Is Dan Andrews doing the right thing?

[Paul1Perth]

1 hour ago, rtritudr said:

These aren't quarantine cases.  These are community transmissions with no known source, spread over a fairly large area: Camden, Wollondilly and Parramatta.

They know where they are and who they are though don't they? I suppose they will be in quarantine now.

[rtritudr]

5 minutes ago, Paul1Perth said:

They know where they are and who they are though don't they? I suppose they will be in quarantine now.

The trouble is that these cases were probably infected more than a week ago (median incubation period of five days after which they became symptomatic enough to seek testing).  In that time the cluster could have grown to dozens of people.  What's worse is that people in Sydney have become very lax at social distancing, especially during this past Labour Day long weekend.

[Quinkla]

6 minutes ago, Paul1Perth said:

They know where they are and who they are though don't they? I suppose they will be in quarantine now.

The problem is that people seem to be contagious for a couple of days before they show symptoms - so there is the issue of their contacts for the past couple of days, and the contacts for those people, and so on. We are seeing in Victoria right now how easily and how far the virus can spread - one person in a shopping centre and a few days later we have infections 80km away in regional Victoria. And that is with Level 4 restrictions. If I were the NSW Premier I would be watching Victoria with a degree of concern that any one of the infections in NSW could go the same way.

 

[Dusty Plains]

On 07/10/2020 at 17:47, Quinkla said:

The problem is that people seem to be contagious for a couple of days before they show symptoms - so there is the issue of their contacts for the past couple of days, and the contacts for those people, and so on. We are seeing in Victoria right now how easily and how far the virus can spread - one person in a shopping centre and a few days later we have infections 80km away in regional Victoria. And that is with Level 4 restrictions. If I were the NSW Premier I would be watching Victoria with a degree of concern that any one of the infections in NSW could go the same way.

 

Correct, it could have gone either way. However, both the NSW government and the Commonwealth Government have indeed been watching Victoria, with great interest, for quite some time.  You see, in a national pandemic, state governments are essential to confining Covid19 outbreaks because they can control their borders.  Victoria was pressured to take commonwealth assistance in order to maintain an effective lockdown, But this was also due to the fact that the Commonwealth government did not to allow the spread of Covid 19 into NSW.

Why? Because NSW is the nation's power house, the largest population  and the largest economy and is not led by a loose cannon. The Commonwealth could endure the failure of Victoria but it could not abide the failure of the main state in Australia 

The commonwealth was well aware of the recalcitrant notions of one Dan Andrews, in sucking up to the Chinese government, putting unionists first over volunteers (Metropolitan Fire Brigade { a small fire brigade}  over the much larger Country Fire Authority professionals and volunteers) and other issues that exemplify the recalcitrant behaviour in terms of Dan Andrews and the national interest.

The Commonwealth pulled out all stops in the broader strategy to ensure that NSW did not become Victoria in terms of Covid19, for the benefit of all Australians.

So when you say:

"If I were the NSW Premier I would be watching Victoria with a degree of concern that any one of the infections in NSW could go the same way" I can tell you that up here in Sydney and down in Canberra we have been all over it for quite some time, and far more than you think.

Edited October 8, 2020 by Dusty Plains

[starlight7]

We are not allowed to do anything here in Victoria even though we have had no cases for weeks now and neither have any of our adjacent suburbs.  The ones with cases tend to be next to each other so surely they could isolate those areas and let the rest of us live and run our businesses?  I think they are absolutely pathetic the way they are destroying us all for the sake of the non compliers and we all know what the demographic is but are not allowed to say so. Political correctness at its worst and that is why I will never vote for that man again.

[Quinkla]

4 hours ago, starlight7 said:

The ones with cases tend to be next to each other so surely they could isolate those areas and let the rest of us live and run our businesses? 

Sadly that is not the case. Our super spreaders from Chadstone have managed to spread it as far as Shepparton. And this is what happens when we do have the restrictions. Imagine what it would be like without. 

[Alan Collett]

6 minutes ago, Quinkla said:

Sadly that is not the case. Our super spreaders from Chadstone have managed to spread it as far as Shepparton. And this is what happens when we do have the restrictions. Imagine what it would be like without. 

