Guest post. David Bidstrup: Can you see it?

Australia had its first “Covid death” on 1 March 2020. In the 136 days since then the cumulative “Covid deaths” have reached 110. The death rate in Australia from all causes averages 434 per day so the cumulative total for the same period is 59,024. The Australian road toll averages around 4.5 per day giving a total for the period of 612.

The first chart below shows cumulative “All deaths” against “Covid deaths”. See if you can see the Covid deaths – hint, it’s the blue line at the bottom.

In the second chart they are plotted against the road toll.

For every “Covid death” there have been 537 deaths for all other reasons. The percentage of Covid deaths compared to all deaths over the period is 0.19%.

This is what we are trashing the country for.

This entry was posted in COVID-19, Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Guest post. David Bidstrup: Can you see it?

  1. duncanm

    where was it I saw – the mortality rate for covid exactly tracks your mortality rate across age.

    ie: it doubles the likelihood of you dying in the next 12 months.

    another way to look at it – *if* you are infected, it shortens your life expectancy by 1 year.

  2. Tim Neilson

    Ah, but David, if we didn’t trash the country a trillion people would have died.
    Besides, if it saves just one life it’s worth it (even if it costs thousands of other lives by suicide and non-treatment of potentially curable conditions to conserve resources for hypothetical virus patients).

  3. Colin Suttie

    You’re absolutely correct, but you’re attempting to bring logic to an emotional / religious argument. Logic is a poor weapon against an army of Karens (of both genders).

  4. NoFixedAddress

    I’ll put my name down to take out a restraining order on the Victorian Public Service Government ™ for cruel and unusual violence against me.

  5. Mustapha Bunn

    Tim Neilson @ 2.19pm .. you beat me to it,I was going to say the same. The question now is,how long does Andrews intend keeping us Victorians locked up for.

  6. Karabar

    But how do you know those 110 succumbed to the dreaded Chicom 19?
    Were some of those the victims of traffic accidents who had the symptoms?
    How many actually died of cancer while at the same time they “showed the symptoms”?
    We will never really know. No one is prepared to say.

  7. John snowy Bowyer

    Chinese Andrews intends for us to never be out of lock-down! He sees his rule as increasing to ensure it is saving just one life. His further strictures to prevent thousands of deaths. Of course Covid has just about run its course but there will always be something just over the horizon except ONE politician to call this shit out and lead a Serbian style fight back that would do it.
    Perhaps if our Public Servants were to be faced with the threat of instant dismissal and loss of all benefits we would see a more compliant Police commissioner and Chief Medical Officer.
    This just has to be the plan but obviously not from the do-nothing LNP over to you Pauline?

  8. Iampeter

    This is what we are trashing the country for.

    The advocates of lock-downs will just argue that this means their policies are working.
    If you want to oppose lock-downs you’re going to need a political argument to do so.

  9. Dirk

    Iampeter is half right – as much as it pains me to say it. You can’t use a statistical argument.

    You have to start by demolishing the idea that the virus has killed *anybody*.

    The political argument *should* be effective but I can guarantee it won’t be. Ask the people who opposed No Jab No Pay how successful their liberty based arguments were. Nobody cares. The moment they believe that there is a contagious disease around nobody is in the slightest bit interested in freedom – not even most libertarians.

  10. Faye

    It’s totalitarianism at work. Scare people enough and they will do anything. Supply them with the least amount of facts and statistics. Don’t burden the people with “unnecessary complex” information which may enlighten them as to what is really going on. Keep them in the dark. And treat them as juveniles to be told what to do and punished if they don’t do it.

  11. mundi

    Since they are not willing to accept the deaths, We will be stuck in this situation for years until an effective vaccine arrives.

    Even countries like spain are now seeing cases go back up.

    The way government manages border security is never going to stop the virus from returning constantly.

  12. Bruce of Newcastle

    For a like vs like comparison you would have to compare suicide deaths vs Covid-19 deaths.

