Analysis Coronavirus - The Impact III “WA - An Island within an Island”

[Scotland]

The thing about the border closures is that they are really in place to stop free movement of people in and out. Coz you know, that's how we got COVID-19 in the first place.

If WA is COVID-free (by whatever measure, say 0 new cases for 14 days or 0 active cases for 14 days) then everything other than people going in and out of the state can go back to normal. We can dig up rocks, grow stuff etc. and export, we just have to closely monitor the exposure of those going on cargo ships to Singapore etc. We are still reliant on imports though, so we can't just make iPhones and cars because we are allowed out of the house.

 

[Hangover Noir]

One problem I have is the longer we lock down, social distance and stop intersate and international travel the less herd immunity we develop to the hundreds of other diseases out there waiting for us to show up again.
Another indirect problem of a continuing lock down. Getting the balance right is almost impossible.

As for the sick and elderly. The lockdown benefits them the most.
First of all by stoping the spread it keeps them free from the virus and second of all they carry the least amount of debt and have the most cash.

Absolutely. I'd prefer not to have to link to the myriad of articles suggesting that there is no guarantee of vaccine in 12 or 18 months time. But those articles are not the thoughts of idiots or people who want to sacrifice the elderly.

When Europe, the US and China are all completely open in 12 or 18 months time (with something resembling herd immunity) while we are waiting for a vaccine, what then? I'm just asking the question, would prefer not to get flamed.

 

[Biggie]

 

[Biggie]

ACT also 0

 

[Dazzler9]

Absolutely. I'd prefer not to have to link to the myriad of articles suggesting that there is no guarantee of vaccine in 12 or 18 months time. But those articles are not the thoughts of idiots or people who want to sacrifice the elderly.

When Europe, the US and China are all completely open in 12 or 18 months time (with something resembling herd immunity) while we are waiting for a vaccine, what then? I'm just asking the question, would prefer not to get flamed.

It depends on the ability to test instantly I guess. If you can literally test anyone coming into the country, as they arrive, and get real-time accurate results, then I think we're good.

I don't know if this is plausible. Does anyone have any knowledge of testing and the likelihood of insta-results?

 

[Scotland]

Absolutely. I'd prefer not to have to link to the myriad of articles suggesting that there is no guarantee of vaccine in 12 or 18 months time. But those articles are not the thoughts of idiots or people who want to sacrifice the elderly.

When Europe, the US and China are all completely open in 12 or 18 months time (with something resembling herd immunity) while we are waiting for a vaccine, what then? I'm just asking the question, would prefer not to get flamed.

Those places are in lockdown, too.

The US have 850k cases and 47k deaths. It's an infection rate of 0.25% and 5% of those have died. Not even close to herd immunity. If the US maintain their 25k new cases per day for 12-18 months then they will end up with 10-15m infected persons. Which in a population of 328m isn't many.

 

[Keys]

Absolutely. I'd prefer not to have to link to the myriad of articles suggesting that there is no guarantee of vaccine in 12 or 18 months time. But those articles are not the thoughts of idiots or people who want to sacrifice the elderly.

When Europe, the US and China are all completely open in 12 or 18 months time (with something resembling herd immunity) while we are waiting for a vaccine, what then? I'm just asking the question, would prefer not to get flamed.

I was listening to some diseases expert (can’t remember who, when or where) discussing the concept of herd immunity and he mentioned a figure of around 60% as a minimum infection rate to achieve it

Even the worst affected countries are yet to reach 1%

The conclusion was that herd immunity is completely unrealistic as an achievable goal

 

[ZergMinion]

I was listening to some diseases expert (can’t remember who, when or where) discussing the concept of herd immunity and he mentioned a figure of around 60% as a minimum infection rate to achieve it

Even the worst affected countries are yet to reach 1%

The conclusion was that herd immunity is completely unrealistic as an achievable goal

That's it right there. Eradication is more realistic than herd immunity.

I guarantee Europe and the US won't be fully open for business in 12-18 months without a vaccine.

 

[Luuuc]

I was listening to some diseases expert (can’t remember who, when or where) discussing the concept of herd immunity and he mentioned a figure of around 60% as a minimum infection rate to achieve it

Even the worst affected countries are yet to reach 1%

The conclusion was that herd immunity is completely unrealistic as an achievable goal

I posted some similar maths earlier in the thread, with the same results.
BUT the problem I have with that conclusion is that it is based on the infection numbers being correct. There is evidence coming in from other countries to suggest that the infection numbers are not even remotely correct. Right now we still simply do not know, and will not know until we do some antibody testing of communities.
For anyone who has a spare half hour, THIS is a very good interview of a Swedish epidemiologist on this subject.

