Coronavirus Outbreak

Status
Not open for further replies.
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145384) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145376) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145370) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145323) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145304) said:
I hope that the wider testing would have that number above more resembling a result of double or so of that number from week or more ago when the criteria was much stricter. Still, it is likely that the true numbers of transmission would be five to ten times and possibly greater than yesterday's figure.

On that basis and that we had already factored in a six month program, I would prefer that we maintain the status quo for another couple of weeks and reassess.


On what basis would you think that FG? Surely it is a mathematical truth that if you drastically ramp up the testing and the result is staying constant that it is empirical proof that the data is valid? If it is "Likely that true numbers are 10 x greater" surely as you increase tests, you get a linear increase in positives?.

I am not arguing the test results, rather that with expanding testing, a lower result is expected and should be at half the numbers or better with the new wider eligibility criteria.

Also stating that for every twenty positive cases found from the current testing, I expect that the number of actual number is a hundred or more infected as they have not been tested for whatever reason, asymptomatic or otherwise.


FG I think it totally understand what you are arguing, but I genuinely dont follow the logic or mathematics of what you are saying.

If Im understanding you correctly, you are saying that if they test and find 100 cases, there are probably 500 - 1000 cases really out in the wild. Is that an accurate representation of your argument?

If that is the case, surely if one day you test and get 100 tests and then the next day you DRASTICALLY increase the number of tests as well as randomise them to take on all comers, then you would get proportionally increased numbers?

To make my case....if you were right and 100 cases really indicates 500-1000 cases in the wild and if on day 1 we test 1000 people and get 100 positives, surely if tomorrow we test 1M people then we would expect to get at least 1000?

If today we test 1000 people and get 100 positives and tomorrow we test 1M and still get 100, doesnt that indicate that 100 is very close to the actual number?

Yes, yes and if the testing criteria is equal, yes, but the scope is much different than it was.

So where are all these cases, everyone who wants a test can get a test? Surely with the increased testing from the last few weeks if there was this hidden community transmission it would be showing up.
 
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145377) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145373) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145363) said:
@innsaneink said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145336) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145185) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145180) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145167) said:
@happy_tiger said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145154) said:
Someone mentioned Vitamin B ...where has anyone in all of this been told we can't exercise .....or even sunbathe in your back yard

People don’t have backyards mate . And many are listening to the media , agenda driven panic merchants , who just want to drive hysteria for the clicks .
So many people , especially woman , who IMO have an already in built , genetic flight response , just are hiding inside .
To dismiss this , is naive at best. Many people are too scared to go outside at all , which like you said is over reacting , but it’s still happening.
Until the general consensus is lift the restrictions , these types , which due to some mental health issues in my family recently , Im starting to be more aware of , are really at risk.
And as the majority of our nation live in cities , and the general isolation , people tend to feel in the biggest cities , this is a huge issue.
Domestic violence , alchohol use , online gambling , are through the roof. This isn’t good , as a potential on going social issue post COVID.

I agree, there are many bad things as a result of restrictions, but the alternatives are worse and today being ANZAC day, it reminds us of who is most likely to be affected by this. Both by solitude for recent service personnel and if we don't continue social distancing on a suitable scale as things improve, those that served in Vietnam, Korea etcetera and the children that grew up in the second world war, along with the few remaining survivors of that conflict, it often means direct death.

I am surrounded with the mental health issues you alluded to at home and helping out my very affected sister daily, so I completely understand your concerns, but I am not willing to sacrifice my parents, along with their generation and similar others for the sake of more freedoms.

Mate , I’m 1 of those people . 3 people I served with topped themselves in the last 3 months.
And there’s are at least another 2 , we are really concerned about , as they won’t answer calls and no one knows exactly where they live , since this kicked off.
There were over 3000 deaths in 2019 from suicide , just knowing from the conversations I’ve had , we all just want support and feel like there’s none out there. VVCS is a joke , and the waiting list now is like 6 months just to get a call back.
I didn’t want to talk about this directly , but I am so concerned about days like today , hence my posting today. And that’s just returned serviceman.
There’s so many vulnerable people , out there who can’t just “go sit on their balcony”
The cure can’t be worse than the cause.

