breaking covid rules

Please don’t blame “Sydney” as a single entity re virus spread. There are many LGAs whose people are following the restrictions to the letter and have no or very few cases. The cases in Maroubra were caused by people from the South West of Sydney breaking rules and visiting a house. I listen to the reporters at the Press meetings saying why isn’t it all of Sydney that has curfews, you are only punishing parts of Sydney. Damn right - they are the f&$#*wits that can’t follow the rules and regulations, don’t give a damn and make the rest of us suffer.

I have problems with the NSW Govt decisions at time though. They gave permission for 60 people to attend a funeral in Wilcannia when the rest of the State is 10. Then approx. 400 turned up, joined in a Covid huddle, got infected then spread it to the four corners.

The NSW government apparently still allows punters to turn up at bunnings browsing for 1 dollar a tin of wax. Go figure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justonething

The NSW government apparently still allows punters to turn up at bunnings browsing for 1 dollar a tin of wax. Go figure.

---

Bunnings are now click and collect only, throughout the whole of Sydney, not just the high risk LGAsvv

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lappa

Bunnings are now click and collect only, throughout the whole of Sydney, not just the high risk LGAsvv

---

So I heard, But its bunnings who decided it was not safe for staff to keep the stores open. NSW government still apparently allows it...

Bunnings' esential staff may not feel so essential when they get the plague due to work.

Wait until a few workmates drop dead.

They'll feel more like sacrifices.

Warb, you may be interested, our chemist has now put up a thing at the door so people cannot get in.

One asks for the item and they go get it. This applies to prescriptions too.

I liked it. It reminds me of an old fashioned shoppe where the wares are displayed on a tall wall.

It seems a sane response to keep highly valuable staff safe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

As I see it, If NSW had implemented a proper lockdown in a timely manner and enforced the rules properly then Victoria would not be in it's current position. And taking it one stage further, all of Australia was pretty much COVID-free - until some genius decided we were doing so well - "Let's open the international border. We can contain it with Hotel Quarantine". Without that stroke of genius there would be no Delta in Australia. Even Dictator Dan could see that coming when he said "If we don't lock a few people out we will have to lock everyone down."

---

I'll be very blunt -- Australia is still very much Covid free.
Here in Alberta (population about 4.4 million), the daily case numbers are greater than what NSW is currently experiencing.



and yes, my perspective is somewhat skewed.
I'm one of the people that "Dictator Dan" meant when he referred to "lock[ing] a few people out ..."
Perhaps I should apply to be recognised as a "Stateless person", given that my country of citizenship has made my return to Australia completely unaffordable. When I looked at air fares last week, the cost to fly on United out of LA was >$20,000 (AUD) per economy seat. Even if I max out all my credit cards, at that price I still can't afford to purchase the 2 seats I'd need to return "home"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

As I see it, If NSW had implemented a proper lockdown in a timely manner and enforced the rules properly then Victoria would not be in it's current position. And taking it one stage further, all of Australia was pretty much COVID-free - until some genius decided we were doing so well - "Let's open the international border. We can contain it with Hotel Quarantine". Without that stroke of genius there would be no Delta in Australia. Even Dictator Dan could see that coming when he said "If we don't lock a few people out we will have to lock everyone down."

---

There is not such thing as truly closed borders. Want medicines? They come from overseas. Someone has to fly the plane.

Blaming individual cities does nothing. Melbourne was similar in 2020 (with a less infectious variant).

COVID was always going to get out again in the community. It is highly infectious.

Australia has done incredibly well and been Evry lucky suppressing COVID. Unfortunately that has lead to mass complacency. And in combination with crap media reporting and IMO short sighted ATAGI advice, resulted in widespread vaccine hesitancy. We have squandered our good fortune.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

I'll be very blunt -- Australia is still very much Covid free.
Here in Alberta (population about 4.4 million), the daily case numbers are greater than what NSW is currently experiencing. ...

---

Yep, the Pacific Ocean does make a reasonable moat, but given the credulity of the previous US administration, I then questioned whether it was adequate.

