Jump to content
Chelli

COVID-19 coronavirus thread #5

Recommended Posts

Chelli

New thread time. 

Previous thread can be found here

 

Kind regards
Chelli
Admin

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
purplekitty

Gold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Winter frost

Silver

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lou-bags

Bronze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
born.a.girl

Wooden spoon.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Etta

SO @Chelli - how many posts are there in total on the first four coronavirus threads? This would have to be the longest running thread ever!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lou-bags
Posted (edited)

Here is the study. It’s small. But interesting nonetheless. And it seems to be a well conducted study to me. Taiwan. 

Basically, the contacts of 100 positive case (and 2761 close contacts- all of whom were in 14 day iso after their contact/index case was identified).
 

Only 23 contacts contracted SARS2. Clearly the index cases (and whomever they lived with during the course of their infection, as well as the health care staff they saw) all did fantastic work in preventing spread.

No contact exposed when the index case was more than 6 days post onset of symptoms became positive.
 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2765641

 

This was published early May, shall keep an eye out for similar publications 😁

09466A1D-DD90-4964-BE82-5857A1349368.png

Edited by Lou-bags
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meepy

Regarding being pulled over my ex was stopped during the last shutdown on his way to work at 430am.  There were few cars travelling at that stage and he is an essential worker of sorts.  He was pulled up at least a couple of times.  He’s also been breath tested a few times on the way to work prior to COVID.  The police can stop you to check what you are up to, I think under state of emergency provisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22Fruitmincepies

Magnolia2, your point from the previous thread about multiple children in one school testing positive - I assume they would be members of the same extended family. At DD’s small school there are quite a few families with several sets of cousins attending. If the virus was spread at a family event, the parents were infected and then passed it on to some of the children. It is a more likely scenario than the government not wanting to scare families and therefore withholding information. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lou-bags

Agreed.

There are also FAR too many people out there desperate for school transmission to be a thing, much like BLM protests, that would jump on any suggestion that this was the case for me to believe that if if were indeed happening that it’s somehow been kept on the down low.

There were reams of comments and commentary and articles about the school community outbreak in NZ. Incidentally I don’t think child to child transmission was ever found in that outbreak either- rather, it was linked to a wider school community event outside of school and most cases were adults. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lou-bags

I also think the ramifications for anyone keeping school transmission secret are far higher than the consequences of being open about it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FuzzyChocolateToes

Re: the failure of the Covid Safe app, The CMO said last week that it needs to be downloaded by 15 million people to be effective. It's nowhere near that of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lizzzard
8 hours ago, Lou-bags said:

Agreed.

There are also FAR too many people out there desperate for school transmission to be a thing, much like BLM protests, that would jump on any suggestion that this was the case for me to believe that if if were indeed happening that it’s somehow been kept on the down low.

There were reams of comments and commentary and articles about the school community outbreak in NZ. Incidentally I don’t think child to child transmission was ever found in that outbreak either- rather, it was linked to a wider school community event outside of school and most cases were adults. 

100%.

And regarding the comment on the last thread about journalists not pursuing the story..... yeah, not buying that one either.

I think some people need to look at the facts and realise their anxiety about school transmission was out of step with the risk.  This doesn't mean there is NO risk - it means it was possible to mitigate the level of risk that actually existed effectively.

I would suggest its helpful for individuals to reflect on instances where their personal risk assessments have been higher AND lower than expected - as a community it helps reduce the chance of problematic social responses (like ignoring social distancing guidelines due to under-estimation of the risk......or like panic buying due to over-estimation of risk).  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can'tstayaway
39 minutes ago, lizzzard said:

I think some people need to look at the facts and realise their anxiety about school transmission was out of step with the risk.  This doesn't mean there is NO risk - it means it was possible to mitigate the level of risk that actually existed effectively.

I don’t think people’s anxiety about potential school transmissions was out of step with the risks. The risks are there. The consequences (children catching Covid) are unacceptable to some. 
 

Covid is highly contagious but we’ve seen that it can be curbed with simple practices such as good hygiene and physical distancing. 
 

