The Serious Covid Thread - For Those Who Want Serious Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

That other thread is a feel good thread, so I thought I’d put the reply in here …

It’s a bit of a 2 pronged strategy - get those most at risk of exposure covered (frontline workers such as quarantine, border force, medical/healthcare, emergency services) and those most at risk of severe illness and death (elderly, vulnerable underlying medical conditions). These are being done in parallel and not one at the expense of the other.

This latest outbreak appears to have been introduced into the community by a driver who was transporting flight crew.

The driver was unvaccinated. And it’s not the first time a driver of flight crew has introduced Covid into the community. I just don’t think it’s right that anybody who is unvaccinated should be allowed contact with people entering the country who haven’t first been through quarantine.
 
That other thread is a feel good thread, so I thought I’d put the reply in here …



This latest outbreak appears to have been introduced into the community by a driver who was transporting flight crew.

The driver was unvaccinated. And it’s not the first time a driver of flight crew has introduced Covid into the community. I just don’t think it’s right that anybody who is unvaccinated should be allowed contact with people entering the country who haven’t first been through quarantine.
Italy has introduced the vaccine passport for lots of indoor activities. The least we can do at this stage is make the vaccine compulsory for people working in health, quarantine, airport workers and transport staff etc.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

That other thread is a feel good thread, so I thought I’d put the reply in here …



This latest outbreak appears to have been introduced into the community by a driver who was transporting flight crew.

The driver was unvaccinated. And it’s not the first time a driver of flight crew has introduced Covid into the community. I just don’t think it’s right that anybody who is unvaccinated should be allowed contact with people entering the country who haven’t first been through quarantine.

Absolutely correct, anyone working in the quarantine system must be vaccinated. I don’t know the precise details of NSW’s program however in Victoria it is a mandatory condition of employment. Every single person working in HQV must be vaccinated or they are stood down. As I understand it, NSW Health orders didn’t extend to private limo drivers as they weren’t considered in scope of the HQV program hence the no mask and no vax. A pretty big hole and it gets back to my point this morning in the other Covid thread about NSW not learning from Victoria and implementing identical or similar measures. The notion of Sydney exceptionalism and gold standard that seemed to characterise the state has unfortunately, and tragically, been busted and shown to be the ridiculous proposition it always was. The old saying “There, but for the grace of god, go I” never seemed to be front of mind.

From a distance and after Melbourne’s horrendous lived experience, we watch in shock and frustration at how this is playing out in Sydney. Elements/factors are eerily similar to our 2nd wave and we all know how that went …
 
The whole roll out has been done on a risk basis with front line and immunocompromised, either through age or condition, first, assumedly they've all been offered the vaccine already. Now the biggest risk is Sydneysiders, both them personally but also in terms of it spreading to other states. On a risk basis, why would you choose to vaccinate a 48 year old in Launceston ahead of any adult in Sydney at the moment.

My view is that Sydney aren't going to quash it without the vaccine. With where they're at, I don’t think anywhere in the world would, with the possible exception of China. Thus the rest of the states are going to be in and out of lockdown either way.

Keep borders closed and minimise the damage by getting the biggest cities, where it will cause the most damage, and where it will seed from, vaccinated as a top priority.

But yes, I shouldn't have given support for Gladys, as I really only meant support for the idea of focusing vaccination on Sydney.

The vaccines are efficient in preventing hospitalisation and death, they are not efficient in preventing transmission. That fact has determined the prioritisation of access to those vulnerable and those exposed to higher viral loads. If the vaccines were effective in preventing transmission the priorities would be different, we would prioritising those most likely to spread the virus, but that is not the case.

If Sydney cannot quash transmission without vaccines, then they’re not going to quash transmission with vaccines either, given that the vaccines are not efficient in preventing transmission. What the vaccines allow for, are for lockdown to be lifted without smashing your hospital system.