Down here in Tasmania we have also raised the drawbridge and effectively closed Bass Strait, locking out "all those contaminated people from Sydney and Melbourne". Drastic, but it seems to be working. We have only had one covid case this calendar year. And restrictions here are relatively minor:

• sign into any commercial premises (for tracing purposes),
• hand sanitisation,
• maintain social distancing - 1.5 metres,
• wear masks when visiting hospitals,
• that's it.

But we know other restrictions will be instantly rolled out if or when we have an outbreak.

But we did have very tight restrictions when we had a major outbreak in Burnie (pop 20,000) with 700+ infections, 15 deaths in March-April 2020. Locked in homes, could only visit local shops, pharmacy, doctor, everything else closed, Police patrolling and $1,000 fines. Even tighter around Burnie. But 90% of people supported the restrictions; we grumbled but agreed.

One "trick" allegedly used by Police in enforcing travel bans is to input a car rego number into their computer, which instantly gives the home address and calculates the distance from home. If more than 3 kms away then please explain. I got pulled up for a random breath test and the young constable greeted me by name and observed that I was only 2 blocks from home. This is consistent with the "trick".

As to people trapped overseas we keep hearing monopoly numbers of those on the waiting list for repatriation. The blocking point is hotel space available for quarantine - cost about $3,000 per person after you arrive - and I cannot realistically see it abating this year. The best I can say for your situation, Ian, is that I would prefer to be trapped in Alberta than a lot of other places.

Maybe you will have to join the "in crowd" who seem to be able to travel internationally without restrictions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

As I see it, If NSW had implemented a proper lockdown in a timely manner and enforced the rules properly then Victoria would not be in it's current position. And taking it one stage further, all of Australia was pretty much COVID-free - until some genius decided we were doing so well - "Let's open the international border. We can contain it with Hotel Quarantine". Without that stroke of genius there would be no Delta in Australia. Even Dictator Dan could see that coming when he said "If we don't lock a few people out we will have to lock everyone down."

---

Really? When were the international borders openned - apart from New Zealand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justonething

So I heard, But its bunnings who decided it was not safe for staff to keep the stores open. NSW government still apparently allows it...

---

Not true. These are the rules re Bunnings issued by the NSW Govt

“From Monday 23 August 2021 the following businesses cannot open to members of the public but can be open to trade or business customers

• garden centres and plant nurseries
• hardware and building supplies
• landscaping material supplies
• rural supplies
• timber supplies. “

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pippin88

Blaming individual cities does nothing.

---

Where did I even mention an individual city? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

As to people trapped overseas we keep hearing monopoly numbers of those on the waiting list for repatriation. The blocking point is hotel space available for quarantine - cost about $3,000 per person after you arrive - and I cannot realistically see it abating this year. The best I can say for your situation, Ian, is that I would prefer to be trapped in Alberta than a lot of other places.

Maybe you will have to join the "in crowd" who seem to be able to travel internationally without restrictions.

---

Look as I've already said, even if I max out all my credit cards, I can't get close to the >$40,000 AUD I'd need to get my wife and myself back to AUS.
finding an additional $3,000 each for hotel quarantine is irrelevant in my situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Down here in Tasmania we have also raised the drawbridge and effectively closed Bass Strait, locking out "all those contaminated people from Sydney and Melbourne". Drastic, but it seems to be working. We have only had one covid case this calendar year. And restrictions here are relatively minor:

---

The fascinating thing is that Tasmania, according to last Fridays statistics in the Guardian (online) are leading the way on vaccinations. I can only assume that the "Burnie event" scared a lot of people - I suppose Tasmania is not very big, either geographically or in population, so people took more notice of the outbreak and acted in a more proactive way?

WA, from the same source, are lagging behind - presumably again the perceived low risk causing no motivation (as was the case in NSW and most other states until recently!).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

Look as I've already said, even if I max out all my credit cards, I can't get close to the >$40,000 AUD I'd need to get my wife and myself back to AUS.
finding an additional $3,000 each for hotel quarantine is irrelevant in my situation.

---

Wondering if there is a sea-going skipper with a 40 footer who might like a bit of a sail? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Yep, the Pacific Ocean does make a reasonable moat, but given the credulity of the previous US administration, I then questioned whether it was adequate.

