-
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 at all costs? There is no balance in these elimination conversations.
No. Not at all costs. However, the cost of going down a level too early will be catastrophic. If we go down to level 3 one week too early, then we might have to spend another 4-5 weeks at level 4. If we go down to level 4 at the right time, we will never have to go back up again.
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
You're missing the point that every country is not the same. NZ had massive advantages. Late to get it, lots of global data, spread out population, not much multi-gen living, island nation etc. What the right response for Italy is/was, is not necessarily what is right for NZ. We had so many advantages, and we are squandering them.
As for the US and the stats, I agree that this isn't just the flu (yet). It appears much more virulent . But I don't believe it's 6x more deadly. We have (unfortunately) seen a lot of deaths, but the fact remains that they have overwhelmingly been those who are elderly and ill . And its certainly come in a rush, and has caused a massive issue for hospital systems that are stretched.
But we have 18 people in hospital in NZ. 18!!! We can care for these people. Yes, those numbers may go up if we discontinue social distancing, but no-one is adcocating that as yet.
I was not against the Lock down initially because we had limited data and lots of unknowns. We now have a lot of data, and proper handle on where NZ is. Continued shutdown of the economy is IMO pointless and massively harmful.
-
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
You're missing the point that every country is not the same. NZ had massive advantages. Late to get it, lots of global data, spread out population, not much multi-gen living, island nation etc. What the right response for Italy is/was, is not necessarily what is right for NZ. We had so many advantages, and we are squandering them.
As for the US and the stats, I agree that this isn't just the flu (yet). It appears much more virulent . But I don't believe it's 6x more deadly. We have (unfortunately) seen a lot of deaths, but the fact remains that they have overwhelmingly been those who are elderly and ill . And its certainly come in a rush, and has caused a massive issue for hospital systems that are stretched.
But we have 18 people in hospital in NZ. 18!!! We can care for these people. Yes, those numbers may go up if we discontinue social distancing, but no-one is adcocating that as yet.
I was not against the Lock down initially because we had limited data and lots of unknowns. We now have a lot of data, and proper handle on where NZ is. Continued shutdown of the economy is IMO pointless and massively harmful.
I query how much better level 3 is for most businesses. Take McDonalds. They can open a drive through but can probably only have like 4 staff at one time? Retail can do online shopping only. People can't travel or move about.
The goal should be to get to level 2 ASAP. Going to level 3 on Thursday is not necessarily the best way to do it.
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
You're missing the point that every country is not the same. NZ had massive advantages. Late to get it, lots of global data, spread out population, not much multi-gen living, island nation etc. What the right response for Italy is/was, is not necessarily what is right for NZ. We had so many advantages, and we are squandering them.
As for the US and the stats, I agree that this isn't just the flu (yet). It appears much more virulent . But I don't believe it's 6x more deadly. We have (unfortunately) seen a lot of deaths, but the fact remains that they have overwhelmingly been those who are elderly and ill . And its certainly come in a rush, and has caused a massive issue for hospital systems that are stretched.
But we have 18 people in hospital in NZ. 18!!! We can care for these people. Yes, those numbers may go up if we discontinue social distancing, but no-one is adcocating that as yet.
I was not against the Lock down initially because we had limited data and lots of unknowns. We now have a lot of data, and proper handle on where NZ is. Continued shutdown of the economy is IMO pointless and massively harmful.
The goal should be to get to level 2 ASAP. Going to level 3 on Thursday is not necessarily the best way to do it.
You're right. Level 2 on Thursday it is!
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
@hydro11
We know no such thing. Dont make up stuff. It may be, but it may not be. The point is we dont actually know yet. -
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
You're missing the point that every country is not the same. NZ had massive advantages. Late to get it, lots of global data, spread out population, not much multi-gen living, island nation etc. What the right response for Italy is/was, is not necessarily what is right for NZ. We had so many advantages, and we are squandering them.
As for the US and the stats, I agree that this isn't just the flu (yet). It appears much more virulent . But I don't believe it's 6x more deadly. We have (unfortunately) seen a lot of deaths, but the fact remains that they have overwhelmingly been those who are elderly and ill . And its certainly come in a rush, and has caused a massive issue for hospital systems that are stretched.
But we have 18 people in hospital in NZ. 18!!! We can care for these people. Yes, those numbers may go up if we discontinue social distancing, but no-one is adcocating that as yet.
I was not against the Lock down initially because we had limited data and lots of unknowns. We now have a lot of data, and proper handle on where NZ is. Continued shutdown of the economy is IMO pointless and massively harmful.
I query how much better level 3 is for most businesses. Take McDonalds. They can open a drive through but can probably only have like 4 staff at one time? Retail can do online shopping only. People can't travel or move about.
The goal should be to get to level 2 ASAP. Going to level 3 on Thursday is not necessarily the best way to do it.
I don't have direct access to the stats, but I heard 500k people back to work under L3 today, not to mention revenue for a stack of small and medium sized businesses who can operate under L3 contacted rules.
Seems worthwhile to me
-
@Tim said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12325916
Canny ole bugger.
-
I made the mistake of reading FB tonight, FFS. If I hear one more white middle class women employed by the govt lecturing everyone how important it is to stay in lockdown.. I will write a reply and create a dust up.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
@hydro11
We know no such thing. Dont make up stuff. It may be, but it may not be. The point is we dont actually know yet.I have not seen anyone credible describe the death rate as less than 0.6%
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback first 2 paragraphs there isn't a lot to disagree with I'd have thought?
"When someone like @taniwharugby supports such things I find more terrifying than anything, because I know he is not stupid, and he is a decent bugger".
Half truths?
