Live data from Hacker News

Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

twitter.com

341–348 of 348 posts

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#341
post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would deaths increase exponentially over a period of years? That would not be expected and was not occurring even before vaccines. The point I'm making here is that the data is contradictory, which means there is a need to investigate. Trials didn't show any impact on hospitalization or death (because it's so rare, they were too small to get significance). That means the data on them is confounded. For example, i…

The expected curve without intervention would have an S-shape: initially, you see exponential growth which will flatten out later on when you reach a point of saturation. In many countries, the intensive care units have not been in the situation where they had to triage, so the selection effects you report have not been necessary there. And even if, no hospital would make the decision on who to assign to an ICU based…

Logistic growth (S shaped) is observed in any specific epidemic regardless of intervention. But what we're looking at here is the sum of all COVID epidemics together.

"no hospital would make the decision on who to assign to an ICU based on their vaccination status, but based on the medical needs"

Your beliefs about hospitals and doctors are romanticized and I already gave you evidence of this. Albeit I didn't cite it, so let me do that now with this analysis of UK ICNARC data:

https://communityoperatingsystem.wordpress.com/2021/12/09/uk...

Pregnant women get admitted more and survive more because they weren't being admitted based on true medical need but rather the subjective feelings of staff that [currently/very recently] pregnant women should get higher levels of care due to having a baby.

This also affects other decisions. Doctors aren't always rational well informed calculating machines:

"We see a similar admissions bias when we examine the hospitalization fatality rates between the fully vaccinated and unvaccinated under 50s with PHE hospitalization data for 218,784 confirmed Delta infections – which show that whilst the 1.7% hospitalization rate of the unvaccinated is almost 2X that of the vaccinated (0.9%), the HFR in the vaccinated is 3 times higher (7.4%) than the unvaccinated (2.4%) and the case fatality rates is also lower in the unvaccinated."

Why does this happen, well, the population has been terrorized for years into believing things that are wildly untrue. The average Australian believes an unvaccinated person has a 33% chance of dying if they catch COVID. They think it's as deadly as smallpox or the plague. 40% of American Democrat voters believe half of unvaccinated people have been hospitalized with COVID! Half!

It'd be great if all the people who believed this nonsense were somehow excluded from the health system but of course they aren't. Quite the opposite: those who understand the true numbers and severity rates are much less likely to want to get vaccinated than those who think it's literally the plague and they're all being fired.

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#342
post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The vaccines are not reasonably effective against transmission, especially for the current dominant strain, but also the previous ones. Vaccinated people are still infecting people..." Perhaps so, but those who are vaccinated shed less viral load, ipso facto it's less likely that another person would be infected. Same goes for masks: viral load is attenuated when someone with COVID breathes out, if an uninfected per…

> Well, I'd suggest you're wrong with that 3% - damn lies and statistics taken out of context. Look at these realworld figures. Yes, there is breakthrough with vaccines but it's a no-brainer to be both fully vaccinated with booster and for those around you to be of the same status. With proper mask protection as well one has a much better chance of either not catching the virus or only getting mild symptoms. That was…

[deleted]

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#343
post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The vaccines are not reasonably effective against transmission, especially for the current dominant strain, but also the previous ones. Vaccinated people are still infecting people..." Perhaps so, but those who are vaccinated shed less viral load, ipso facto it's less likely that another person would be infected. Same goes for masks: viral load is attenuated when someone with COVID breathes out, if an uninfected per…

> Well, I'd suggest you're wrong with that 3% - damn lies and statistics taken out of context. Look at these realworld figures. Yes, there is breakthrough with vaccines but it's a no-brainer to be both fully vaccinated with booster and for those around you to be of the same status. With proper mask protection as well one has a much better chance of either not catching the virus or only getting mild symptoms. That was…

My earlier post was already too long. If I had then tried to quantify what I said by examining instances of the effect of COVID and various of vaccines on the virus over range of different counties then it would have been too long to post. My response, therefore, is just a summary of what I have observed. I’d add that I’m a professional—although not a medico—so I’m used to reading scientific papers and journals and I reckon since the advent of COVID I’ve almost doubled my reading. I've read papers on almost every aspect of the disease and that includes some that are of a highly technical nature which have challenged my comprehension thereof. Simply, I’ve been covering COVID in considerable detail and I believe I'm reasonably well informed.