Down here in Tasmania we have also raised the drawbridge and effectively closed Bass Strait, locking out "all those contaminated people from Sydney and Melbourne". Drastic, but it seems to be working. We have only had one covid case this calendar year. And restrictions here are relatively minor:

• sign into any commercial premises (for tracing purposes),
• hand sanitisation,
• maintain social distancing - 1.5 metres,
• wear masks when visiting hospitals,
• that's it.

But we know other restrictions will be instantly rolled out if or when we have an outbreak.

---

This is issue of States being permitted to close their borders seemingly at will, is something I feel very strongly about.

All state governments and territories are sailing very close to, if not directly into, the wind when it comes to "border closures" and travel bans.


Up until the formal adoption of the Statute of Westminster on 9 October 1942, (although the Statute's adoption was made retrospective to the outbreak of WW2), certain sovereign powers -- including the ability to independently declare War, were "reserved" to the UK sovereign. I don't know how many on here can recall hearing a repeat of Menzies' "as a consequence Australia is also at War" speech.

So up until September 1939, not even the Commonwealth had full sovereign (i.e. independent) power, and the state parliaments which federated into the Australian Commonwealth on 1 January 1901 NEVER had those powers.


When Mr Palmer attempted to invoke s.92's "intercourse among the states ... shall be absolutely free" to challenge the validity of the Border Directions issued under WA's Emergency Management Act, the High Court held that the real constitutional question was whether the Border Directions exceeded the statutory powers conferred under WA's Emergency Management Act. And as Palmer had not argued that the Border Directions were outside the scope of that statutory power, the s.92 constitutional question did not arise.


It will be interesting to see if Palmer can succeed against WA should his proposed s.117 "no different treatment" challenge proceed.
As I understand the "facts" Premier McGowen is proposing to require people from other states, including people from WA who have been in another state, to prove they are NOT Covid positive before allowing them to enter WA.


What I find distressing is that Covid is thrusting a knife into the heart of Australia's guarantee of freedom of movement between the states.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lappa

Not true. These are the rules re Bunnings issued by the NSW Govt

“From Monday 23 August 2021 the following businesses cannot open to members of the public but can be open to trade or business customers

• garden centres and plant nurseries
• hardware and building supplies
• landscaping material supplies
• rural supplies
• timber supplies. “

---

I did not know that.
What I know is this statement from Bunnings
"With the new restrictions on retail spanning a large part of Sydney, Bunnings has made the decision to temporarily close all its stores across Greater Sydney to the general public," Bunnings managing director Mike Schneider said on the 20th August, 2021.
That's 3 days before the NSW government's order.

The decision was announced by the Premier at the 20th August press conference and was slated to come into effect from Monday 23rd together with the curfew laws. I suppose it was to give people a small space of time to get things in order. I, for one, would prefer to see these changes come into effect from midnight on the day they are announced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

The fascinating thing is that Tasmania, according to last Fridays statistics in the Guardian (online) are leading the way on vaccinations. I can only assume that the "Burnie event" scared a lot of people - ?..

---

Yes, but The stats may be a little misleading in that Tas vax rates are only fractions of a percent ahead of other areas. Last night, 36% were fully vaccinated and a further 20% had received the first vax.

Where we are ahead is that the vax rats are quite uniform around the state; without the disparities of other states. For example, Brisbane has very high vax rates whilst Logan has amongst the lowest in the country. Last time I looked Logan was essentially a suburb of Brisbane.

We are all guilty of complacency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justonething

I did not know that.
What I know is this statement from Bunnings
"With the new restrictions on retail spanning a large part of Sydney, Bunnings has made the decision to temporarily close all its stores across Greater Sydney to the general public," Bunnings managing director Mike Schneider said on the 20th August, 2021.
That's 3 days before the NSW government's order.

---

It's confusing to say the least. I've just been to my local hardware which was open to anyone. I just checked the NSW covid site which says they can be open.
Attachment 499954

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Yes, but The stats may be a little misleading in that Tas vax rates are only fractions of a percent ahead of other areas. Last night, 36% were fully vaccinated and a further 20% had received the first vax.

