Coronavirus Outbreak

[mike]

I find it annoying that some people say that the disease doesn't have the signs of a deadly one. They fail to realise that lockdown is one of the reasons.

I did some rough numbers on this.

UK/USA have had about 2000 deaths per million people. Data from here:- https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Australia has a population of about 25 million.
Say we get to 80% vaccinated and everyone who is vaccinated is safe. That leaves 20% of the population as the percentage exposed to COVID.
In that scenario we'd get 10,000 deaths.

The flaws in those numbers are as follows:-

**1. The 2000 deaths per million population is over the course of the pandemic and not 1 year.**
2. That scenario assumes no deaths for vaccinated people.
3. Getting to 80% may be hard.

More people would die of heart disease and dementia compared to COVID.

Lower vaccination rates would chance the picture completely. If we were completely unvaccinated you are looking at 50 000 deaths which would be our biggest killer by far.

Happy for anyone to come up with rougher figures or point our anything I missed.

The way I view it though is if we can somehow get people vaccinated this isn't a big issue. The unvaccinated will also develop COVID and then develop immunity so deaths should decrease over time.

If people don't get vaccinated this would be a catastrophe. People are getting vaccinated though. From yesterdays figures I get a figure of 56% first dose protected in NSW. If we get to 80% by end of this lockdown and people follow through I think we can basically beat this.

https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/australias-covid-19-vaccine-rollout

For every 528 people in the US a person has died of Covid-19. 1 in 528. Think about that for a minute. That probable equates to 1 person in every street or two has died of Covid-19 in the US.

>**It's about 2 percent of the population**. It's freaken horrendous.

I get a couple of broad takings out of this:-

1. Lockdowns/border closures in Australia have saved so many lives.
2. The Delta strain coming late in the pandemic has been exceptionally lucky for us. It's bad it's here but if the virus was this contagious at the start I think we'd be similar to the UK or the US.
3. Vaccines are going to save so many lives.

This has been bothering me since you posted it and it needs to be corrected. You are out by a couple of orders of magnitude. It’s not 2% but approximately 0.02% of the population. I can do the maths for you if you like.

It was already corrected. I didn't add the correct decimal point. The numbers are correct but the percentage is incorrect.

Sorry I missed the correction.

 

[tigger]

So effectively the institute is saying that that even without lockdowns there will need to be restrictions. It also leaves me a bit confused about the reports predictions being reliant on adequate contact tracing. I’m wondering how effective that contact tracing will be when one state alone is suffering 800+ infections a day.

I've mentioned this previously.

Forget harsh lockdowns like we are in now. That would be an extreme response.

You have contract tracing plus quarantine as a way to slow the spread. The higher the case numbers the less effective this is.

The only limiting factor is the health systems ability to handle the additional load.

Here is the thing - we have to open up at some point. It's going to be bad because we have so little natural immunity. It's going to pass though.

We should also be very clear - there is no spin. This is epidemiological modelling and we have the best data-set I've ever seen and probably anyone has ever seen when it comes to modelling this situation.

We should keep politics out of this discussion. There should be bi-partisanship support of the Doherty report and any politician who goes against this should rightly be called out for playing politics rather than doing their civic duty.

Crunch time is coming up.

The spin is not coming from the Doherty report. The spin comes from the politicians.

You can spin things by not telling the whole story. I haven't heard our prime minister tell us that opening up along the lines inferred by the Doherty report will result in a couple of thousand deaths. It's true, and probably unavoidable, but it's time our elected leaders started to be straight with us about this.

And I don't agree with you that there should automatically be bi-partisan support for the Doherty Report (as though it was handed down on a couple of stone tablets to Moses on Mt Sinai). I'm happy for people to challenge it. A thorough and rigorous debate is more likely to ensure that we get the right outcome.