    I see the Lifeline number a lot advertised lately, which makes me think the suicide toll has risen with the lockdowns. In which case the excess suicide deaths can be subtracted from the Covid-19 deaths to get a net real Covid toll. I suspect the result would shock most of the population.

  13. The BigBlueCat

    Just a cotton-pickin’ minute … shouldn’t the graph be about “preventable deaths”? Doesn’t “All Deaths” include, say, old age? Murder? Suicide? And “Death by Accident” while regrettable may not necessarily be preventable – what was the cause of the accident? Machine failure?

    So, if we’re to look at “Preventable Deaths” and then look at comparing “Death from COVID-19”, what does it look like?

    I’m not saying COVID-19 deaths are necessarily significant, or significant enough to cause an economic shutdown, but if we’re going to have this sort of conversation we need to know more than just “All Deaths v COVID-19 Deaths” and “Road Toll v COVID-19 Deaths” in order to make an informed assessment. Also, we’re not at the end of the COVID-19 road, and with current numbers coming out of Victoria and NSW we may well see a significant uptick in cases – hopefully not.

    We know that COVID-19 is highly infectious. And with COVID-19 it’s not just about death – it seems the virus can cause significant (and possibly lasting) damage to those infected despite many infected having virtually no symptoms.

    BTW – those graphs don’t cite a source – bad form. Seems to me this is a case of reporting bias to support a position – while the position might very well be true, we can’t rely on the data if we don’t know it’s source, and likely it’s being cherry-picked for its headline value. How about some objectivity? How about some academic integrity?

    Since they are not willing to accept the deaths, We will be stuck in this situation for years until an effective vaccine arrives.

    Yes we will. Maybe not years, but it has a “far horizon”.

  14. Dirk

    We know that COVID-19 is highly infectious.

    No we don’t. According to leftists, protests that involved millions of people around the word barely led to any infections.

    Clearly it isn’t infectious at all.

    Here’s the thing. Unless you understand how viral testing “works” then any pro-lockdown position is invalid.

  15. Megan

    Car accidents are not just about deaths either. Many people end up with injuries that have permanent or long term health ramifications. Yet we all believe in our own abilities to assess risk and drive defensively.

    VicPol and Vic Health constantly remind us of their commitment (and therefore ours) to a zero road toll. That can only be achieved by no one at all driving, riding motorbikes, scooters or cycles. Even a walk to work can be deadly if an elm tree falls on you.

    Lock yourself in your house and wear a mask. Get all your food delivered. No chance at all of anything deadly happening to you at all then, right?

  16. Rafe Champion

    may well see a significant uptick in cases – hopefully not.

    Just remind me about the death rate among people who are infected?

    How many of the people incarcerated in the towers are infected?

    Not trying to score points, I would just like to know and since I opted out of the argument in favour of wind watching and other pastimes I don’t have the figures at fingertips:)

  17. This absolutely skewers the lockdown fruitcakes.

  18. Squirrel

    If this is an argument for no restrictions at all, then comparable charts for Brazil, or some other place which has had far fewer restrictions than Straya, would be relevant.

    If it’s an argument for limited restrictions – sensibly and consistently applied (without mass hysteria) – then that’s another matter.

  19. Todd Myers

    The number of COVID deaths to date is irrelevant. I would agree with the conclusion that lockdowns (and associated economic damage) were the wrong approach, but you should be looking at deaths avoided, for which the numbers are rubbery. Or even better,quality-adjusted life-years lost, which the academics in the western world value at something in the region of $100,000 per QALY.

    Also, COVID was always going to produce some level of economic damage, so the economic output should be compared to what it otherwise would have been factoring in the COVID damage.

