Thread: breaking covid rules

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Whilst I would have to agree that pressure and results are not a primary concern for such institutions as the CSIRO, I would expect, but don't know, they are increasingly having to justify their existence in the this commercial world. However, to say the government is reducing their funding because of taxpayer concerns I believe is exceeding generous towards the politicians and I don't see it as any more than a money grab for political expediency.

Reducing taxes is what most people want. What gets sacrificed to do this is only of concern when the thing being sacrificed is something that particular taxpayer "likes". The average person therefore doesn't care what is cut, as long as their taxes are reduced. Many government funded organisations have very loud (or influential) supporters, but science? Under normal circumstances I'm not sure many people would notice or make a fuss about funding reduction for science (recently we have had the STEM push, but that's still quite recent and targeted at schools) so it's an easy target! The taxpayer concerns are not specifically anti-CSIRO, they are simply "less tax".

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

In this instance, as in Covid-19 times, the agency could have diverted attention to this pandemic if they had not had their structure so disabled. The argument against would be that it cost too much to keep things running for such an event: My comment would be can you afford not to do this? All hypothetical now, but very short sighted. I would also comment that we, as a group of people, are extremely self-centred and apparently are incapable of seeing a greater good. I can understand that attitude from people barely eeking out a living. I cannot accept that is the right attitude from people who are "comfortable."

It's not always possible for science to redirect. A bunch of scientists may be experts in breeding better wheat, and may be very well equipped to do that, but it is unlikely they could quickly (or perhaps ever) refocus on a viral disease of humans. If they were suitably qualified and equipped "medical" researchers, then such a redirect is far more likely, but such people and equipment is massively expensive to maintain, so........

One thing that covid has made very clear is that "the common good" is not something that is universally understood. We seem to be a very selfish and short-sighted society!

Originally Posted by Warb

One thing that covid has made very clear is that "the common good" is not something that is universally understood. We seem to be a very selfish and short-sighted society!

Warb

I think you have hit on the essence of humanity's failing there.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by BobL

One thing I haven't heard that much about is the complete mess of the Australian vaccines roll out.

There are/were two big problems with the vaccine roll-out. Firstly our 19th century "state" system, where health is a state run service. Secondly the media trashed the AZ vaccine so people didn't (and in many cases still don't) want it. There were/are many other contributing factors, but those caused the biggest proportion of the problem.

Originally Posted by Warb

In contrast, "business" can, when it desires, through money at something if they think it will be profitable. That includes staff salaries..... So whilst I have no doubt that there are some talented people in the CSIRO, the problem remains that the really talented people often get poached by big business. It takes a very dedicated person to turn down a doubling of their salary and the opportunity to have as much of the latest equipment as they need! This happens across the board, not just in science - governments (worldwide) tend to be at the low end of the pay scale for most job sectors, and therefore often lose their better staff to big business. That's always assuming that those talented people don't get picked up straight out of university by the corporate graduate recruitment programs.

There are also government incentives for companies to conduct research. I have a relative who works for the Research and Development Tax Incentive Office of the Federal Government. There are Australian companies as well as International companies operating in Australia who have their annual tax burdens reduced by BILLIONS of dollars per year for the research they are carrying out in Australia.

So it's not only the money spent to run CSIRO and other Government bodies that comes out of money that would otherwise be available to the government for other purposes.

Originally Posted by Warb

There are/were two big problems with the vaccine roll-out. Firstly our 19th century "state" system, where health is a state run service. Secondly the media trashed the AZ vaccine so people didn't (and in many cases still don't) want it. There were/are many other contributing factors, but those caused the biggest proportion of the problem.

I'm not sure I agree. Every doctor I speak to says, "Feds are all crap at "human services" delivery", EG Centrelink, quarantine, NBN, the aged care vac roli out. If anything its the feds failure to properly use the state systems that has us where we are now.

I think the media AZ beat issue is also a convenient excuse to not have order enough of a range of vaccines to begin with.

Our GP had no problems. We rang up to get an appointment for a flu shot. They booked the flu shot and made an appointment three weeks after that for the first AZ and another 12 weeks later for the second AZ shot. Smooth as silk. Sent out reminders as well. They are a busy practice with 8 doctors and we have been going there for years.

I think there is a scale issue involved. Last night I was surprised when SWMBO told me that our local pharmacy could give the jab. BUT, there was a catch. She overheard the booking and the condition was they had to get ten people in, because as has been mentioned in this thread, the vials come in ten dose quantities. If only one person rocks up for the jab, the remaining doses are wasted.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by BobL

I'm not sure I agree. Every doctor I speak to says, "Feds are all crap at "human services" delivery", EG Centrelink, quarantine, NBN, the aged care vac roli out. If anything its the feds failure to properly use the state systems that has us where we are now.

I think the media AZ beat issue is also a convenient excuse to not have order enough of a range of vaccines to begin with.

