The corona virus COVID-19

 
  John E Locomotive Driver

C'mon you Mexican's, dig deep! With a bit more effort you can break the 2,000 mark and still have a case rate less than half the UK - who are still racking up 40,000 a day. Razz
Well done Danistan, awesome work, setting new records in Covid mediocrity every week.Laughing

2,297 new cases today, a new record for the so-called "nation" of Australia. It's heartening to see those soul-destroying lockdowns (that made Melbourne the most-detained-city on the planet) and arresting kiddies for daring to use a playground is working sooooo well to keep numbers down.

And yet, I still cannot visit my rellies in Sicktoria, lest I bring the pestilence with me from NSW. I dungeddit....

On a serious note now, though, 11 deaths isn't even worth writing home about, really in the big scheme of things - and for what we have given up and are continuing to do so in the case of our Mexican readers, I think a lot of people are starting to seriously question whether or not it has all been worth it?
Forums

Because from where I sit, the answer is a most definite NO!
KRviator



Really charming post.....

Remind me where this outbreak originated from and what early steps were taken to at least try and minimise the outbreak? And why NSW has exited lockdown earlier than Victoria, when it was provided with a whole lot more vaccines. You know what I can't visit relies in Sydney either and I have family overseas who I haven't seen in years.
I noticed in another post you raised WA and QLD keeping their borders closed but didn't mention that Tasmania and SA are basically doing the same thing.

Has it all been worth it? We can ask that same question the world over, not just in Australia. Maybe the only point I agree with is the Playground ban and separately the construction ban was counterproductive - but that was at least an attempt to bring the case numbers down to zero and even then both restrictions were lifted not long after.

IMO we would all be out of this if we hadn't been so scared of Astrazeneca (culprits include the Media, the Feds, the QLD CHO). I was prepared to take the risk but so many of my friends and family refused too.


MOD EDIT: Fixed your quote syntax - KRviator

Sponsored advertisement

  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

From where I sit, had nothing been done cases would’ve been at a minimum 2000 a day, and the ensuing death toll, each and everyday since April or may of last year.
I actually agree with you @michaelgm - but I do not agree the result of preventing that has been worth the cost of doing so, be it financial to individuals or the Government, emotional with people missing weddings funerals and births, or mental with being stuck in the same house with your missus & kids for months on end with no end in sight and being unable to do the simplest things like have your kids mate around to play in your backyard.

The nieces'  (7+10yo) in Melbourne were so over it they "broke the law" and had a picnic on the footpath in front of their mailbox just to be able to leave the house.

That is not living, not by a long shot. Victoria's lockdowns turned a quarter of the country into de-facto criminals under house-arrest. And for what, really? To prolong the lives of several thousand people who, in all probability, would have died anyway had we had a bad influenza season like we did a few years ago.

I'm not debating Covid isn't contagious or anything ridiculous like that, I freely acknowledge it is, and can prove fatal if you would be deemed to be 'at risk', however to prevent those 'at risk' of Covid from dying of Covid, we have destroyed the very fabric of what it means to be a Nation, what it means to be Australian.

WA doesn't look to be giving a flying phuck about anyone except McGowan these days, nor does Anna-Stayaway (unless you bribe her CHO with $$$ to get an 'exemption'), and they've "saved" 15,000 of their citizens. Maybe 50,000 Australian's in total if you go absolute worse-case scenario.

But at what cost?

Crunch the numbers and you'll rapidly discover we haven't got "value for money" in a purely financial sense based on the value of 'lives saved', add to that the indirect costs and I don't believe any of this has been worthwhile, not for what it has cost in $$ terms, and certainly not for the freedoms we have given up.
KRviator
KR, difficult to know how to respond.
You’ve been gracious enough to explain your particular circumstances in relation to being prevented from working, likely done it harder than many. Aside from the missus working from home, my situation has altered little. Perspective is imperative.
Had any family/friends needing lifesaving medical intervention in the last 18 months? I have.
Motor vehicle accidents?
Chances are they’d be dead, or at least be covid positive.

In terms of the national budget, I read earlier today (cannot find link) job keeper funded every job saved to the tune of $18073 per job, per week.

Make of that what you choose.
Regards, Mick.
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat Line
Australia’s Gladys Berejiklian was bribed, blackmailed by Big Pharma to impose covid “vaccine” mandate

BOMBSHELL: Australia’s Gladys Berejiklian was bribed, blackmailed by Big Pharma to impose covid “vaccine” mandate (newstarget.com)
8502

In a similar vein to the Representative from SA espousing his alternative views you are equally entitled to yours as well. However any publication that refers to Anthony Fauci as 'treasonous' and quoting verse from Clive Palmer is in my humble opinion, not a reliable or credible source of the facts.