  20. Harpo of Wolli Creek

    Well, a while back I posited that Australia had avoided about 600 or so excess Covid deaths by draconian lockdowns. I arrived at this estimate after reading some WHO (at least I think that’s where they came from) figures that said influenza deaths across a dozen or so countries had fallen to 15% of expected levels during the panic over covid. Extrapolating from flu to covid at the same contagion rate then the 110 deaths would have been about 700 deaths absent lockdowns.
    Then a few weeks ago the Australian treasury estimated that the long term cost to the economy of the shutdowns would be around $650 billion dollars. So my admittedly back of the envelope calculation is that each life saved cost approximately $1 billion. Given that the average age of those saved was likely about 80 years old or even higher and that person likely in poor health anyway then I think the cost of every QALY was probably around $200 million or so.
    Even if my calculation is wrong by a factor of ten, I think the government and community response to this ‘pandemic’ ought to go down in history as the most hysterical, overwrought and downright insane policy ever instituted in this country. Instead of the fools responsible being shamed and humiliated for their idiocy I think we are instead going to see a lot of back-slapping, Orders Of Australia being awarded and even more galling, the governments responsible being voted back in when they face the electorate next.

  21. HT

    The BigBlueCat
    #3515250, posted on July 16, 2020 at 4:56 pm

    BTW – those graphs don’t cite a source – bad form. Seems to me this is a case of reporting bias to support a position – while the position might very well be true, we can’t rely on the data if we don’t know it’s source, and likely it’s being cherry-picked for its headline value. How about some objectivity? How about some academic integrity?

    Must admit, I thought the road toll numbers being used was “ambitious”. Looked it up though and it’s pretty much right.

    https://www.bitre.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/rda_jun_2020.pdf

    More people dying on the road thanks I thought 🙁

  22. Wyndham Dix

    Let us not abandon the field entirely to feelings and emotion concerning the influenza virus COVID-19.
    .
    In September 2019 the ABS reported that of 158,493 registered deaths in Australia in 2018, 3,102 (less than 2%) resulted from influenza and pneumonia. The median age at death from these causes was 89.3 years. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3303.0.
    .
    NSW HealthStats reported that in 2018 there were 951 deaths from influenza and pneumonia in that State. Of these, “…just over 92% … were in persons aged 65 years and over…” (a reasonable proxy for Australia I should think). http://www.healthstats.nsw.gov.au/Indicator/res_infpneudth/res_infpneudth
    .
    Where is the curiosity amongst politicians, not least Federal Health Minister Hunt and Victorian Premier Andrews, to discover these facts for themselves?

  23. NoFixedAddress

    Where is the curiosity amongst politicians, not least Federal Health Minister Hunt and Victorian Premier Andrews, to discover these facts for themselves?

    They do know this, but the Corona soup is the most viral, deadly, contactable civilizational destroying excuse to exercise unfettered power, short of a war, they are ever likely to come across in their lifetimes and when they take the WHO awarded medals at some time in the future they will know :-
    WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER.

    Brings a tear to your eye doesn’t it.

  24. NoFixedAddress

    I wonder if we will ever have a representative Democracy in Australia?

  25. Dinky

    The only thing that gives me pause & makes me take this virus seriously is how the ChiComs reacted.

    We all know they place no value on human life, their history attests to that, and yet they were spooked by this virus & went to extrordinary lengths to contain it. They acted because of the potential threat it posed to their grip on power. I mean, who here really believes they had only 80,000 cases and 4,000 deaths?

  26. The BigBlueCat

    Just remind me about the death rate among people who are infected?

    It’s low comparatively – 1.04% (113) of confirmed cases (10,815 as I write) in Australia have died with COVID-19. UK is 15.4% Sweden is 7.3% Switzerland is 5.9% Globally it is 4.2% Don’t forget that in Australia those infected and seriously ill are receiving perhaps the best medical care than anywhere else in the world. But if the number of infections increase beyond the capacity for our ICU’s to be able to deal with them, I would expect the death rate of those infected to increase – we saw this in New York. And with more opportunities for infections, infections there will be. On current stats, 1% of those infected will die if everything else remains static. So, for every 100 infections, 1 person is likely to die (statistically) – in Victoria that means 3 people on today’s infections alone. Just because it’s lower than car accident deaths, you think there isn’t a problem here?

    COVID-19 is a nasty, infectious disease. That you might not have it or get it doesn’t change the fact it’s a bad virus and there is no cure or vaccine to deal with it …. yet.

    How many of the people incarcerated in the towers are infected?

