Coronavirus.

[BELMORE]

If you are worried about them tracking you then sign up to the app with a fake name....... magic.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

View attachment 14749

Never trust a chick who's lips are bigger than my dick.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Yep I know. I generally try to qualify my statements by saying 'almost all' or 'most' deaths are above a certain age.

But the general point still stands. It would appear (based on current data in Australia) that by and large the only people at risk appear to be the elderly or those with existing conditions. So we should have a more targeted approach to restrictions towards these people rather than just blindly locking everyone down.

At this stage I think we're screwed anyway. Even after every state/country went into lockdown the virus still got the old people. In Sweden they avoided lockdown but put extra protections in place for the nursing homes, and still it got into the nursing homes. Same thing happened in Australia. They're testing nursing home staff in Australia every day and have them under heavy protection, and we're still keep getting more infected staff.

I don't think there's any way we can stop the virus, just slow it down. And when we ease restrictions I'm fully expecting a massive second wave that will result in many old people dying.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Don't get me wrong though. I don't want anyone to die and the latest research shows that if we didn't lock down then we'd have at least 5,000 dead by now, a majority of them old people. Problem is that research is also suggesting that those 5,000+ deaths are still coming regardless, and that's just the start.

 

[Dawgfather]

At this stage I think we're screwed anyway. Even after every state/country went into lockdown the virus still got the old people. In Sweden they avoided lockdown but put extra protections in place for the nursing homes, and still it got into the nursing homes. Same thing happened in Australia. They're testing nursing home staff in Australia every day and have them under heavy protection, and we're still keep getting more infected staff.

I don't think there's any way we can stop the virus, just slow it down. And when we ease restrictions I'm fully expecting a massive second wave that will result in many old people dying.

I basically agree with all of that.

I'm generally resigned to the fact that:

- The virus exists, it transmits easily and it kills elderly and sick people easily
- People are going to die and there is not a lot we can do about this because economy wide lockdowns are not sustainable for any real length of time

The best we can do is come up with really good protocols for aged care facilities, and for the elderly generally.

And then we need to pray for a vaccine.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

All that said, you have to remember that the strategy was never about preventing the unavoidable deaths. The strategy was about slowing down the pressure on the hospital system so there wouldn't be additional deaths on top of that.

 

[Dawgfather]

All that said, you have to remember that the strategy was never about preventing the unavoidable deaths. The strategy was about slowing down the pressure on the hospital system so there wouldn't be additional deaths on top of that.

Yep exactly. That's my point - we have achieved what they set out to achieve (slow the curve and protect the hospital system), therefore in my book we should have already opened up parts of the economy.

 

[JayBee]

Don't get me wrong though. I don't want anyone to die and the latest research shows that if we didn't lock down then we'd have at least 5,000 dead by now, a majority of them old people. Problem is that research is also suggesting that those 5,000+ deaths are still coming regardless, and that's just the start.

This is what trips me out about this situation.

I have been hearing people in the medical profession saying the worst has not even come yet - but if you look at the curve - we are smashing it. How is this going to continue and be worse in 4 weeks time, when we are as far ahead as we are?

 

[Hacky McAxe]

This is what trips me out about this situation.

I have been hearing people in the medical profession saying the worst has not even come yet - but if you look at the curve - we are smashing it. How is this going to continue and be worse in 4 weeks time, when we are as far ahead as we are?

The main problem is that we only explain this as one curve because beyond that it becomes a big unknown.

The curve we see is technically a first wave and doesn't account for any other waves. It also accounts for total population infection. In our case we stopped the virus from spreading to the total population so the curve model becomes pointless, until a second wave hits.

That's where the real problem comes in. We have two options:

1) ease of restrictions, test everyone, use heavy contact tracing on any new cases, keep the borders closed until a vaccine arrives. If we start seeing larger numbers, shut everything down again

2) fully ease off restrictions and hope for the best

Option 1 will lead to economic damage for a long time but we may keep the deaths under 1,000.l and we won't have to worry about the curve.

Option 2 will lead to a new curve that we'll have to try to flatten with social distancing and the deaths will be anywhere from 5,000 - 50,000 (most likely around the 8,000 - 10,000 mark)

Until a vaccine arrives (if a vaccine arrives) then that's generally where we are at.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Of course there's much that doesn't take into account. For example:

- it's possible we will never have a vaccine, although that is unlikely and there are other paths of treatment we are pursuing (antibody transplant, drugs)

- it's possible that immunity may not be a thing as not everyone infected is developing antibodies and we don't know how well the antibodies will protect people. Also, immunity can be temporary. For example, SARS-Cov-1 which was similar to this but much less infective and much more deadly, had an average immunity rate of 2 years. If it was still around then you would need a vaccine booster every 1-2 years. Sars-cov-2 immunity could potentially be even shorter than that

 

[LordSidious66]

This is what trips me out about this situation.

I have been hearing people in the medical profession saying the worst has not even come yet - but if you look at the curve - we are smashing it. How is this going to continue and be worse in 4 weeks time, when we are as far ahead as we are?

