Coronavirus.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
It's well known why NY and NJ had such high cases though. Complete government screw up. They forced sick people to stay in nursing homes which just spread the virus like crazy. It was a complete screw up.

At least early on. Full lockdown started in April. Numbers started dropping after that so NY lockdown did exactly what it was meant to.
You made my point for me.

hard lock downs are not an effective measure against Coronavirus.

effective measures include appropriately designed policies to protect aged care.

Sweden had no hard lock down but has a death rate per million three To four times less Than NY and NJ and still slightly lower than all of America even though most of America has experienced varying degrees of hard lock downs.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
You made my point for me.

hard lock downs are not an effective measure against Coronavirus.

effective measures include appropriately designed policies to protect aged care.

Sweden had no hard lock down but has a death rate per million three To four times less Than NY and NJ and still slightly lower than all of America even though most of America has experienced varying degrees of hard lock downs.
I noticed that you skipped the part where I said that cases went down after NY went into hard lockdown.

Also, on Sweden, I do find it funny that Conservatives still push the Sweden hero meme. Sweden had soft lockdowns (restrictions on social gatherings) and their death rates were 5-10 times worse than their neighbouring countries.

The guy who came up with the Swedish strategy admitted that it didn't work and said that if it happened again he would encourage stronger lockdowns. Not as strong as the US lockdowns but much stronger than what they used.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
I noticed that you skipped the part where I said that cases went down after NY went into hard lockdown.

Also, on Sweden, I do find it funny that Conservatives still push the Sweden hero meme. Sweden had soft lockdowns (restrictions on social gatherings) and their death rates were 5-10 times worse than their neighbouring countries.

The guy who came up with the Swedish strategy admitted that it didn't work and said that if it happened again he would encourage stronger lockdowns. Not as strong as the US lockdowns but much stronger than what they used.
Funny what a little research and proper analysis uncovers.. Bravo Hacky.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I noticed that you skipped the part where I said that cases went down after NY went into hard lockdown.

Also, on Sweden, I do find it funny that Conservatives still push the Sweden hero meme. Sweden had soft lockdowns (restrictions on social gatherings) and their death rates were 5-10 times worse than their neighbouring countries.

The guy who came up with the Swedish strategy admitted that it didn't work and said that if it happened again he would encourage stronger lockdowns. Not as strong as the US lockdowns but much stronger than what they used.
I skipped it because I made my point in a different way. My point is that countries that used hard lock downs didn’t fair any better than countries that did.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
I skipped it because I made my point in a different way. My point is that countries that used hard lock downs didn’t fair any better than countries that did.
Dpeends on your analysis. If you take a country in a completely different demographic, in a completely different part of the world in a different season then equating a difference to one factor over the thousands of others isn't easy to do. Taking a closer demographic in the same season, like comparing Sweden to its neighbours, is probably better.

That's not to say it's the be all and end all. There's still a mass of differences between Sweden and its neighbours so thorough research is needed to find the actual cause of increase in Sweden. But there's enough data and discrepancy there to say that Sweden should not be used as the hero strategy.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
BTW. Sweden had 577 deaths per million. Translated to the Australian population (removing all other variables), if we had the same death rate it would be around 14,400 deaths.

Are you happy with 14,400 deaths?
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
BTW. Sweden had 577 deaths per million. Translated to the Australian population (removing all other variables), if we had the same death rate it would be around 14,400 deaths.

Are you happy with 14,400 deaths?
When are you going to stop beating your wife?

Throwing out a question like this, and presupposing I’m ok with death is silly.

Are you happy with 15,000+ heart disease deaths in Australia every year? Why hasn’t government banned smoking, fast food and forced fat people to lose weight? All of these are markers for heart disease.

what I’m not ok with is hard lockdowns of entire populations which ruin an economy (and therefore people’s livelihoods). I’m also not ok with government sanctioned use of drones to spy on its citizens and also not ok with police powers to enter your home without a warrant approved by a judge.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
When are you going to stop beating your wife?

Throwing out a question like this, and presupposing I’m ok with death is silly.

Are you happy with 15,000+ heart disease deaths in Australia every year? Why hasn’t government banned smoking, fast food and forced fat people to lose weight? All of these are markers for heart disease.

what I’m not ok with is hard lockdowns of entire populations which ruin an economy (and therefore people’s livelihoods). I’m also not ok with government sanctioned use of drones to spy on its citizens and also not ok with police powers to enter your home without a warrant approved by a judge.
In this case it very much may be one or the other. So a more apt question may be, how many additional deaths would you accept to protect the economy?

BTW, there's actually a good answer to that question and it's not "zero"
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
In this case it very much may be one or the other. So a more apt question may be, how many additional deaths would you accept to protect the economy?

BTW, there's actually a good answer to that question and it's not "zero"
Yes there is. Tony Abbott used the argument this week to point out that governments always calculate a financial figure they are willing to pay to avoid a certain number of deaths or to prolong someone’s life for a certain amount of time.

Not just government either. Families regularly determine whether their grandparents should be kept alive longer or just made to feel comfortable while the inevitability of death catches up with them. We will all be there one day and it’s no easy decision.

Personally I view governments role to educate citizens on health risks so that individuals can make their own choices.