    Too many. And if you took a percentage view, much higher than the general population. Plus they risked infecting others. But VicPol and Dan Andrews generally handled it very poorly.

    No we don’t. According to leftists, protests that involved millions of people around the word barely led to any infections.

    Clearly it isn’t infectious at all.

    So you listen to those leftists and believe them? Well, ok I guess, your choice (you might be being sarcastic, but I don’t think so) … I think I’d prefer to listen to someone experienced in infectious diseases than some leftist or random blog poster. You’re free to believe what you want and make decisions accordingly.

    My whole point was that without knowing the source of the data for the graphs and whether or not the comparisons are actually valid, then we can’t have a good conversation about this – we’re only be dealing somone making conclusions based on seemingly inadequate data analysis from unknown sources. Dangerous, irresponsible stuff especially in the absence of any actual expert analysis. Also, if the infection rate is trending upwards (who really knows – with more testing per capita you’d expect more detections), then “what if” it overtakes road fatalities? “What if” it overtakes other death categories? Personally, I think it’s way too soon to tell. We’ve been lucky it hasn’t been higher or more deadly earlier but I suspect that’s all about to change. I hope it doesn’t.

    People still think COVID-19 is benign, akin to having a bad flu (or not even) – tell it to someone who’s had it bad and see how you go. Tell the ICU health care workers battling this thing and see how you go. Over 13.5 million (at least) people globally have it (or have had it – who knows if they are really free from it. 5 million are said to have recovered). Over 580,000 have died with COVID-19 (not necessarily from, though I’d be reasonably certain COVID-19 has contributed). The “it’s not killing as many people as …” argument isn’t particularly compelling to me; I don’t think we’ve experienced the worst of it yet. We’re only half-way through winter.

    In my opinion, too many people have become complacent about COVID-19 by thinking it’s not going to infect them, and if it does it’s just like the flu. Statistically, that might be true, but a lot of people will get it, and they may die, and those they cross-infect may die. For every 100 who get it, 1 (statistically speaking) will. Maybe more.

    Here’s the thing. Unless you understand how viral testing “works” then any pro-lockdown position is invalid.

    Unless you understand how transmission of highly-infectious, viral respiratory diseases occurs, then you’re even further behind …. I’ve not advocated forced lockdowns or travel restrictions for those without COVID-19 infection, but if there are to be restrictions they need to be reasonable, fair and effective – we don’t see this from the Andrews government in Victoria. But also, I don’t know if the alternate government would have been any better.

  27. Kneel

    “On current stats, 1% of those infected will die if everything else remains static. ”

    I disagree.
    It seems to me that you are conflating several terms – not surprising if you get your info from the MSM.

    Firstly, “cases” (as reported by MSM at least) has changed from “sufficiently ill to seek medical treatment” (medical definition) to “tested positive” (“scare” definition). Changing definitions will distort the stats and is done by people with an agenda other than communicating the facts.

    Secondly, CASE (medical definition) fatality rate is indeed above 1%. INFECTION fatality rate is (and needs must remain) unknown. There is significant evidence that only around 10% or less of infections turn into cases (medical definition) – if so, your estimates are an order of magnitude too high and THAT would place Covid1984 at the same level as a nasty flu – as does the age profile of those dying.

    Thirdly, deaths appear to be continuing to fall, as CDC shows on this page:
    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
    so perhaps it’s already killed most of those who are likely to die from it anyway.
    And this despite “record” “case numbers” from testing many more millions than are actually seeking treatment for an illness.

    Despite a much higher death toll, and a much higher case fatality rate, no-one locked down for swine flu 10-ish years ago – this was a variant of the “Spanish flu” of 1918 (both H1N1 variants) that killed an estimated 50 million+ world-wide ( a not insignificant percentage of the population at the time).

    Viruses evolve – and they tend towards being less lethal to the host, as this is the best survival strategy for any parasite. Indeed, the most successful parasites eventually are either integrated into the hosts DNA directly, or become symbiotic with the host.