Please don't leave the forum. Keep posting mate but may I suggest try not take things personally.
Stay with us.... Even chatting here helps... As they say we all In this together

Mate thank you for your concern, but this wasn’t me reaching out for help . It was me being an advocate for those who won’t ask for it .
And just being generally disgusted with the way some of our society have drilled down on anyone not complying with what they perceive is the right thing to do, based on their own bubble. Which , frustrates me , as , any opinion I have today , can and should be open to change at a moments notice , when presented with facts. I don’t look for confirmation bias . Or echo chambers. Which reading this thread really felt like that to me .
It reminds me of V for Vendetta , or any other story about Dystopias. As this forum is a reflection of the rest of society. And you all should be very concerned about how easily , some , including some of you, have embraced this to an almost manic enforcement . Sure most because they want to protect the ones they love , but for some , it’s about having power over influencing other people . Nothing at all to do with covid.
The sooner we return to something resembling regular life , the better , as the longer it goes , the more brazen and justified these people will feel .
I’ts not conspiracies and nonsense either . It’s human nature . That’s why there’s so many books about it . And it’s happened before . The Spanish Inquisition, straight off the top of my head.


I totally understand what you are talking about Strongee and if you read some of my posts, particularly in the Politics thread, Im of the opinion that this crisis suits the left of politics more than the right.....but IMO based on your posts, you need to leave room for others in your opinion ( I can see a hand ful of others rolling their eyes at the irony). More than one thing can be true at once and like Hangonaminute elsewhere in this thread, an opinion differing from yours does not at once equal your pre-judged definition.


I think this is where you and @cochise are getting lost in my comments . I’m taking what both of you are saying as a given , and moving to the next point of the conversation. It’s really hard to have discussions in text , as it can be misread and breezes over etc. as I know it may seem like I’m way more emotional and negative than is in actuality.
Where as I’m merely speaking directly to the source of what I perceive is an imbalanced discussion .
Ie. to someone with issues , being alone is way more of a threat than covid. So to me I say , it’s about risk assessment . They perceive thier risk isn’t covid but isolation. To which you guys say , well covid is a huge threat to the world so bad luck .
And I think that lacks any form of nuance . And I try as best as I can to restrict my judgement .

Because to you covid is number 1 and assume that position , to which I agree.but to that person , the need to hang with the parents for a few hours might be enough to get them through . But they are perceived as a Lepper by many .
And that’s what I can’t get my head around


Mate, I take your point that text isnt the most expressive of communications and that from that I may misinterpret your POV. I'd suggest that you have also misinterpreted my (and I think Cochise but Ill let him speak for himself) POV.

To me COVID is not no.1 and protect at all costs. I totally understand its a nuanced position and I also undertand the issues you have raised. I have elderly parents and Im not bulletproof and so understand the requirement for caution and protective restrictions but at the same time I am a filthy capitalist with my own business that employs other people with families to feed, that is without even discussing more relavant and worthy issues like mental health etc as you have raised.

My POV with this is I think more nuanced. I think in Australia we are in an almost unique situation in the world with regards our control of the virus. If I was in the US I would be more pro-opening up society, business and economy than I would be in Australia. My reasoning is that in the US and most of Western Europe, they are buggered and way past the point of controlling the spread, they are in a position of harm minimisation and trying not to overload hospitals etc. Under those circumstances, IMO, they need to find a balance to drip feed society whilst reducing and minimising harm. Bloody hard.

Australia is in a much better situation and as a result I actually think we should be more conservative. Because we are so close to having it beat, I thikn we should hold down a little longer in the hope of screwing it down so hard that we can open up the society, more widely, more confidently and with less risk of having to re-introduce restrictions again in the future. Do it once, do it hard and do it well.

When I see yourself and say, Hangonaminute prosecuting "the cure is worse than the disease", Im not thinking you are wrong, Im thinking that it misses an opportunity for short term pain for long term gain.
 
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145384) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145376) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145370) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145323) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145304) said:
I hope that the wider testing would have that number above more resembling a result of double or so of that number from week or more ago when the criteria was much stricter. Still, it is likely that the true numbers of transmission would be five to ten times and possibly greater than yesterday's figure.

On that basis and that we had already factored in a six month program, I would prefer that we maintain the status quo for another couple of weeks and reassess.


On what basis would you think that FG? Surely it is a mathematical truth that if you drastically ramp up the testing and the result is staying constant that it is empirical proof that the data is valid? If it is "Likely that true numbers are 10 x greater" surely as you increase tests, you get a linear increase in positives?.

I am not arguing the test results, rather that with expanding testing, a lower result is expected and should be at half the numbers or better with the new wider eligibility criteria.

