- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 11,591
- Location
- l'appel du vide
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2014
- Uni Grad
- 2018
So the British PM is in hospital...
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52192604
He's in intensive care now.
So the British PM is in hospital...
Fuark how did it suddenly get so serious
Seems to be if people aren't on the mend by around day 7, they get dramatically worse.Fuark how did it suddenly get so serious
The government really needs to be transparent on the next steps, because "flattening the curve" isnt a solution. Also keeping this status quo until a vaccine is found (or should I say if it is found) is pretty ridiculous.NSW Premier says coronavirus social distancing to stay 'until vaccine is found'
NSW Health confirms 49 new coronavirus infections and two deaths, as Premier Gladys Berejiklian warns social distancing will stay in the state "until a vaccine is found".mobile.abc.net.au
Hmn
NSW Premier says coronavirus social distancing to stay 'until vaccine is found'
NSW Health confirms 49 new coronavirus infections and two deaths, as Premier Gladys Berejiklian warns social distancing will stay in the state "until a vaccine is found".mobile.abc.net.au
Hmm. Realistically might not be feasible to do so.
Agreed. SARS was brought under control without a vaccine. This is obviously a bigger scale pandemic but longer term there needs to be an optimal middle ground with restrictions vs infection risk.The government really needs to be transparent on the next steps, because "flattening the curve" isnt a solution. Also keeping this status quo until a vaccine is found (or should I say if it is found) is pretty ridiculous.
The restrictions as they currently stand are very blunt. The benefit of having a blunt tool is that it is the quickest means to control the immediate problem of an exponential growth of infections. The restrictions could be more targeted to those that have an actual impact on reducing infections (e.g. preventing someone from having lunch on a park bench by themselves does crap all in actually reducing infections).Unless you're going for herd immunity there isn't actually too much of a middle ground. Release too many restrictions and cases will explode.
An option is summer slows transmission to the point where you can temporarily ease restrictions.
Problem with coronavirus is milder symptoms and more contagious than SARS, therefore hard to track and more difficult to effectively quarantine sick people.
Expanding on this, a lot of people who scream for lockdowns and "putting lives ahead of the economy" dont fully understand the ramifications of the lockdown. First of all, public health and economic health go hand in hand. Hospitals are a major cost to any society and at the moment, the already meager revenue base of hospitals (elective surgeries) have been suspended. Moreover, those "non-essential" businesses that are being shut down pay the taxes that fund the healthcare system, as do their employees. Keeping the economy shut down for an extended period will eventually impact the health system as funding decreases. If you are really that obtuse, just remember, a societies health and wealth are positively correlated. It doesnt run on fairy dust and good will, just look at Africa or other third world regions to see how their health systems operate.The point is you can't sustain tough restrictions like that for too long, especially if the downward trend in infections are looking good, because you risk unnecessary economic pain or even worse, social unrest. There needs to be restrictions that are more sustainable than what is currently being done if our strategy is to manage a low number of infections for a long period of time.
I think the current restrictions should remain in place until we have truly flattened the curve for a sustained period of time (something like 0.0-0.5% sustained growth rate over the rest of April perhaps - we're currently at 1-3% growth rate in the past week) and reduce the proportion of confirmed cases from unknown sources to some acceptable level.I believe the approach you are suggesting is the "on and off" where restrictions are put in place and the released in cycles as infections climb, thereby creating a sense of normality for at least periods of times?
If instead you are looking at a long term release in restrictions, indeed as you note the most restrictive aspects (i.e Stage 3 restrictions) can be eased without too much of an effect. However when you start opening bars and resturants, schools and universities, the potential for gatherings accompanied by the high infectivity of coronavirus makes it very likely to cause a second wave. I find it hard to imagine bars and resturants opening but guests following social distancing principles when the entire objective is to socialize.
Talking about reducing the cases to zero, that will likely take several months before we get there, but is an option to consider. If you look at countries like Singapore or South Korea (well known for their good response), even they have daily increases around 50-100. Maybe we can get there - but a short term "lockdown" at zero cases is unlikely enough to eradicate the virus, as there are always people who don't follow the rules and transmission within a household can occur over months. For example, a linear transmission chain down 4 people in a large household could take almost 2 months to complete. We will learn more about this approach when NZ comes out of their lockdown, and can further evaluate its effectivness. Essentially, Australia's effective approach so far has bought us time to wait-and-see what happens within other countries.
Had by far the lowest increase from 6am yesterday to 6am today - 51. It's been around 80-100 for almost a week (reported 6am-6am and 3pm-3pm).Australia now has 6,289 confirmed cases of Covid-19.
Confirmed cases
1,773,358
Deaths
108,702
Source:https://www.theguardian.com/austral...demic-politics-scott-morrison-nrl-latest-news
Would treat that lower figure with caution because testing activity is usually lower on weekends (and it’s the Easter weekend as well). There is also a rescue plane full of like 70 positive cases that landed from Uruguay so not sure how that will get incorporated into the count.Had by far the lowest increase from 6am yesterday to 6am today - 51. It's been around 80-100 for almost a week (reported 6am-6am and 3pm-3pm).
I've seen this mentioned, but the effect doesn't seem too pronounced for positive cases in Australia at least. ~80-90 -> 51 was a pretty big drop thoughWould treat that lower figure with caution because testing activity is usually lower on weekends (and it’s the Easter weekend as well).
Not having internet at home is comparable to not having water or electricity nowadays, it's impossible to live a normal life without internet.in all fairness there prob isnt a single person in aus who cant afford the internet
the only ppl who dont have internet in aus are oldfags and ppl who deliberately live "off the grid" lol at there being ~anyone~ who isnt homeless, unemployed and is completely is ineligible for any govt payment (lots of homeless ppl are on the DSP), and thats an implausibly tiny number of ppl, who cant afford the internet
and those fags wouldnt have kids in schools anyway