“That was a paper from the Lancet.”

When I said ”damn lies and statistics taken out of context.” I meant it. In fact, The Lancet article is almost the quintessential example of what I was talking about: someone cites a very reputable source to prove a point and then expects everyone to take its findings as gospel, or readers are bamboozled with the science and then don't question any further—these outcomes being the original objective. I've known The Lancet for years and have read articles from it in the past, and I'm well aware that it's an authoritative source of information. Moreover, I have no doubt that when The Lancet published the article the information therein was both authoritative and up to date—the trouble is that it was published on April 20, 2021—some nine months ago! (Here, your objective may not have been to deliberately mislead but one sees so many instances of this tactic that it's hard not to believe that most of them are nothing other then a deliberate ploy to deceive.)

The information the article contains is now nigh on useless—it's nothing other than ancient history, thus it can no longer be relied upon for fact and authoritative information, as the COVID situation has changed vastly from the time of its publication. For starters, we've developed better methods of treating the disease, we’ve had time to evaluate booster shots—and probably the most important factor of all, which is that we’ve seen the subsequent emergence of COVID's most contagious strains to date—Delta and Omicron—and they have altered everything.

I’m far from the smartest person around but I’m certainly smart enough not to be conned or mislead this easily whether deliberately or otherwise. When presented with a link like that or when reading scientific papers the first thing I check is the paper's submission date, I then check the publication date.

However, what this demonstrates is that in this highly polarized climate over COVID, people have very few qualms about twisting or distorting the truth—or exaggerating for the point of emphasis: as the saying goes ‘if the facts don't agree with one's own worldview then alter them to suit’. Unfortunately, it's this widespread propensity to not to bother checking the accuracy of source material, or to cheat and be loose with the facts that’s been one of the most significant and substantial reasons for why our response to the COVID pandemic has been—and still is—in so much of a schemozzle.

Re: hospitalization rate by vaccination status in Denmark, I have now read various docs and I’ve nothing further to add other than Denmark’s response to COVID, like almost every other country or different location across the globe, has had a very different response to the disease when compared to many other places. And that’s happened for any number of reasons: the time of its first lockdown, vaccinations rates, etc., etc. are likely to be very different to anywhere else.

With respect to tolerating the risk, yes I do spend more time at home than previously. This makes sense for two reasons, the first is that it just makes sense to do so if it’s at all possible, and because of COVID I am able to do just that. The second reason is that I have yet to receive my booster (third) shot, so it’s prudent to be more careful than normal. Where I am I’ve not been able to get the booster shot because of damn stupid rules set by the authorities who require a certain set time between the initial shots and the booster, here that’s four months. And for similar bureaucratic reasons, the initial shots weren’t available earlier. Whilst it's likely that maximum antibody response will be achieved at four months or more, we simply don't have the luxury to be overly fussy with Omicron about.

Moreover, it’s not for the want of trying, I told both my doctor and pharmacist on multiple occasions that if I couldn't get my booster very soon then I’d obtain it on the black market. I further suggested that they report me to authorities for both making such a suggestion, not to mention overly 'harassing' them and making a nuisance of myself. Of course, nothing happened, it was just water off a duck's back—and I'm still waiting (and looking for alternative sources).

Again, my experience here only further demonstrates the enormous variation between counties, states and even towns in their differing approaches to dealing with COVID—like your comment about vaccine mandates being dead. Whether they’re dead or not clearly depends upon where one is. As you're well aware, Djokovic’s efforts to buck the system over vaccine mandates only brought him big trouble, and he’s likely to strike the problem again if he doesn't pull his head in and bow to the inevitable. The forthcoming French Open comes with new mandate that all players be vaccinated. As we’ve just witnessed, if anything, there are more vaccine mandates now than previously, and from what we've seen it's clear that some countries have become much less tolerant of difficult and recalcitrant people than previously. Like them or not, evidence suggests we're stuck with vaccine mandates for the foreseeable future.

As for vitamin D, no I’ve not had my levels tested but I’ve been taking about double the normal dose for about a year now, so my levels won’t be low. BMI: I’m close to the middle of the normal range. Insulin: no, air: not yet but it's still early in the day.