Also stating that for every twenty positive cases found from the current testing, I expect that the number of actual number is a hundred or more infected as they have not been tested for whatever reason, asymptomatic or otherwise.


FG I think it totally understand what you are arguing, but I genuinely dont follow the logic or mathematics of what you are saying.

If Im understanding you correctly, you are saying that if they test and find 100 cases, there are probably 500 - 1000 cases really out in the wild. Is that an accurate representation of your argument?

If that is the case, surely if one day you test and get 100 tests and then the next day you DRASTICALLY increase the number of tests as well as randomise them to take on all comers, then you would get proportionally increased numbers?

To make my case....if you were right and 100 cases really indicates 500-1000 cases in the wild and if on day 1 we test 1000 people and get 100 positives, surely if tomorrow we test 1M people then we would expect to get at least 1000?

If today we test 1000 people and get 100 positives and tomorrow we test 1M and still get 100, doesnt that indicate that 100 is very close to the actual number?

Yes, yes and if the testing criteria is equal, yes, but the scope is much different than it was.


The scope is completely open now. If you want a test you can have one. Previously it was only if you were at risk.

I still dont see your logic? If you were arguing that with the open scope the *percentage* of positives would go down I would undertand, but we are talking absolute totals. Can you explain what you mean further?
 
@happy_tiger said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145374) said:
@cochise said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145344) said:
@innsaneink said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145340) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145267) said:
@pawsandclaws1 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145240) said:
@cochise said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145235) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145231) said:
@pawsandclaws1 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145207) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145185) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145180) said:
@Strongee said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145167) said:
@happy_tiger said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145154) said:
Someone mentioned Vitamin B ...where has anyone in all of this been told we can't exercise .....or even sunbathe in your back yard

People don’t have backyards mate . And many are listening to the media , agenda driven panic merchants , who just want to drive hysteria for the clicks .
So many people , especially woman , who IMO have an already in built , genetic flight response , just are hiding inside .
To dismiss this , is naive at best. Many people are too scared to go outside at all , which like you said is over reacting , but it’s still happening.
Until the general consensus is lift the restrictions , these types , which due to some mental health issues in my family recently , Im starting to be more aware of , are really at risk.
And as the majority of our nation live in cities , and the general isolation , people tend to feel in the biggest cities , this is a huge issue.
Domestic violence , alchohol use , online gambling , are through the roof. This isn’t good , as a potential on going social issue post COVID.

I agree, there are many bad things as a result of restrictions, but the alternatives are worse and today being ANZAC day, it reminds us of who is most likely to be affected by this. Both by solitude for recent service personnel and if we don't continue social distancing on a suitable scale as things improve, those that served in Vietnam, Korea etcetera and the children that grew up in the second world war, along with the few remaining survivors of that conflict, it often means direct death.

I am surrounded with the mental health issues you alluded to at home and helping out my very affected sister daily, so I completely understand your concerns, but I am not willing to sacrifice my parents, along with their generation and similar others for the sake of more freedoms.

Mate , I’m 1 of those people . 3 people I served with topped themselves in the last 3 months.
And there’s are at least another 2 , we are really concerned about , as they won’t answer calls and no one knows exactly where they live , since this kicked off.
There were over 3000 deaths in 2019 from suicide , just knowing from the conversations I’ve had , we all just want support and feel like there’s none out there. VVCS is a joke , and the waiting list now is like 6 months just to get a call back.
I didn’t want to talk about this directly , but I am so concerned about days like today , hence my posting today. And that’s just returned serviceman.
There’s so many vulnerable people , out there who can’t just “go sit on their balcony”
The cure can’t be worse than the cause.

I am sorry to learn of your situation. The transition from service life is difficult enough without having to deal with mental health issues. Anyway it is good to have you posting on the forum.

Another death in Tasmania. Thanks Ruby Princess.

Mate I’m fine , but thanks for your concern. Most AJs who return have a really tough time assimilating with regular society , and this can cause huge issues. Sure it can be the things you saw and did , but for many that’s not even the issue. From what I know , it’s the general attitude of regular people , their lack of a certain moral code , and the biggest one , a lack of purpose and belief in what your doing .
So this time of year may seem like a celebration of war for some , but for many , it’s a time of reflection and assessment . Which isn’t always positive .
That’s all I’m saying, speaking in absolutes , and grandstanding to me , just makes people look stupid , no matter how intelligent or in point the subject matter they’re saying .

What moral code are regular people lacking?

