapman (BC Conservative)
Email: Brent.Chapman.MLA@leg.bc.ca
Office: 206–15850 24 Avenue, Surrey, BC V3Z 0G1
MLA for Surrey – White Rock: Trevor Halford (BC Conservative)
Email: trevor.halford.MLA@leg.bc.ca
Office: 101–1493 Johnston Road, White Rock, BC V4B 3Z4
Local & national media outlets (e.g., CBC, Global, The Tyee, Vancouver Sun)
From: Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita, Vancouver BC Re: Dental Plans That Don’t Work for the People Who Need Them Most
Dear Elected Officials and Relevant Agencies,
Let’s talk about the so-called Canada Dental Benefit and the BC Healthy Kids Program — because from where I’m standing, it’s not working. Not for me, not for my friends, and not for the countless Canadians who fall between the cracks of government promises and real-life poverty.
I’m writing as someone who has been forced to choose between feeding my child and taking them to the dentist. I’m writing as someone who watched her back teeth break off over the course of two years and was told by the ER that they “couldn’t help.” I’m writing on behalf of my friend who’s missing a front tooth and has to wait until September for coverage to reset —
Your plan doesn’t help people like us. Why?
Because dentists rarely — if ever — accept only what’s covered.
Because we’re expected to pay upfront or cover the “difference.”
Because $20 or $200 more is a dealbreaker when you have nothing.
Because there’s no enforcement, no oversight, and no dignity in how this care is delivered.
And don’t be fooled: it’s not just about appearances. Dental care is health care — tied to heart disease, diabetes, mental health, and nutrition.
Reflective Questions for You, the Decision-Makers:
Why is there no regulation forcing dentists to fully accept the government plan with no upcharges for people in financial crisis?
Why isn’t emergency dental care available at hospitals or clinics without gatekeeping?
Why aren’t mobile or community-based dental programs mandatory in low-income neighbourhoods?
Why do benefits expire or reset instead of being flexible, like a health account?
Where is the transparency in dental pricing? Can Canadians see a breakdown of costs and decide who is profiting?
How many Canadians (especially those unhoused, disabled, or on income assistance) are living in pain, shame, or infection risk because of dental neglect?
Who monitors the quality and safety of tools and practices in clinics that serve people on public plans?
My Suggestion for Real Change:
Enforce public plan acceptance. Make it mandatory for dentists to accept full payment through public plans — with no extra charges.
Public dental clinics in every region. Staffed by salaried professionals who focus on care, not profit.
Portable dental health accounts. Let unused funds roll over. Let people use them when emergencies arise — not just when bureaucracy allows.
Create a dental ombudsman. Someone to oversee complaints, standards, and equity.
Fund mobile dental units. Reach seniors, unhoused people, and rural residents.
I believe many of you entered public service to make a difference. I’m asking you now — prove it. Fix the system. And most of all, listen to people like me, who’ve lived the consequences of this broken system for far too long.
Sincerely, Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita
Vancouver, BC
Disclaimer, AI wrote this. Personally I am against cloning. I am against alot of stuff, I can't stop it, so just share info on it
In a world where scientific breakthroughs like the cloning of Dolly the sheep have opened doors to new possibilities, it's easy to see how cloning could be used for good. Dolly, cloned in 1996, symbolized hope for advancements in medicine and agriculture. However, not all cloning stories have positive outcomes. In recent years, an American rancher, Arthur Schubarth, took cloning down a much darker path, attempting to clone mountain sheep for financial gain in the hunting industry.
Schubarth illegally imported endangered sheep and manipulated their genetic material to create hybridized animals that he intended to sell for high-profit trophy hunting. This goes far beyond the ethical cloning of animals like Dolly. The motivation behind Schubarth’s actions was not advancing science or improving agricultural practices—it was driven purely by greed.
The consequences of his actions were far-reaching. On the legal front, Schubarth faced charges under the Lacey Act, which regulates the trafficking of wildlife. He was sentenced to six months in prison for violating these laws, and his illegal smuggling and cloning efforts highlighted how cloning technologies, when misused, can lead to serious ethical and environmental issues.