The policy is one of suppression, not eradication.

Isn't it?

Some day soon we're going to have to learn to live with the virus.   Hopefully without the accompanying hysteria.

Onwards!

 

[starlight7]

The thing is we have had no cases at all here for weeks and weeks and yet we are treated in the same way as the northern suburbs who are 40 kms away from here. I have come across local businessmen actually in tears because everything has collapsed . I no longer watch the lies on tv because it makes me feel physically sick. 

 

 

 

 

[MARYROSE02]

I don't know what to make of it. The 3 month lockdown in Sydney from March to June was unplesaant enough and it was nowhere near as harsh as in Melbourne. And now I've been in Queensland for three months where to be honest, apart from signing in to places and the odd mask, you would not know there is a crisis. As I said, I don't get it. Are we in Qld going to be like Victoria or the UK? I wonder if there will be negative health issues in Victoria for years to come, both mental and physical.

[MacGyver]

5 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

The policy is one of suppression, not eradication.

Isn't it?

Some day soon we're going to have to learn to live with the virus.   Hopefully without the accompanying hysteria.

Onwards!

 

Indeed, but living with it is a scary prospect, no hysteria intended 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54540544

[Quinkla]

10 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

Some day soon we're going to have to learn to live with the virus.   Hopefully without the accompanying hysteria.

That may well have to happen, but that would be a decision for society as a whole, not for a couple of politicians or medics. The mortality rate in Victoria has been 4%. I just don't think we, as a society, are ready for that. The countries where they have lesser restrictions (e.g. UK, USA) still have some restrictions and they don't seem to be very happy with the way things are going. This is a bad situation, and blaming the people leading the response won't make the problem go away. 

[Alan Collett]

8 minutes ago, Quinkla said:

That may well have to happen, but that would be a decision for society as a whole, not for a couple of politicians or medics. The mortality rate in Victoria has been 4%. I just don't think we, as a society, are ready for that. The countries where they have lesser restrictions (e.g. UK, USA) still have some restrictions and they don't seem to be very happy with the way things are going. This is a bad situation, and blaming the people leading the response won't make the problem go away. 

And how is "society as a whole" going to decide?

Are we going to have a referendum?

And that percentage - what's the number as a % of the number of people in Victoria outside aged care facilities?

Surely better to focus resources on the vulnerable and let the remainder live with the virus.   That's surely where we have to go.

Best regards.

 

 

[rtritudr]

13 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

The policy is one of suppression, not eradication.

Isn't it?

Some day soon we're going to have to learn to live with the virus.   Hopefully without the accompanying hysteria.

Onwards!

 

Living with the virus like they do in Europe? No thanks!

[Alan Collett]

Views from the UK that resonate with me ...

SIR – The Government needs to be honest with us. What is the plan if a vaccine doesn’t appear? Ministers are aware that one may not be widely available for years, so why are they stringing us along?

The definition of madness applies to the latest lockdown: it didn’t work last time and it won’t work now either. Suppression is not eradication. We will not put up with this way of life indefinitely. Vulnerable people are not unintelligent and are well able to manage their own risk. For the most vulnerable, targeted protection is needed while the rest of the population carries on and lives with the virus, as we live with numerous other contagious diseases.

AND ...

SIR – The average number of deaths in the UK pre-Covid was 10,000 per week; that figure is currently around 8,000. The number of weekly deaths recorded since the end of July with Covid-19 mentioned on the death certificate is less than 200 per week. How can the Government justify taking away all of our liberties, and why are we accepting it?

Each day, a breakdown of figures should show what people are dying of – whether it is coronavirus, cancer, diabetes or heart disease – to put the Government’s response to Covid into context. If we were given the facts, we would be queuing for tests for diseases other than Covid. There is no logic to any of this.

Best regards.

[Quinkla]

36 minutes ago, Alan Collett said:

Views from the UK that resonate with me ...