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The vaccines are not reasonably effective against transmission, especially for the current dominant strain, but also the previous ones. Vaccinated people are still infecting people..." Perhaps so, but those who are vaccinated shed less viral load, ipso facto it's less likely that another person would be infected. Same goes for masks: viral load is attenuated when someone with COVID breathes out, if an uninfected per…

> Why are people like you so damn negative about this and so deliberately intent in disrupting society when it's in such a state of stress? Why are so many of you so intent in trying to undermine and sabotage the rest of us when we're doing our darndest to try and protect ourselves from this cursed disease? It is pretty simple, actually. When facing a critical situation one need to (A) do as much as possible to recti…

I'm not disagreeing one iota, Australia could hardly have made a worse job of COVID than if it had deliberately tried with Victoria, NSW and the Prime Minister being the prime culprits. Reckon there's little point in regurgitating the crap all over again as we both know exactly what's happened/happening. Nevertheless, read the section of my reply to Ls15 (below) about my hapless efforts to get vaccinated (it'll be all too familiar).

I'm damn fed up with being constantly lectured at to get my booster shot and the message being made worse—rubbed in like salt in a wound—when in the next breath I'm then told that the State's vaccination centre had 50,000 spare places or whatever the number was which were not taken up—only to find that I'm still ineligible because of the ridiculous four-month rule.

Any other time a four-months interval is probably OK but not with Omicron on the loose. And having only AZ shots with Omicron about is essentially equivalent to being unvaccinated. (No doubt you've likely seen the HN story where Israel has said that with Omicron four shots doesn't seem to fully to the job.)

Stupid bastards, some of them (the decision-makers) couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag on the deck of a sinking ship. That said, many of those who are trying to pick up bits are not only working overly hard to do so, but also their situation means that they are often overly exposed to the virus. The people I really feel sorry are the overworked medical workers. I'm damn glad that I'm not in that profession.

"...summarily for 5 or 6 months out of the last 20. I'm sensing that you may be familiar with that."

Right, I do, the only effective outcome of your incarceration seems to be that you'll get into the Guinness Book of Records. Not much of a compensation is it?

Your sense is correct, I'm from the Emerald City, but it's been anything but emerald over the past year or two.

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are people like you so damn negative about this and so deliberately intent in disrupting society when it's in such a state of stress? Why are so many of you so intent in trying to undermine and sabotage the rest of us when we're doing our darndest to try and protect ourselves from this cursed disease? It is pretty simple, actually. When facing a critical situation one need to (A) do as much as possible to recti…

I'm not disagreeing one iota, Australia could hardly have made a worse job of COVID than if it had deliberately tried with Victoria, NSW and the Prime Minister being the prime culprits. Reckon there's little point in regurgitating the crap all over again as we both know exactly what's happened/happening. Nevertheless, read the section of my reply to Ls15 (below) about my hapless efforts to get vaccinated (it'll be al…

Wow, I find myself agreeing with every bit in your post. How these people managed in one breath to piss off their supporters and opponents alike is astonishing. Squandering their obligation to support people, at the same time insisting on performative dances... Do they think they gain votes this way? Sad thing that they very well may be.

> I'm from the Emerald City, but it's been anything but emerald over the past year or two.

Just like Melbourne is not "the most livable" anymore. We are from the sewer fields on the opposite side of this "blessed" city. Emerald was once an enviable place to be, now the whole Lucky Country seems to be gone to sewers. If 15 years ago we knew what we know now about Au, we'd never set foot here. We had won GC lottery a few years ago but decided to let the application lapse - biggest regret of my life now, we could just fly off to New Hampshire :)

Maybe we can find way to an armistice, a compromise of sorts. I appreciate your responses in this thread very much. I feel sorry for your troubles with booster. I've heard just today that interval has been shortened to 3 months and they are open to shortening even more. I support your way of life, of tackling this problem and have no right to dictate or judge. I cannot support mandates under any circumstances, though. I also do not understand the desire to be boosted often, given that it has been demonstrated only marginally useful past certain point, but that's me. I believe the govt (mis)places too much faith and moral emphasis on bureaucratic rules. They are scared to admit their mistakes so much that they are trying to pitch people against each other.

