Thread: Covid Mk ll

Originally Posted by trout1105

Despite over 1200 new cases NSW is Already starting to open up with weddings back on and extra so called "Exercise Time" increased even Before the Magic 80% has been achieved.
Then there are plans to open hairdressers and god knows what else they have in the pipeline So it Does look like NSW is rushing into opening up regardless of how it affects the rest of Australia and you wonder why I have concerns.

Just one dark predictions - Deaths are about to go up in NSW. Happily I saw a fantastic report suggesting while kids can get covid, significant covid and long covid are a much lower risk.


Excuse me I shared this before. Australia COVID: Does the Delta variant affect children more severely?


While running I heard a chat which seems to make a lot of sense now. Covid case numbers with low/no vaccinations resulted in hospital, ICU and death rates world wide which are easy to see. The opeing up in some very well vaccinatated places is seeing covid case numbers yet significantly lower hospitalization, ICU admission and death rates.

The point the discuss took was "when" vaccination rates in crease the total number of Covid cases becomes a lot less important than the hospitalization, ICU admission and death rates. No idea myself as usual. I do think the number of people in ICU is a significant and easy predictor of the body count. NSW is possibly in for a very tough time.

Figured out how to do all the VCE students at my place while out running. I was a little like drowned rat by the time I got home. Beer in hand now post a shower. VCE idea is a bit of work for me. Glad I managed to juggle it to make it occur shortly. Created a email address for it. Assuming it is not overwhelmed with spam I think I can do it.

Originally Posted by SBD4

I think you are missing the point. Of course there are going to be variations in vax rates across the country as there are between states, rural and urban, LGAs, even suburbs. This is just a way to show when Australia, based on the vax rate for the whole country, will reach a given milestone. Is this not exactly what is done for every other country when when forecasting what vax level they have reached and when? How else would it be expressed?

As I said, I agree with you that the date has no bearing on what will happen with restrictions.... it's just when the country as a whole reaches a certain milestone.

Anyway, the original post was about whether or not we might reach the 80% milestone by Christmas, even basing it on the slowest state that looks very likely to be, yes.

With respect, you’re missing my point.

The 80% vax rate for the whole country cannot be based on an average, otherwise massive parts of the country will be well below 80%.

Deaths lag cases by two to four weeks, and we can expect a somewhat lower death rate since a very high proportion of the elderly and highly susceptible people are fully vaccinated. But this will not be the case everywhere - for example, Wilcannia, with the majority population first nations, and hence susceptible, now has over ten percent of the population infected. And until the last couple of weeks there was practically no vaccination - basically none available, so the vaccination rate is very low.

And if we start to get a lot among children (in Western NSW at least half current are under 18, and half of them under 10), while the death rate will be low, if the case numbers are high, there will be deaths in these age cohorts.

Several days ago I read an interview with a pediatrician at a hospital in a southern US state (can't remember which one) who said something like "all my pediatric ICU beds are full, and six of them are on ventilators - and I don't think two are going to make it".

And another comment from Louisiana, facing a really major hurricane in about a day - they cannot evacuate the hospitals in New Orleans, because all the hospitals in neighbouring states that they would normally use are absolutely full and already offloading patients to states further away.

If the NSW R rate really is 1.4 then the NSW case numbers are likely to keep rising for some time irrespective of the vaccination rate.

Am I correct in thinking the national agreement is the national eligible vaccination average must reach the target before any state which has reached the target can open up?
So, for example, the national average would have to hit 70% before a state which had reached 70% could relax restrictions.
So that would stop any state monopolising the vaccine supplies and then relaxing before the nation as a whole got there.
That's how I remember it being announced. Is that correct?

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

Just one dark predictions - Deaths are about to go up in NSW. Happily I saw a fantastic report suggesting while kids can get covid, significant covid and long covid are a much lower risk.


Excuse me I shared this before. Australia COVID: Does the Delta variant affect children more severely?


While running I heard a chat which seems to make a lot of sense now. Covid case numbers with low/no vaccinations resulted in hospital, ICU and death rates world wide which are easy to see. The opeing up in some very well vaccinatated places is seeing covid case numbers yet significantly lower hospitalization, ICU admission and death rates.

The point the discuss took was "when" vaccination rates in crease the total number of Covid cases becomes a lot less important than the hospitalization, ICU admission and death rates. No idea myself as usual. I do think the number of people in ICU is a significant and easy predictor of the body count. NSW is possibly in for a very tough time.

Figured out how to do all the VCE students at my place while out running. I was a little like drowned rat by the time I got home. Beer in hand now post a shower. VCE idea is a bit of work for me. Glad I managed to juggle it to make it occur shortly. Created a email address for it. Assuming it is not overwhelmed with spam I think I can do it.

I find it easier to figure out how to do stuff in the shower, that way you don't have to do the run beforehand, masochist.........

Regards,
Tote

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

If the NSW R rate really is 1.4 then the NSW case numbers are likely to keep rising for some time irrespective of the vaccination rate.

Am I correct in thinking the national agreement is the national eligible vaccination average must reach the target before any state which has reached the target can open up?
So, for example, the national average would have to hit 70% before a state which had reached 70% could relax restrictions.
So that would stop any state monopolising the vaccine supplies and then relaxing before the nation as a whole got there.
That's how I remember it being announced. Is that correct?

All the states seem to be doing their own thing, so I'm betting no......, at least for the things that are in the state remit, international borders etc might be a different situation

Regards,
Tote

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Deaths lag cases by two to four weeks, and we can expect a somewhat lower death rate since a very high proportion of the elderly and highly susceptible people are fully vaccinated. But this will not be the case everywhere - for example, Wilcannia, with the majority population first nations, and hence susceptible, now has over ten percent of the population infected. And until the last couple of weeks there was practically no vaccination - basically none available, so the vaccination rate is very low.

And if we start to get a lot among children (in Western NSW at least half current are under 18, and half of them under 10), while the death rate will be low, if the case numbers are high, there will be deaths in these age cohorts.

Several days ago I read an interview with a pediatrician at a hospital in a southern US state (can't remember which one) who said something like "all my pediatric ICU beds are full, and six of them are on ventilators - and I don't think two are going to make it".

And another comment from Louisiana, facing a really major hurricane in about a day - they cannot evacuate the hospitals in New Orleans, because all the hospitals in neighbouring states that they would normally use are absolutely full and already offloading patients to states further away.

I'd just question one thing, we have relatives in Warren, one of whom is of indigenous heritage and they are both double vaccinated,and have been for some time. So I'm not sure about the unavailability of vaccination. Having said that communications have been pretty lacking for non-indigenous people, let alone the indigenous communities.

Regards,
Tote

I suspect it varies enormously from town to town. And to some extent, it is probably not just whether the vaccine was available, but but whether the individuals were able to find out when and where it was available. Or even knew about it at all.

I only managed to get my second dose on Friday, despite trying to get vaccinated as soon as I was eligible (1. It took me about six weeks to get the first appointment. But I have relatives who got theirs a lot earlier, simply because they work at the hospital, and a friend when I told him I was booked in for my first dose in a week, said "I must do that", got on line, and got a booking two days before mine.