Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
Okay, I can reconcile this now
OurWorldInDate is using % of total population, matches the Guardian UK numbers.
Economist is using 12+ (UK is just about to start on 12-15)
UK Government official numbers currently use 16+
UK First dose 16+ - 89%
UK Second dose 16+ - 82%So 90% of eligible at 12+ or 16+ is certainly doable, 90% of total population definitely pretty hard!
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial Surely we have to use total population, not who it's offered to????
I mean in terms of epedemial control?
Our measures quoted in the media are usually against the 'eligible'. The target is against that (over 12s).
I think there are still lots of unknowns around the benefits of vaccine in U12s
The main benefit is the herd immunity for their grandparents.
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial Surely we have to use total population, not who it's offered to????
I mean in terms of epedemial control?
Our measures quoted in the media are usually against the 'eligible'. The target is against that (over 12s).
I think there are still lots of unknowns around the benefits of vaccine in U12s
The main benefit is the herd immunity for their grandparents.
Modellers in Europe where Delta is real life have pretty much concluded that with given a baseline (uncontrolled) R rate of lowball 5.0 - maximum estimated 8.0 and effectiveness of current vaccines in reducing infection, herd immunity would require ...
90% of total population (not just eligible) at 5.0
95% at 7.0
NZ modelling I have seen uses 6.0, most European modelling assumes 7.0I don't disagree about NZ's strategy, just noting that with current vaccine technology, no country I am aware of is shooting for herd immunity any more after Delta.
-
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial Surely we have to use total population, not who it's offered to????
I mean in terms of epedemial control?
Our measures quoted in the media are usually against the 'eligible'. The target is against that (over 12s).
I think there are still lots of unknowns around the benefits of vaccine in U12s
The main benefit is the herd immunity for their grandparents.
Modellers in Europe where Delta is real life have pretty much concluded that with given a baseline (uncontrolled) R rate of lowball 5.0 - maximum estimated 8.0 and effectiveness of current vaccines in reducing infection, herd immunity would require ...
90% of total population (not just eligible) at 5.0
95% at 7.0
NZ modelling I have seen uses 6.0, most European modelling assumes 7.0I don't disagree about NZ's strategy, just noting that with current vaccine technology, no country I am aware of is shooting for herd immunity any more after Delta.
Yeah, it is all about management of health system capabilities. I would be happy if we transferred losses from the effects of restrictions to spending on health capabilities.
The biggest 'sell' in NZ would be deaths. WE simply aren't used to them due to our strategies. Doesn't help that the PM has said 'one is too many'.
Plenty of other diseases/illnesses that cause death and are managed. We 'accept' cancer deaths as we don't always have a cure. It is sad but part of our world.
IMO we need to increase capability to deal with a new threat and find the 'right' balance. -
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
We will never get 90% vaccination rates.
That’s just another way of saying the lockdown level is permanent.
Has any other country exceeded 90? From memory one is at 87?
Looking at Denmark again (a very compliant people that buy into the value of being part of a society), and they are at 86.4 for partially vaccinated but 84.4 for fully. Although people are still getting shots it is mostly closing that small gap with about 0.2% new vax starters per day. Maybe in about another month they will be near 90?
So assuming that's the best case, using your term compliant, I don't see how we ever get there.
This feels like an unattainable target to justify the blunt lockdown approach for years, if not forever.
-
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
We will never get 90% vaccination rates.
That’s just another way of saying the lockdown level is permanent.
Has any other country exceeded 90? From memory one is at 87?
Looking at Denmark again (a very compliant people that buy into the value of being part of a society), and they are at 86.4 for partially vaccinated but 84.4 for fully. Although people are still getting shots it is mostly closing that small gap with about 0.2% new vax starters per day. Maybe in about another month they will be near 90?
So assuming that's the best case, using your term compliant, I don't see how we ever get there.
This feels like an unattainable target to justify the blunt lockdown approach for years, if not forever.
It's doable. On those 12+ Economist eligible stats, Portugal is on 90% now, Ireland nearly 88%?
From afar the lack of clarity from the NZ Goverment feels disingenuous at this point because they know NZ healthcare and ICU capacity, they know their healthcare plans and flex. They will have modelled cases > hospitalisations > deaths with varying levels of controls, and with and without MIQ in place.
Not sure kiwis are compliant but your media sure as hell are subserviant.
-
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
We will never get 90% vaccination rates.
That’s just another way of saying the lockdown level is permanent.
Has any other country exceeded 90? From memory one is at 87?
