Coronavirus - Australia
-
@Godder said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@antipodean I think a key issue is if the numbers overwhelm the ICU (and the wider health system) ability to cope, the health system has to triage more unpleasantly. In Italy, the numbers of cases saw them having to make decisions to limit admissions to younger people, basically leaving older Italians to die. People also start to die from other causes because ICU and other areas of the health system are full.
I'm well aware of that argument. So how long are you prepared to be locked up in your own home?
-
@Godder said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@antipodean I think a key issue is if the numbers overwhelm the ICU (and the wider health system) ability to cope, the health system has to triage more unpleasantly. In Italy, the numbers of cases saw them having to make decisions to limit admissions to younger people, basically leaving older Italians to die.
I think it's clear enough at this point in time that Australia is not experiencing the same level of crisis as Italy, Spain or the US.
The Chief Medical Officer was at pains to point that out last night, where he stressed our early response and high level of testing was very different to that of other countries.
I don't have the stats at hand, but I'd assume Australia at 16 deaths compares far better than those other countries at the same point in the outbreak.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@antipodean I think a key issue is if the numbers overwhelm the ICU (and the wider health system) ability to cope, the health system has to triage more unpleasantly. In Italy, the numbers of cases saw them having to make decisions to limit admissions to younger people, basically leaving older Italians to die. People also start to die from other causes because ICU and other areas of the health system are full.
I'm well aware of that argument. So how long are you prepared to be locked up in your own home?
It's the absolute crux of the issue, all other arguments are just noise. We can't shut down the economy to stop old people getting sick and dying, that's just a fact of life. The only reason we're shutting down is because of the fear of our health system getting overwhelmed like has happened in Italy - that affects anyone needing care, not just people with Coronavirus.
So to answer your question, I'd say once we are confident our health system can cope with the increased demand we can then start re-opening. It's an infectious virus that will likely spread through the majority of the population at some point no matter what we do.
I'd also say I don't know what the right approach is - a complete shutdown, some restrictions, or no change at all. I don't envy those making decisions, as there is no immediate right/wrong - we'll only know down the track if what we did was the correct course of action, and by that stage it's too late to change. So I can understand why many governments are choosing to err on the side of caution to protect the health system.
-
@No-Quarter those numbers in Italy are just scary now...
10,779 deaths and 97,689 cases...thats a mortality rate of just over 11%
If everyone plays ball and we come out of lock down in 4 or 5 weeks, I expect our borders have to stay closed.
-
@No-Quarter said in Coronavirus - Australia:
So to answer your question, I'd say once we are confident our health system can cope with the increased demand we can then start re-opening.
Which I think you'll acknowledge isn't actually an answer...
What is missing on this side of the ditch is a clear indication to Australians that we need to x for this long in order to achieve the desired end-state.
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - Australia:
If everyone plays ball and we come out of lock down in 4 or 5 weeks, I expect our borders have to stay closed.
Definitely, otherwise we'll be opening up to people who could be travelling asymptomatically and the whole process has to start again.
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@No-Quarter those numbers in Italy are just scary now...
10,779 deaths and 97,689 cases...thats a mortality rate of just over 11%
If everyone plays ball and we come out of lock down in 4 or 5 weeks, I expect our borders have to stay closed.
Test everyone as they come off planes, rigorous self isolation measures for all incoming passengers. Asian countries have used various methods such as downloadable apps, or issuing burner phones to make sure people observe the conditions. It is vital to the economy and the people that this is done
-
@Tim although post-Covid that will look different to previous seasons I'd expect. Where many of the at risk folks might have already passed due to Corona? Flu deaths may actually be lower due to heightened vigilance about hygiene and the (positive) hangover of isolation.
-
-
@Tim said in Coronavirus - Australia:
I’d be interested in data on how Italy normally copes with flu season and how many people die. Would be good to put their experiences into context.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971219303285
This is a 3 year study I found. 68000 deaths from 5,290,000 cases of flu in total, 22700 per year. Coronavirus death total is close to 11000 from 100000 total cases right now.
