Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

covid19data.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#271

Post by 0xfaded »

doubleunplussed wrote: post #257
hnick wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We mostly sell ore, meat, and grain. If I'm reading the ECI right this takes no particular skill and these are common products that many countries in the world can produce, explaining the low score. It's why we rank alongside so many African nations. It doesn't seem to take into account internal economies, but I don't know how we fare there.

I understand that, and if the ECI is normalised by total economic output, it would make sense for it to be low in Australia for that reason. But if you subtracted these industries from Australia, I would expect there to be more knowledge and technology industry remaining than in some of the countries with a higher ECI. So if ECI is not normalised by total economic output, I would be surprised. Normalising by economic…

Good point, I hadn't really considered the effect of normalizing by GDP.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#272

Post by Devils-Avocado »

0xfaded wrote: post #270
Devils-Avocado wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australia will be the slowest to go back to normal since they will need to maintain national quarantine forever - until a suitable vaccine is found and administered. $25,000 per person is a huge amount of money, far greater than for any national scheme, ever. Probably approaching Australia's expenditure for a world war or major international conflict. Keep in mind that currently in Europe - there is very limited exce…

Well, my parents live in Perth. They've been living a normal existence since May. Monetarily, it's no different than any other medical expenditure. Would you spend 25k for an extra year of normal life? What about if you're 20-30? Colour me jealous.

In Sweden 0.06% of the population has died from COVID, and those that did have a median age of about 80.

Would you pay $25,000 in order to have a 1 in 1,666 chance of living an extra few months when you are 80 years old?

No one would take those odds - but it has been forced on the population.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#273

Post by _-___________-_ »

Aachen wrote: post #159
_-___________-_ wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah let's get all the young people infected, having one percent of that population die is fine right? Are you really claiming with a straight face that the chance of a young person who gets infected dying is 1/100? Would love to see you try to provide a source for that...

Are we really going to split hairs over what the exact percentage is or can we talk about the point? To me it seems like crazy talk to pose something, which would cause millions of deaths, to be unbelievable not to do. I'd be much more interested in how they think this could possibly work in a safe manner than debating whether it causes 5 per thousand or 10 per thousand (a sibling comment said 0.63%, so 6.3 million a…

You’re probably two orders of magnitude off. Not exactly splitting hairs. (Sibling comment is talking about CFR, not IFR.) Any conclusions you might reach based on that kind of exaggeration of the risk are pretty meaningless.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#274

Post by DrJones1098 »

doubleunplussed wrote: post #269
nickthemagicman wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they go to the grocery store that's hundreds of people they contact potentially. Its odd that you believe that only contacts and secondary contacts are susceptible. With an natural r naught of three and the and the fact that it stays on surfaces for days...it's just a matter of time until another outbreak happens.

I'm telling you, empirically if you do this, the virus goes away. The proof is in the pudding: we are seeing this strategy work. Those grocery store shoppers might be susceptible, but it turns out that not enough of them get infected for this strategy to fail if it is stuck to for long enough. I'm posting this from Victoria, where we've had zero new COVID cases for three days now. I'm telling you, it works.

It doesn't work ....it DELAYS.

Has any virus ever just gone away.....

Once society lets down it's guard, if your country hasn't reached herd immunity when the virus returns you're back to lockdown. Perpetual corona whack a mole.

There's no realistic way out of this other than herd immunity through a vaccine or natural means.

Non vaccine human control of this virus is impossible long term.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#275

Post by JoeAltmaier »

DrJones1098 wrote: post #274
doubleunplussed wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm telling you, empirically if you do this, the virus goes away. The proof is in the pudding: we are seeing this strategy work. Those grocery store shoppers might be susceptible, but it turns out that not enough of them get infected for this strategy to fail if it is stuck to for long enough. I'm posting this from Victoria, where we've had zero new COVID cases for three days now. I'm telling you, it works.

It doesn't work ....it DELAYS. Has any virus ever just gone away..... Once society lets down it's guard, if your country hasn't reached herd immunity when the virus returns you're back to lockdown. Perpetual corona whack a mole. There's no realistic way out of this other than herd immunity through a vaccine or natural means. Non vaccine human control of this virus is impossible long term.

Some places have eradicated it by careful tracking and isolation.

It's a virus. It has no reservoir but currently infected people. In fact, if we could all stay isolate for 2 weeks it would be gone from the earth. Of course that's impossible but combination strategies can (have) worked.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#276

Post by LeCow »

jonsno56 wrote: post #177
LeCow wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mistake is to think it's never going to happen. It will get you eventually, could be 5 years, 10 years...but it will come.

It’ll get YoU in particular in 10 years cause you won’t get vaccinated

...okay

I'm not sure why this needs explaining still. But this virus, like all viruses will evolve and change over time. The vaccine today won't be effective in a couple of years.