You seem to have latched onto this like someone who has invested everything in a pyramid sales scheme and wants to convince everyone else that it's a wonderful idea. Challenging the assumptions used in, and outputs from, a report does not equate to politicisation of an issue. It's what we should expect, and in fact demand, before this report is used as the basis for an irreversible policy.

 

[Tiger5150]

I find it annoying that some people say that the disease doesn't have the signs of a deadly one. They fail to realise that lockdown is one of the reasons.

I did some rough numbers on this.

UK/USA have had about 2000 deaths per million people. Data from here:- https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Australia has a population of about 25 million.
Say we get to 80% vaccinated and everyone who is vaccinated is safe. That leaves 20% of the population as the percentage exposed to COVID.
In that scenario we'd get 10,000 deaths.

The flaws in those numbers are as follows:-

**1. The 2000 deaths per million population is over the course of the pandemic and not 1 year.**
2. That scenario assumes no deaths for vaccinated people.
3. Getting to 80% may be hard.

More people would die of heart disease and dementia compared to COVID.

Lower vaccination rates would chance the picture completely. If we were completely unvaccinated you are looking at 50 000 deaths which would be our biggest killer by far.

Happy for anyone to come up with rougher figures or point our anything I missed.

The way I view it though is if we can somehow get people vaccinated this isn't a big issue. The unvaccinated will also develop COVID and then develop immunity so deaths should decrease over time.

If people don't get vaccinated this would be a catastrophe. People are getting vaccinated though. From yesterdays figures I get a figure of 56% first dose protected in NSW. If we get to 80% by end of this lockdown and people follow through I think we can basically beat this.

https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/australias-covid-19-vaccine-rollout

For every 528 people in the US a person has died of Covid-19. 1 in 528. Think about that for a minute. That probable equates to 1 person in every street or two has died of Covid-19 in the US.

>**It's about 2 percent of the population**. It's freaken horrendous.

I get a couple of broad takings out of this:-

1. Lockdowns/border closures in Australia have saved so many lives.
2. The Delta strain coming late in the pandemic has been exceptionally lucky for us. It's bad it's here but if the virus was this contagious at the start I think we'd be similar to the UK or the US.
3. Vaccines are going to save so many lives.

This has been bothering me since you posted it and it needs to be corrected. You are out by a couple of orders of magnitude. It’s not 2% but approximately 0.02% of the population. I can do the maths for you if you like.

I have previously corrected it, it is 0.2% (just under). With respect, if you get the answer 0.02%, I wouldnt bother with the maths lesson.

 

[cochise]

So effectively the institute is saying that that even without lockdowns there will need to be restrictions. It also leaves me a bit confused about the reports predictions being reliant on adequate contact tracing. I’m wondering how effective that contact tracing will be when one state alone is suffering 800+ infections a day.

I've mentioned this previously.

Forget harsh lockdowns like we are in now. That would be an extreme response.

You have contract tracing plus quarantine as a way to slow the spread. The higher the case numbers the less effective this is.

The only limiting factor is the health systems ability to handle the additional load.

Here is the thing - we have to open up at some point. It's going to be bad because we have so little natural immunity. It's going to pass though.

We should also be very clear - there is no spin. This is epidemiological modelling and we have the best data-set I've ever seen and probably anyone has ever seen when it comes to modelling this situation.

We should keep politics out of this discussion. There should be bi-partisanship support of the Doherty report and any politician who goes against this should rightly be called out for playing politics rather than doing their civic duty.

Crunch time is coming up.

The spin is not coming from the Doherty report. The spin comes from the politicians.

You can spin things by not telling the whole story. I haven't heard our prime minister tell us that opening up along the lines inferred by the Doherty report will result in a couple of thousand deaths. It's true, and probably unavoidable, but it's time our elected leaders started to be straight with us about this.

And I don't agree with you that there should automatically be bi-partisan support for the Doherty Report (as though it was handed down on a couple of stone tablets to Moses on Mt Sinai). I'm happy for people to challenge it. A thorough and rigorous debate is more likely to ensure that we get the right outcome.

