Thread: breaking covid rules

Originally Posted by BobL

Cant help think of how NA are just another form of smoke and mirrors to keep the pollies looking good.

Try telling the famers who cannot harvest their crops, people who work in the arts, , the 40,000 people who have lost university jobs, and the thousands of former workers of the tourism and hospitality industries.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Pete

I think you have the crux of the issue there. Unfortunately the vaccines are not 100% effective but they can certainly minimise the effects on individuals, remove the necessity of a hospital visitation and quite likely prevent the unexpected and unwanted premature termination of life: So generally it can be considered a good thing. Of course nothing is entirely simple. There will be people who are medically unable to have a vaccine and those who are too young. Those groups will be placed at increased risk by the selfish or stupid few who refuse vaccination. Nothing is simple, as I said, or perfect.

There is another reason for vaccination, which in the early days was a real concern and that was the overloading of hospital resources. We have started to forget that aspect, but an overloaded hospital now begins to be unable to treat other emergency cases quite apart from Covid-19. As it is, much elective surgery was placed on hold I believe.

On the subject of a " vaccination passport," I don't really see the issue there either. We have a license to drive a car, tickets for various skills in the workplace. I would regard a vaccination passport as an extension of that way of thinking.

Invasion of privacy? Pah!. Forget about that if you have a mobile phone or a computer. That boat sailed a long time ago.

Regards
Paul

Paul. I hadn't forgotten those who are unable to take this (or presumably any other) vaccine for medical reasons. I would imagine they already have strategies in place to minimize their exposure to this and other diseases.
As baby boomers (as most of us on the forum are) born into a post-penicillin world, our expectations have perhaps become too high regarding the ability of science to develop cures for any disease. I feel certain our parents, or certainly our grandparents, had a different mindset when it came to mortality - particularly infant and child mortality. They had no option and perhaps we now have to come to terms with the same reality. I realize this is harsh, and as a parent/grandparent I would be devastated if it happened in my family, but I have to accept the possibility. We already have common illnesses such as influenza which we have to live with and protect ourselves against each season. Perhaps Covid is another to add to the list.
Pete

Originally Posted by woodhutt

We already have common illnesses such as influenza which we have to live with and protect ourselves against each season. Perhaps Covid is another to add to the list.

Originally Posted by woodhutt

We already have common illnesses such as influenza which we have to live with and protect ourselves against each season. Perhaps Covid is another to add to the list.

Exactly - and we protect ourselves from influenza with an annual vaccine.

Even before Covid I had to show proof of influenza vaccination before being allowed to visit my mother in a nursing home. No jab no visit.

Certainly in Australia Flu has almost disappeared, no doubt it will come roaring back at some point.

Quote from Influenza cases hit an all-time low in Australia in 2021 — that could be a problem when it returns - ABC News

Before COVID-19 arrived, the number of influenza cases was reaching some of its highest levels, with 313,033 notifications of laboratory-confirmed influenza across Australia in 2019 — 2.7 times higher than the five-year average — and 953 deaths.
In 2020, there were more than 20,000 notifications to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) and 37 deaths.
This year, to August 29, just 484 cases were recorded and zero deaths.

-----------------

Originally Posted by Aussiephil

Certainly in Australia Flu has almost disappeared, no doubt it will come roaring back at some point.

Quote from Influenza cases hit an all-time low in Australia in 2021 — that could be a problem when it returns - ABC News

Before COVID-19 arrived, the number of influenza cases was reaching some of its highest levels, with 313,033 notifications of laboratory-confirmed influenza across Australia in 2019 — 2.7 times higher than the five-year average — and 953 deaths.
In 2020, there were more than 20,000 notifications to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) and 37 deaths.
This year, to August 29, just 484 cases were recorded and zero deaths.

-----------------

Not just in Australia but worldwide. Hasn't the low incidence of flu been put down to the Covid precautions most of us have been taking (hand-washing, mask wearing and social distancing)? All those things, especially hand-washing, we should be doing as a matter of course each flu season.
Pete

Originally Posted by woodhutt

Not just in Australia but worldwide. Hasn't the low incidence of flu been put down to the Covid precautions most of us have been taking (hand-washing, mask wearing and social distancing)? All those things, especially hand-washing, we should be doing as a matter of course each flu season.
Pete

From that article and a couple of others the low incidence comes from the lack of international travel combined with the precautions as you say above.

I've been watching the situation in the UK, post "freedom day" and it's been interesting. The UK is currently running 50,000+ new cases per day, and around 1000 hospitalisations per day. The UK's Office for National Statistics has stated that in the week ending October 16th, 1 in 55 people in the UK had covid, and 1 in 14 "kids" of secondary school age (high school) were infected. This, it must be noted, is in autumn and could perhaps be expected to get worse as they move in to winter. There is pressure on the UK government to reintroduce compulsory mask usage, vaccine passports etc.

