Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I think part of the issue is that having developed criteria for hot spots, the Australian government ignores them when reinstating quarantine as soon as we have a community case. As long as they can't even stick to their own rules, it's hard to have much faith in their stated position. I can see how an Kiwi advisor or politician would get cynical quickly...
No issue with that, I can understand NZ driving the process. It's Australia potentially not wanting the reciprocal right to go to NZ that's winding me up!
-
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@donsteppa to be fair, the borders inside the goddam country do the same thing
I'm not discounting it, it's actually pretty smart.
I'd go with Hanlon's razor on this. The government simply isn't smart enough to come up with such a plan. The PM needs his wife to ask him how he'd feel about his own daughters being raped before he has any empathy. This after hiring an empathy consultant.
-
Presumably if we get a case or 2 every other day, all linked to the existing one, there would be no need to change alert levels?
I see scanning numbers have dropped significantly with Auckland dropping back to L1.
-
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo I am told, (from a source very close to the Beehive), that despite the PR the Aussie govt has no wish for a two way travel bubble with N.Z. They see no upside for Australia but lots of downside as Aussies starved of international; or even inter-state, travel flock to for a little RnR.
Wouldn't two-way be better than one-way? Not sure what I'm missing.
-
@majorrage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo I am told, (from a source very close to the Beehive), that despite the PR the Aussie govt has no wish for a two way travel bubble with N.Z. They see no upside for Australia but lots of downside as Aussies starved of international; or even inter-state, travel flock to for a little RnR.
Wouldn't two-way be better than one-way? Not sure what I'm missing.
The source was implying that the Australian Gov wants Aussie tourism $ spent domestically, presumably assuming that this is worth more than any potential NZ tourists coming into NZ
-
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@majorrage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo I am told, (from a source very close to the Beehive), that despite the PR the Aussie govt has no wish for a two way travel bubble with N.Z. They see no upside for Australia but lots of downside as Aussies starved of international; or even inter-state, travel flock to for a little RnR.
Wouldn't two-way be better than one-way? Not sure what I'm missing.
The source was implying that the Australian Gov wants Aussie tourism $ spent domestically, presumably assuming that this is worth more than any potential NZ tourists coming into NZ
I'd like to see the numbers on that. Considering none of us can travel anywhere else I would have thought that there was plenty of tourists to go around.
-
@taniwharugby It's a worry that the teenager worked at Kmart, esp on a Friday and Saturday.
31 close contacts (colleagues) and who knows how many customers.
And then all the places they visited that they don't know about yet.
-
@stargazer said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@taniwharugby It's a worry that the teenager worked at Kmart, esp on a Friday and Saturday.
31 close contacts (colleagues) and who knows how many customers.
And then all the places they visited that they don't know about yet.
I hope she worked because she felt fine, in which case she was far less infectious and it becomes a dead end. Because I really don't want to go back into L3 again....
-
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
-
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
I think it comes down to the contact tracing and how quickly they can track down all the contacts and if need be get them into isolation. The Coronacast podcast in Oz often discusses this - I should take notes so I can better recall what they say.
-
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
I think they are conscious that the public will become increasingly intolerant of long lockdowns. And they were going to take a massive subsidy hit if the lockdown lasted a week. Maybe they are getting better at contact tracing too
-
@nepia said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
I think it comes down to the contact tracing and how quickly they can track down all the contacts and if need be get them into isolation. The Coronacast podcast in Oz often discusses this - I should take notes so I can better recall what they say.
They never found the source did they?
-
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@nepia said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
I think it comes down to the contact tracing and how quickly they can track down all the contacts and if need be get them into isolation. The Coronacast podcast in Oz often discusses this - I should take notes so I can better recall what they say.
They never found the source did they?
No
-
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@nepia said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
I think it comes down to the contact tracing and how quickly they can track down all the contacts and if need be get them into isolation. The Coronacast podcast in Oz often discusses this - I should take notes so I can better recall what they say.
They never found the source did they?
No idea, I haven't been following what's happening in NZ too closely, just relaying what the Coronacast lot have said in relation to Australia lockdowns that are shorter then 14 days.
-
I felt they overreacted in both directions a couple of weeks ago. At least in terms of any consistency. Des Gorman’s comments on rapidly changing levels of risk acceptance seemed to sum it up well.
So now we have KMart cases and Level 1 is fine.
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
University of Auckland professor Des Gorman said he felt unease with the decision to lower the alert levels.
"I think the reason I share that unease is because the level of risk we seem to be tolerating is going up and down almost imperturbably," he told Checkpoint.
"For example, the Ministry of Health found out about these cases on Saturday night but didn't think it was necessary to tell the prime minister for 12 hours. So things which should have been cancelled if we needed to be in alert level 3... weren't.
"I can't see a consistency in our risk appetite, it seems to go up and down depending upon the optics of the situation."
-
So apparently the K Mart offshoot was started by a family member of a Papatoetoe college student. They were told to self isolate until their tests came back, this person was slow to get tested because they were asymptomatic, then they got aches. Fucking hell
-
@donsteppa yea I think most people were surprised at the level drops last week.
-
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
One thing I don't understand about the governments quick move back down the levels is that the virus tends to have a 10 - 14 day incubation period. So surely if we get put at L3 we should be there for two weeks to monitor further cases?
Not that I am advocating for further lockdowns, but there's really no consistency with our response at the moment.
The main reason of going to level 3 was to establish whether the source of this new cluster was related to the virus already being in the community (with the risk of a quick community spread), or whether one of case A, B and C was the first of a new outbreak in the community.
That's why they started testing things like waste water, testing work colleagues of the person worked at that company that did the laundry for airlines (so a link to the border) etc. It would also have been picked up by the increased number of people getting tests.
While they haven't found the exact source of this new cluster, they have been able to establish that the new cluster isn't caused by previously undetected spread in the community. If they had, Auckland would have stayed in level 3.
Going back to level 2 and then 1, is because they trust the contract tracing procedures they have in place, apparently despite people not using the Covid tracer app.
-
This is from an interview with the Papatoetoe HS principal on Radio NZ:
It was too soon for him to make contact with the latest family. They were hard to contact previously, Couillault said. More testing was being done at the school today, with students turning up as they had been asked to do, Couillault said. While he didn't know yet whether any families or pupils would decide not to be tested again, probably there would be some. "In the last round there were some that were consciously choosing not to test and were choosing to isolate for 14 days. That is of course their prerogative." Asked if he would be confident students who were meant to have isolated for 14 days had done so, Couillault said it was a "high trust situation". "I don't really have any alternative, but we're going to make every effort to communicate effectively with those people." He didn't know why the family identified with Covid-19 yesterday had been hard to contact. "We have a number of families that often change numbers, change addresses... We did get there in the end, but yes they were hard to contact. The phones were ringing but no one was picking up. "Which was frustrating but everyone's got a story to tell, which when you listen to their side of the story is always quite reasonable."
-
About the teenager who works at Kmart:
Most of the time the worker with Covid-19 was folding clothes in the men's and women's clothes areas. "She did a little bit of customer interface with click and collect but for very short periods. That gives an opportunity to identify those people who she interacted with and follow them up.