The other massive unknown in this whole equation, which would very much shape our responses if we knew the answers, is can this virus be vaccinated against, how effectively, and how soon? If we knew a highly effective vaccine was 12 months away, we'd probably act very differently than if we knew it was 2 years away and would only be semi-effective.

 

[Keys]

That's it right there. Eradication is more realistic than herd immunity.

I guarantee Europe and the US won't be fully open for business in 12-18 months without a vaccine.

Where does an effective treatment sit in the grand scheme of things?

Would that help with a return to whatever normal will look like on the other side of this

 

[ZergMinion]

Where does an effective treatment sit in the grand scheme of things?

Would that help with a return to whatever normal will look like on the other side of this

An effective treatment would be brilliant. Not sure there will be one due to the type of virus, but I'm no virologist

Did see an article today suggesting hydrochloroquine (or whatever it was) actually increased the death rate of covid-19 sufferers, but the source was 9news so who knows.

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

Absolutely. I'd prefer not to have to link to the myriad of articles suggesting that there is no guarantee of vaccine in 12 or 18 months time. But those articles are not the thoughts of idiots or people who want to sacrifice the elderly.

When Europe, the US and China are all completely open in 12 or 18 months time (with something resembling herd immunity) while we are waiting for a vaccine, what then? I'm just asking the question, would prefer not to get flamed.

If this thing is more contagious than the flu (and we cant even vaccinate fully against that) then we learn to live with Covid and the death that comes with it. Wouldn't expect there would be much international travel by then.
As for completely open, well the US are about to start opening it up so they're a good test case for the rest of us. As long as they keep their borders closed otherwise the data would be too compromised.
No way we're still in lock down in 12 to 18 months time though. Thats just NWO BS.

 

[Forward Press]

An effective treatment would be brilliant. Not sure there will be one due to the type of virus, but I'm no virologist

Did see an article today suggesting hydrochloroquine (or whatever it was) actually increased the death rate of covid-19 sufferers, but the source was 9news so who knows.

There have been numerous reports that it does not work after further study by Brazilian, French, US and other authorities.

Preliminary research finds hydroxychloroquine doesn’t help COVID-19 patients - National | Globalnews.ca

The malaria drug touted by Trump appeared to have little effect on coronavirus patients' symptoms, and there were more deaths among those who received it.

globalnews.ca

Now obviously as it's a novel coronavirus and treatments are still new, any research and study at this stage is preliminary, but it appears Dr Zelenko's claims are just that. I have noticed a conspicuous absence of those claiming the 'MSM' and 'fake news leftist media' are seeking to undermine Trump by expressing doubts and caution over its use.

 

[Chris_6678]

The formation of the National Cabinet has been one of the single best decisions made and it’s relatively smooth operation has been key to our success

There hasn’t been 100% agreement on all issues between the states and feds as evidenced by the school debate but they’re all pulling in the same direction, working together and whatever disagreements there might be are being kept behind closed doors. There’s certainly not the public spats that are being seen in the USA between trump and the governors

I also give a tick to Albanese and the opposition- they’ve respectfully questioned some policy measures as they should but when it’s come to passing legislation they’ve not stood in the way

The cohesiveness across levels of government regardless of political persuasion has been a very pleasant surprise

This has been the biggest positive to come out of this situation and goes to show how well our country is run compared to many other countrys.

 

[Forward Press]

It depends on the ability to test instantly I guess. If you can literally test anyone coming into the country, as they arrive, and get real-time accurate results, then I think we're good.

I don't know if this is plausible. Does anyone have any knowledge of testing and the likelihood of insta-results?

A rapid test with results that are 99.9% accurate would be a game changer for international travel - and for relaxing lockdowns, too.

As it is, surely any travel into Australia for the foreseeable future must incur a mandatory 14 day quarantine.

 

[Scotland]

I accept that true infection rates aren't known, but by how much do people think they are out? Australia has conducted 450,000 tests and no state except Tassie has returned more than 2% positive results. WA started doing random tests and last I heard it produced no positive test results. We've done 30k tests and had 546 positives, most of which are concentrated from cruise ships and international air travel passengers.

We've basically tested 1% of the population and 2% of those tested have it. The more we test the fewer positives we get. If we had 2.6m test kits and tested every person in WA, I would be very surprised if the infection rate was even 1%. Right now it's more likely that our 546 total cases is 1,000 at most, and the infection rate is 0.04%.

We are so far away from herd immunity it isn't funny.

 

[Avalor]

One problem I have is the longer we lock down, social distance and stop intersate and international travel the less herd immunity we develop to the hundreds of other diseases out there waiting for us to show up again.
Another indirect problem of a continuing lock down. Getting the balance right is almost impossible.