  28. The BigBlueCat

    Firstly, “cases” (as reported by MSM at least) has changed from “sufficiently ill to seek medical treatment” (medical definition) to “tested positive” (“scare” definition). Changing definitions will distort the stats and is done by people with an agenda other than communicating the facts.

    No, I’m getting my data from elsewhere, Kneel. Like the sites at the top of the Catallaxy page. I’m not going to respond to the issue of “MSM scare tactics” … suffice it to say we need to be very concerned about COVID-19 given it is a virus without a clinical means of control. If you want to believe it’s a benign virus, then go ahead. I choose to believe what medical practitioners actually say about without cherry-picking on the basis of “politics”. The medical/scientific community are expected to play this issue with a straight bat, and I have no reason to believe they wouldn’t.

    Secondly, CASE (medical definition) fatality rate is indeed above 1%. INFECTION fatality rate is (and needs must remain) unknown. There is significant evidence that only around 10% or less of infections turn into cases (medical definition) – if so, your estimates are an order of magnitude too high and THAT would place Covid1984 at the same level as a nasty flu – as does the age profile of those dying.

    I agree to a point … the stats I quote are CASE fatality rates, that is reported cases of COVID-19. CDC says here that a case includes confirmed and probable cases and deaths. Of course, there will be people infected and not reported. But also deaths from COVID-19 not reported as such. We only have the official information to go by. There may well be category errors – different countries reporting cases differently, and certainly insufficiently (Thailand is a good example). It is reliable to make conclusions from the percentages I quoted, which are reported COVID-19 deaths / reported COVID-19 cases reported by the countries I mentioned – these numbers are based on 7 months’ history and represent what I would think is “current state”. So, for Australia, that predicts that for every 1000 reported cases, 14 will die. If the rate goes down, that’s good, but at what point do you think that trying to control the disease (either clinically or other methods) should stop? When it gets to 10? 5? Of when the rate of transmission decreases significantly because of non-clinical factors?

    Thirdly, deaths appear to be continuing to fall, as CDC shows on this page:
    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
    so perhaps it’s already killed most of those who are likely to die from it anyway.
    And this despite “record” “case numbers” from testing many more millions than are actually seeking treatment for an illness.

    It’s good that the death rate is falling, and I hope it continues. Though I would still be concerned with a falling rate but an increasing rate of infection.

    For week ended July 11, deaths in the US are reported at 21,176 – peak in April was over 94,000. There is still a significant number of deaths in the US, and it may indicate improved clinical methods for treating the illness, along with earlier detection. If the rate of infections requiring treatment increases and exceeds clinical capacity, we should expect the death rate to increase. It is literally about the numbers.

    But without a vaccine or cure, it is still clear that an uncontrolled pandemic will result in people dying unless they take steps to reduce the likelihood of contracting the virus. This is what the epidemiologist have been telling us, and it makes sense.

    Despite a much higher death toll, and a much higher case fatality rate, no-one locked down for swine flu 10-ish years ago – this was a variant of the “Spanish flu” of 1918 (both H1N1 variants) that killed an estimated 50 million+ world-wide ( a not insignificant percentage of the population at the time).

    I don’t think that’s a case for not doing anything. CDC information on SARS says globally there were 8096 people who became sick, and 774 died. And to say nothing was done is also inaccurate – see that same page.

    Stats for Swine Flu are worse than SARS (up to 575,000 died) with 80% of those dying younger than 65. COVID-19 seems to kill people mostly over the age of 65. CDC also says here that:

    Though the 2009 flu pandemic primarily affected children and young and middle-aged adults, the impact of the (H1N1)pdm09 virus on the global population during the first year was less severe than that of previous pandemics. Estimates of pandemic influenza mortality ranged from 0.03 percent of the world’s population during the 1968 H3N2 pandemic to 1 percent to 3 percent of the world’s population during the 1918 H1N1 pandemic. It is estimated that 0.001 percent to 0.007 percent of the world’s population died of respiratory complications associated with (H1N1)pdm09 virus infection during the first 12 months the virus circulated.