In answer to the last few posts, in no particular order:

1/ Feds are crap at human services delivery: Yep, as are all governments. However, health is state run, so doctors are in fact dealing with state systems so may not be in a position to accurately comment on federal systems. We work closely with several doctors, and it is interesting to hear their views on each other, as well as to observe how differently they are dealing with the situation - our local doctor has completely shut down everything, moved to 100% telehealth, and is not doing vaccines. Our next nearest doctor is running an enormous vaccination centre in addition to their usual practice.....

2/ The AZ media beat-up is a convenient excuse: Australia bought a sufficient quantity of the most available vaccine to do the staged roll-out it had planned. That vaccine has been used to dose the entire population of other countries. In Australia we didn't have a massive death toll, so people weren't desperate to get vaccinated. Then the media pushed the issues with AZ and after that almost nobody wanted it. Had it been Pfizer that had been publicised as being bad, the government would have been heroes for not wasting money, (edit, shouldn't have rushed!) but not if they had split the purchase. We still, on a daily basis, get told by patients that they'll wait until Pfizer is available... That is changing, even today (Sunday), because we have now got local cases of covid and people are texting us (private phones, the pharmacy is closed) to get vaccinated with anything available.

3/ The ten jabs per vial issue: The industry has now been told that we have ample stocks of AZ, and no attempt needs to be made to save doses. We are also now being told that the written informed consent process can be ignored, as long as the "tick boxes" in the online system are completed with the patient giving the appropriate answers. This translates to "just shove it in to anyone who'll have it, no matter what".

4/ Government incentives to companies carrying out research: Yes indeed. Unfortunately, contrary to what many people and some politicians think, Australia is a tiny country with very little real clout. We also have a great deal of government micro-management by way of laws, and an employment system that makes it far harder and more expensive to run a company than in many other countries. So to get those big companies to do research here requires, er, encouragement. And once you start providing encouragement, the next company says "I'll only do it if you give me the same or more" and it spirals. The encouragement is done in several ways, both direct grants and also tax reduction based on expenditure - so the more a company spends on research, the more it can offset against tax. This is not just in Australia, many countries operate such schemes. The results are "interesting"; because the incentives apply to "research", the R&D branch of a company can spend more or less whatever it wants, whilst other branches may not. In one company in the UK, I was a consultant in the R&D division and I had a budget that I never got to the end of, we just bought whatever we thought we might need. In the next building, a good friend of mine worked for the "corporate" division of the same company (sales, accounting, all that normal stuff) and they were using out of date "coal fired" computers, and were unable to buy anything until months, and many pleas, after the old one broke beyond repair. Our R&D spending created tax benefits, theirs didn't! R&D conferences and meetings were in flash hotels overseas. He never left the office..... but they did give him a push-button phone!

This link is the account by a nurse (Anne Elliott), who was present in the UK during the early days of the virus, (now back in Australia) and a doctor (Stephen Parnis). They walk you through the four stages of the way in which Covid-19 grabs hold of you. It would be frightening if you were thirty and fit: Mortifying (literally) if you are eighty and fundamentally infirm.

This is what COVID-19 does to your body and why it can kill - ABC News

Interestingly, Elliott herself contacted the virus in the UK and even after the illness had subsided she did not feel "well" for some time subsequently.

Regards
Paul

I hounded "The Kids" (24, 25, 27) into going out this bloody weekend to get their shots.

The chemist was giving them out and I told them to just turn up. The kids wanted to fill out online forms and wait. Such good drones - but I ranted at them. They finally relented, went up and the chemist gave them ALL the jab with no appointment. It was busy, but there was no wait. Five people at a time.

This was the first weekend of chemist availability, also to young people, plus the first week of Canberras hard lockdown.

Now if this was only done 12 months ago.....

Goddam Fcn government.


EVERYTHING, and EVERY FAILURE lays at the feet of those in charge and all levels of government. Hold them accountable at the next election. They PLAYED WITH YOUR LIVES.

Originally Posted by woodPixel

I hounded "The Kids" (24, 25, 27) into going out this bloody weekend to get their shots.

Good work to get your kids vaccinated!

What follows is a rant, caused by lack of coffee. It is not targeted at anyone, and is largely just a vent.

The vaccine rollout in Australia was targeted towards those most at risk. It was not perfect, and as always when so many people have their hands in the pot, the waters got very muddied. However, at least in my area, it went very well. The old folks homes held clinics, mobile clinics visited to deal with the elderly and other "high risk" people very early on. A large clinic was set up in the next town (rural area) where high risk, old, essential services people (etc.) could get their shots. There was no constraint on supply or appointments - I made an appointment (for the following week) and then had to change it due to unforeseen circumstances, and they rebooked me for the following day. The clinic was largely empty when I had my shot, the nurses were bored and the "on site" doctor (in case of emergency) had almost finished his book!