From an ecological standpoint, the introduction of cloned hybrid sheep into the wild threatened local wildlife populations, risking the spread of diseases like Johne's disease. This case illustrates how cloning, which once symbolized a leap in scientific progress, can easily be corrupted when placed in the wrong hands.
Cloning remains a controversial tool, with potential benefits on one side and serious ethical questions on the other. While Dolly’s cloning gave hope for a future where medical advancements might include curing genetic disorders or reviving extinct species, Schubarth's case reminds us that without strong regulations and ethical considerations, cloning can be exploited in harmful ways.
As someone who still holds onto the memory of Dolly's legacy from an old newspaper clipping, I find it critical that we reflect on how far cloning has come—and where it might lead us if we don’t prioritize ethical boundaries. Cloning technology can be used for incredible progress, but it also has a darker side that needs careful regulation.
References:
The Dolly the Sheep cloning breakthrough and its implications for the future of genetics.
Arthur Schubarth’s illegal cloning and its consequences for wildlife conservation and ethics.
What are your thoughts on the balance between scientific advancement and ethical considerations in cloning?
Go have a glimpse at the link and info below, then think about this, A LOT of Good this is going to do me when there are no salmon to eat because they are all polluted.
If legislation is passed, key elements of the new spill regime will come into effect in 2017, https://t.co/Rzm95Qs1rS
https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2016ENV0008-000302?WT.cg_n=Hootsuite Quick Facts:
B.C.’s five conditions were
established in 2012 to outline requirements that must be met for the
Province to support the construction and operation of heavy-oil
pipelines in B.C. The Province’s position has not wavered since then.
The 5 conditions are:
Successful completion of the environmental review process.
World-leading marine oil spill response, prevention and recovery
systems for B.C.’s coastline and ocean to manage and mitigate the risks
and costs of heavy-oil pipelines and shipments.
World-leading practices for land oil spill prevention, response and
recovery systems to manage and mitigate the risks and costs of
heavy-oil pipelines.
Legal requirements regarding Aboriginal and treaty rights are
addressed, and First Nations are provided with the opportunities,
information and resources necessary to participate in and benefit from a
heavy-oil project.
British Columbia receives a fair share of the fiscal and economic
benefits of a proposed heavy-oil project that reflect the level, degree
and nature of the risk borne by the province, the environment and
taxpayers.
A LOT of good this will do me when I can't breathe from the forest fires caused by the climate change from the mining, drilling, destruction of mother earth to steal her life's blood.
A LOT of good this will do any of us and I know this is a scary thought but it is one we MUST CONSIDER.
IMAGINE... 17 OR more tankers, cargo, and what ever types I see sitting in Burrard Inlet on a given day. When an earthquake hits, and for what ever reason there are fires everywhere and KABOOOOM,KABOOOOM, KABOOOOM, one tanker blows and then another and another and there is oil leaking all over the place.
You know what. Sort of like the end of the dinosaurs. At least the end of us. All of Kitsilano, Point Grey, False Creek. So then what.
Canada just says ah well, silly people, SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER and they move to Victoria or up the coast and start a new port.
GIVE ME A BREAK!
This isn't rocket science people. The rules and regulations are all nicey nice but you just stop for a minute and think about FLINT MICHIGAN and how all those beautiful children have been poisoned.
And everyone is asking WHY? HOW? I thought we had rules and regulations to protect us.
Right?
But the truth is when it comes to the people...let's face it the poor people or middle income, no one cares. Because rich people don't have time for poor people. People who are not rich are looked down upon by most of the 1% and haven't a clue to the life you are living. They think they can just move away...and they can. But we can't. And maybe we don't want to.
Update: I just remembered that not only did my grandparents build a home in Vancouver, my dad did too, and then sold it when we moved to Surrey and then Hope. I will try to find out if it still exists. I know my grandma's house is gone.
The Songhees' traditional foods included salmon, shellfish, whale, deer, duck, berries, camas root, and herbs. The Coast Salish traditionally lived in bighouses, which were large rectangular communal houses of cedar planks, adorned with carved and jointed totem posts.[1]
(Just updating here)
My great great grandpa was one of the early Portugese Pioneers and he settled in Nanoose bay and Enos Lake was named after him.
