Thread: Covid Mk ll

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Is true - don't you believe me

See Researchers reveal Australia’s smartest cities | Victoria University

Well they would say that if they wanted to hang on to more research money.

With respect, but some of the horse **** that emanates from that big white joint makes me think otherwise. No really.


Now, if you were talkin' Arfur Daly/St Trinians stuff, yes I could believe you. Possibly.

Originally Posted by 4bee

With respect, but some of the horse **** that emanates from that big white joint makes me think otherwise. No really.


Now, if you were talkin' Arfur Daly/St Trinians stuff, yes I could believe you. Possibly.

What big white joint - oh you mean Parliament - well that is not the ACT it is just one place within its boundaries just as the SA Parliament is not SA etc - and not relevant to the Covid policies of the ACT which are not determined by the Feds. You are confusing the Feds with the Territory - completely different institutions. In fact the Horse **** you mentioned only eminates for about 35 - 40 days a year from the big white joint - the rest of the time it eminates from the boonies like where you are.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

What big white joint - oh you mean Parliament - well that is not the ACT it is just one place within its boundaries just as the SA Parliament is not SA etc - and not relevant to the Covid policies of the ACT which are not determined by the Feds. You are confusing the Feds with the Territory - completely different institutions. In fact the Horse **** you mentioned only eminates for about 35 - 40 days a year from the big white joint - the rest of the time it eminates from the boonies like where you are.

Ooooooo what he said. You have no idea where I live although you may think you do, & to me Canberra is the "big white joint."

Maybe it is because of all the bad publicity it gets?

Originally Posted by Arapiles

So, are you suggesting that I'm a confused sociopath?

No, but I am suggesting that you need to look rather at the public health issues, and perhaps try to understand better what you are reading. What got me really annoyed was the claim that "vaccination does not limit transmission", clearly confusing (or distorting?) the issue - if you had used "stop" instead of "limit", it would have been more correct.

And this statement was particularly egregious in that you spoke about vaccines in general rather than one particular vaccine. And it is absolutely clear that vaccines in general do limit transmission. They are the principal reason that we no longer see outbreaks like the measles one in Sydney in 1867, which killed 80% of children under four in the colony. This sort of outbreak of a variety of diseases, including measles, mumps, smallpox, scarlet fever, whooping cough, polio, was a part of life in Australia (and elsewhere) until the mid 1950s. For example, Sydney had a lockdown of over 100 days in 1913 because of smallpox. While smallpox was rarely significant after WW2 infectious diseases remained a part of life. These diseases mainly affected children - a major reason for this was that those who became adults were survivors of these diseases, in sufficient numbers to minimise spread. With widespread vaccination becoming the norm from the 1950s on, by 1970 these diseases were becoming rare, and by 1990 there were doctors retiring without ever seeing a case.

Note that some diseases were controlled by other measures than vaccination, such as cholera being controlled by ensuring safe water, and bubonic plague by getting rid of rats, and part of the control for all infectious diseases was by border quarantine and requiring travellers from some places to be vaccinated. All states used to have infectious disease hospitals, and quarantine stations, but these had largely disappeared by the 2000s.

I grew up in the 1940s and 50s under the shadow of these diseases, and went to school with blind and deaf kids, and ones with their legs in braces and knew of kids in iron lungs, as well as the ones that did not come back to school. These are things that are rarely seen today, and I have been aware for sixty years of the role of vaccines in limiting the spread and in effectively eliminating these from Australia.

Originally Posted by Arapiles

As the articles on the UK situation stated, vaccines aren't enough - you need to have what they're calling "vaccine plus", meaning ongoing social distancing and masks.

According to my calculations, vaccines can be enough - but as far as i can see, no country has a high enough vaccination rate - the numbers I see show that we need around 85% of the whole population (not 16+ or even 12+), and I don't think any country has reached that.

Actually, it is worse than that - to prevent local outbreaks, we need to have this rate to apply to all locations and all ages.

On the other hand, with NSW currently over 90% single dose for 12+, if we assume that nearly all those who get a first dose will get the second, and make the reasonable assumption that kids under 12 will be vaccinated as fast as 12-15 are doing, there is good reason to suppose that a figure in the 90% range of the whole population is achievable in Australia, possibly even by Christmas. I would expect this to rapidly reduce cases to a very low level early next year even without other measures although there is the risk of a blowout in numbers before we reach that.

On the other hand social distancing, masks, and requiring vaccination in some circumstances continues in NSW in particular as they "open up" - noting that nothing much opens for unvaccinated people until December (which should encourage a lot of holdouts to get vaccinated!). My worry is whether it will be enough.

And in addition, giving me some hope, there will be a lot of people (like myself) who will remain very cautious about getting into situations where they cannot maintain social distance, adding an unlegislated component to the mix.

Originally Posted by BradC

In other news, my in-laws from Scotland are currently visiting my other sister in-law in Manchester, and she's now tested positive. The next week should be interesting to see if she infects her husband and parents.

In-laws are back in Scotland. Mother in-law is now positive. Anecdotally across our extended family in the UK R > 1.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Maybe who knows but the reports all say compliance with the rules is higher than else where - the reason given is that ACT people are more intelligent and smarter than those elsewhere in the country

If that's the data behind the 'compliance with the rules is higher than else where' I'd bet that non-compliance is actually causing the steady new case numbers.

cheers, DL

Originally Posted by JDNSW

According to my calculations, vaccines can be enough - but as far as i can see, no country has a high enough vaccination rate - the numbers I see show that we need around 85% of the whole population (not 16+ or even 12+), and I don't think any country has reached that.

Portugal is the country to watch. Close to 100% of eligible people vaccinated giving over 85% of the total population vaccinated.

Daily case numbers still around 500-800 per day and deaths still around 6-10 per day. They also paid a high toll to get to this point with 10% of the population infected and 18,000 deaths.