Coronavirus - Australia
-
@nta said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - Australia:
When you also publicly say that the decision was the CHO's you are abdicating responsibility to an unelected official who is leaving the post in 2 months to become the Governor
I don't get the whole "unelected official" thing.
Mainly in light of Craig Kelly. He's elected and he's batshit fucking crazy while being dumb as shit.
Mmmmm... smells like Horse medication ....
I only really watch history/general knowledge type vids on Youtube but I get at least an ad from this fucker everyday. Pisses me off.
-
@nepia said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@nta said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - Australia:
When you also publicly say that the decision was the CHO's you are abdicating responsibility to an unelected official who is leaving the post in 2 months to become the Governor
I don't get the whole "unelected official" thing.
Mainly in light of Craig Kelly. He's elected and he's batshit fucking crazy while being dumb as shit.
Mmmmm... smells like Horse medication ....
I only really watch history/general knowledge type vids on Youtube but I get at least an ad from this fucker everyday. Pisses me off.
/cough adblock /cough
-
@nepia said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@nta said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@nepia YouTube premium my friend
Let's not get stupid.
Suffer in ya jocks, then.
Makes no difference to me 😉
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@nepia said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@nta said in Coronavirus - Australia:
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - Australia:
When you also publicly say that the decision was the CHO's you are abdicating responsibility to an unelected official who is leaving the post in 2 months to become the Governor
I don't get the whole "unelected official" thing.
Mainly in light of Craig Kelly. He's elected and he's batshit fucking crazy while being dumb as shit.
Mmmmm... smells like Horse medication ....
I only really watch history/general knowledge type vids on Youtube but I get at least an ad from this fucker everyday. Pisses me off.
/cough adblock /cough
I haven't found an adblock that works on the app on the iPad - plus, I don't mind the ads playing through on the channels I like, well normally.
-
I don't get the Doherty Institute modelling ScoMo and Gladys are waving aroung like it's a fricken bible. It just seems to bear no relationship to the real world of Delta Covid which lots of countries have been through and still are ... so work with me here.
(https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/doherty-findings-implication-covid19-modelling-presentation.pdf)So Page 9 seems key to me, a model of opening up (easing restrictions?) with 70% of all Australian adults vaccinated.
- It predicts 1,520 deaths in the first 180 days so lets say 3,000 annualized.
- Key assumption #1 states: "This table is likely to overstate the numbers of infections and deaths. The numbers would be significantly lower with low level restrictions and effective TTIQ."
- Key assumption #2 states: "The modelled scenario is premised on the seeding of infections by 30 individuals. The scenario is unlikely as it assumes baseline restrictions (minimal density and capacity restrictions). "
Yeah but, yeah but, hold on a mo ...
- Delta still will go at some stage, potentially and imho likely, exponential and run through your unvaccinated 30% AND statistically 40-50% of vaccinated in terms of cases. Worldwide has shown waves of exponential curves is much what likely happens, and Australia looks well on that path in NSW and Victoria.
- The model is based on seeding by 30 individuals, yet Australia already has thousands of cases even now?
- Controlling Delta even at 70% vaccinated from going exponential would requires significant restrictions, not just "low level control". See UK. See Israel .. though I didn't see how "low level control" is defined tbh.
- And TTIQ (track and trace and quarantine) breaks down real fast once it gains traction. That's pretty universal imho. Australia is different somehow?
fwiw as background, I used to follow a few UK modelling groups and wizards, and the most balanced is an independent actuary who reviews the formal models that feed up to the UK government committees and does his own modelling, retrospective comparisons etc ... critically he has no political skin in the game so not Dr Doom nor Mr Nice Guy.
Frankly the Doherty Institute report doesn't look realistic to me - as of this point - for ScoMo or Gladys to be using it for guidance ... can someone tell me what I'm missing?
-
@landp said in Coronavirus - Australia:
I don't get the Doherty Institute modelling ScoMo and Gladys are waving aroung like it's a fricken bible. It just seems to bear no relationship to the real world of Delta Covid which lots of countries have been through and still are ... so work with me here.
(https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/doherty-findings-implication-covid19-modelling-presentation.pdf)So Page 9 seems key to me, a model of opening up (easing restrictions?) with 70% of all Australian adults vaccinated.
- It predicts 1,520 deaths in the first 180 days so lets say 3,000 annualized.
- Key assumption #1 states: "This table is likely to overstate the numbers of infections and deaths. The numbers would be significantly lower with low level restrictions and effective TTIQ."
- Key assumption #2 states: "The modelled scenario is premised on the seeding of infections by 30 individuals. The scenario is unlikely as it assumes baseline restrictions (minimal density and capacity restrictions). "
Yeah but, yeah but, hold on a mo ...
- Delta still will go at some stage, potentially and imho likely, exponential and run through your unvaccinated 30% AND statistically 40-50% of vaccinated in terms of cases. Worldwide has shown waves of exponential curves is much what likely happens, and Australia looks well on that path in NSW and Victoria.
- The model is based on seeding by 30 individuals, yet Australia already has thousands of cases even now?
- Controlling Delta even at 70% vaccinated from going exponential would requires significant restrictions, not just "low level control". See UK. See Israel .. though I didn't see how "low level control" is defined tbh.