The rollout through pharmacy is interesting. The AMA are dead set against pharmacy getting the ability to vaccinate - 'flu shots have been available through pharmacies for some time, but that was a battle. The AMA certainly didn't want covid shots in pharmacy. The process of getting that through was time consuming, and only happened at all because the vaccination uptake was so low. People are happier to talk to a pharmacist than to a doctor, so it was seen as an answer to getting shots in arms. However it was a long process, and started with a trial run with a very small number of pharmacies (we were one of them) to demonstrate it was possible. That pilot run was in fact cut short, due to the Sydney/NSW outbreak, and the fact that in the face of the outbreak nobody could really argue or delay it any further.....

However, with all that said, we (locally) still hear, every day, "I can't get a vaccination". It's now 6.30am, and I already have a missed call on my phone (it's in silent mode until 6.30am!) which I know for a fact is an "I need a vaccination" plea. That call is from someone who could have been vaccinated months ago, but they weren't interested. Two local cases and now everyone has to drop everything to poke a needle in them, and they'll tell you it's the governments fault. Is it? Really? Those people at the old folks home, staff and residents, who chose not to have Pfizer when the nurse was there waving the needles around and begging for arms to stick them in, are now blaming the government because they can't instantly get a shot. When did we lose track of personal responsibility?

This is my opinion. Australia has (had?) done a very good job at supressing the virus until everyone had got vaccinated. It had created a reasonable (not perfect) vaccination plan. The lack of deaths unfortunately (?) meant the population had little interest in getting vaccinated, and then the media stepped in and trashed AZ, making the uptake even less. The multiple layers of healthcare responsibility meant that apparently some areas had better access to vaccination than others, some doctors gave vaccinations whilst others didn't, and I have no idea as to the reality of those situations in other areas. In my area it was fine. Anyone over 50 could have been vaccinated at any time in the last two or three months, the old, infirm, essential workers etc. since around March (can't remember exactly!). Under 50's have also been eligible for long enough that those who wanted it have been done.

Here's the problem. Governments are stupid, and they stupidly believe that people will "do the right thing". That's why the Sydney lockdown was not a "ring of steel" - the government believed that people were clever/sensible enough to see , and abide by, the "spirit of the law". But people aren't. People (not all, but many) are selfish and, dare I say it, lazy. They did what suited them, in the case of the vaccination it was "nothing", and in the case of the lockdown it was "whatever they wanted to". So nobody got vaccinated, and the virus spread. Now, when the truth starts to dawn on them, they blame the government, the doctors, the pharmacists, or anyone else that they can think of to avoid admitting that their own actions, or lack of actions, have landed them in a bad situation. In my area we now have covid. And guess where it started? At a petrol station, brought in by someone from Sydney travelling when they should have been locked down.

There has been a very strange and excessively "risk averse" approach to these vaccines. (I say "risk averse" in quotes because it is people thinking they are being careful and cautious but are in fact causing harm)

Making people wait 15 minutes.
Asking a bunch of questions about past health which have no known bearing on (very low) risk of adverse effects.
Restricting AZ due to an incredibly rare risk and running the numbers as if we won't have any COVID in the community. (If the disease doesn't exist then of course the treatment of riskier, but the disease is in fact highly contagious...)

We should be doing what other countries like the UK and Canada have done.
Stadiums, churches, mobile clinics.
25,000 people vaccinated at a stadium in Toronto in one day.


Instead we spend 6 weeks building 'mass vaccination clinics' with pretty walls that can only do a couple of thousand per day.


The sum of the above is that a significant proportion of the population are fearful of COVID vaccination. Despite it being incredibly safe and effective.
And vaccines have been more difficult to access for those that want them.

And there are still many GPs/Drs telling people to hold out for Pfizer.
Or that someone can't have AZ because they have had a clot in the past - which has completely different pathophysiology. (There are no known risk factors for the vaccine induced clotting problem, apart from it being a little bit more common at younger ages)

Originally Posted by pippin88

There has been a very strange and excessively "risk averse" approach to these vaccines.

The 15 minute wait is standard for all/most vaccinations, as are the questions. 15 minutes for possible anaphylaxis (a risk with most vaccinations) and the questions to avoid/identify any risks, because there are factors that impact the risk. They also help with future analysis (and legal defence!) should there be a problem.

The building of vaccination hubs was, I suspect, an attempt to be seen to be doing something when in fact the existing facilities (at that time) were only at 50% capacity because nobody wanted the jab!

The population is/was generally fearful, but that is the fault of the media who shouted loudly about the (minimal) dangers in a way that made it sound like it was Russian roulette. It's very hard for a doctor, pharmacist, or government to persuade someone that something is safe when the media is telling them (as are all their friends) that it's not! In countries where hundreds of thousands have died of the disease it's easy to ignore the handful who died from the cure, but in Australia we had minimal covid deaths and a very well publicised, albeit small, number of deaths from the vaccine.

Overall, however, at this time I agree. We should be using any available facility to inject everyone who is willing. Those who are not willing should go to the back of the queue for both "mind changes" and also treatment if they should get the disease....