It raises interesting questions! In much of mainland Europe masks and isolation etc. never went away. I read that in Germany (and I'm not sure if it's all of Germany or just certain cities) masks are compulsory, and must be medical grade masks not just bits of cloth. Negative tests within 48hours are required for most indoor activities, and this has been enabled by having testing facilities "on every corner" that email results within 15 minutes. The levels of covid in such areas is vastly reduced compared to the "free" UK.

The UK has quite a high vaccination rate, and is now well in to boosters but were a touch slow to start their booster program, and their death toll is reasonably low compared to the infection rate. But the numbers quoted above still suggest that 1 in 55 covid cases end up in hospital, and hospital resources are not limitless. If the numbers increase beyond the hospital capacity in the winter, presumably the death toll might increase?

So we are left with a conundrum! Remove restrictions and watch the case numbers surge? Keep restrictions (forever?) and maintain control? And when does the government get fed up of paying for boosters that look like they will be required at 6 monthly intervals or perhaps even more frequently? And, playing devils advocate again, when do we start to consider whether doing all of this is a worthwhile trade-off to maintain the upward trajectory of average life expectancy?

Interesting times!

In other news, boosters are soon (in the next two weeks according to our latest information) to be made available to pharmacies, as will the Pfizer vaccine which has just been recommended by the FDA (in the US) for approval in 5 to 11 year olds. Unfortunately it is not a given that pharmacies will choose to supply boosters - when done according to the rules vaccination has not been a very profitable exercise, and the vaccinators have received a great deal of grief from some individuals (including attempted bribes to falsify vaccine history). Our local team are exhausted and completely fed up with the whole thing.........

I, too, wonder at efficacy of the the British approach to covid. According to Johns Hopkins, 12.95% of the British population have had or are infected with covid, and 2,046 people per million of population have died. Comparable death rates for Australia and New Zealand are 64 and 6 respectively. The death rate in UK is over 30 times greater than in Australia, and over 300 times that in NZ. Someone has stuffed up big time!

But there is a major debate going on behind the scenes in the medical profession and I think it will soon become public. Many professionals, especially specialists are seathing that they and their patients are being locked out of treatments that may involve intensive care, as intensive care and ventillator spaces are being reserved for existent or predicted covid patients.

Patients are classified into four groups:

• Category 0 - Emergency - immediate treatment (eg appendix, road trauma, heart attack, stroke),
• Category 1 - Urgent - treatment within 30 days,
• Category 2 - Semi-Urgent - treatment within 90 days, and
• Category 3 - Non-Urgent - treatment within 1 year.

Although often labelled as "elective surgery", treatments do not necessarily involve surgery; the constrictors are hospital bed spaces, staffing and intensive care spaces. Many urgent cases are deteriorating to become emergency cases and Cat 2 deteriorate to Cat 1. Some waiting have died. "Why are covid patients being given preference over my patients?"

If you look at the stats on Health Vic and NSW websites over 90% of hospitalisations are not vaccinated, and those with vaccinations almost always have serious other complaints.
The figures are even more stark when you look at those in intensive care and on ventillators; the vast majority are not fully vaccinated.

At what point does it become a self inflicted plaint? Why should a covid patient get preferential treatment over a cancer or heart patient? The latter are now being excluded, until they are classified as emergencies, which may be too late.

This is a critical ethical issue. It is also a standard triaging question - asked and answered multiple times a day in every hospital. Some are questioning that the underlying ethics may have been compromised unintentially.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

At what point does it become a self inflicted plaint? Why should a covid patient get preferential treatment over a cancer or heart patient? The latter are now being excluded, until they are classified as emergencies, which may be too late.

That is a question that isn't really restricted to covid, but is far more all-encompassing. It relates to everything from smokers with lung cancer through drunk drivers with car crash injuries to sportspeople (skydivers, skiers, climbers, boxers etc.). Interestingly it also relates very strongly to many of the co-morbidities that impact Covid outcomes, things like obesity and diabetes (I'm thinking more type 2 as a result of "lifestyle" more than "born with type 1"). Not being vaccinated is a choice, but so is eating too much, being unfit etc. and they all result in bad health outcomes - with or without covid!

I'm not sure that the situation in the UK is a stuff-up as such. It could be viewed as such based purely on current numbers, but it could also be viewed as a necessary step on the path to a future that incorporates Covid, or as a result of culture and lifestyle. Much of Australia has been "lifestyle restricted" (locked down) to a greater or lesser degree for the last 18 months or so. We also have a far more outdoor oriented lifestyle, and a far lower population density over much of the country. All these things help to reduce the spread of an airborne virus, so it could be argued that our lower numbers are at least partly due to cultural differences. It would also explain why most (?) of our outbreaks have been in areas of higher population density.