---

36% for Tasmania, only 26% for WA. The "predicted" time to 70% fully vaccinated (over 16's), based on a 7 day rolling average of daily doses, is 54 days for Tasmania, 62 days for NSW and 95 days for QLD. Interestingly it's 76 days for WA, so whilst they're lagging behind it looks like they're catching up! Nonetheless, Tasmania are doing well!

I wonder (assuming it's not politically incorrect, which when I think about it seems very likely!) if anyone has done any analysis on those differing rates within a state. It could be socio-economic, or perhaps religious, if the varying uptake is based on vaccine-hesitancy rather than availability. In western NSW apparently the vaccination numbers are shockingly low, but the rumour mill (it's too political for any official comment) is that the indigenous population have been very unwilling to get vaccinated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Picko

It's confusing to say the least. I've just been to my local hardware which was open to anyone. I just checked the NSW covid site which says they can be open.
Attachment 499954

---

There are two lists as such. The one I posted is for the 12 LGAs of concern. The one you posted is for LGAs in the Greater Sydney Area but not one of the 12 LGAs of concern To save confusion Bunnings decided to apply the rules to all their stores in the greater Sydney Area. Coles will be closing at 8:30pm in the LGSs of concern but it’s business as usual in the other LGAs but I’m not sure about Woolies.

This is a link to the opening page re Covid Restrictions

COVID-19 rules | NSW Government

A little further down it divides into Greater Sydney, Local Government Areas of Concern, Rural NSW etc.


Attachment 499962

I agree it’s as clear as mud because when you do a search for restrictions in Google, you get a variety of links which can take you to the opening page, the page for the 12 LGAs of concern or the General Sydney Area or old rules and Regs.
My wife and I went for our usual walk today and 50% of people out there were not wearing masks when the rules state when outside your home you must wear a mask. The reason for not wearing a mask is if you are exercising and Barilaro said today walking or walking a dog is not exercise
so so you must wear a mask. Very confusing to say the least and is the information getting out to everyone. Unless you listen to the news or watch the 11am Gladys show, you have no idea of the rules. No adverts, nothing on social media from the Govt.

With Bunnings closed to public now except for Click'n'collect I was surprised that paint items can't be bought that way.

Was after some Scandi Oil, but their web site says no to it all.

Thankfully one of the paint shops carries Feast Watson and had a litre can and was willing to sell at the door.

Boy, this is getting to be a pain :)

But, as I keep reminding myself - first world problems Bob!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

This is issue of States being permitted to close their borders seemingly at will, is something I feel very strongly about.

.....

What I find distressing is that Covid is thrusting a knife into the heart of Australia's guarantee of freedom of movement between the states.

---

I would have expected a lot of people to share your view, Ian, but that does not seem to be the case. There is a tremendous amount of debate on the matter and opinion seems to be overwhelmingly in support of the lockdowns and the drawbridge. Many more comments complaining that the government is too lax, especially where the are exemptions from the state border restrictions, and/or quarantine provisions.

Please note that my comments apply particularly to Tasmania which may be a little more insular than the mainland. I do not know of any surveys, but from discussions, my estimate is that at least 80%, possibly 90%, of people support the drawbridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

What I find distressing is that Covid is thrusting a knife into the heart of Australia's guarantee of freedom of movement between the states.

---

Understandable Ian, especially as it seems increasingly pointless, judging by other countries experiences. Hard lockdowns, border closures, are only delaying the inevitable spread. The thing that puzzles me is, what do they think they will do if they do crush the virus #'s to zero? The way they talk in their daily briefings, I get the feeling they think something magical will happen when they get to xx% vaxxed.

It's almost as if Australia is now a victim of its own success over the past year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lappa

The decision was announced by the Premier at the 20th August press conference and was slated to come into effect from Monday 23rd together with the curfew laws. I suppose it was to give people a small space of time to get things in order. I, for one, would prefer to see these changes come into effect from midnight on the day they are announced.

---

This is EXACTLY what happened in Wuhan. Exactly.

This is why the world now suffers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lappa

The decision was announced by the Premier at the 20th August [a Friday] press conference and was slated to come into effect from Monday 23rd together with the curfew laws. I suppose it was to give people a small space of time to get things in order. I, for one, would prefer to see these changes come into effect from midnight on the day they are announced.