Purely on humanitarian grounds I’m all for pumping as much vaccines into Sydney’s vulnerable populations to protect them from serious consequences, nobody wants to see people die. But outside of that you’re doing it for economic reasons, to enable the lifting of lockdown as it will still spread.

Now if releasing Sydney from the half and half lockdown is considered in the national interest, then fine I’m all onboard, but you need to recognise the risk a Sydney living with the virus poses to the rest of the nation. The rest of the country unvaccinated is exposed not only to the health risk but the economic consequences of lockdown every time the virus seeps from Sydney, as we are experiencing now. The only way you could manage that is to seal Sydney off from the rest of the country until everyone else has caught up.

Vaccinating Sydney at the expense of the rest of the country doesn’t remove the virus leakage risk, it bakes it in. It is shifting the health risk and economic pain away from Sydney and imposing it on the rest of the nation.
 
The vaccines are efficient in preventing hospitalisation and death, they are not efficient in preventing transmission. That fact has determined the prioritisation of access to those vulnerable and those exposed to higher viral loads. If the vaccines were effective in preventing transmission the priorities would be different, we would prioritising those most likely to spread the virus, but that is not the case.

If Sydney cannot quash transmission without vaccines, then they’re not going to quash transmission with vaccines either, given that the vaccines are not efficient in preventing transmission. What the vaccines allow for, are for lockdown to be lifted without smashing your hospital system.

Purely on humanitarian grounds I’m all for pumping as much vaccines into Sydney’s vulnerable populations to protect them from serious consequences, nobody wants to see people die. But outside of that you’re doing it for economic reasons, to enable the lifting of lockdown as it will still spread.

Now if releasing Sydney from the half and half lockdown is considered in the national interest, then fine I’m all onboard, but you need to recognise the risk a Sydney living with the virus poses to the rest of the nation. The rest of the country unvaccinated is exposed not only to the health risk but the economic consequences of lockdown every time the virus seeps from Sydney, as we are experiencing now. The only way you could manage that is to seal Sydney off from the rest of the country until everyone else has caught up.

Vaccinating Sydney at the expense of the rest of the country doesn’t remove the virus leakage risk, it bakes it in. It is shifting the health risk and economic pain away from Sydney and imposing it on the rest of the nation.
I think they should ring fence Sydney, or at least keep borders closed until other parts of the country catch up with vaccination. I don't think they'll get rid of the virus. It took Melbourne how many months with a half as infectious strain?

And you're underselling the vaccines ability to massively reduce spread. Through both reducing the chances of catching it and reducing the viral loads of those who catch it, they're suggesting a conservative 75% reduction in transmission.

I just don't see how vaccinating Sydney first doesn't help everyone, just do it with strings attached whereby they have to agree to not be "I'm alright Jack" knobs until everyone else has been vaccinated.

It won't happen though as each state is acting like a separate nation and running with the I'm alright Jack mentality.
 
ScoMo just found 50,000 more doses of Pfizer to help get his mate out of her self dug hole.
Wonder where they came from?

Just yet more Proof that NSW get well looked after where other States get Shitted On
 
They are very small minded selfish people Dave.
Thankfully they are a tiny minority. And I mean TINY.
The people you saw on the street today wanted to attract attention, they wanted to cause conflict, they wanted to be arrested.
All so they could record it, which of course they all were, to post up on social media and try and get a few likes.
They really don’t deserve our attention.

Well Said but Sadly they will get that Attention
 
I think they should ring fence Sydney, or at least keep borders closed until other parts of the country catch up with vaccination. I don't think they'll get rid of the virus. It took Melbourne how many months with a half as infectious strain?

And you're underselling the vaccines ability to massively reduce spread. Through both reducing the chances of catching it and reducing the viral loads of those who catch it, they're suggesting a conservative 75% reduction in transmission.

I just don't see how vaccinating Sydney first doesn't help everyone, just do it with strings attached whereby they have to agree to not be "I'm alright Jack" knobs until everyone else has been vaccinated.