I can relay the personal anecdote. Something cold-like had swiped through our family here in December, with some rather unusual (for common cold) aspects pointing that it may have been Omicron. A non-event overall, but maybe it wasn't covid. Most of our extended family is in Eastern Europe. As Eastern as Europe goes, given that Russia is arguably considered Asia. My elderly in-laws and in-law siblings had Alpha. Some have been hospitalized. My parents had Delta couple of months ago. Although they usually freak out over every sniffle, this episode was surprisingly "meh" in comparison. Many, many other relatives and acquaintances had Alpha or Delta, of varying age and comorbidities, some had it easier and some harder, but ultimately all have dodged the bullet and recovered. So this is one thing that largely informs my perception.

Interestingly, their president was often cited for "downplaying" and lack of lockdowns. I do hate the guy, he is criminal in every aspect, but (probably) because he does not need to worry about political points or votes (he can fudge as much of votes as he wishes), the overall response has been much more balanced, without unnecessary terrorizing, fearmongering or mandates. President largely distanced himself from the issue, the health agencies were left to do their job and as a result testing, tracing and isolation was pretty swift, early treatment protocols enabled and vaccines amply available to everyone who wanted. Also, "sauna and vodka" may not be a sound medical advice, but won't hurt either :). So, the situation on the ground is quite different from how it was portrayed. By contrast, in AU (and almost everywhere) politicians hijacked the response and busted it completely. They also managed to kill all joy of living. PM has made a complete mockery of a leader, not a single word or action from him had any weight. Premiers have revealed their absolutely worst side as Neo-feudals chasing popularity with peasants. In this situation my ability to reason is completely frozen, risk perception is distorted and the saddest of all, I don't see how this crisis is going to be resolved for better. All pointers are down :(

And maybe to bring my response here into "on-topic". Djokovic may have made an admin mistake on a form, but ultimately he was sent off not because of this. So, to me it doesn't look like a principled stance of a govt, but rather an arbitrary whim. They said that they did not assess the counterfactual, nor they have to - how "smart" is that, even if legal? If they can do it to the only person who could challenge them in court, I'm terrified what they can do to my family.

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#346
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will not be known as the tournament where the best player wins, but as the tournament where the best vaccinated player wins, because the best player was not allowed to participate. It's not a top league tournament anymore, when you don't have all the best player, but only those that are allowed by government criteria.

Ah ok, so is he was discovered taking performance enhancing drugs you would complain in the same way saying that it’s unacceptable that only the best non-doped player can win. Your logic is completely flawed. If there are rules and he breaks then they have ALL the reasons to ban him.

Hi, I just saw your reply from 55 days ago on a related COVID topic, and I'm honestly stumped that you would think paraphrasing Vincent Racaniello who literally writes the modern textbook on virology is somehow spreading misinformation. I don't know if you've watched his podcasts on YouTube, but he and his colleagues lay out their reasons for disagreeing with the position of other scientists. So check it out and maybe if you still think what I said was wrong then let me know.

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”Sports should stay neutral.” Right, it should but that's not the issue. Right again, Australian politicians have fucked up their response to COVID on multiple occasions but so have other many countries—name one that hasn’t! And I include Serbia in that lot, it having only 50% of its citizens vaccinated; currently, it has one of the worst vaccination records in all Europe. Leaving Australia aside for the moment, ther…

> they're in place to save lives! But not all lives. The whole population does not need to get vaccinated. Not everyone's life is under threat. Not even close. Omicron spreads regardless, as is clearly observable. Australia has very high vaccination rate, but the virus is everywhere. Yet, they're still worried about unvaccinated sentiment? It's important for vulnerable and elderly people to get vaccinated because the…

"The whole population does not need to get vaccinated. Not everyone's life is under threat. Not even close."

That's a sweeping statement, so where's your evidence - as most of the world disagrees with you - so too does the science.

Presumably, you also disagree with the health experts at the WHO? When WHO experts say that "you can't boost your way out of the pandemic" they are NOT saying "you don't need to get vaccinated." They are quite separate issues altogether.

"Novak's life is not under threat from the virus. He chose not to be vaccinated for himself. Only a fool would get vaccinated for reasons of "perception."