Mike.
  KRviator Moderator

Location: Up the front
Really charming post.....

Remind me where this outbreak originated from and what early steps were taken to at least try and minimise the outbreak?
John E
If you want to play those games, we can do that all day long. By all reports it originated in Sydney from a FedEx flight crew.

But why on earth were FedEx flying into Sydney? Because Sydney airport handles the vast majority (I can get the actual figures if you really want) of Australia's airfreight task - and for that matter, incoming passengers, not just on a per-capita basis, but raw numbers.

And with that, comes an attendant increase in risk - a risk that NSW has taken on, on behalf of the rest of the country, because, apart from the NT (and then, only because of Howard Springs in combination with an exceptionally low population) no other state has brought in more people when viewed against their percentage Australia's population. NSW brought in ~48.6% of all arrivals since the pandemic kicked off, against ~31.8% of the Australian population. WA finally came close, but still didn't get there, Qld? Miles short, and the amount Tasmania has taken in could probably share a cab from the airport. In NSW, we didn't shirk our responsibilities to the Nation like Victoria did when they had the outbreak and said "We're not taking any arrivals until we get it under control".

Sure, we could have done a Tasmania and said "Nope, youse can all sod off to somewhere else, wherever that somewhere else might be, but youse aren't coming here", but Gladys did the right thing, not just by NSW, but by the Nation and everyone in NSW has paid the price for it.

And why NSW has exited lockdown earlier than Victoria, when it was provided with a whole lot more vaccines.
John E
Given NSW has a greater risk of an outbreak because of the greater number of freighters and incoming arrivals you don't think that's a reasonable compromise? OR do you think NSW should just carry the lions share of the risk but have no reward for it, or even mitigation for that risk?

I noticed in another post you raised WA and QLD keeping their borders closed but didn't mention that Tasmania and SA are basically doing the same thing.
John E
Because - if I were FIFO into Tasmania - I would have still been allowed to go there! The same applies to SA -They allowed NSW FIFO workers in provided their employer had the relevant Covid-management plans in place. WA said "Stuff you!" never minding the fact that my employer considers my interstate colleagues and I "essential for business continuity"...

IMO we would all be out of this if we hadn't been so scared of Astrazeneca (culprits include the Media, the Feds, the QLD CHO).
John E
But on this, I agree with you 110% - The media and that cretin of a CHO in Qld should be hanged for treason the way they've carried on about it.
  Mr. Lane Chief Commissioner

From where I sit, had nothing been done cases would’ve been at a minimum 2000 a day, and the ensuing death toll, each and everyday since April or may of last year.
That is not living, not by a long shot. Victoria's lockdowns turned a quarter of the country into de-facto criminals under house-arrest. And for what, really? To prolong the lives of several thousand people who, in all probability, would have died anyway had we had a bad influenza season like we did a few years ago.

I'm not debating Covid isn't contagious or anything ridiculous like that, I freely acknowledge it is, and can prove fatal if you would be deemed to be 'at risk', however to prevent those 'at risk' of Covid from dying of Covid, we have destroyed the very fabric of what it means to be a Nation, what it means to be Australian.
KRviator

Do we all really need to go over 2020s arguments yet again?

I had some stronger words but decided not to post them.
  Mr. Lane Chief Commissioner

Would not surprise me at all.
bevans
Your tin foil hat fall off?
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
From where I sit, had nothing been done cases would’ve been at a minimum 2000 a day, and the ensuing death toll, each and everyday since April or may of last year.
That is not living, not by a long shot. Victoria's lockdowns turned a quarter of the country into de-facto criminals under house-arrest. And for what, really? To prolong the lives of several thousand people who, in all probability, would have died anyway had we had a bad influenza season like we did a few years ago.

I'm not debating Covid isn't contagious or anything ridiculous like that, I freely acknowledge it is, and can prove fatal if you would be deemed to be 'at risk', however to prevent those 'at risk' of Covid from dying of Covid, we have destroyed the very fabric of what it means to be a Nation, what it means to be Australian.

Do we all really need to go over 2020s arguments yet again?