I will give you an example of difficulty I have with the code of behaviour
which is not the norm in the military.

The first day on the Track walking from Kokoda to Ower's Corner (north to south), is one of the toughest. It is 8 to 10 hours up hill mostly in full sun. It takes a lot out of you and you need to pace yourself. This young man took off and made it okay to Isurava village but the following day he was second from the rear and clearly staggering. I was last in column and stayed with him as he stopped, said he couldn't go on, vomited and shat his pants. His so-called mates pissed off and raced ahead leaving him alone in the New Guinea Jungle with a virtual stranger. They ended up being 4 hours ahead.

I did what any mate would do for a mate and got him to wash his shorts (bio degradable soap away from the water source), sit, drink staminade, gave him a pep talk and got him going. He powered home to complete the Track.

His mates failed to realise we were walking on sacred ground where mateship allowed men to survive and die with a mate around. Their. actions were foreign to me and the spirit of what the ANZAC code is all about.

Thank you for this analogy . I was struggling to reply without sounding like a wanker ex- army guy who thinks he’s better than the rest.

This type of behaviour flows into all types of regular day life . From the guy who decides he’s going to turn up late to a meeting which causes more meetings , or the guy who decides he’s going to tell the boss you took 5 mins longer for lunch , and so on it goes.
There’s a lot of bad blokes who were In The army for sure . And of course you could easily pull what I’m saying apart with examples of them , but the don’t go jack on your mates ethos , runs through all nooks and crannies of ex army guys . No matter what corps your in . It was THE most taboo thing to do .
And it is extremely hard to deal with , when culturally the real world operates the exact opposite .

They're called dogs inside... I reported a post a week ago which was slanderous and as I've seen in the past could've had the forum shut down.... it was hard for me to report it.
Maybe on 2nd thoughts I could've adressed the poster directly first... Hindsight ?

That post had to be dealt with otherwise we all could have lost this place, I think you did the right thing.

Can I ask what you are talking about .....

I had an opinion on Greenberg and his performance as NRL CEO. It was considered slanderous. That is all there was to it.
 
@cochise said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145385) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145384) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145376) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145370) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145323) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145304) said:
I hope that the wider testing would have that number above more resembling a result of double or so of that number from week or more ago when the criteria was much stricter. Still, it is likely that the true numbers of transmission would be five to ten times and possibly greater than yesterday's figure.

On that basis and that we had already factored in a six month program, I would prefer that we maintain the status quo for another couple of weeks and reassess.


On what basis would you think that FG? Surely it is a mathematical truth that if you drastically ramp up the testing and the result is staying constant that it is empirical proof that the data is valid? If it is "Likely that true numbers are 10 x greater" surely as you increase tests, you get a linear increase in positives?.

I am not arguing the test results, rather that with expanding testing, a lower result is expected and should be at half the numbers or better with the new wider eligibility criteria.

Also stating that for every twenty positive cases found from the current testing, I expect that the number of actual number is a hundred or more infected as they have not been tested for whatever reason, asymptomatic or otherwise.


FG I think it totally understand what you are arguing, but I genuinely dont follow the logic or mathematics of what you are saying.

If Im understanding you correctly, you are saying that if they test and find 100 cases, there are probably 500 - 1000 cases really out in the wild. Is that an accurate representation of your argument?

If that is the case, surely if one day you test and get 100 tests and then the next day you DRASTICALLY increase the number of tests as well as randomise them to take on all comers, then you would get proportionally increased numbers?

To make my case....if you were right and 100 cases really indicates 500-1000 cases in the wild and if on day 1 we test 1000 people and get 100 positives, surely if tomorrow we test 1M people then we would expect to get at least 1000?

If today we test 1000 people and get 100 positives and tomorrow we test 1M and still get 100, doesnt that indicate that 100 is very close to the actual number?

Yes, yes and if the testing criteria is equal, yes, but the scope is much different than it was.

So where are all these cases, everyone who wants a test can get a test? Surely with the increased testing from the last few weeks if there was this hidden community transmission it would be showing up.

See my post above the one quoted, where I already mentioned asymptomatic and otherwise.

We may be nearly clear or could be like other studies elsewhere that have shown antibody rates at up to ten times more prevalent than that of the virus positives. I worry that like north eastern Tasmania or our NSW nursing home, it only takes one, two or a few to begin to create havoc, even when they know where it originated it still takes a while to wrestle back control.
 