You seem to have latched onto this like someone who has invested everything in a pyramid sales scheme and wants to convince everyone else that it's a wonderful idea. Challenging the assumptions used in, and outputs from, a report does not equate to politicisation of an issue. It's what we should expect, and in fact demand, before this report is used as the basis for an irreversible policy.

Gladys Berejiklian said it last night.

 

[earl]

I haven’t heard our prime minister tell us that opening up along the lines inferred by the Doherty report will result in a couple of thousand deaths. It’s true, and probably unavoidable, but it’s time our elected leaders started to be straight with us about this.

That is a massive perversion of the report and a massive perversion of the situation. That is what I call spin.

We have something like 18k people die per year from heart disease. We can massively impact those numbers by stopping everyone eating meat. You can't do that.

I am definitely 100% behind the science of this issue.

I disagree with your point about challenging science. We've seen this throughout this pandemic. It has consistently failed.

I have no issues with being transparent about the science.

I'll add that I think there are a lot of pro Labour supporters on here. I just read an article that people don't trust Labour in relation to managing the pandemic.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/coalition-gains-on-pandemic-management-as-morrison-holds-ground-labor-vote-falls-20210823-p58lan.html

If I was giving advice to any politician I would suggest they accept the scientific evidence and do their civil duty. I think people will be supportive of this.

 

[earl]

Gladys Berejiklian said it last night.

What did she say ? Every time I listen to her she gets it pretty much right. The last poor comment I heard her state was that NSW can handle anything. No area has been able to handle the Delta strain without high vaccination rates.

 

[Demps]

Wish me luck brothers 💉

 

[tigger]

I haven’t heard our prime minister tell us that opening up along the lines inferred by the Doherty report will result in a couple of thousand deaths. It’s true, and probably unavoidable, but it’s time our elected leaders started to be straight with us about this.

That is a massive perversion of the report and a massive perversion of the situation. That is what I call spin.

We have something like 18k people die per year from heart disease. We can massively impact those numbers by stopping everyone eating meat. You can't do that.

I am definitely 100% behind the science of this issue.

I disagree with your point about challenging science. We've seen this throughout this pandemic. It has consistently failed.

I have no issues with being transparent about the science.

I'll add that I think there are a lot of pro Labour supporters on here. I just read an article that people don't trust Labour in relation to managing the pandemic.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/coalition-gains-on-pandemic-management-as-morrison-holds-ground-labor-vote-falls-20210823-p58lan.html

If I was giving advice to any politician I would suggest they accept the scientific evidence and do their civil duty. I think people will be supportive of this.

Ok. from now on we just accept scientific reports without any form of debate. Whatever.

 

[earl]

Wish me luck brothers 💉

Good luck. You'll be fine. You should take care but the risk is extremely low. Get another does. Give it a bit of time and you will be as covered as you can be.

Then we open up and then we all pray and I'm an atheist.

 

[earl]

Ok. from now on we just accept scientific reports without any form of debate. Whatever.

It's not that simple. You can't debate the facts. You can debate policy implications but you can't debate the facts.

I would question any scientific report dependent on how it was produced and the data it used. You can get all sorts of dodgy scientific reports. The point is the dodgy stuff gets found out. The Doherty report is not dodgy stuff.

When you start calling spin on politicians who are following the Doherty report whereas you point out a couple of thousand deaths that is spin.

The Doherty report is based on a massive data-set the like of which we've probably never seen. Why argue with it ?

 

[full80]

yup exactly everything ennis said is correct, we simply cant attract anyone and now its becoming so evident no one wants to come to Tigers.. Im not bothered about Thompson on that money but i just cant see any future and that is so worrying. The young kids look good but they cant do it on their own..Questions have to be asked of Madge now but nothing will change as we all know. Pascoe will just say we have a centre of Excellence next year and the club is going well financially. Unfortunately all we care about are on field results and Pascoe doesnt care about that.