I had some stronger words but decided not to post them.
Mr. Lane
Yes, yes we do....., Back in early 2020, there were no Vaccines readily available to the general public, so the Lockdown that Melbourne had back in July I think it was was bloody well worth it!! you cannot let a virus like this loose in the community without a vaccine, there are to many vulnerable people in the community for that to happen, don't forget, it's not just the old and frail that fall into these risk groups, it is young people who are on immunosuppressant drugs as well (I fall into that demographic, as I had a kidney transplant some 14 years ago), many other people are on these drugs as well for a number of reasons.

Nothing against you M.R Lane, what I have written is to try and justify the argument's why we had to have lockdown's in the first place.
  Mr. Lane Chief Commissioner

From where I sit, had nothing been done cases would’ve been at a minimum 2000 a day, and the ensuing death toll, each and everyday since April or may of last year.
That is not living, not by a long shot. Victoria's lockdowns turned a quarter of the country into de-facto criminals under house-arrest. And for what, really? To prolong the lives of several thousand people who, in all probability, would have died anyway had we had a bad influenza season like we did a few years ago.

I'm not debating Covid isn't contagious or anything ridiculous like that, I freely acknowledge it is, and can prove fatal if you would be deemed to be 'at risk', however to prevent those 'at risk' of Covid from dying of Covid, we have destroyed the very fabric of what it means to be a Nation, what it means to be Australian.

Do we all really need to go over 2020s arguments yet again?

I had some stronger words but decided not to post them.
Yes, yes we do....., Back in early 2020, there were no Vaccines readily available to the general public, so the Lockdown that Melbourne had back in July I think it was was bloody well worth it!! you cannot let a virus like this loose in the community without a vaccine, there are to many vulnerable people in the community for that to happen, don't forget, it's not just the old and frail that fall into these risk groups, it is young people who are on immunosuppressant drugs as well (I fall into that demographic, as I had a kidney transplant some 14 years ago), many other people are on these drugs as well for a number of reasons.

Nothing against you M.R Lane, what I have written is to try and justify the argument's why we had to have lockdown's in the first place.
lsrailfan

Wait...I am on your side here! I am saying do we really need to have to go over the 2020 anti-lockdown arguments again!

I am amazed that people are still arguing against them.
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
From where I sit, had nothing been done cases would’ve been at a minimum 2000 a day, and the ensuing death toll, each and everyday since April or may of last year.
That is not living, not by a long shot. Victoria's lockdowns turned a quarter of the country into de-facto criminals under house-arrest. And for what, really? To prolong the lives of several thousand people who, in all probability, would have died anyway had we had a bad influenza season like we did a few years ago.

I'm not debating Covid isn't contagious or anything ridiculous like that, I freely acknowledge it is, and can prove fatal if you would be deemed to be 'at risk', however to prevent those 'at risk' of Covid from dying of Covid, we have destroyed the very fabric of what it means to be a Nation, what it means to be Australian.

Do we all really need to go over 2020s arguments yet again?

I had some stronger words but decided not to post them.
Yes, yes we do....., Back in early 2020, there were no Vaccines readily available to the general public, so the Lockdown that Melbourne had back in July I think it was was bloody well worth it!! you cannot let a virus like this loose in the community without a vaccine, there are to many vulnerable people in the community for that to happen, don't forget, it's not just the old and frail that fall into these risk groups, it is young people who are on immunosuppressant drugs as well (I fall into that demographic, as I had a kidney transplant some 14 years ago), many other people are on these drugs as well for a number of reasons.

Nothing against you M.R Lane, what I have written is to try and justify the argument's why we had to have lockdown's in the first place.

Wait...I am on your side here! I am saying do we really need to have to go over the 2020 anti-lockdown arguments again!

I am amazed that people are still arguing against them.
Mr. Lane
Indeed. sad to say there are 1,000s around the world that still don't get it!
  doyle Chief Commissioner
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
Yes, yes we do....., Back in early 2020, there were no Vaccines readily available to the general public, so the Lockdown that Melbourne had back in July I think it was was bloody well worth it!! you cannot let a virus like this loose in the community without a vaccine, there are to many vulnerable people in the community for that to happen, don't forget, it's not just the old and frail that fall into these risk groups, it is young people who are on immunosuppressant drugs as well (I fall into that demographic, as I had a kidney transplant some 14 years ago), many other people are on these drugs as well for a number of reasons.
lsrailfan
The vaccine still isn't available to all, still only available to those 12 and up. It is still not yet know what portion of a population at a minimum (including people of all ages) needs to be vaccinated in to eliminate chains of transmission with little or no public health measures, in other words, the herd immunity threshold is still not yet known.
So maybe the microstates still committed to elimination should continue with it until the vaccine is available to all and the herd immunity threshold is known. All adults being immune (be it through recovery or vaccination) is not a case for letting children get infected, even if they tend to only get it mildly. Think of rubella, that was considered mild before there was a vaccine against it and most babies are vaccinated against that.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
The herd immunity threshold is known, I calculated it in the early pages of this very thread.