I have no idea what that has to do with anything.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#277

Post by nickthemagicman »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #275
DrJones1098 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't work ....it DELAYS. Has any virus ever just gone away..... Once society lets down it's guard, if your country hasn't reached herd immunity when the virus returns you're back to lockdown. Perpetual corona whack a mole. There's no realistic way out of this other than herd immunity through a vaccine or natural means. Non vaccine human control of this virus is impossible long term.

Some places have eradicated it by careful tracking and isolation. It's a virus. It has no reservoir but currently infected people. In fact, if we could all stay isolate for 2 weeks it would be gone from the earth. Of course that's impossible but combination strategies can (have) worked.

Didn't it emerge from a natural reservoir like bats or monkeys?

Ebola's reservoir has yet to have been discovered but it's still there.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#278

Post by 0xfaded »

Devils-Avocado wrote: post #272
0xfaded wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my parents live in Perth. They've been living a normal existence since May. Monetarily, it's no different than any other medical expenditure. Would you spend 25k for an extra year of normal life? What about if you're 20-30? Colour me jealous.

In Sweden 0.06% of the population has died from COVID, and those that did have a median age of about 80. Would you pay $25,000 in order to have a 1 in 1,666 chance of living an extra few months when you are 80 years old? No one would take those odds - but it has been forced on the population.

I'm not talking about dying, I'm talking about normal life.

I live in Denmark, with arguably more restrictions than Sweden. I'd happily sacrifice 25k in future lifetime earnings to have 2020 back. (BTW, as a startup founder, the possible costs of COVID may wind up being far more disastrous to my lifetime earnings)

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#279

Post by doubleunplussed »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #277
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some places have eradicated it by careful tracking and isolation. It's a virus. It has no reservoir but currently infected people. In fact, if we could all stay isolate for 2 weeks it would be gone from the earth. Of course that's impossible but combination strategies can (have) worked.

Didn't it emerge from a natural reservoir like bats or monkeys? Ebola's reservoir has yet to have been discovered but it's still there.

Ok, in that case I agree with you that it only delays re-introduction. By, like, a hundred years. I'll take that.

Obviously the bigger risk to Australia et al is reintroduction from other countries. So Australia's borders will continue to require 14 days of quarantine until there is a good enough vaccine. However, New Zealand has now seen three re-introductions, and they have managed to suppress them just fine so far. So if this is what delaying the inevitable looks like, I'll take it too. Seems like it can be delayed an awfully long time.

Maintaining quarantine at borders is an option, if a country decides they want to do it. Australia decided it wanted to. I see no reason why this can't be sustained indefinitely, it's merely a matter of how long Australia is willing to have a border quarantine system in place (which comes with all kinds of costs due to reduced international travel).

There's no epidemiological reason the virus can't be suppressed and kept out of a given region. The only remaining question is how soon we expect a vaccine such that this isolation is worth it in the long run. If a vaccine never comes then it is not a viable strategy, otherwise, it does seem like a good call.

Just want to remind you that I'm writing this from Australia where there is practically no virus in the community and are freedoms are increasing rather than decreasing. I don't expect there'll be widespread COVID in Australia ever again, as we've gotten quite good at suppressing small outbreaks now.

Re: No new locally-acquired coronavirus cases in Australia yesterday

#280

Post by m0zg »

flamble wrote: post #67
0xy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lockdown has a death toll. This is just fact. People delay preventative treatment, they get depressed, overweight, suicides skyrocket. In Melbourne in particular, there was a giant spike in 12 year olds getting prescribed serious anti-depressant medication. Four newborn babies died because the South Australian government did not want to risk flying them to Melbourne for treatment. Lockdown primarily harms young peopl…

> Lockdown has a death toll. This is just fact. I steeled myself to read this post in the most charitable possible light. Yes, lockdown most likely has some death toll. But the specific points you're making are very dubious and also very recognisable as the effect of consuming specific kinds of media. Firstly, the point about "not getting as much exercise" is frustrating. Back when we didn't have data on this, it was…

I can confirm his exercise point. The physically active people I know, including myself and my wife, exercised mostly in gyms before COVID. First, gyms were shut down for months, which pretty much kills the habit of going to the gym (the main reason why people stick with it). Now their policies are so onerous, they're borderline psychotic, so we canceled our gym memberships months ago. On a less anecdotal note, two of our three major local gyms are now in bankruptcy. The one that's not in bankruptcy is largely funded by Microsoft, their employees used to go there, and now even though they don't go, Microsoft still keeps paying.

Both my and my wife's weight went up. I was able to beat it, she wasn't, so she's about 8kg heavier now than she was in February. The only exercise I get now is half an hour of stationary bike a day. I used to seriously lift weights 4-5 days a week, in addition to it.

It's not even a question for anyone not completely brainwashed that lockdowns are very psychologically hard on people.

Post reply on HN