It won't happen though as each state is acting like a separate nation and running with the I'm alright Jack mentality.
that 75% figure was based on the alpha variant as I understand it, the data out of Israel puts it at 39% for Pfizer for the delta variant and declines over time, people double vaxed in January see only a 16% reduction in transmission now. The good news is the protection from serious illness is still very high. That broadly aligns with what’s observed in counties with high vaccination that have opened up. They see an explosion in delta cases but the hospitalisation rates are far lower than previous waves.

That was my point there needs to be strings attached, but they don’t want a ring of steel as hazzard said today. So you’re shifting risk to other states. That’s before you consider any future leaks from quarantine which is bound to happen.
 
that 75% figure was based on the alpha variant as I understand it, the data out of Israel puts it at 39% for Pfizer for the delta variant and declines over time, people double vaxed in January see only a 16% reduction in transmission now. The good news is the protection from serious illness is still very high. That broadly aligns with what’s observed in counties with high vaccination that have opened up. They see an explosion in delta cases but the hospitalisation rates are far lower than previous waves.

That was my point there needs to be strings attached, but they don’t want a ring of steel as hazzard said today. So you’re shifting risk to other states. That’s before you consider any future leaks from quarantine which is bound to happen.

At the Moment Ring of Steel is needed around NSW or it will just keep going to other states
 
that 75% figure was based on the alpha variant as I understand it, the data out of Israel puts it at 39% for Pfizer for the delta variant and declines over time, people double vaxed in January see only a 16% reduction in transmission now. The good news is the protection from serious illness is still very high. That broadly aligns with what’s observed in counties with high vaccination that have opened up. They see an explosion in delta cases but the hospitalisation rates are far lower than previous waves.

That was my point there needs to be strings attached, but they don’t want a ring of steel as hazzard said today. So you’re shifting risk to other states. That’s before you consider any future leaks from quarantine which is bound to happen.
The risk of quarantine leaks is why you should do the big cities first, as they're the places with greatest risk. Then throw in high density apartment blocks, far greater public transport usage and a far greater number and density of essential workers.

The 75% is based on a very rough 50% less likely to catch it multiplied by 50% less likely to transmit it due to smaller viral loads. If the Israeli stats are correct, the first 50% will have dropped. No idea about the second one. But still well above the Israeli data for likelihood of catching it due to the multiplier of lower viral loads and shorter periods of infection, which is the reason for lower hospitalisations.

But yes, with states running their own mini nations regarding covid, it probably isn't doable. Each state though should be focusing all of their resources on cities and ignoring regional vaccination for the time being.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The risk of quarantine leaks is why you should do the big cities first, as they're the places with greatest risk. Then throw in high density apartment blocks, far greater public transport usage and a far greater number and density of essential workers.

The 75% is based on a very rough 50% less likely to catch it multiplied by 50% less likely to transmit it due to smaller viral loads. If the Israeli stats are correct, the first 50% will have dropped. No idea about the second one. But still well above the Israeli data for likelihood of catching it due to the multiplier of lower viral loads and shorter periods of infection, which is the reason for lower hospitalisations.

But yes, with states running their own mini nations regarding covid, it probably isn't doable. Each state though should be focusing all of their resources on cities and ignoring regional vaccination for the time being.

Should they take Quartine away from People and not Smack Dam Middle of a Busy City?
 
The risk of quarantine leaks is why you should do the big cities first, as they're the places with greatest risk. Then throw in high density apartment blocks, far greater public transport usage and a far greater number and density of essential workers.

The 75% is based on a very rough 50% less likely to catch it multiplied by 50% less likely to transmit it due to smaller viral loads. If the Israeli stats are correct, the first 50% will have dropped. No idea about the second one. But still well above the Israeli data for likelihood of catching it due to the multiplier of lower viral loads and shorter periods of infection, which is the reason for lower hospitalisations.