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145387) said:
If you were arguing that with the open scope the percentage of positives would go down I would undertand

Good, because criteria, scope, whatever, that has always been my position.
 
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145401) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145387) said:
If you were arguing that with the open scope the percentage of positives would go down I would undertand

Good, because criteria, scope, whatever, that has always been my position.

I want to see localised blanket testing to confirm greater eradication.
 
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145402) said:
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145401) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145387) said:
If you were arguing that with the open scope the percentage of positives would go down I would undertand

Good, because criteria, scope, whatever, that has always been my position.

I want to see localised blanket testing to confirm greater eradication.

I think that is what we are moving towards, the CMO stated the other day he would like to see the capability to test 50 000 people a day.
 
The COVIDSafe app is now available to download and install. I’ve done my bit and installed the app and will leave it running in the background.
 
@formerguest said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145401) said:
@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145387) said:
If you were arguing that with the open scope the percentage of positives would go down I would undertand

Good, because criteria, scope, whatever, that has always been my position.


OK, then you clearly understand, that with the open and increased scope, the TOTAL cases hasnt changed markedly, which clearly means the testing shows the total cases to be pretty close to accurate?
 
If anyone is interested, Kristina Keneally's outstanding interview with David Speers is well worth watching. Speers is rude and a lightweight, attempting to get a gotcha moment on the Ruby Princess. Keneally not only puts him in his place, but makes it clear to all the Commonwealth is responsible.
 
@pawsandclaws1 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145416) said:
If anyone is interested, Kristina Keneally's outstanding interview with David Speers is well worth watching. Speers is rude and a lightweight, attempting to get a gotcha moment on the Ruby Princess. Keneally not only puts him in his place, but makes it clear to all the Commonwealth is responsible.

Great so no failure at all from NSW Health
 
@mike said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145408) said:
The COVIDSafe app is now available to download and install. I’ve done my bit and installed the app and will leave it running in the background.

I didn't hesitate.

WA are easing a few restrictions from midnight tonite after only 4 new cases in the last week and 55 current cases. This will be very interesting.
 
Yes My wife and I have downloaded the app
If we all did this we would get back to normality much quicker
I have nothing to hide from the government and I don't care if they know where I am
It could save you life and those around you so why wouldn't you down load it.
I think that technology could also be used to solve and prevent a lot of crime
But that's another story for another day
 
@Cairnstigers said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145433) said:
Yes My wife and I have downloaded the app
If we all did this we would get back to normality much quicker
I have nothing to hide from the government and I don't care if they know where I am
It could save you life and those around you so why wouldn't you down load it.
I think that technology could also be used to solve and prevent a lot of crime
But that's another story for another day

Just a small clarification. The app doesn’t actually track where you have been. It only tracks people that you have been near, so you can be contacted if one of those people returns a positive result. And they can be contacted if you return a positive result.
 
@mike said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145434) said:
@Cairnstigers said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145433) said:
Yes My wife and I have downloaded the app
If we all did this we would get back to normality much quicker
I have nothing to hide from the government and I don't care if they know where I am
It could save you life and those around you so why wouldn't you down load it.
I think that technology could also be used to solve and prevent a lot of crime
But that's another story for another day

Just a small clarification. The app doesn’t actually track where you have been. It only tracks people that you have been near, so you can be contacted if one of those people returns a positive result. And they can be contacted if you return a positive result.

Yes, too many people hearing the word tracking and thinking the govt will know where they are. The media should stop using that word.
 
@Cairnstigers said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145433) said:
Yes My wife and I have downloaded the app
If we all did this we would get back to normality much quicker
I have nothing to hide from the government and I don't care if they know where I am
It could save you life and those around you so why wouldn't you down load it.
I think that technology could also be used to solve and prevent a lot of crime
But that's another story for another day


No it cannot be used to solve crimes. If police were to use this track and trace app then they would be punished under the law.
 
@dazza65 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1145422) said:
Why would that hack Kenneally want to blame anyone other than the Commonwealth? Irrelevant


The Feds stuffed up big time which quickly became apparent in the first day of the Inquiry. How difficult is it to conf!irm that a y or n had been placed in the appropriate box as to whether passengers are displaying symptoms of the virus!

And the issue many are missing is that this form is for permission to dock and disembark. You can't disembark if docking is not permitted. This is a Border Force responsibility.
 
There's no way in the world I will ever use this tracking app.

Legally, access to the data is a free for all for law enforcement agencies.

A "nah they won't" at a press conference isn't good enough for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top