Good old Ennis - always good for a baggin' (he did it on the field like a grub, and is doing it off the field).

What is the solution Ennis?

What do the Tigers do to attract players Ennis?

Oh! they don't want to go to the Tigers, the tigers aren't interested in being a retirement home (like they have been), the Tigers just aren't interested in buying losers or the Tigers aren't interested in paying massive overs (like they have previously).

Well, well, what is your answer dopey? Big on putting the boot in but like most of your comments on fox, you don't back it up with answers.

As a commentator or analyst - you would make a great bricklayer.

I suggest you leave us to work out our problems and try and help the "Dogs" work out how to stay under the cap.

Agree mate.
Easy for these flogs to bag us but no solutions.
I'm sure they have seen or been in similar situations in their careers

Well all the ex footballers turn commentators are usually blokes who had successful careers, you don’t see many Nofoalumas or Brooks type players end up calling the game, what would they bring to the table besides a wealth of knowledge about losing.
And I agree they don’t really offer solutions but can you?
I can’t.
Until we start winning games and blood some more quality juniors who can actually play as a unit we are not going to attract the personal we need.
If it was a job and you had the chance of joining a successful business in a Coastal town like Newcastle or Cronulla or Bondi, Or a place out west that struggles year after year what would you choose?
Penrith are a great example of what we need to emulate to be where we all wish our club could be.
Stack the team with juniors that have played together for a few years and know each other, create an atmosphere they don’t want to leave, give them time to because it won’t happen overnight.
This ideal that buying a crop of big names and becoming dominant is not an option for us so stop thinking it is.
Juniors are the only way this club will ever get out of the cellar.


This is what we need to keep together...
https://www.weststigers.com.au/news/2021/08/23/35-down-jersey-flegg/

Ben is a very articulate young man. Very strategic in his thinking and thankful for the opportunities in the Wests Tigers system.

All these Jersey Flegg boys and HM & SG Ball players and the Juniors to come are being destroyed by this bloody Flu!

This is the real human tragedy folks - our kids are being denied their natural growth as humans by a dodgy bug no more dangerous than the Flu or Common Cold.

It can't continue like this.


COVIDS not the flu. I have two people close to me who have had it. I also know someone who has died from it. I would not want my kids to catch it. As a parent of teens I know just how much these lockdown and restrictions are affecting them, and it is a true tragedy for time and experiences they will never get back, but I would not let my kid play a sport now unless the team's are vaccinated. Just a personal view.

Agree that Covid is not the flu. This is a headline from a story in the SMH now online

PM says Australia will soon treat COVID-19 ‘like the flu’

I'm not an expert, but sadly have close personal experience of it. Maybe it's like the flu that killed a lot of people in 1919, but not today's flu that we can almost manage with vaccines. But, as I said, not an expert.

 

[Tiger5150]

I find it annoying that some people say that the disease doesn't have the signs of a deadly one. They fail to realise that lockdown is one of the reasons.

I did some rough numbers on this.

UK/USA have had about 2000 deaths per million people. Data from here:- https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Australia has a population of about 25 million.
Say we get to 80% vaccinated and everyone who is vaccinated is safe. That leaves 20% of the population as the percentage exposed to COVID.
In that scenario we'd get 10,000 deaths.

The flaws in those numbers are as follows:-

**1. The 2000 deaths per million population is over the course of the pandemic and not 1 year.**
2. That scenario assumes no deaths for vaccinated people.
3. Getting to 80% may be hard.

More people would die of heart disease and dementia compared to COVID.

Lower vaccination rates would chance the picture completely. If we were completely unvaccinated you are looking at 50 000 deaths which would be our biggest killer by far.

Happy for anyone to come up with rougher figures or point our anything I missed.

The way I view it though is if we can somehow get people vaccinated this isn't a big issue. The unvaccinated will also develop COVID and then develop immunity so deaths should decrease over time.