What gives you special insight to say that if he got vaccinated then it would be only for a 'perceived' advantage? I cannot see how you would know this - even Djokovic's Dr wouldn't know that without extensive tests. If such tests were done then he has never offered them as evidence or for public examination.

Whether your assertion is correct or not is immaterial. The real issue is that Djokovic is a leading world figure in sport so he should have lead by example but he failed to do so (for many decades, as long as we've had mass media or even longer, it's been customary and even expected of athelets to set a good example to their followers).

...And the example he should have set would have been to get vaccinated whether he needed to do so or not - as that's what celebrities do! After all, the very vast majority of the world's population accepts vaccination as a normal medical procedure - one from which everyone benefits.

As a celebrity, Djokovic failed to live up to the time-honored conventions expected of him. The fact that he deliberately bucked the system and disobeyed convention has to be one of the worst PR exercises in the history of sport for many decades and he's now paying a very heavy penalty for doing so. It's damn shame his advisors hadn't been more politically astute otherwise it's likely that it wouldn't have ended up so badly for him.

(Really I don't particularly care if Djokovic gets vaccinated or not, I'm simlpy just stating what has actually happened to him.)

"Everything else you said is irrelevant"

I'm only an unknown HN poster so what I say hardly matters in the grand scheme of things. The fact is that much bigger players with real influence think very similarly to me and to millions of others - and in the end that's all that really matterd. They have real teeth with real biting power which I don't. What's more they've shown that they are capable of exercising that power and that they've actually done so.

I've a sneaking suspicion that Djokovic was gambling that they wouldn't given his celebrity status, unfortunately for him it's a gamble he's lost.

Blaming me for what has happened won't change anything.

Re: Novak Djokovic's Visa Cancelled by Australian Minister for Immigration

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they're in place to save lives! But not all lives. The whole population does not need to get vaccinated. Not everyone's life is under threat. Not even close. Omicron spreads regardless, as is clearly observable. Australia has very high vaccination rate, but the virus is everywhere. Yet, they're still worried about unvaccinated sentiment? It's important for vulnerable and elderly people to get vaccinated because the…

"The whole population does not need to get vaccinated. Not everyone's life is under threat. Not even close." That's a sweeping statement, so where's your evidence - as most of the world disagrees with you - so too does the science. Presumably, you also disagree with the health experts at the WHO? When WHO experts say that "you can't boost your way out of the pandemic" they are NOT saying "you don't need to get vaccin…

> That's a sweeping statement, so where's your evidence - as most of the world disagrees with you - so too does the science.

The sweeping statement is yours: that "everyone" needs the vaccine. You're trying to shift the burden of sweeping statements to the person who disagrees with your original sweeping assertion.

Nowhere does "science say" that everyone needs the vaccine. You're confusing policy decisions which turn into "rules are rules", which turn into "what the science says".

Are you forgetting that last September, the UK's Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization recommended against vaccinating children? If that wasn't "science" what was it? This is merely one example of science-based objection to the "need" to vaccinate everything that crawls or walks.

> "their risk of severe COVID-19 disease is small and therefore the potential for benefit from COVID-19 vaccination is also small. The committee underlined that the vast majority of children had mild or no symptoms. It also pointed out the very low risk of heart inflammation with mRNA vaccines, noting that the long-term effects of this were unknown." https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-committee-healthy-kids-ag...

Sounds like science and reason formed their opinion. But they were overruled by the higher-up policy makers and politicians.

> "And the example he should have set would have been to get vaccinated whether he needed to do so or not - as that's what celebrities do!"

Wow. "That's what celebrities do". It amazes me how easily people slip into a fabricated signalling world, where mandating "solidarity vaccination" and towing party lines is normal behaviour, even expected and mandated because "keeping people safe"!

Novak had Covid, recovered, and does not want the vaccine for himself as his symptoms were obviously mild, which is the norm for his health profile. That's his business.

If you aren't defending the right of anyone to make their own choice on that basis, it's sad. Omicron spreads regardless. The Australian government acknowledged he was not an actual risk, but they were worried about "anti-vax" sentiment from his presence in the country. The sad irony is Novak wanted to keep his vaccination status private. He would have been happy not to discuss it at all, but the media did not allow it, and a tennis villain was forged in the outrage fires.

Post reply on HN