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I made the mistake of reading FB tonight, FFS. If I hear one more white middle class women employed by the govt lecturing everyone how important it is to stay in lockdown.. I will write a reply and create a dust up.
Post the link when you do
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback What I would like to know is how much the people wanting to stay in lockdown would be willing to personally pay towards doing so. I'm imagining it would come nowhere near close to covering the cost of doing so.
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
I think this highlights a choice to be made.
If the aim is elimination, which is likely to take longer than expected, there is a case for more Level 4, and probably extended Level 3. Economic cost VERY high.
At the other end is getting down rapidly to Swedish levels of lockdown, with borders closed. There might be 100 deaths a week, and economy would still be subdued, but in FAR better shape than under first alternative.
There is no cake and eat it too.
From where I sit the latter path is far preferable.
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
@hydro11
We know no such thing. Dont make up stuff. It may be, but it may not be. The point is we dont actually know yet.I have not seen anyone credible describe the death rate as less than 0.6%
So? It is fact that they dont know the death of the Wu Flu, but if yiu cna correct me on that feel free to send in the direction of our proof, so I can have a read,
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly.
We don't know that.
This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
The flu season isn't a year.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly.
We don't know that.
This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
The flu season isn't a year.
The stat holds for a whole year, not for what you define as the flu season.
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly.
We don't know that.
This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
The flu season isn't a year.
The stat holds for a whole year, not for what you define as the flu season.
It's not what I define, it's data held by the CDC and publicly available.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
@hydro11
We know no such thing. Dont make up stuff. It may be, but it may not be. The point is we dont actually know yet.I have not seen anyone credible describe the death rate as less than 0.6%
So? It is fact that they dont know the death of the Wu Flu, but if yiu cna correct me on that feel free to send in the direction of our proof, so I can have a read,
Of course we don't know the exact death rate. There is no one such figure. It depends based on how they are treated and perhaps what dosage they have received. We don't know the death rate for the bubonic plague either. All the estimates I have read from credible people put the death rate at at least 0.6%. They don't know but that is the logical estimate and therefore that is the number we should use to inform public policy.
-
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 3 lets more people go to work, but it's hardly a huge improvement on level 4 in terms of the cage doors opening.
However, in good news, apparently, not only is our curve flattening, it's exponentially reducing - halving every 5 days. At this rate, we are probably looking at a total of 6-8 weeks at levels 3&4 (so another 2-4 weeks) and then back to level 2.
The rest of the world is rightly envious of that, because they're generally looking at months of the equivalent of level 3+. 4 weeks seems a bit early to be rolling out the civil liberties flag - human rights and civil liberties are critically important to the NZ democracy, but the most important right is the right to life because the rest are not much use to dead people.
And a cratered economy is a damn sight harder on people on the other side.
This is exactly the sort of scare mongering that drove that poll result.
The original justification for this lockdown was not to eliminate the disease but to prevent our health system from being overwhelmed. That has been achieved and over the last four weeks process and capacity has been added to help even more with that.
So let’s move down the levels fast, test appropriately, contain regional reoccurrence, and get back to normalise life.
Even today Cindy was downplaying the huge impact this is having on the economy. “Doing in tough” is not even close to what’s coming IMO.
I think when level 4 started we didn't think it would be as successful as it has been. Now we have a chance to actually eliminate this from New Zealand. The worst thing we could do would be to go down the levels quickly and have it spread. Then you go back to level 4 or have unfettered community transmission and what we have done so far will be for nothing. We have the chance to get back to "normal" in NZ and we should take that if possible.
What a giant leap you make to get from our current 10 cases per day to "unfettered community transmission". We are destroying our economy, and the livelihood of thousands of people, for something that has 18 people in hospital.
It's just absurd.
As it stands, we could return to some semblance of "normal life" in NZ right now. We should be at L3 immediately, where there is next to no extra risk given how tight it is.
L2 should be right around the corner if the data continues on this trajectory.
This BS about elimination and effective contact tracing does my head in. Why do we need to have the "gold standard" / 100% success rate for this? We have no drain on our hospitals. This disease doesn't have some 20% fatality rate on the otherwise-healthy. Do we know where every flu patient has been every year, do we get stressed that they may have visited a rest home or a workplace or a school? Are people asked to keep diaries in case they catch it?
We just dont need to eliminate this thing in NZ. Its a totally unnecessary goal, and it's doing significantly more harm than good right now.
It's not absurd. This started in China from one person getting infected towards the end of last year. In 5 months, it has infected at least two million people all around the world. It is not impossible that 10 cases per day can turn into hundreds and then thousands. It has literally happened like that in other countries around the world.
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly. This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
@hydro11
We know no such thing. Dont make up stuff. It may be, but it may not be. The point is we dont actually know yet.I have not seen anyone credible describe the death rate as less than 0.6%
So? It is fact that they dont know the death of the Wu Flu, but if yiu cna correct me on that feel free to send in the direction of our proof, so I can have a read,
Of course we don't know the exact death rate. There is no one such figure. It depends based on how they are treated and perhaps what dosage they have received. We don't know the death rate for the bubonic plague either. All the estimates I have read from credible people put the death rate at at least 0.6%. They don't know but that is the logical estimate and therefore that is the number we should use to inform public policy.
Right then so we dont know it is at least 6 times more deadly?
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hydro11 said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
This is not the flu - we know it is at least six times as deadly.
We don't know that.
This has killed half as many people in a month in the US compared to what the flu does in a whole year and that it with all the measures that have been put in place.
The flu season isn't a year.
The stat holds for a whole year, not for what you define as the flu season.
It's not what I define, it's data held by the CDC and publicly available.
I don't understand what the issue is? I said I was referring to a whole year, I never said I was referring to flu season.
Coronavirus - New Zealand