If people don't get vaccinated this would be a catastrophe. People are getting vaccinated though. From yesterdays figures I get a figure of 56% first dose protected in NSW. If we get to 80% by end of this lockdown and people follow through I think we can basically beat this.

https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/australias-covid-19-vaccine-rollout

For every 528 people in the US a person has died of Covid-19. 1 in 528. Think about that for a minute. That probable equates to 1 person in every street or two has died of Covid-19 in the US.

>**It's about 2 percent of the population**. It's freaken horrendous.

I get a couple of broad takings out of this:-

1. Lockdowns/border closures in Australia have saved so many lives.
2. The Delta strain coming late in the pandemic has been exceptionally lucky for us. It's bad it's here but if the virus was this contagious at the start I think we'd be similar to the UK or the US.
3. Vaccines are going to save so many lives.

This has been bothering me since you posted it and it needs to be corrected. You are out by a couple of orders of magnitude. It’s not 2% but approximately 0.02% of the population. I can do the maths for you if you like.

It was already corrected. I didn't add the correct decimal point. The numbers are correct but the percentage is incorrect.

It's 2000 people per million that have died from the virus. That is significant. I think it is .2% of the population. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

***I also think the figure for heart disease is about 0.072 % of the population.***

So without vaccines and with less restrictions than what Australia has had you get a lot of deaths from COVID. It's not a joke.

Maaaaate....please stop.

Firstly you didnt just "add the correct decimal point" there is a MASSIVE difference between 2% and 0.2% and you doubled down numerous times and kept reporting it.

Now you are lying or merely making things up regarding relative deaths due to heart disease. Where do you get **0.072%** from? **POST YOUR DATA** if you are going to post such provocative information. It is complete made up rubbish if not deliberate misinformation (lies).

According to the **American Heart Association**, cardiovascular disease killed 868,662 people in 2018 which represents ***0.26%*** of the US population IN ONE YEAR which is 30% higher than COVID has killed over 18 months. Almost 4 times higher than you claim.

https://www.heart.org/-/media/phd-files-2/science-news/2/2021-heart-and-stroke-stat-update/2021_heart_disease_and_stroke_statistics_update_fact_sheet_at_a_glance.pdf

I am NOT minimising the deadliness of COVID, I am correcting Earls lies when he posts that COVID kills 2% then is corrected to 0.2% and then to gin his point up lies about the rate of cardiovascular disease to make it seem worse is pretty bad. Its misinformation and dangerous and goes against what Earl rabbits on about.

I think that Earl has me on foe because he hates me pointing out his lies but I think its important that he get pulled up. Can someone repost so @Earl will read and hopefully realise that he cant just continue to make stuff up.

 

[Tiger5150]

I have no issues with being transparent about the science.

And yet you continually make things up and never post your data....ever.

I'll add that I think there are a lot of pro Labour supporters on here. I just read an article that people don't trust Labour in relation to managing the pandemic.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/coalition-gains-on-pandemic-management-as-morrison-holds-ground-labor-vote-falls-20210823-p58lan.html


How is your crusade to keep politics out of the COVID issue going?

 

[tigger]

It’s not that simple. You can’t debate the facts. You can debate policy implications but you can’t debate the facts.

Can I debate assumptions? Because that was the very basis of the article that I posted this morning. The internationally accepted range of reproduction for the Delta variant is 5 to 9. The R factor used in the Doherty report is 3.6. So it would have to be considered as an outlier.

Now, the authors of the report have reasons for this assumption, but assumptions aren't facts and they should be challenged. The outputs from this report, and the irreversible policy decisions that will flow from their adoption, are all predicated on those assumptions.

Whatever you do, don't question them.

 

[Devon Head]

Wish me luck brothers 💉

Had mine on Sat morning and it hit my like a bus around midnight. Cold sweats, fever, headaches, body aches and severe fatigue. Was crook Sunday and some of yesterday. Still feel fatigued and foggy headed however on the mend. Good luck.