I truly am entitled to live here. I have lived my whole life in BC and I have lived the last 20 years in Vancouver.
If our home, food and water are destroyed....what then.
And the corporations have it made so you will never get justice, because like I said in my other post, once you are on life support, all the money in the world is not going to help you enjoy your life to the fullest before the life support.
So think about this. This has been going on for the last 20 years that I have followed it and long before that and WHAT makes you think it would be any different hear in BC, in our beautiful Vancouver. #WeDisagree
It's a nice show, but the show is much different than the book and there's a 'KEY ' element that people aren't looking at. LOOK LOOK deeply into my eyes when I tell you, there's big money in cleaning up an oil spill. YES! as gross as that sounds watch the Exxon Valdez video below.
So something else I want you to consider.
There 3 things I want you to consider carefully. Here are some links to explain it better. I getting tired.
1) The movie is very different than the book (Inspired by does not mean true)
The movie shows how all of the
participants in the rescue used or tried to use the media for their own
purposes, including Greenpeace, which had to bring in more people to
answer *phones as calls came in from all over the world and the oil man
portrayed in the film by Ted Danson.
* see they didn't have the internet YET!!!
**Remember my other post- about grassroots, power of the people...social
media is the new media..it didn't exist when this whale rescue
happened. We can use it to OUR advantage. So keep that in mind. Because TOGETHER we WILL change the world!http://tinawinterlik.blogspot.ca/2016/03/grassroots-rock-candy-revolution.html
"The film focuses on the challenges of the
arctic conditions and the bigger challenges of finding a way for the
humans to set aside their differences for a common goal. It also
touches on some ot the darker themes Rose addresses more extensively in
his book, as indicated by its original title:
Freeing The Whales: How the Media Created the World’s Greatest Non-Event
"Rose points out that the Soviet ice-cutting ship portrayed in the media
of the time and the movie of today as the whale-saver was actually in
Alaska as a part of the USSR’s whale-slaughter industry, the largest in
the world at the time of the rescue and for many years after. "
"Rose’s
book explores the role of the media in what a cynical character in the
movie calls “cat up a tree” stories. The rescue of the three whales had
enormous public appeal, but all around it were stories the media
overlooked that were more important by any measure. Rose calculated
that the cost of the rescue and media coverage was more than $5.7
million."
3)- (I need to find the link) but the guy that cleaned up the Exxon Valdez oil spill, he got really rich cleaning it because he got chosen for being nice OIL guy in the movie.
"The $500,000 ARCO spent on Operation
Breakout was one of the best investments it ever made. A $20 million
public relations campaign** couldn’t have bought a tenth the goodwill ARCO
earned helping free the three trapped whales. It seemed to be perfect
timing.
ARCO cashed in at a critical juncture in the history of the
slumping Alaskan oil industry. No oil company in Alaska ever received
more favorable press coverage than ARCO did during its two week
investment in Operation Breakout.
Usually the rich whipping boy of the
environmentalists, ARCO now worked side by side with Cindy Lowry and
Greenpeace.
In the game of P.R. Pac-Man, ARCO swallowed any hint of
criticism by pouring tremendous resources into a rescue destined to save
three animals endangered by nature, not man’s insatiable carving for
fossil fuels.
Of course, ARCO’s work on behalf of the three whales stranded in
Barrow did nothing to clean up its share of the more than 11,000 acres
of North Slope Arctic tundra the Environmental Protection Agency said
were ruined by oil drilling."
Check out this really fantastic animated video that explains the complexities of the cosmetic industry in a simple way that even a child can understand.
And that is exactly what I did with my daughter, we watched this together.
See for yourself. I'm sure you'll be surprised at many things.
The Story of Cosmetics, released on July 21st, 2010, examines the pervasive use of toxic chemicals in our everyday personal care products, from lipstick to baby shampoo.
Produced with Free Range Studios and hosted by Annie Leonard, the seven-minute film by The Story of Stuff Project reveals the implications for consumer and worker health and the environment, and outlines ways we can move the industry away from hazardous chemicals and towards safer alternatives.
The film concludes with a call for viewers to support legislation aimed at ensuring the safety of cosmetics and personal care products.