    I would conclude that COVID-19 is a major pandemic and will be far worse than Swine Flu since we have no effective vaccine for it and it has yet to mutate into a benign state. Already the COVID-19 death rate is above that of Swine Flu after 7 months.

    Viruses evolve – and they tend towards being less lethal to the host, as this is the best survival strategy for any parasite. Indeed, the most successful parasites eventually are either integrated into the hosts DNA directly, or become symbiotic with the host.

    Until that state occurs, we have no idea when that would be. It’s not a good idea to just let viruses mutate – it’s a better idea to research them and develop effective methods to combat them (vaccines, cures).

    CDC tells us how COVID-19 is spread here. Basically, avoid getting it into your home, since that is where transmission occurs more easily. To say that COVID-19 is just “a bad flu” ignores the significant differences between the 2 viruses.

    People ought to accept that COVID-19 is the worst respiratory disease pandemic than we have experienced in our lifetimes and globally it has reportedly killed 600,000 people – the facts are speaking for themselves, irrespective of what people believe about it.

  29. The BigBlueCat

    Correction on the no. of US death stats – numbers are total deaths. COVID-19 deaths for week ended 11 July are 1099, peaking in April at 16,935. I had to dig deeper into the website to find this – the second page of the graph is misleading. The mortality rate seems to be decreasing because younger people are being infected – the aged are relatively more controlled in terms of their exposure. So infection rates increase because more younger people are being infected, but they are more likely to recover from COVID-19. This might help explain it.

    It means to 4% of all deaths in the US for the week ended July 11 were COVID-19 related. In April it was 22%. In April, a number of cities were struggling to deal with the issue. Let’s see where August and September goes, following the BLM protests …

  30. Dirk

    Unless you understand how transmission of highly-infectious, viral respiratory diseases occurs, then you’re even further behind

    I know that it doesn’t happen.

    I understand why it can’t. But if you don’t understand how PCR testing works then you don’t even have a basis to claim this virus is one of those diseases that you believe can be transmitted.

    So you listen to those leftists and believe them?

    Well no. But it’s perfectly acceptable to assume some of your opponent’s premises are correct in order to demonstrate that their conclusions are wrong. The right has been terrible on this made up virus but they’ve still been vastly better than the left.

  31. The BigBlueCat

    Dirk
    #3515147, posted on July 16, 2020 at 3:45 pm
    Iampeter is half right – as much as it pains me to say it. You can’t use a statistical argument.

    You have to start by demolishing the idea that the virus has killed *anybody*.

    You said to demolish the idea has killed anybody – that’s extremely tough going and denies the evidence.

    You then said that transmission of COVID-19 doesn’t happen – another tough one to prove, again against the evidence.

    You also went on to claim that the virus is made up. Strike three. You have no credibility on the matter of COVID-19. You’re delusional. It’s real – just ask anyone who’s had it, or the medical staff having to deal with it. Denial is risky business when it comes to global pandemics.

  32. Dirk

    Please give me one solitary example of the virus having been shown to cause any kind of pathogenesis.

    Remember, correlation =/= causation.

    And opinions aren’t assumptions don’t count as evidence either.

  33. Dirk

    By the way, when the researchers told you this virus had never been harboured in anybody before this year why did you believe them?

    How could they (or any mere mortal) have possibly known this?

  34. The BigBlueCat

    Dirk, worldwide there are 600,000 people who have died with COVID-19. I’m not suggesting they all died from COVID-19, but take into account this. I know that correlation and causation are different, however scientific analysis concludes that COVID-19 is the cause of death for the majority, all other things being considered.

    You may wish to believe that no-one has died from COVID-19, and you are also free to believe that the earth is flat. Unfortunately, science is against both propositions.

  35. The BigBlueCat

    Also consider from here.:

    “For COVID-19, the immediate cause of death might be listed as respiratory distress, with the second line reading “due to COVID-19.” Contributing factors such as heart disease, diabetes or high blood pressure would then be listed further down. This has led to some confusion by people arguing that the “real” cause of death was heart disease or diabetes, Aiken said, but that’s not the case.