In any case, I'm waiting until a few months after our own "freedom day" before I throw too many stones! The problem, as I see it, is that Covid isn't going away and the protection offered by vaccines (or natural immunity after infection) doesn't seem either particularly high or particularly long lived. The result is that without ongoing restrictions, masks and so forth, the UK situation is likely to be repeated everywhere. Which again begs the question "how long do we restrict our lives to keep the vulnerable safe?". My kids have now had nearly two years of minimal social life, mask wearing and remote learning. Viewed in the context of the question about unvaccinated covid patient vs. cancer patients, what about the lifestyles of all those kids (and everyone else!) vs. those who have/will die from covid?

Originally Posted by Warb

That is a question that isn't really restricted to covid, but is far more all-encompassing. It relates to everything from smokers with lung cancer through drunk drivers with car crash injuries to sportspeople (skydivers, skiers, climbers, boxers etc.). ...

Quite true, and they have all been excluded in preference to covid patients.

... I'm not sure that the situation in the UK is a stuff-up as such. It could be viewed as such based purely on current numbers, but it could also be viewed as a necessary step on the path to a future that incorporates Covid, or as a result of culture and lifestyle. ...

I wonder if the family and friends of 140,000 dead Poms agree with you.

... The problem, as I see it, is that Covid isn't going away and the protection offered by vaccines (or natural immunity after infection) doesn't seem either particularly high or particularly long lived. ...

Boris seemed to place massive reliance on "natural immunity after infection" or herd immunity as he called it, but the evidence seems to be that it does not exist. The available evidence seems to be that vax reduces the incidence of covid by a factor of perhaps 30, and also greatly reduces the severity of the infections that do occur. NSW + Vic Health websites are good sources.

My guess is that we will finish up needing an annual covid vax, just like the flu - after all, flu and covid are both coronaviruses.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

I wonder if the family and friends of 140,000 dead Poms agree with you.

Quite possibly they are very upset. But also, possibly, the other 68million Poms are happily going to the pub....

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Boris seemed to place massive reliance on "natural immunity after infection" or herd immunity as he called it, but the evidence seems to be that it does not exist.

Herd immunity is the concept that when sufficient members of the population are immune, either by vaccination or naturally after infection, the virus has nowhere to go and dies out. That concept is perfectly sound, but in the case of covid it seems that neither natural immunity nor vaccination gives a sufficient level of protection to cause the virus to run out of hosts. The vaccination may reduce the incidence of the disease, though remember that we don't test asymptomatic people so there is a degree of "no positive results doesn't mean no infections", and also the severity of symptoms (once again potentially causing some people not to bother getting tested), but not sufficiently to allow herd immunity to "remove" the disease as initially suggested.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

The available evidence seems to be that vax reduces the incidence of covid by a factor of perhaps 30, and also greatly reduces the severity of the infections that do occur. NSW + Vic Health websites are good sources.

My guess is that we will finish up needing an annual covid vax, just like the flu - after all, flu and covid are both coronaviruses.

I agree, although remember that this is exactly what is happening in the UK. Currently 80% of the UK have had two doses, and they're giving autumn boosters. Yet still they're seeing 50K new cases per day and around 1000 hospitalisations, and rising.

Germany, in contrast, has "only" around 68% fully vaccinated yet their new cases are averaging 5000-10,000 per day, much lower than the UK but also appear to be rising. They are also no longer providing free RATs, but have a double-vax or negative RAT (sometimes both) requirement to do many things - so unvaccinated will have to pay for a RAT every time they want to eat out, get a haircut etc., and they also require medical grade masks to be worn indoors. But it STILL seems that their cases are rising.......

I still have a suspicion that booster or not we'll see a massive increase in covid rates when we start to unlock...

Originally Posted by Warb

I still have a suspicion that booster or not we'll see a massive increase in covid rates when we start to unlock...

I believe this will happen too
I find the thought worrisome as well
A lot of communities are still NOT prepared with low vaccination rates
Nth Qld in particular
Must say it has me on edge...and i'm fully vaccinated
Log Dog

The latest thinking is that, the higher the vaccination rate, the lower the risk of new variants emerging, variants which could have a more severe impact on those already vaccinated.
This is an argument being put forward by epidemiologists while businesses and workplaces wrestle with the "no jab - no job" issue.
SWMBO, who works for a local authority, has been asked to complete a questionnaire regarding her thoughts on working alongside unvaccinated fellow workers. It's an issue we all face as we don't know who we are interacting with during our everyday life and is driving the continuing exhortation to wear masks.