What we need is a vaccine that can actually provide immunity in the sense of being able to achieve herd immunity. This does not exist anywhere in the world at the present time.
  doyle Chief Commissioner

Crystal balls
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Crystal balls
"doyle"
And balls to you, sir.
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
Australia’s Gladys Berejiklian was bribed, blackmailed by Big Pharma to impose covid “vaccine” mandate

BOMBSHELL: Australia’s Gladys Berejiklian was bribed, blackmailed by Big Pharma to impose covid “vaccine” mandate (newstarget.com)

In a similar vein to the Representative from SA espousing his alternative views you are equally entitled to yours as well. However any publication that refers to Anthony Fauci as 'treasonous' and quoting verse from Clive Palmer is in my humble opinion, not a reliable or credible source of the facts.

Mike.
The Vinelander
I would argue that HE IS NOT entitled to his views, I don't care who this bloke is , you don't come on a public website such as this and sprout such utter smeg!, it is harmful, it is dangerous, it can lead to a lot of confused people out there taking that tripe as gospel! *Rant over*
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
The herd immunity threshold is known, I calculated it in the early pages of this very thread.
Aaron
I've read and I'm told it isn't.

What we need is a vaccine that can actually provide immunity in the sense of being able to achieve herd immunity. This does not exist anywhere in the world at the present time.
Aaron
How can you claim that when those who are vaccinated are less likely to test positive and even less likely to infect others? If a some other vaccine does not provide immunity, then transmission among those who have had it should be just as common as among the unvaccinated. But transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among those vaccinated against it is a lot less common than among those who are not vaccinated against it.
And again, the U.A.E, with it's high vaccine uptake and a population of over 9 million is now recording less than 150 new cases a day. Surely that would not happen if currently available vaccines did not provide immunity.
  303gunner Train Controller

What we need is a vaccine that can actually provide immunity in the sense of being able to achieve herd immunity. This does not exist anywhere in the world at the present time.
How can you claim that when those who are vaccinated are less likely to test positive and even less likely to infect others?

And again, the U.A.E, with it's high vaccine uptake and a population of over 9 million is now recording less than 150 new cases a day. Surely that would not happen if currently available vaccines did not provide immunity.
Myrtone
So what you've proven, with your own argument, is that the virus continues to thrive, and potentially mutate, in the community despite high rates of vaccination.

Immunity means not able to be infected, not reduction of symptoms. "Less likely" is not Herd Immunity, and as Aaron has said, nowhere in the world has been able to use vaccines or any other means to prevent the virus from continuing to be able to spread.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
So what you've proven, with your own argument, is that the virus continues to thrive, and potentially mutate, in the community despite high rates of vaccination.
303gunner
No way, in Melbourne, we have a population of about 5 million and way more new cases a day than the U.A.E. The U.A.E itself had over 3,000 new cases a day back in February, now it's not even a quarter of that.

Immunity means not able to be infected, not reduction of symptoms. "Less likely" is not Herd Immunity, and as Aaron has said, nowhere in the world has been able to use vaccines or any other means to prevent the virus from continuing to be able to spread.
303gunner
Except I noted that the vaccines used don't just reduce the symptoms but the actual test positivity rate and also the infection rate. No vaccine is 100% effective yet other vaccines have prevented other viruses from spreading.
  303gunner Train Controller

[quote=Myrtone][quote]So what you've proven, with your own argument, [b]is that the virus continues to thrive, and potentially mutate, in the community despite high rates of vaccination[/b].[/quote][b]No way[/b], in Melbourne, we have a population of about 5 million and way more new cases a day than the U.A.E. The U.A.E itself had over 3,000 new cases a day back in February, [b]now it's not even a quarter of that[/b].

[quote]Immunity means [i]not able to be infected[/i], not reduction of symptoms. "Less likely" is not Herd Immunity, and as Aaron has said, nowhere in the world has been able to use vaccines or any other means to prevent the virus from [i]continuing to be able[/i] to spread.[/quote]Except I noted that the vaccines used don't just reduce the symptoms but the actual test positivity rate and also the infection rate. No vaccine is 100% effective yet.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
The herd immunity threshold is known, I calculated it in the early pages of this very thread.
I've read and I'm told it isn't.
Myrtone
Read more, it's a trivial mathematical formula, it relies on a few assumptions, and these assumptions will tell you why the level of immunisation is not available. It's not because the calculation is too difficult, or impossible, it's purely because there are exactly zero vaccines on the market, or in development that satisfy the required assumptions. Namely, an effectively zero rate of transmission post vaccination.