Looks like Italy always has a higher than average mortality rate due to their aging population. Combine that with no immunity to a new pathogen and things get ugly fast
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@No-Quarter said in Coronavirus - Australia:
So to answer your question, I'd say once we are confident our health system can cope with the increased demand we can then start re-opening.
Which I think you'll acknowledge isn't actually an answer...
What is missing on this side of the ditch is a clear indication to Australians that we need to x for this long in order to achieve the desired end-state.
We have 585 ICU beds in the entire country, according to the article Stargazer linked to earlier today.
I think the most I’ve seen in use from the virus is around 12. So for us it’s charting the expected peak use of that from the increase in cases. (And having spare capacity for normal medical cases)
Once we have passed that, and have more wider and quicker testing, we will move to targeted lockdowns for outbreak areas.
So they have a plan for ending it, it depends on how well the lockdown has been adhered to.
I’m expecting them to add another two weeks on when they check the progress after 14 days.
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - Australia:
Is that australia wide data or just NSW?
All Australia. Sourced here: https://www.covid19data.com.au/
-
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@No-Quarter said in Coronavirus - Australia:
So to answer your question, I'd say once we are confident our health system can cope with the increased demand we can then start re-opening.
Which I think you'll acknowledge isn't actually an answer...
What is missing on this side of the ditch is a clear indication to Australians that we need to x for this long in order to achieve the desired end-state.
We have 585 ICU beds in the entire country, according to the article Stargazer linked to earlier today.
I think the most I’ve seen in use from the virus is around 12. So for us it’s charting the expected peak use of that from the increase in cases. (And having spare capacity for normal medical cases)
Once we have passed that, and have more wider and quicker testing, we will move to targeted lockdowns for outbreak areas.
So they have a plan for ending it, it depends on how well the lockdown has been adhered to.
I’m expecting them to add another two weeks on when they check the progress after 14 days.
Is that being well communicated in NZ, because unless I'm missing the announcements, it isn't here. What would make it more palatable would be a daily explanation of the remaining capacity and the date by which we would overcome our ability to treat serious cases. This would also assist people in understanding how long these restrictions were expected to remain in place.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
What is missing on this side of the ditch is a clear indication to Australians that we need to x for this long in order to achieve the desired end-state.
Quoted at yesterday's press conference was "up to 6 months". Not exactly concrete, but what do you propose?
Remember this is a government operating on slogans and a populace that doesn't want a flowchart.
-
@NTA said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
What is missing on this side of the ditch is a clear indication to Australians that we need to x for this long in order to achieve the desired end-state.
Quoted at yesterday's press conference was "up to 6 months". Not exactly concrete, but what do you propose?
I propose something workable. I'm not the only person who won't put up with not being able to travel to see friends and family, have a drink, celebrate life etc.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@Kirwan said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@No-Quarter said in Coronavirus - Australia:
So to answer your question, I'd say once we are confident our health system can cope with the increased demand we can then start re-opening.
Which I think you'll acknowledge isn't actually an answer...
What is missing on this side of the ditch is a clear indication to Australians that we need to x for this long in order to achieve the desired end-state.
We have 585 ICU beds in the entire country, according to the article Stargazer linked to earlier today.
I think the most I’ve seen in use from the virus is around 12. So for us it’s charting the expected peak use of that from the increase in cases. (And having spare capacity for normal medical cases)
Once we have passed that, and have more wider and quicker testing, we will move to targeted lockdowns for outbreak areas.
So they have a plan for ending it, it depends on how well the lockdown has been adhered to.
I’m expecting them to add another two weeks on when they check the progress after 14 days.
Is that being well communicated in NZ, because unless I'm missing the announcements, it isn't here. What would make it more palatable would be a daily explanation of the remaining capacity and the date by which we would overcome our ability to treat serious cases. This would also assist people in understanding how long these restrictions were expected to remain in place.
Yep, the entire point is to prevent overwelming the health system. We get daily briefings on what is expected, and it's clearly communicated that we won't see the impact of the lockdown for at least 14 days from when it started.
They are less specific of the timing aspect as it's reliant on the lockdown impact. So I'm expecting after 14 days to start hearing phrases like a few more weeks may be necessary.