    “Without the COVID19 being the last straw or the thing that led to the chain of events that led to death, they probably wouldn’t have died,” she said.”

  36. The BigBlueCat

    Dirk
    #3517312, posted on July 18, 2020 at 4:19 pm
    By the way, when the researchers told you this virus had never been harboured in anybody before this year why did you believe them?

    How could they (or any mere mortal) have possibly known this?

    I was skeptical, but being researchers they will have formed that position from known information. It is well recognised that COVID-19 is a novel virus that hadn’t been seen in humans until the outbreaks in Wuhan in 2019.

    I think we need to stop with the conspiracy theories unless there is direct evidence that a conspiracy of international (global) proportions is happening. Even right-wing countries are reporting COVID-19 deaths from the pandemic.

  37. Kneel

    “The medical/scientific community are expected to play this issue with a straight bat, and I have no reason to believe they wouldn’t.”

    The “front line” ones I do trust to play “straight”.
    The various CMO’s etc, I do not.
    Why?
    Because if you ask an epidemiologist, one that specialises in epidemics, one that specialises in respiratory disease, or even better, one that specialises in the combination, they all say the same thing – lockdowns don’t work, the fatality rates are not significantly different to a “bad” flu, the age profile of those dying are similar to a flu, that doing nothing is likely the way to go, but that if you want to do anything, then Sweden is the best example of what should be done.

    Look, it’s out of the bottle – had China lived up to its duty to prevent the spread from Wuhan, instead of “saving” themselves and literally deliberately allowing carriers to leave the country, then things might be different. But they’re not, and we have to live with it.

    As we were initially told, we needed to “flatten the curve” – that is, slow the rate of spread so that the system isn’t overloaded. OK, I’m good with that. But that’s morphed into “crush, kill, destroy!” – we don’t want anyone to get it. OK, fine – if that’s what you want, then we need to keep the border shut permanently – no overseas tourism and no overseas trade, period. Make everything ourselves. This is not realistic, I think most would agree.
    So.
    The only option then, is plan one – slow it down. The Swedish system.But no – we have some bastard cross system that can’t and won’t work, that no-one has ever been so foolish as to try before, and it’s costing us big time – businesses, jobs, economic activity, the list goes on. And now it looks like we are getting a taste of what will continue to happen while we stay on this ridiculous path – shutdown after shutdown, lives and livelyhoods, families and businesses destroyed and no end in site the red ink.

    This is political, not medical. It’s “save everyone at any price”. It’s wrong. It’s not what the most vulnerable want (with the odd exception like Monty). I’m up there – I’m 57, so hardly at low risk (not high, but hardly low). I don’t want the economy and the business that employs me destroyed because I might catch it and I might die. Yeah, I might – so what? Something will kill me, and I’d rather the next generation had things better than me, not worse just so I can live another 5,10,20 whatever years. No, I don’t want to die – who does? But I will. I most certainly don’t want to go down in history as a selfish prick that destroyed kids lives for decades just to live a little longer. That’s just selfish and wrong.

  38. The BigBlueCat

    I’m not in violent disagreement with you Kneel. Dan Andrews has now issued a mandatory face-covering order for Victorians, and I can’t justify that at all given the probabilities and the politics. From my perspective, mandatory face coverings are the wrong response, and may well prove to increase infection rates in cluster groups because of inefficiency and misuse by those not educated in their proper specifications and use.

    I am older than you by 4 years and live in the Western suburbs of Melbourne. I can walk for 2-to-5 kilometres and not be within 5 meters of anyone, but from Wednesday I have to wear a mask. Why? If I don’t I risk a $200 fine. It makes no sense at all, and the police have limited discretion on this. Sure, I can go to the supermarket – but I can still socially distance, and there are no reported cases in my suburb or places where I shop.

    Slowing the rate through social distancing seems to be the best, least worst way of dealing with this if only people would adhere to it. BLM protests should not have happened, but we are now seeing the flow-on effects from that. Although the probability of a single random contact with contagious COVID-19 is very, very low I still wouldn’t want to catch this thing. But face coverings? No.

Comments are closed.