But yes, with states running their own mini nations regarding covid, it probably isn't doable. Each state though should be focusing all of their resources on cities and ignoring regional vaccination for the time being.
Actually there is some merit in first vaccinating the suburbs with the highest virus numbers which are largely populated by people unable to work from home and with lots of people under one roof.
 
Last edited:
Should they take Quartine away from People and not Smack Dam Middle of a Busy City?
They have already reduced inward traffic to a trickle. Quarantine is a necessity as Australians are entitled to return to their own cities. We just need to ensure the process is done with the utmost caution.
 
They have already reduced inward traffic to a trickle. Quarantine is a necessity as Australians are entitled to return to their own cities. We just need to ensure the process is done with the utmost caution.

That Fine but why have it in a Busy City?
 
Actually there is problem some merit in first vaccinating the suburbs with the highest virus numbers which are largely populated by people unable to work from home and with lots of people under one roof.
Unless they can dramatically speed up contract tracing, even with tighter restrictions and compliance, Sydney will keep getting worse until the 20-40 year olds, who make up the largest percentage of the high contact essential workers, are vaccinated.
 
Unless they can dramatically speed up contract tracing, even with tighter restrictions and compliance, Sydney will keep getting worse until the 20-40 year olds, who make up the largest percentage of the high contact essential workers, are vaccinated.

So they use that as a Reason as they should get Vaccinated 1st?
 
So they use that as a Reason as they should get Vaccinated 1st?
It won't happen Dave. More will be directed to Sydney, but they won't switch to targetting 20-40 year olds ahead of 40-60 years, as the older age group would go nuts. They should also increase the amount of mass vaccination hubs and stop giving Pfizer to GPS and other small vaccinators, as they're responsible for more wastage, so with supply being the issue, GPS doing vaccinations is actually slowing vaccination rates.
 


They are Just Selfish.

Putting at Risk the Lockdown even to go Longer


IMO it’s useful to separate out people’s right to object to the actions of the government (whether you agree or disagree with them, our society is better when people do question the government).

But that doesn’t give people the right to break the law, nor does it give people the moral right to put their fellow citizens at risk.

There are ways people can make their point without breaking the law.

Plus, if people who are objecting have been directly affected, or if they represent somebody who can’t represent themselves - then that’s reasonable.

What is uncool are the anarchists who object to everything, they just want to seek attention.
 
It won't happen Dave. More will be directed to Sydney, but they won't switch to targetting 20-40 year olds ahead of 40-60 years, as the older age group would go nuts. They should also increase the amount of mass vaccination hubs and stop giving Pfizer to GPS and other small vaccinators, as they're responsible for more wastage, so with supply being the issue, GPS doing vaccinations is actually slowing vaccination rates.

Not a fan of Sydney getting more without doing a Proper Lockdown.

IF they send more maybe should send Astrazanica then
 
It's a tragedy the way state leaders enabled by a weak federal government have divided the nation.

Actually I reckon it looks like it’s been a positive thing. The big issue in democracies is how do you get people to trust their government, to comply and follow government orders?

The spats and mud throwing between the state premiers is stirring up parochialism and encouraging people to comply.

By and large every state is thankful that - as bad as things are - that at least they’re not any other state. The Qld folks with their low case loads are thankful that they’ve not like NSW with Covid running through the community. NSW and Vic are thankful that they’re not like Qld with their shattered economy. NSW and Qld are thankful that they’re not like Victoria with their rings of steel. WA is happy to have an excuse to close the border.

Publicly the NSW and QLD premiers hate each other’s guts. I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest if behind the scenes they’re having a chat and a chuckle over a chardy on Zoom
 
Not a fan of Sydney getting more without doing a Proper Lockdown.

IF they send more maybe should send Astrazanica then
I think it will happen though.

The real issue is that stopping covid has become a state based problem to solve, but now one of the most important tools available is controlled by the Feds.

Feds should either unify responses or they should just divvy the vaccines to the states on a per capita basis and let States decide if they want to help protect Sydney and thus help to protect themselves.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top