---

I suspect that it's more a case of the decision [to lock down more strongly] was made a few minutes before the 11 AM press conference. i.e. the decision to lock down more strongly was not made far enough in advance (like one to two days) to allow the public servants involved the time they need to carefully craft the required lock down regulations.
Just look at what is happening with the "northern border bubble" -- the definitions of which people crossing the NSW-Qld border are considered "essential workers" changes every few days as the applicable regulations are "refined". I also note that while NSW Police may be working cooperatively with Qld Police, the border restrictions apply to people entering Qld, not those entering NSW.


"Dictator Dan" has locked parts of Victoria down five or six times already, so has the required regulations ready to go at essentially a moment's notice.
For NSW, the current lock down is their first experience of a state-wide lockdown and the last thing any of us need is for NSW Supreme Court to toss out a "lock down" regulation as being disproportionate to the threat posed by Covid.
But remember, as sovereign entities, the legislation in each state is sufficiently different as to require careful drafting in each separate case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

I would have expected a lot of people to share your view, Ian, but that does not seem to be the case. There is a tremendous amount of debate on the matter and opinion seems to be overwhelmingly in support of the lockdowns and the drawbridge. Many more comments complaining that the government is too lax, especially where the are exemptions from the state border restrictions, and/or quarantine provisions.

Please note that my comments apply particularly to Tasmania which may be a little more insular than the mainland. I do not know of any surveys, but from discussions, my estimate is that at least 80%, possibly 90%, of people support the drawbridge.

---

the fact that 70 or 80 or even 90 percent of Tasmanians support border "the Tassie drawbridge" doesn't make those people right.

At its core, the Australia Constitution is essentially an agreement that all trade, commerce and intercourse between the states "shall be absolutely free". The principal of free trade requires that the "means of conveyance" be irrelevant and that people, goods, services and communications should move freely across state borders.

In Palmer vs WA, the High Court determined that the s.92 "absolutely free" arguments advanced by Palmer were not relevant to the constitutional question as to the validity of the WA's Emergency Management Act so struck down the s.92 challenge.


If the High Court ultimately determines that the Biosecurity Act and orders made under the several State's Health Acts can freely be used to prevent the interstate movement of people, then God help the Australian notion of what it means to be "free".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bendigo Bob

Understandable Ian, especially as it seems increasingly pointless, judging by other countries experiences. Hard lockdowns, border closures, are only delaying the inevitable spread. The thing that puzzles me is, what do they think they will do if they do crush the virus #'s to zero? The way they talk in their daily briefings, I get the feeling they think something magical will happen when they get to xx% vaxxed.

It's almost as if Australia is now a victim of its own success over the past year.

---

Worse.

Even if you are fully vaccinated, the probability that you will end up being so ill (from the Delta variant) that you require hospitalisation is around 1 in 15, and the probability that you will end up in the ICU is about 1 in 20 -- i.e. around 5%

Vaccination, whether with AstraZeneca, Pfizer or Moderna, does not confer immunity from either infection or the ability to transmit the virus.

From what I read and hear on science based broadcasters, the Delta variant while a different more contagious form of the virus, is not a more infectious form of the virus.
(If people can distinguish the difference in meanings between "more contagious" -- e.g. spreads more easily -- and "more infectious" e.g. causes more infections.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

From what I read and hear on science based broadcasters, the Delta variant while a different more contagious form of the virus, is not a more infectious form of the virus.
(If people can distinguish the difference in meanings between "more contagious" -- e.g. spreads more easily -- and "more infectious" e.g. causes more infections.)

---

Contagious and infectious are often used interchangeably, even by official bodies. While that technically might be incorrect, in fact most data is showing that delta is far more contagious than previous variants, i.e. it spreads more easily.

Contagious means it spreads between people, infectious means it causes an infection (disease). By definition, if it spreads it does so by infecting and so whenever I read "more infectious" I simply interpret it is an inaccurate phrasing of "more contagious". However "more infectious" could refer to the more rapid reproduction of the virus; the data I have seen suggests that delta reproduces far more rapidly than previous strains, and this is suggested to be the reason it is more contagious - a far smaller "dose" is required to guarantee the survival of the virus and its subsequent attack on the body.