What we need is a vaccine that can actually provide immunity in the sense of being able to achieve herd immunity. This does not exist anywhere in the world at the present time.
How can you claim that when those who are vaccinated are less likely to test positive and even less likely to infect others? If a some other vaccine does not provide immunity, then transmission among those who have had it should be just as common as among the unvaccinated. But transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among those vaccinated against it is a lot less common than among those who are not vaccinated against it.
And again, the U.A.E, with it's high vaccine uptake and a population of over 9 million is now recording less than 150 new cases a day. Surely that would not happen if currently available vaccines did not provide immunity.
Myrtone
This has been mentioned so many times that I cannot believe you still don't get it.

Like someone else, I will refer you to these articles in Nature. Proper science from people and reviewed by people that don't smeg up when it comes to knowing what they know.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2

I'll literally underline it for you...

Herd immunity is only relevant if we have a transmission blocking vaccine.
"Shweta Bansal - Nature"


'Herd immunity' used in the context of our current set of vaccination options for Covid is meaningless.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
No vaccine is 100% effective yet other vaccines have prevented other viruses from spreading.
Myrtone
Because ...








Think about it ...








The vaccines that we have used to prevent/control/eliminate other viruses whilst not 100% effective, are a whole lot closer to 100% effective than any current Covid vaccine.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
Read more, it's a trivial mathematical formula, it relies on a few assumptions, and these assumptions will tell you why the level of immunisation is not available. It's not because the calculation is too difficult, or impossible, it's purely because there are exactly zero vaccines on the market, or in development that satisfy the required assumptions. Namely, an effectively zero rate of transmission post vaccination.
Aaron
I'm not sure this is clear yet, how do we know that COVID-19 vaccines aren't as close to 100% effective, the statistics in the U.A.E suggests they are like many other vaccines in that respect.

I have seen the articles you refer me before and one of them was written before there was any COVID-19 vaccine available. By the way, the reason herd immunity is elusive in Israel is due to each vaccinated person being given the two doses too close together. The numbers in the U.A.E are more promising.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Read more, it's a trivial mathematical formula, it relies on a few assumptions, and these assumptions will tell you why the level of immunisation is not available. It's not because the calculation is too difficult, or impossible, it's purely because there are exactly zero vaccines on the market, or in development that satisfy the required assumptions. Namely, an effectively zero rate of transmission post vaccination.
I'm not sure this is clear yet, how do we know that COVID-19 vaccines aren't as close to 100% effective, the statistics in the U.A.E suggests they are like many other vaccines in that respect.

I have seen the articles you refer me before and one of them was written before there was any COVID-19 vaccine available. By the way, the reason herd immunity is elusive in Israel is due to each vaccinated person being given the two doses too close together. The numbers in the U.A.E are more promising.
Myrtone
Again:

Read more
"Aaron"

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2

What do you mean 'how do we know that COVID-19 vaccines aren't close to 100% effective'?

How about the fact that finding a person who is double vaccinated (with any Covid vaccine of your choice) and both catches the virus and transmits the virus is a trivial exercise.

Now go out and poll every person you can find, or make some cold calls to random phone numbers and ask them 'Have you got/had Polio?'. In the very unlikely case that you get a 'yes' I can pretty safely predict that they were either not born in Australia, or otherwise 'caught' the virus overseas, or are over 60.

Consider two dice, one numbered with two of each number 1-3, another numbered with only six 1s. Rolling a 4 is the perfect result you're looking for, 2 and above is 'good enough' but a number 1 is still okay.

Clearly neither is going to give you a perfect result, but you have a lot more chance of getting close to the 'perfect' 4 with the 1-3 die than you do with the 1 only die. The 1-3 die will be 'good enough' 2/3 of the time, but the other die will never achieve those numbers.

The 1-3 die is like the Prevenar/Infanrix/Pneumovax/Gardasil vaccines, the die with only the 1s is like the current range of Covid vaccines (and BCG vaccine in adults).
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Still sitting above the 2000 per day

  Carnot Minister for Railways

Dom is the most sensible Premier in Australia. Finally some sanity:

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: