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

[Scotland]

We are at 0.02% cases out of the total population. 546 cases, 2.6m people.

If the testing is out by a factor of 100 then 2% of people have it, so 52k people. Personally I find it hard to believe that the testing is out by anywhere near that much, or that if 52k people have it only 6 or 7 have died.

 

[ZergMinion]

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.

If we never get to consistent zeroes on new cases then I'd agree that we have more cases in the community than we know about (WA and Australia as a whole). Will be interesting to see how the next two to four weeks look.

 

[Luuuc]

We are at 0.02% cases out of the total population. 546 cases, 2.6m people.

If the testing is out by a factor of 100 then 2% of people have it, so 52k people. Personally I find it hard to believe that the testing is out by anywhere near that much, or that if 52k people have it only 6 or 7 have died.

I agree. And just to reiterate my last post, I think Australia's testing has been more accurate than most. But if it was wrong by 5x I would not be surprised.
And your last sentence is key IMO. I think fatalities are a much better indicator than cases. Even fatalities are being both under-reported and over-reported in various places so they're not rock solid either, but I think they're the best indicator of what has really happened in a place. And they certainly prove what an effective job Australia has done so far.

 

[Luuuc]

If we never get to consistent zeroes on new cases then I'd agree that we have more cases in the community than we know about (WA and Australia as a whole). Will be interesting to see how the next two to four weeks look.

Bingo. The size of that silent spread factor is effectively what will determine whether total elimination is even possible. So now that we've got the numbers tiny and there are no barriers for getting tested, it will indeed be interesting to see what happens next.

 

[Forward Press]

Bingo. The size of that silent spread factor is effectively what will determine whether total elimination is even possible. So now that we've got the numbers tiny it will indeed be interesting to see what happens next.

If by some miracle there is randomised widespread testing of people (even with no symptoms whatsoever) and we get consistent results of zero for three or four weeks - then we have achieved total elimination. We'd be globally lauded and envied.

Here's hoping.

*crosses fingers*

 

[Hangover Noir]

Bingo. The size of that silent spread factor is effectively what will determine whether total elimination is even possible. So now that we've got the numbers tiny and there are no barriers for getting tested, it will indeed be interesting to see what happens next.

There's still a barrier to testing: you have to show symptoms.

No symptoms, no testing. But there are preliminary studies that show that asymptomatic carriers aren't major spreaders. When you are really sick, you shed bigger quantities of the virus than when you're not. But the amount of testing we are doing (as per Scotland's point) would suggest that there can't be (statistically speaking) many people out there with the virus because it is not showing in community transmissions without a known contact with a carrier.

 

[Scotland]

I agree. And just to reiterate my last post, I think Australia's testing has been more accurate than most. But if it was wrong by 5x I would not be surprised.
And your last sentence is key IMO. I think fatalities are a much better indicator than cases. Even fatalities are being both under-reported and over-reported in various places so they're not rock solid either, but I think they're the best indicator of what has really happened in a place. And they certainly prove what an effective job Australia has done so far.

Fair enough, and if we are under reporting by a factor of 5 then that means that around 0.1% of the population have it. Which isn't much.

 

[Hangover Noir]

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.

The study is flawed, but it certainly douses any hope that there's a miracle cure (which I had).

One of the flaws in the study (from page 12):

However, hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, was more likely
to be prescribed to patients with more severe disease, as assessed by baseline ventilatory status
and metabolic and hematologic parameters. Thus, as expected, increased mortality was observed
in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, both with and without azithromycin.

 

[Forward Press]

The study is flawed, but it certainly douses any hope that there's a miracle cure (which I had).

One of the flaws in the study (from page 12):

However, hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, was more likely
to be prescribed to patients with more severe disease, as assessed by baseline ventilatory status
and metabolic and hematologic parameters. Thus, as expected, increased mortality was observed
in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, both with and without azithromycin.

Yeah that's what I meant - unless you administer it to those with more mild symptoms or are asymptomatic then you cannot be sure if it works. Needs further study anyway - I mean, Trump did get one thing right when he said there's nothing to lose by trying, there's enough anecdotal evidence out there to warrant research. However, I hold severe doubts and in my view far too many were conned by Dr Zelenko's success with his patients.

 

[CM9000]

So no lives lost under any circumstances?

The majority of deaths have been amongst seniors. Those who will shoulder the economic load with be the youth.

I am just wondering if this drags on just how much are you willing to sacrifice so that not a single life is lost.

People seem to think its a choice of life versus money. It's not that black and white. The economy isn't just money its people livelihoods. You take away the economy you take away their means to survive.

What do you think the mortality rates are of housed versus homeless? Employed versus unemployed? Middle class versus poverty? People die due to economic downturns.

I think we will lose more people to the economic downturn then the virus itself.

What is the "economy", exactly? Why is it directly tied to people's wellbeing and livelihood? Does it stop us from giving homeless people homes and food? Does it stop us guaranteeing those who recently lost a job work? Apparently, it didn't stop the government from printing trillions of dollars to assist the country, so obviously it's not an impenetrable wall that can't be overcome.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. We can prevent all deaths while at the same time ensuring everything goes back to normal.

 

[Altum Volantes]

These pricks are actually going to do a massive Vic hub.

...and the media will actual praise them and gush about ‘the home of football’.

This league could not be anymore corrupt if they tried.