As for the sick and elderly. The lockdown benefits them the most.
First of all by stoping the spread it keeps them free from the virus and second of all they carry the least amount of debt and have the most cash.

"have the most cash." - that's a whale of an assumption.

 

[Seadog]

An effective treatment would be brilliant. Not sure there will be one due to the type of virus, but I'm no virologist

Did see an article today suggesting hydrochloroquine (or whatever it was) actually increased the death rate of covid-19 sufferers, but the source was 9news so who knows.

There was a group of around 370 US vets who were studied, those given normal treatment had a fatality rate of 11% those given the malaria drug had a fatality rate of 28%. Not really a clinical trial so a lot of variables but probably more reliable than the French Dr who claimed it cured everyone.

 

[Chris_6678]

I heard in passing on the radio ( Maybe last week when that worker came back from Bali?) how a few mining company's have tested around 2-3k of their staff but have wondered if this was added to the total of testing ?

 

[Forward Press]

There was a group of around 370 US vets who were studied, those given normal treatment had a fatality rate of 11% those given the malaria drug had a fatality rate of 28%. Not really a clinical trial so a lot of variables but probably more reliable than the French Dr who claimed it cured everyone.

That study was flawed as the drugs were administered to those on the edge anyway. You need to preferably have control groups and account for variables in conditions - someone who is asymptomatic positive and 20 years old would likely have better results than one who is on a ventilator and 80 years old.

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

"have the most cash." - that's a whale of an assumption.

Averages. Pretty sure most retirees have a bigger super balance than me or the 18 year old at McDonalds.

 

[Seadog]

The more things change the more they stay the same.

The exemption, granted by WA Police after advice from the State Health Incident Coordination Centre, meant Mr and Mrs Stokes could self-isolate in their Dalkeith home rather than be locked down in a hotel room like thousands of other West Australians returning from overseas

 

[RookiePick]

The more things change the more they stay the same.

The exemption, granted by WA Police after advice from the State Health Incident Coordination Centre, meant Mr and Mrs Stokes could self-isolate in their Dalkeith home rather than be locked down in a hotel room like thousands of other West Australians returning from overseas

Some folks are just created more equal in this great democracy of ours. The world was ever thus.

 

[Seadog]

That study was flawed as the drugs were administered to those on the edge anyway. You need to preferably have control groups and account for variables in conditions - someone who is asymptomatic positive and 20 years old would likely have better results than one who is on a ventilator and 80 years old.

Someone who is 20 yrs old and and asymptomatic would have better results than one on a ventilator and 80 yrs old.
You don't say? I agree, someone who wasn't ill to start with would have a better result than someone on death's door.

 

[Luuuc]

I accept that true infection rates aren't known, but by how much do people think they are out? Australia has conducted 450,000 tests and no state except Tassie has returned more than 2% positive results. WA started doing random tests and last I heard it produced no positive test results. We've done 30k tests and had 546 positives, most of which are concentrated from cruise ships and international air travel passengers.

We've basically tested 1% of the population and 2% of those tested have it. The more we test the fewer positives we get. If we had 2.6m test kits and tested every person in WA, I would be very surprised if the infection rate was even 1%. Right now it's more likely that our 546 total cases is 1,000 at most, and the infection rate is 0.04%.

We are so far away from herd immunity it isn't funny.

Just firstly, I'm not suggesting that Australia is anywhere remotely near herd immunity. In fact that is the whole point of one of my earlier posts.

How far out the tests are is anyone's guess. One study out of the USA suggested the discrepancy could be massive. Another study suggests merely huge. I'm talking factors of 7x and upward.
And I don't think that's too far-fetched, if the number of asymptomatic infections is higher than we've been assuming. Up until recently, the criteria to even get tested were pretty stringent. I think a lot of healthy young people could have a) had it and not even realised, or b) maybe had some mild symptoms but not enough to pass the earlier testing criteria and possibly also not enough to worry them into even bother trying to get tested.

My guess is that it never really took hold in Australia anyway, so I think our infection numbers are likely more realistic than most countries. But could still be way wrong. Nearly every country had a shortage of tests at first, and as a result had similarly stringent criteria - or even more stringent - than we did, meaning an even higher likelihood of it coming & going without being officially logged.
But right now we just don't know.

Personally I suspect that this discrepancy is one of the main factors in Covid CFR being so different in different countries.
Here, where testing was relatively good, it is roughly in the 1% ballpark. In the USA it's > 5%. In a number of European countries it is > 10%. I'd wager that main factor in those discrepancies is the number of infections all being wrong, but by varying degrees.