With the public expressing their concerns, the governments and schools have had to respond and have implemented better protocols which has allowed for better hygiene practices and minimised large group gatherings in schools. 
 

ScoMo didn’t want to close or change the way schools operated in the beginning. It was pressure from parents and teachers unions that achieved change.  And that was from State governments listening while ScoMo was threatening school funding.  Some schools regularly had no soap for hand washing which we know works to minimise spread.  
 

We don’t know what the situation would have been if habits didn’t change but it would likely be a lot more cases than we have now. The protocols put into place are working.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lizzzard
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, can'tstayaway said:

I don’t think people’s anxiety about potential school transmissions was out of step with the risks. The risks are there. The consequences (children catching Covid) are unacceptable to some. 

CSA - I don't mean to be pedantic, but risk is not assessed only on impact (consequences).

Inherent risk (which is how much risk exists BEFORE you mitigate it)=Likelihood x Impact

Residual risk (which is how much risk exists AFTER you take steps to mitigate it)= Inherent risk minus effectiveness of controls

In plain language, what you're saying in the main part of your post is that there are lots of effective controls we can take to manage the inherent risk. I agree this might be a significant part of why we haven't had outbreaks in schools (the other could be the likelihood part of the inherent risk assessment was lower...but let's put that aside for the moment). But if controls have been effective, this would still mean the overall residual risk was lower than a lot of people feared (eg those who said it was 'impossible' to keep kids safe at school, regardless of steps to clean etc).

Edited by lizzzard
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can'tstayaway
11 hours ago, Lou-bags said:

Here is the study. It’s small. But interesting nonetheless. And it seems to be a well conducted study to me. Taiwan. 

Basically, the contacts of 100 positive case (and 2761 close contacts- all of whom were in 14 day iso after their contact/index case was identified).
 

Only 23 contacts contracted SARS2. Clearly the index cases (and whomever they lived with during the course of their infection, as well as the health care staff they saw) all did fantastic work in preventing spread.

No contact exposed when the index case was more than 6 days post onset of symptoms became positive.
 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2765641

 

This was published early May, shall keep an eye out for similar publications 😁

09466A1D-DD90-4964-BE82-5857A1349368.png

That’s interesting and another great result for Taiwan. I hope the world is watching and learning and on a geopolitical angle, I hope people don’t forget China’s behaviour to easily. 
 

I have a family member in self quarantine in Taiwan now. They have said the checks are vigorous and if you miss a check in phone call because you were in the shower, there will be officials at your door within minutes. You are given a warning and the fines are massive (from $10k going up past $100k AUD!!!) for noncompliance. 
 

Taiwan learned their lesson after SARS and have responded quickly and efficiently to Covid. They have heat sensor things at shopping centres and workplaces to take the temperature of everyone who enters. The wearing of face masks is the norm and very common for people who go out in public. Hand hygiene is almost religious at the schools I know of. 
 

The great results in the study is a testament to the efforts Taiwan have made.  We can’t assume that it directly translates to the Australian context. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can'tstayaway
5 minutes ago, lizzzard said:

CSA - I don't mean to be pedantic, but risk is not assessed only on impact (consequences).

Inherent risk (which is how much risk exists BEFORE you mitigate it)=Likelihood x Impact

Residual risk (which is how much risk exists AFTER you take steps to mitigate it)= Inherent risk minus effectiveness of controls

In plain language, what you're saying in the main part of your post is that there are lots of effective controls we can take to manage the inherent risk. I agree this might be a significant part of why we haven't had outbreaks in schools (the other could be the likelihood part of the inherent risk assessment was lower...but let's put that aside for the moment). But if controls have been effective, this would still mean the overall residual risk was lower than a lot of people feared (eg those who said it was 'impossible' to keep kids safe at school, regardless of steps to clean etc).

But we don’t know because this virus is new and we know very little about it. 