In addition governments must protect their most vulnerable (sick and elderly) who also happen to be the exact people at risk from covid.

aged care should have been locked down hard from the start with no visitors and government should have immediately spent a few hundred million to ensure aged care staff can be assigned full time to one centre or at most two (with a quarantine period if nurses and doctors move between two).

social distancing is a good regulation and should be enforced with fines.

I’m undecided on whether masks should be mandatory on public transport but I think government should make sure ppl know masks may be effective but this is not conclusive. Individuals can then make their minds up.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
Yes there is. Tony Abbott used the argument this week to point out that governments always calculate a financial figure they are willing to pay to avoid a certain number of deaths or to prolong someone’s life for a certain amount of time.

Not just government either. Families regularly determine whether their grandparents should be kept alive longer or just made to feel comfortable while the inevitability of death catches up with them. We will all be there one day and it’s no easy decision.

Personally I view governments role to educate citizens on health risks so that individuals can make their own choices.

In addition governments must protect their most vulnerable (sick and elderly) who also happen to be the exact people at risk from covid.

aged care should have been locked down hard from the start with no visitors and government should have immediately spent a few hundred million to ensure aged care staff can be assigned full time to one centre or at most two (with a quarantine period if nurses and doctors move between two).

social distancing is a good regulation and should be enforced with fines.

I’m undecided on whether masks should be mandatory on public transport but I think government should make sure ppl know masks may be effective but this is not conclusive. Individuals can then make their minds up.
It's all good in theory but in practice it often results in unintended infection.

I often here, "I don't care about the risks" which is fine. If someone wants to sky dive head first with no parachute, that's cool. I'm happy to let it happen. But if you're going to sky dive without a parachute into a group of people, you're not only one who'll get hurt.

So what kind of measures are acceptable?

Obviously lockdowns aren't accepted by many so the alternative could be that if you breach social distancing and you inadvertently infect someone else who dies, should you be charged with manslaughter?

What about if you are following all the guidelines except not locking down, and you end up infecting someone and they die? What's the repurcussions?
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I also don’t think life should be brought to a standstill like it has in Melbourne. Disease is an inevitable part of life and we can’t all exist in bubbles permanently.

A more mature approach would be fewer draconian restrictions on business and freedoms and to understand the virus and attempt to get the best health outcomes when ppl get sick and have to go to hospital.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
BTW, some of the latest research shows that at least 36% of infected (symptomatic and asymptomatic) have potentially permanent neurological damage.

 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
I also don’t think life should be brought to a standstill like it has in Melbourne. Disease is an inevitable part of life and we can’t all exist in bubbles permanently.

A more mature approach would be fewer draconian restrictions on business and freedoms and to understand the virus and attempt to get the best health outcomes when ppl get sick and have to go to hospital.
The lockdowns were always about providing safety until we better understand the virus and have better treatment for it, along with minimising impact on the health system.

We do need to re-open but the protests taking place show why strong measures are still needed. Encouraging social distancing is great. But we have hundreds carrying signs that say that the virus is a hoax. No attempt among them to social distance.

It's the same reason why we put warning labels on everything. People are too ignorant and illogical to take care of themselves.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
It's the same reason why we put warning labels on everything. People are too ignorant and illogical to take care of themselves.
Yes but you could make the same case of government. They are no better at creating good outcomes than individuals. The only reason Melbourne are in the mess is because govt couldn’t administer hotel quarantine.

but then the same govt comes out and repeatedly says how disappointed they are in individuals ‘doing the wrong thing’

look govt clearly has a role, but state government and the premiers in Australia have delusions of grandeur. I don’t think we actually need state govts and would be far better off with one federal and one local system.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
Yes but you could make the same case of government. They are no better at creating good outcomes than individuals. The only reason Melbourne are in the mess is because govt couldn’t administer hotel quarantine.

but then the same govt comes out and repeatedly says how disappointed they are in individuals ‘doing the wrong thing’

look govt clearly has a role, but state government and the premiers in Australia have delusions of grandeur. I don’t think we actually need state govts and would be far better off with one federal and one local system.
I tend to agree on your last point. State government is meant to be about micromanaging which is fine, but with the full separation from federal it just ends up being about developing an us or them mentality.
 

Dogna88

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
7,553
Reaction score
6,701
The lockdowns were always about providing safety until we better understand the virus and have better treatment for it, along with minimising impact on the health system.

We do need to re-open but the protests taking place show why strong measures are still needed. Encouraging social distancing is great. But we have hundreds carrying signs that say that the virus is a hoax. No attempt among them to social distance.

It's the same reason why we put warning labels on everything. People are too ignorant and illogical to take care of themselves.
To be fair. The long term effects still cant be determined.

Some of the neurological symptoms that occur are not just exclusive to covid akd are pretty common amongst other aspects of life in general.

The common cold can cause headaches, a loss of smell and confusion. Me looking at a computer screen for too long causes nausea, headaches and confusion. When i eat peanuts i cant smell.

Shit. Ask and married man. My wife causes me a headache and to be confused at least once a week without fail. (Not relative i know, but good for a bit of humor).

Those stats you mentioned are a bit ambiguous unless it can be broken down to what percentage suffered headaches, loss of smell or confusion or opposed to more more serious neurological symptoms. Also the sevarity of the symptom itself and the duration of it.

EDIT. I replied to the wrong post of yours. Cbf trying to fix it haha
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top