But that is very selective. The bit about 200 deaths from Covid per week, for example, as a justification for removing restrictions. Sure, there was a time under lockdown when the death rate did get that low. It has since increased. Yesterday, for example, there were 138 deaths due to Covid. The day before there were 137. The day before there were 143. And since the start of Covid, there have been 43,293 deaths, which is about 1500 deaths per week, give or take. It exceeded 1100 deaths a day before lockdown. So by all means look at low death and transmission rates under lockdown, but be aware that the low numbers are because of lockdown, not because the virus has gone away. 

[Alan Collett]

OK, let's flip the argument around.

How many deaths from COVID - or indeed from any infectious disease - are you prepared to accept?

Best regards.

[Quinkla]

8 minutes ago, Alan Collett said:

OK, let's flip the argument around.

How many deaths from COVID - or indeed from any infectious disease - are you prepared to accept?

I'm not sure how that is flipping an argument around or how that is relevant. We know that the mortality from Covid is 2-4% and we know that if it is left unchecked, almost all of us will get it. So with Australia having a population of 20 million, that would be 400,000-800,000 deaths. I don't think many people would think that was OK if it could be avoided. 

[MacGyver]

7 minutes ago, Quinkla said:

I'm not sure how that is flipping an argument around or how that is relevant. We know that the mortality from Covid is 2-4% and we know that if it is left unchecked, almost all of us will get it. So with Australia having a population of 20 million, that would be 400,000-800,000 deaths. I don't think many people would think that was OK if it could be avoided. 

You are viewing it from a health perspective, which I happen to agree with. Mr Collett seems to be viewing it primarily from an economic perspective.

I would argue that Australia is moving to a position whereby state borders will come down and international borders will remain closed. This will lead to a situation across the country where life is basically back to normal and a large majority are back in work (see WA economy as a good example of this). 

The main sectors that will remain impacted will be tourism and the migration industry and one might expect people working in those industries to form a view that opening international borders is a necessity. I disagree with that point at the moment but my employment isn’t dependent on open borders, luckily.

[Alan Collett]

23 minutes ago, Quinkla said:

I'm not sure how that is flipping an argument around or how that is relevant. We know that the mortality from Covid is 2-4% and we know that if it is left unchecked, almost all of us will get it. So with Australia having a population of 20 million, that would be 400,000-800,000 deaths. I don't think many people would think that was OK if it could be avoided. 

Maybe you could nonetheless answer the question, so we can better understand your rationale.

Is the answer none?

In anticipation ...

Best regards.

[Alan Collett]

12 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

You are viewing it from a health perspective, which I happen to agree with. Mr Collett seems to be viewing it primarily from an economic perspective.

I would argue that Australia is moving to a position whereby state borders will come down and international borders will remain closed. This will lead to a situation across the country where life is basically back to normal and a large majority are back in work (see WA economy as a good example of this). 

The main sectors that will remain impacted will be tourism and the migration industry and one might expect people working in those industries to form a view that opening international borders is a necessity. I disagree with that point at the moment but my employment isn’t dependent on open borders, luckily.

You can call me Alan - we're all friends on here ...

I'm looking at this from what I think is a holistic perspective.   A devastated economy means an inability to fund all the demands that will be placed on health and welfare - we're heading over the cliff the way this is going/being handled.

We all get blase about Government borrowings - a trillion here and a trillion there.   It used to be that a billion $'s was a large amount of money.  Here's a pictorial of what a trillion $'s represents.

Incidentally my financial livelihood is not materially impacted by the well being of the migration industry,  just in case you were suggesting my view is tainted.

Best regards.

[Quinkla]

1 hour ago, Alan Collett said:

Maybe you could nonetheless answer the question, so we can better understand your rationale.

No - it's a stupid question. This is a complex issue and it deserves serious consideration, not sloganeering or tricking people into making damaging statements. 

[MacGyver]

1 hour ago, Alan Collett said:

You can call me Alan - we're all friends on here ...

I'm looking at this from what I think is a holistic perspective.   A devastated economy means an inability to fund all the demands that will be placed on health and welfare - we're heading over the cliff the way this is going/being handled.

We all get blase about Government borrowings - a trillion here and a trillion there.   It used to be that a billion $'s was a large amount of money.  Here's a pictorial of what a trillion $'s represents.