The real question is: How long can we even maintain this state of lockdown? The economy is pretty much at breaking point and it pretty much is having a negative affect on people's mental health. Sooner or later people will start being sick and tired of being on lockdown and want normal life to resume.

 

[BDPScarface]

Don't get me wrong though. I don't want anyone to die and the latest research shows that if we didn't lock down then we'd have at least 5,000 dead by now, a majority of them old people. Problem is that research is also suggesting that those 5,000+ deaths are still coming regardless, and that's just the start.

I never believed, and don't believe the research. 5,000+ deaths wasn't going to happen. Even if it did, the government, the media have totally warped perspective on this virus, in comparison to other respiratory illness and its toll.

History tells us, repeatedly, that you should never let doctors and scientists govern policy. Their research tends to hard numbers in very narrow contexts, with no real grasps of complex realities. The Soviet Union is the reference standard for a catastrophic attempt at an engineered society.

Public discourse, as ever in this modern era, is also warped. You cannot even suggest that lockdown measures were not necessary, lest you be shouted down as some blood thirsting murderer.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I never believed, and don't believe the research. 5,000+ deaths wasn't going to happen. Even if it did, the government, the media have totally warped perspective on this virus, in comparison to other respiratory illness and its toll.

History tells us, repeatedly, that you should never let doctors and scientists govern policy. Their research tends to hard numbers in very narrow contexts, with no real grasps of complex realities. The Soviet Union is the reference standard for a catastrophic attempt at an engineered society.

Public discourse, as ever in this modern era, is also warped. You cannot even suggest that lockdown measures were not necessary, lest you be shouted down as some blood thirsting murderer.

New York has a smaller population than Australia. They have 26,000 deaths. Sweden has half the population of Australia. They have 3,000 deaths. UK and Italy, 30,000 deaths each. 5,000 is a moderate number.

I'm not saying that the experts got everything right. They were working on projections of a new, unknown virus with very limited data. But the evidence is clear that this is a major issue.

That said, as I pointed out earlier. Sweden is literally the only country that has followed the scientific research as recommended by the WHO. Our lockdowns weren't based on a mass of scientific research. They were based on limited simulations and the government wanting to save as many lives as possible with a lot of guess work thrown in.

How accurate that will be still remains to be seen, and it's also debatable whether Sweden's approach worked or if they killed off a portion of their population for nothing.

 

[Riggs80]

Can you blame them for going full hog with restrictions , now there are calls royal commissions for the age care centre and every press conference get savaged by every death , like they are personally injecting people with the virus

 

[BDPScarface]

Can you blame them for going full hog with restrictions , now there are calls royal commissions for the age care centre and every press conference get savaged by every death , like they are personally injecting people with the virus

Agree. It's really gross.

 

[Cook]

New York has a smaller population than Australia. They have 26,000 deaths. Sweden has half the population of Australia. They have 3,000 deaths. UK and Italy, 30,000 deaths each. 5,000 is a moderate number.

I'm not saying that the experts got everything right. They were working on projections of a new, unknown virus with very limited data. But the evidence is clear that this is a major issue.

That said, as I pointed out earlier. Sweden is literally the only country that has followed the scientific research as recommended by the WHO. Our lockdowns weren't based on a mass of scientific research. They were based on limited simulations and the government wanting to save as many lives as possible with a lot of guess work thrown in.

How accurate that will be still remains to be seen, and it's also debatable whether Sweden's approach worked or if they killed off a portion of their population for nothing.

Agree 5000 is nothing. I thought original predictions were towards the 100000 mark. If we stay anywhere near 5000 after this virus it’ll be a win in my mind

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Agree 5000 is nothing. I thought original predictions were towards the 100000 mark. If we stay anywhere near 5000 after this virus it’ll be a win in my mind

Yep. Without any control measures they were looking at 200,000 so 5,000 is a blessing. Still many deaths though so the more we can save the better.

 

[Dawgfather]

There is a balance to be struck between restrictive health measures and reopening the economy. At the moment we are far too much on the side of restrictive health measures which are causing unnecessary damage.

My bet is that the socialists down in Victoria are going to hang on to power and control longer than the other states. I hope they don't, because the economy needs to reopen and a sense of normality needs to return as much as possible.

 

[Riggs80]

Wow Americans really are &$%##

https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/heal...ronavirus-cases-in-washington-state-c-1023296

covid parties so they can get the virus ... these guys should meet up with the anti vas’s brigade

 

[GoTheDoggies]

Don't get me wrong though. I don't want anyone to die and the latest research shows that if we didn't lock down then we'd have at least 5,000 dead by now, a majority of them old people. Problem is that research is also suggesting that those 5,000+ deaths are still coming regardless, and that's just the start.

We're in trouble either option. Lock down or no lock down. The key thing is it's inevitable, they have to lift the lock down since there is no way we're going to wait for a vaccine.

Option A - lock down destroy the economy for years

Option B - social distancing, prevent super spreading events, protect the most vulnerable - ultimately reach a level of herd immunity.

The virus is not going anywhere we are going to have to face it because the economic impacts will force the government's hand.