- And TTIQ (track and trace and quarantine) breaks down real fast once it gains traction. That's pretty universal imho. Australia is different somehow?
fwiw as background, I used to follow a few UK modelling groups and wizards, and the most balanced is an independent actuary who reviews the formal models that feed up to the UK government committees and does his own modelling, retrospective comparisons etc ... critically he has no political skin in the game so not Dr Doom nor Mr Nice Guy.
Frankly the Doherty Institute report doesn't look realistic to me - as of this point - for ScoMo or Gladys to be using it for guidance ... can someone tell me what I'm missing?
I think I liked you better when you were a silent lurker bro 😎
-
Just a follow on that Prof. Peter Doherty (@ProfPCDoherty on Twitter) is f**king awesome, he doesn't go near the modelling and is very clear on that. But he communicates constantly on latest CoVid science, vaccination and treatments. Answers all questions, debunks nonsense and pseudo-science one by one. He's a Nobel Prize winner and doing this?? ... heroic, hats off to the guy.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@landp said in Coronavirus - Australia:
I don't get the Doherty Institute modelling ScoMo and Gladys are waving aroung like it's a fricken bible. It just seems to bear no relationship to the real world of Delta Covid which lots of countries have been through and still are ... so work with me here.
(https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/doherty-findings-implication-covid19-modelling-presentation.pdf)So Page 9 seems key to me, a model of opening up (easing restrictions?) with 70% of all Australian adults vaccinated.
- It predicts 1,520 deaths in the first 180 days so lets say 3,000 annualized.
- Key assumption #1 states: "This table is likely to overstate the numbers of infections and deaths. The numbers would be significantly lower with low level restrictions and effective TTIQ."
- Key assumption #2 states: "The modelled scenario is premised on the seeding of infections by 30 individuals. The scenario is unlikely as it assumes baseline restrictions (minimal density and capacity restrictions). "
Yeah but, yeah but, hold on a mo ...
- Delta still will go at some stage, potentially and imho likely, exponential and run through your unvaccinated 30% AND statistically 40-50% of vaccinated in terms of cases. Worldwide has shown waves of exponential curves is much what likely happens, and Australia looks well on that path in NSW and Victoria.
- The model is based on seeding by 30 individuals, yet Australia already has thousands of cases even now?
- Controlling Delta even at 70% vaccinated from going exponential would requires significant restrictions, not just "low level control". See UK. See Israel .. though I didn't see how "low level control" is defined tbh.
- And TTIQ (track and trace and quarantine) breaks down real fast once it gains traction. That's pretty universal imho. Australia is different somehow?
fwiw as background, I used to follow a few UK modelling groups and wizards, and the most balanced is an independent actuary who reviews the formal models that feed up to the UK government committees and does his own modelling, retrospective comparisons etc ... critically he has no political skin in the game so not Dr Doom nor Mr Nice Guy.
Frankly the Doherty Institute report doesn't look realistic to me - as of this point - for ScoMo or Gladys to be using it for guidance ... can someone tell me what I'm missing?
The modelling is required because the four stage plan to normality referenced "based on the scientific modelling conducted". As such when Doherty started, their assumptions had some semblance of accuracy. Obviously things have changed but that poses a ffew problems:
- lockdown weariness
- new assumptions
- models are only as good as their assumptions
- the expectation amongst most people (as far as I can tell) is we hit a magic number and then freedom.
5.3% of the cases constitute 91.5% of the deaths as of yesterday (people aged 70+). 87% of that same cohort has had at least one vaccination and two-thirds are fully vaccinated.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@landp it most probably isn't accurate, don't think I've seen a model so far that has been
But
Australia's plan was wall itself off (externally and internally) and wait for the vaccine to make covid go away. To move on from that you need some sort of road map.
Throw in a bunch of state premiers comfortable with the status quo and you need something, anything to get them to face up to the reality the rest of the world is dealing with
And so you get this model. I'm sick of hearing about it, because it's clear that in the end it isn't going to mean shit, the gut feel of a few state CHOs will decide where we go
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - Australia:
The modelling is required because the four stage plan to normality referenced "based on the scientific modelling conducted". As such when Doherty started, their assumptions had some semblance of accuracy. Obviously things have changed
Exactly, I don't have a problem with scientific modelling which has rapidly been surpassed by events, that's pretty normal with CoVid.
I have a problem with politicians who wave models around and use them to make promises based on assumptions which have been over-taken. Especially when they almost certainly have other models too.
I wonder if Doherty is an Oz best-case model or the "reasonable worst case estimate" which is what is typically used as a roadmap. It's a bit opaque - Gladys acknowledges there are other models but won't talk about them it seems?
-
208 in vic....definitely have to wait for vax targets before open the travel bubble, i honestly had hope while it sat around 40-60 cases for so long
-
This post is deleted!
-
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - Australia:
the gut feel of a few state CHOs will decide where we go
Good luck, hang in there, and I mean it genuinely. You will get through it, somehow.
It seems in Oz, on healthcare and state borders the Feds can only try to herd the cats (states) but the state has the real ownership and responsibility, is that how it works?
There's superficial UK comparisons with Scottish and Welsh devolved responsibilities on healthcare here but ... nah ... UK Covid numbers and vaccination rates have been relatively similar across UK so no huge differences on direction compared to NSW vs WA.
-
This post is deleted!