Incidentally my financial livelihood is not materially impacted by the well being of the migration industry,  just in case you were suggesting my view is tainted.

Best regards.

Hi Alan!

I wasn’t intending to suggest your view is tainted, my apologies if it came across that way. I was trying to discuss the genesis of different viewpoints, where people like myself have the luxury of focussing only on the health aspect as employment is unaffected, but others such as yourself may incorporate different factors into your viewpoint given the huge impact on migration at present.

Both are valid views/positions and perhaps selfishly I consider the current arrangements as an acceptable temporary solution given life feels very much like normal and the local economy is thriving. I realise that isn’t a universal experience, but it is the basis for my position and the reason I extend that view out to supporting Victoria’s lockdown, as I consider how well it worked in WA and imagine all other states having similar economic success and recovery post lockdown. Easy to say from a distance though!

On a bigger scale I worry about the impact of recurring lockdown, open up early, lockdown, open up earl and the impact this would have on the economy. There seems little point in lockdown unless you take the Victorian approach of locking down very hard, getting almost elimination then opening up fully (with borders intact). Long term this obviously causes different problems (isolation/ongoing quarantine).

Glad to hear you’re not overly impacted by the global chaos, I feel very lucky (and sometimes guilt) myself to be doing ok given what I see/hear others experiencing.

 

[Alan Collett]

17 minutes ago, Quinkla said:

No - it's a stupid question. This is a complex issue and it deserves serious consideration, not sloganeering or tricking people into making damaging statements. 

No, it's not a stupid question.    Nor is it a gotcha question.

Rather, its a hard question.

The number of COVID deaths doesn't sit in a vacuum. 

There are consequences/collateral damage if you simply say we have to minimise COVID deaths.

More people - including health professionals - are saying the policies of the Andrews Government are not sustainable.

Only today ...

"A network of more than 500 Victorian doctors has urged Premier Daniel Andrews to end current lockdown restrictions and abandon mandatory wearing of face masks and a 5km limit on movement when he announces the next step of easing on Sunday.

The group, calling themselves the “Covid Medical Network, earlier this week penned a petition arguing Victoria’s lockdown was “unnecessary” and “disproportionate” and was likely to cause many more deaths than it would save by exacerbating mental illness and discouraging people from seeking medical attention for life-threatening conditions such as cancer and heart disease.

... the Covid Medical Network renewed their push, with a statement from anaesthetist and CMN spokesman Eamonn Mathieson.

“We want (Mr Andrews) to end current lockdown restrictions including abandoning the mandatory wearing of face masks and lifting the five-kilometre limit to enable Melburnians to lead normal lives once again,” Dr Mathieson said.

“The lockdown has had devastating economic and wellbeing effects on the community as a whole with an alarming increase in mental health cases and cancer screening appointments being cancelled.

“Retail businesses and bars and restaurants should be allowed to re-open to help get the economy moving.”

Dr Mathieson also cited comments from World Health Organisation Special Envoy on COVID-19 David Nabarro, who said earlier this week that the WHO “do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus”, highlighting the role they were playing in “making poor people an awful lot poorer”.

“The draconian measures imposed by the Andrews government have created unnecessary fear in the community with people worried they may be infected with the virus if they attend doctors’ waiting rooms or visit hospitals,” Dr Mathieson said.

“The Premier’s determination to eliminate COVID-19 is futile. To pursue this objective will only cause more misery and suffering for Victorians.

“We also echo the call by leading international epidemiologists and infectious disease experts for a “targeted protection’ approach for the vulnerable, whilst allowing all other Victorians to immediately to resume life as normal, with simple hygiene measures, including the habit of regular handwashing, and staying home when sick.”"

Best regards.

[unzippy]

I can understand their wanting to lift restrictions such as 5km but why "abandon mandatory wearing of face masks"?

[Alan Collett]

1 minute ago, unzippy said:

I can understand their wanting to lift restrictions such as 5km but why "abandon mandatory wearing of face masks"?

A virologist I know says most are ineffective - I understand that the size of the virus is comfortably less than the size of the holes in most of the masks that are being worn.

I perceive though that masks invite an awareness (maybe almost subconscious) of keeping one's distance from others.

Best regards.