Thread: Covid Mk ll

Originally Posted by bob10

Still that mythical creature of 80%. Do you mean 80% of all our population, children included or just 8o% of eligible adults?

I hope 100% of everyone myself Bob. We cannot do Kids until at least Feb 2022. The Political types are making that choice an decisions widely known now. I agree that is frightening at several levels for under 15 today and probably only under 12 shortly!

The vaccine skeptics and antis will like in the US now be confronted by their own ill informed decision. A minutes silence then Darwin Award nomination I feel

I do not want to see people dying to prove their point!

Almost needed a change of pants at the Border moves ideas Gents. Ripsnorter

Originally Posted by bob10

The National Cabinet agreement was predicated on 30 cases. You haven't been paying attention.

Yes paying attention. Doherty have said "Reopening the country despite high numbers of new infections will be safe when Australia reaches its vaccine target of 70 to 80 per cent, the head of the Doherty Institute says."

Doherty Institute director says reopening the country is safe once 70-80 per cent COVID vaccination rate achieved - ABC News

Originally Posted by bob10

There goes the thread, thought this was supposed to be a serious discussion. Where are you 4BEE?

It is a serious discussion albeit with a humorous twist as couple of people have picked up on and seem to enjoy.

Why is it still serious - well Qld suggested moving the border south - fair enough but the same result would be achieved if the border was moved north - result is people in the real border area, on both sides, can still go about their business.

Regardless of where or if the border were moved, people are going to be inconvenienced. The Gold Coast to Brisbane is a busy commuter corridor for workers. The logistical and legal ramifications of moving the border south are not insignificant.
I believe the requests and denials are political posturing to garner brownie points. I doubt there was any serious contemplation of such a move.

Originally Posted by bob10

The National Cabinet agreement was predicated on 30 cases. You haven't been paying attention.

The head of the Doherty Institute clarified that point saying that the number is irrelevant:

Australia COVID: Doherty Institute’s Sharon Lewin says reopening still safe with hundreds of daily cases

“The really big important issue about moving from phase A to phase B is that we’re moving out of an environment of zero-COVID,” she told the ABC’s The Drum program on Monday evening. “Zero-COVID is no longer the goal once you have 70 to 80 per cent of people vaccinated. Whether you start at 30 cases or 800 cases you can still open up safely.”

The article also explains the change in strategy for health interventions, testing and tracing. It allows a rebalancing of resources.

People seem to think that there is going to be a free for all. That's not the case and no one has said anything of the sort. There will continue to be restrictions but hopefully without the number and severity of lock downs we've experienced so far.

It's apparent that some think that our governments can continue support the country through the current arrangements forever without any repercussions. The capacity of our governments to support our communities and our businesses to sustain themselves under these circumstances is finite. If we don't move ahead in some way, we risk sending our nation backwards at a great rate of knots.

Personally I see this as an opportunity to find a pathway to doing this well. Opening up in such a way that makes sure people don't get left behind, allowing our communities to get back to work and looking out for each other. Rightly or wrongly I prefer to be optimistic about this.

Originally Posted by Eevo

if people want to continue wearing a mask, people can do that too.
manage your own risk.

This is the problem though, wearing a mask isn't managing your own risk, it's managing the risk you pose to others. Those rabidly against mask wearing also seem to exhibit the sort of behaviour that makes them a risk to others and pay little attention to the welfare of others, so that's a no-win really.

Originally Posted by BradC

This is the problem though, wearing a mask isn't managing your own risk, it's managing the risk you pose to others. Those rabidly against mask wearing also seem to exhibit the sort of behaviour that makes them a risk to others and pay little attention to the welfare of others, so that's a no-win really.

its both as far as im aware. its protecting you and me.

Do Face Masks Actually Protect Me, Or Just Those Around Me? – Cleveland Clinic
Will a face mask protect me from COVID-19? | Queensland Health

Originally Posted by Eevo

its both as far as im aware. its protecting you and me.

Unless it's a properly fitted N95 it's doing sfa for you.