There is also the question of the impact of the virus and the severity of symptoms. The data I have read (for example the CDC quoting Scottish and Canadian data) suggests that delta is likely to be more "harmful" than other variants, causing more symptoms and a greater rate of hospitalisation and death. As discussed in a previous post, the difficulty arises because the "total" (un-processed) numbers that are published in the media do not give a true representation of reality. For example, when covid "alpha" first appeared we were completely unprepared. No masks, no isolation, no vaccination and no idea how to treat the patients. Compare that to the current situation, where we have a great deal of experience of dealing with covid, we have masks, lockdowns, social isolation, a fair percentage of people are vaccinated or (possibly) immune through prior exposure. We have now spent nearly two years manufacturing ventilators, training medics and exchanging information about how to combat the disease. Also, being brutally honest, worldwide (not so much in Australia) many of the "easy targets" for covid have already succumbed. So the delta variant is facing a far more "battle hardened" version of the human race (again, not so much in Australia!). Numbers reflecting totals therefore do not give an accurate picture. It is my suspicion, given the data I have seen, that delta is indeed more contagious AND more harmful than alpha, and the only reason that the "total" numbers do not reflect this is that we are slightly better prepared and the (forgive me) "easy targets" have already fallen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

"Dictator Dan" has locked parts of Victoria down five or six times already, so has the required regulations ready to go at essentially a moment's notice.
.

---

Victoria has now been locked down longer than London

I'm getting more and more annoyed by media interviewers trying to push people in to giving definitive answers of "guarantees", and then criticising them later for being "liars" when things don't pan out. It's even more disturbing that so many people seem to jump on the bandwagon, claiming that some individual is a "liar" because what they said was later changed. What is wrong with these people? They clearly have no grasp of the reality of the situation! There is almost nothing in the world that can be guaranteed. Things change, situations evolve and this results in plan changes. If someone says they will arrive at 9am to help, but they have a flat tyre and don't turn up until 10am, should we berate them as a "liar"? Apparently so! When the school bus, which is supposed to arrive at 7.45am, doesn't arrive until 8am because a kid was travel-sick, or another parent was running late, should we make social media posts calling the bus driver a liar and demanding they be sacked?

All those people are trying their best, but changing circumstances result in plans and dates being modified. The politicians are no different. They are taking advice, making decisions and hoping that things go to plan. Sometimes things don't. Sometimes people don't do what they are told, so the desired outcome isn't achieved. Sometimes the best modelling in the world turns out to be inaccurate. If you push someone into giving an absolute response, you are doing so either in the hope you will be able to criticise, or because you have no understanding of what is happening.....

[The above does not excuse all errors, by the way, but a plan changing due to unforeseen events is not "lying"].


On another note. Things I'm surprised I haven't yet seen in the media, number 1:

"Long Novid" - the symptoms of anger, lethargy, despair etc. caused by extended periods of lockdown in areas that don't have cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lappa

Victoria has now been locked down longer than London

---

So true, and it shows in the numbers.

Allowing for the differences in population, one measure is covid deaths per million of population:

• United Kingdom - 1,928
• Australia - 38

Essentially, Australia has been 50 times more effective at preventing covid deaths than Britain.

Australia has had too many covid deaths, 984 officially, but if we had avoided lockdowns and had been as effective as Boris then perhaps the death toll would now be approching 50,000! The lockdowns are a pain; the alternative is a lot worse.

There have also been wide variations between the states and even between regions within a state. The figures below are current:

Attachment 500002

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

Things I'm surprised I haven't yet seen in the media, number 1:

"Long Novid" - the symptoms of anger, lethargy, despair etc. caused by extended periods of lockdown in areas that don't have cases.

---

I would swear that I have seen such a "diagnosis"


:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Allowing for the differences in population, one measure is covid deaths per million of population:

• United Kingdom - 1,928
• Australia - 38

Essentially, Australia has been 50 times more effective at preventing covid deaths than Britain.