 

[mike]

Wish me luck brothers 💉

Good luck. Hope it all goes well @Demps

 

[earl]

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/nsw-s-extraordinary-vaccination-rates-give-it-a-fighting-chance-against-delta-20210823-p58l1g.html

This is by an epidemiologist. Some interesting points:-

>Vaccination can pave the way for NSW to bring this wave of the pandemic to an end. It is the most powerful lever in our efforts to control the Delta variant and NSW is making huge advances towards using it to maximum effect.

>What we really need to watch are hospitalisations. They should level out even earlier – not only as a function of plateauing case numbers, but also as the proportion of cases with vaccine-protection from serious illness rises. The chances of having a serious illness requiring hospitalisation after even one dose drop by as much as 80 per cent.

>Hospitalisations and fatalities, as well as the capacity of our testing and tracing systems, will set the infection rate limits that Australia can tolerate. Meanwhile, we need to hold the restriction levers such as stay-as-home orders tightly in place to maintain control until we reach high enough vaccination levels to ease back on them. That can’t come soon enough, but it’s great to see those vaccine target horizons now accelerating towards us.

 

[earl]

It’s not that simple. You can’t debate the facts. You can debate policy implications but you can’t debate the facts.

Can I debate assumptions? Because that was the very basis of the article that I posted this morning. The internationally accepted range of reproduction for the Delta variant is 5 to 9. The R factor used in the Doherty report is 3.6. So it would have to be considered as an outlier.

Now, the authors of the report have reasons for this assumption, but assumptions aren't facts and they should be challenged. The outputs from this report, and the irreversible policy decisions that will flow from their adoption, are all predicated on those assumptions.

Whatever you do, don't question them.

Fair points. That is cool to me.

We should be clear about models and their worth. The equation goes like this garbage in -- garbage out. You can look at this in different ways. You can look at specific details like you've done and think it's relevant or not relevant. In my opinion that number isn't relevant. You have to understand that these numbers are all just approximations. The key is to get the right message across. You can't predict to a completely accurate level of detail and those numbers you quote are within range of reality which is all they need to be.

You may be correct in your individual number but it doesn't change the picture. The picture is very clear because we have massive data-sets that are showing clear trends. Those trends are being backed up in real time.

You aren't getting political advice. It's health advice. It's not going to be perfect. If we keep following this approach this gives us our best chance.

We don't have a lot of natural immunity to this as well because we haven't had large outbreaks.

People will die. People will get sick. It sucks. At the end of the day though we don't have any options. The science also states statistically we think this will be okay. We've had time to prepare. We have vaccines. We are taking an educated guess that seems pretty clear cut.

 

[Tiger5150]

It’s not that simple. You can’t debate the facts. You can debate policy implications but you can’t debate the facts.

Can I debate assumptions? Because that was the very basis of the article that I posted this morning. The internationally accepted range of reproduction for the Delta variant is 5 to 9. The R factor used in the Doherty report is 3.6. So it would have to be considered as an outlier.

Now, the authors of the report have reasons for this assumption, but assumptions aren't facts and they should be challenged. The outputs from this report, and the irreversible policy decisions that will flow from their adoption, are all predicated on those assumptions.

Whatever you do, don't question them.

Earl doesnt understand the scientific process. What science actually means and the scientific process relies on continual testing of hypothesis and attempted falsification. Earls constant demands to accept "the science" and not challenge "scientific consensus" is very unscientific.

 

[Demps]

Wish me luck brothers ?

Had mine on Sat morning and it hit my like a bus around midnight. Cold sweats, fever, headaches, body aches and severe fatigue. Was crook Sunday and some of yesterday. Still feel fatigued and foggy headed however on the mend. Good luck.

Interesting man.
Heard some similar feedback from others.

My co worker said they were fine and then 10 days later they were sizzled.
No energy.
Delayed effect.

Gotta roll the dice though.
Hope I'm free of any negatives.