We were asking our community to behave in new ways and we didn’t know if it would/could be done.  We didn’t know at the time what the level of community transmissions was. We didn’t have enough testing kits to widely test at the beginning of the pandemic.  There was so much that was unknown. 
 

With the benefit of hindsight, some might feel that the residual risk was lower than feared. At the time, we didn’t have as much information to go off. Also, everyone has different risk appetites. 
 

Back in March, I pulled my kids out of school because I knew of many school families who were just returning from ski holidays in North America. One family actually tested positive to Covid and were not isolating. For me, the risks for my child to continue going to school was not worth the benefit.  For friends in a regional town, they have had no cases at all and this seems like a big waste of time to them. They have barely been affected by the pandemic. We all have different experiences and make judgements on risks based on that. 
 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Datrys
1 hour ago, lizzzard said:

This doesn't mean there is NO risk - it means it was possible to mitigate the level of risk that actually existed effectively.

I think the thing that's causing some cognitive dissonance around all of this is that schools are being treated so differently from so many other places where people gather.

If it's possible to mitigate the level of risk in schools, then it should also be possible elsewhere.  On the other hand, if the inherent risk is actually lower in schools than we thought it might have been, should it not also be lower elsewhere?

It's being expected to treat schools as a special category where somehow the virus operates differently than in every other gathering of people that's causing some people to feel like the discourse around schools isn't entirely honest.  For me, that doesn't mean I think the government are covering up transmission in schools, but I think there's a strong agenda to present schools as safe (or safer than lots of other places), when that might not be exactly the whole truth, because the government don't want to have to close schools again.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
born.a.girl

It's not schools, it's children.  

Children's sport has mainly been delayed because of the behaviour of the parents.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
born.a.girl
1 hour ago, can'tstayaway said:

That’s interesting and another great result for Taiwan. I hope the world is watching and learning and on a geopolitical angle, I hope people don’t forget China’s behaviour to easily. 
 

I have a family member in self quarantine in Taiwan now. They have said the checks are vigorous and if you miss a check in phone call because you were in the shower, there will be officials at your door within minutes. You are given a warning and the fines are massive (from $10k going up past $100k AUD!!!) for noncompliance. 
 

Taiwan learned their lesson after SARS and have responded quickly and efficiently to Covid. They have heat sensor things at shopping centres and workplaces to take the temperature of everyone who enters. The wearing of face masks is the norm and very common for people who go out in public. Hand hygiene is almost religious at the schools I know of. 
 

The great results in the study is a testament to the efforts Taiwan have made.  We can’t assume that it directly translates to the Australian context. 

The study is absolutely relevant for Australia, because it's not comparing one country with another, it's comparing the results from (eg) day two, with (eg) day eight, in exactly the same country, in which exactly those same behaviours you're talking about are happening.

In Australia we have a significant benefit in that significant numbers are not living in high density living. The Australian deputy CHO has reiterated that masks are irrelevant for the vast proportion of the population unlike in Taiwan where social distancing is much more difficult.

I believe there is talk about recommendations for Victorians to use masks for public transport use to protect others.   i.e. use masks to (mainly) protect others where social distancing is a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XieXie

75 new cases in Vic today

 

  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blimkybill
16 minutes ago, XieXie said:

75 new cases in Vic today

 

Eek.

I would say, sadly for Melburnians, that it is time for restrictions there again. That does not feel safe. 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XieXie

Still might start to come down within the next few days with a bit of luck 🙏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
born.a.girl
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, XieXie said:

Still might start to come down within the next few days with a bit of luck 🙏

Brett Sutton said he absolutely expects it to go up, because they've uncovered much of this with the hot spot suburb blitz and many of those results (50% testing in some of those suburbs!) are still to come through.

ETA: There is some good news - as the numbers are bigger they are finding connections between outbreaks.  Just confirms what they keep saying - stop mixing so much.

Edited by born.a.girl
Can't type
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnythingGoes

I'm trying to keep it in perspective - many places would be happy with 75 daily cases and they are all over the testing etc - heard that 50% of the target suburbs have been tested now. 

But still 75 is a bit freaky.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...