 

[Biggie]

 

[Forward Press]

Pending the Tassies, 14,000 tests for 8 positives is pretty good, ngl.

 

[MrWoollie]

All life has a price. One of the biggest lies we tell ourselves is that all life is priceless.

That is very true.

The good 'ol, not talked about much, VSL, or Value of a Statistical Life.

These pricks are actually going to do a massive Vic hub.

...and the media will actual praise them and gush about ‘the home of football’.

This league could not be anymore corrupt if they tried.

This makes it virtually impossible for any non-Vic team to win it. Get to play every game as an away game and have to live locked up in motels for 6 weeks plus finals.

 

[Max zero]

So the flipside to this question

Are you willing to sacrifice your own life or the lives of your loved ones by lifting the restrictions early?
Would you consider it acceptable collateral damage for the sake of the economy?

Was expecting this question.

Who wants to sacrifice their family? No one of course.

But is exporting the suffering to others to save yourself the grief better?

Sometimes there is no right answer but simply the least worst. Not taking that option because you are too afraid of hurting anyone is not bravery but cowardice.

 

[Max zero]

What is the "economy", exactly? Why is it directly tied to people's wellbeing and livelihood? Does it stop us from giving homeless people homes and food? Does it stop us guaranteeing those who recently lost a job work? Apparently, it didn't stop the government from printing trillions of dollars to assist the country, so obviously it's not an impenetrable wall that can't be overcome.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. We can prevent all deaths while at the same time ensuring everything goes back to normal.

Still trying for the Disney ending I see.

We can neither prevent all deaths nor ensure everything goes back to normal. More Australians will die of that is certain and this will not go back to normal unlike the rest of the world (or at least our major trading partners and allies) go back to normal.

 

[CM9000]

Still trying for the Disney ending I see.

We can neither prevent all deaths nor ensure everything goes back to normal. More Australians will die of that is certain and this will not go back to normal unlike the rest of the world (or at least our major trading partners and allies) go back to normal.

You are aware we live in a resource rich country, right? We have farmland, animals, electricity, all the things needed to sustain ourselves. Our livelihood isn't tied entirely to other nations. I'm not trying for a Disney ending, you're the one thinking in terms of either/or - it can only be one or the other (the "economy" or people's actual lives).

 

[Rowan18]

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

There is a lot of conjecture over offical figures vs actual infection rate, as not 100%of population are tested. Germany is moving toward herd immunity and they plan on testing 100%of the population over the next month or so. This will be fascinating data.

If we eliminate the virus and everywhere else has herd immunity, then we can open up because it should be dormant. I assume this is how we were able to carry on unaffected through SARS, MERS etc.

End of the day, I suspect they will just feel it out. Wait until start of June and then slowly roll back restrictions. Virus might be eliminated by then anyway.

 

[Rowan18]

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

Funny, where is the west Australian article about how unfair that is? Oh, he's the owner.

 

[Rowan18]

That is very true.

The good 'ol, not talked about much, VSL, or Value of a Statistical Life.


This makes it virtually impossible for any non-Vic team to win it. Get to play every game as an away game and have to live locked up in motels for 6 weeks plus finals.

Fools, we had a 100% win rate at the MCG in 2018.

Imagine if this gives our squad so much experience in Victoria that we dont lose there for the next three seasons. They will have created a monster!

It is incredibly biased, but it gives our group huge motivation to prove themselves. I would love a non-vic GF this year.

 

[RookiePick]

Not across the hub Vicco concept. Surely the Vic teams have to live out of hotels too at the very least?

 

[kane249]

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

To be fair Stokes wasn't the only person to be allowed to self isolate at home and bypass hotel quarantine.

There was an article about a doctor who was doing the quarantine checks for hotels and she said a few people had got their usual GP to do a note for them citing claustrophobia or other ailments which meant they couldn't isolate at a hotel.

WA doctor 'sad and ashamed' of conditions of those in hotel quarantine

Perth GP Dr Julie Manasseh says she was shocked with what she was confronted while caring 600 returned travellers at the Crown Promenade and Metropol hotels

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Max zero]

You are aware we live in a resource rich country, right? We have farmland, animals, electricity, all the things needed to sustain ourselves. Our livelihood isn't tied entirely to other nations. I'm not trying for a Disney ending, you're the one thinking in terms of either/or - it can only be one or the other (the "economy" or people's actual lives).

You don't realise is the economy is people's lives too. Have a look at mortality rates during financial downturns. Deaths from mental health, homelessness and poverty all spike.

 

[ep2018]

Not across the hub Vicco concept. Surely the Vic teams have to live out of hotels too at the very least?

Hard to see Richmond not winning it this year if every game is at the MCG. Absolute balls by the AFL if the Melbourne hub idea comes to fruition. I'd rather the season be played out in the NT or Tasmania ffs where no teams are based.

 

[ZergMinion]

Hard to see Richmond not winning it this year if every game is at the MCG. Absolute balls by the AFL if the Melbourne hub idea comes to fruition. I'd rather the season be played out in the NT or Tasmania ffs where no teams are based.

Not sure about that. If every game is at the MCG with no crowds and Richmond have to stay cooped up in hotel rooms like everyone else, it might actually negate their advantage. VFL won't go for that though so I expect interstate teams to have to play at Docklands or something equally stupid.