Looking at Denmark again (a very compliant people that buy into the value of being part of a society), and they are at 86.4 for partially vaccinated but 84.4 for fully. Although people are still getting shots it is mostly closing that small gap with about 0.2% new vax starters per day. Maybe in about another month they will be near 90?
So assuming that's the best case, using your term compliant, I don't see how we ever get there.
This feels like an unattainable target to justify the blunt lockdown approach for years, if not forever.
It's doable. On those 12+ Economist eligible stats, Portugal is on 90% now, Ireland nearly 88%?
From afar the lack of clarity from the NZ Goverment feels disingenuous at this point because they know NZ healthcare and ICU capacity, they know their healthcare plans and flex. They will have modelled cases > hospitalisations > deaths with varying levels of controls, and with and without MIQ in place.
Not sure kiwis are compliant but your media sure as hell are subserviant.
If they aren't, then PM refuses to go on the show anymore. And muzzles her ministers.
-
This is as sad as it is true
https://www.reddit.com/r/auckland/comments/psqfzk/here_we_go/
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan that 90% target in the media, is actually an NZME initiative, possibly with advice form Govt in the background, but the article in an actual paper today, it is thier initiative and not Govt. backed.
The longer you don't have a clear policy or goals (just directional intents at most) the harder it is to be held to account for not meeting them?
Every government will do this if it can, it's Boris Johnson's default mode.
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p guess they have been burnt by putting out lofty goals before, although our media don't really hold them to account.
Is always contrasting interviews from them interviewing Cindy vs anyone else...
Yet no one seems to question that. She definitely has teflon coating like early PM Key
-
I'm amazed that you guys are aguing potential percentage numbers.
Today Bloomfield said we may never go back to zero. Gone to L3 regardless. Virus now in 3 gangs, try containing that!. Crossed a provincial border, still gone to L3.
Seems to me they're hinting as hard as can be hinted that elimination is about to blow.
You're discussing the past's vision of a potential future exit.
Its moved.
That's how I'm reading it.
-
@rapido yeah some of the messaging has definitely been leaning that way.
I see some numpty in Auckland forged docs, went to Taranaki, and then had an non-covid medical issue...busted!
-
@rapido said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I'm amazed that you guys are aguing potential percentage numbers.
Today Bloomfield said we may never go back to zero. Gone to L3 regardless. Virus now in 3 gangs, try containing that!. Crossed a provincial border, still gone to L3.
Seems to me they're hinting as hard as can be hinted that elimination is about to blow.
You're discussing the past's vision of a potential future exit.
Its moved.
That's how I'm reading it.
Because of this;
"He (Bloomfeild) said vaccination rates need to be north of 90 per cent before they’re confident of opening up the freedoms of alert level 1."
My take on that is the same as what you say, that these measures are permanent.
-
View from afar. Mixed messaging, but actions speak louder than words ... to definitely eliminate Delta you'd need to keep Auckland in L4 surely?
I think they've accepted "aggressive suppression" becomes reality for now but hope (somehow) that the low probability of elimination still happens.
-
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@rapido said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I'm amazed that you guys are aguing potential percentage numbers.
Today Bloomfield said we may never go back to zero. Gone to L3 regardless. Virus now in 3 gangs, try containing that!. Crossed a provincial border, still gone to L3.
Seems to me they're hinting as hard as can be hinted that elimination is about to blow.
You're discussing the past's vision of a potential future exit.
Its moved.
That's how I'm reading it.
Because of this;
"He (Bloomfeild) said vaccination rates need to be north of 90 per cent before they’re confident of opening up the freedoms of alert level 1."
My take on that is the same as what you say, that these measures are permanent.
We'll go to level 1 when we get 90 to 100% antibodies. But, only about 80 % will be via vaccination, the rest will be naturally acquired.
My take.
-
@rapido said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@rapido said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I'm amazed that you guys are aguing potential percentage numbers.
Today Bloomfield said we may never go back to zero. Gone to L3 regardless. Virus now in 3 gangs, try containing that!. Crossed a provincial border, still gone to L3.
Seems to me they're hinting as hard as can be hinted that elimination is about to blow.
You're discussing the past's vision of a potential future exit.
Its moved.
That's how I'm reading it.
Because of this;
"He (Bloomfeild) said vaccination rates need to be north of 90 per cent before they’re confident of opening up the freedoms of alert level 1."
My take on that is the same as what you say, that these measures are permanent.
We'll go to level 1 when we get 90 to 100% antibodies. But, only about 80 % will be via vaccination, the rest will be naturally acquired.
My take.
At the current ~20 cases a day, there's only 20000 days to go!