---

of course, the corollary is that the population adjusted infection and death rates are so very very low, that its only the current non-outbreak that is causing people to consider to be vaccinated. And according to Warb, the pharmacy's customers are still asking for the Pfizer "the safe one" rather than accepting the safe vaccine that is available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Australia has had too many Covid deaths, 984 officially, but if we had avoided lockdowns and had been as effective as Boris then perhaps the death toll would now be approaching 50,000! The lockdowns are a pain; the alternative is a lot worse.

There have also been wide variations between the states and even between regions within a state. The figures below are current:

Attachment 500002

---

Increasingly, I'm finding these sorts of "league tables" to be of only marginal utility.


Don't forget, that once Boris was "convinced" that achieving herd immunity by letting Covid rip was a really bad idea (and I suspect his advisors might have had to channel Yes, Prime Minister to convince him) he did lock London down.


Sweden, which from what I read has adopted a "low touch" approach, might be a better example -- 109,779 cases per million, and 1438 deaths per million.


Serum testing in LA county suggests that 1 in 2 Americans have been exposed to the virus, so that would adjust the US's numbers to 500,000 cases per million.



IMO, in Australia it's well beyond time that we stopped reporting raw case numbers, and instead focused on the impact the endemic is having on the health system.

Unfortunately for Australia, our various governments used the period (March 2020 to June 2021) when we were all exalted to help flatten Covid's pandemic curve, to not even think about, let alone plan for, what must come next.

From what I can see from this distance, there has been no attempt to bolster the various health system to cater for a permanent increase in hospitalisations due to Covid infections -- even with a high level of vaccination, 1 in 15, perhaps as many as 1 in 10 people infected with Covid will require hospitalisation.
Where is the Government's plan to permanently increase (and staff) the number of hospital beds that will be required? From what I can see it hasn't even been considered.


Apart from Australia and New Zealand, the rest of the world has accepted that Covid is now endemic.

But I'm reluctant to group New Zealand with Australia. NZ, being NZ, have probably started on bolstering their health system to cope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

I'm getting more and more annoyed by media interviewers trying to push people in to giving definitive answers of "guarantees", and then criticising them later for being "liars" when things don't pan out.
[snip]
All those people are trying their best, but changing circumstances result in plans and dates being modified. The politicians are no different. They are taking advice, making decisions and hoping that things go to plan. Sometimes things don't. Sometimes people don't do what they are told, so the desired outcome isn't achieved. Sometimes the best modelling in the world turns out to be inaccurate. If you push someone into giving an absolute response, you are doing so either in the hope you will be able to criticise, or because you have no understanding of what is happening.....

---

the Military fully accept that the best plan will never survive the first shot

First - Imagine 50,000 dead Australians from COVID.

Second - S92 of the constitution is a mess. Here is an excellent synopsis: https://auspublaw.org/2020/06/border...-constitution/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ian

... Increasingly, I'm finding these sorts of "league tables" to be of only marginal utility. ...

---

An inconvenient truth!

Quote:

---

... Don't forget, that once Boris was "convinced" that achieving herd immunity by letting Covid rip was a really bad idea (and I suspect his advisors might have had to channel Yes, Prime Minister to convince him) he did lock London down. ...

---

Meanwhile, 130,000 Brits died.

And yesterday, there were only 31,914 new cases and 40 deaths. Hardly getting on top of the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

And according to Warb, the pharmacy's customers are still asking for the Pfizer "the safe one" rather than accepting the safe vaccine that is available.

---

It is being reported that there are 10,000 AZ vaccination appointments cancelled EVERY DAY in Victoria, because people would rather wait for Pfizer.

Much of the attitude towards this pandemic depends on what is considered acceptable. Australia really has said that even a single death is unacceptable while some countries, such as the US, the UK and many others have taken the deliberate approach reminiscent of "natural attrition." Other counties have had this attitude forced upon them: Brazil for example.

One of the early concerns apart from death and unpleasant illness was the overspill of health facilities. I think Ian mentioned this and much of our efforts at constraining the virus were to prevent the health facilities becoming overwhelmed. Triage was a real fear and one that no health system should be confronted with. We do seem to have forgotten that. Dying out on the pavement in the forecourt of a hospital seems an inglorious way to depart.

Regards
Paul