Less funny than Dave Hughes?
COVID-19 Stuff Here
- Thread starter dru
- Start date
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
It's the reason why I'm not normally a big fan of comedy that is almost completely social commentary and politics. It often comes off as holier than thou, humourless finger wagging.
Rob42
John Solomon (38)
I thought Colbert in the Colbert Report was one of the most consistently brilliant satirists/current affairs interviewers you would ever find. I don't know how he created a 30 min show 4 nights a week that analysed US politics and news more effectively than anything on a news channel. Amazing. Colbert on the Tonight Show? Boring.
Kenny Powers
Ron Walden (29)
When you look at where the discussion and media coverage on COVID is going it is becoming more political and divided. It has become less about the medical science side which I guess after 2 years has advanced a long way and people are comfortable with it especially now with most having some first hand experience of COVID all be it the mutated version similar to the flu. Its about policies, restrictions, kids at school, mental health and other health issues etc.
It’s not the vaccinated vs the small minority unvaccinated but as I have heard it described here in NSW the ‘let’s get on with life people’ vs the ‘bedwetters’ many of whom have a political axe to grind.
The thing that gets me on this is that if you express a view of ‘let’s get on with life‘ you are labeled an anti vaxer despite being vaccinated or some sort of redneck pro Trump supporter. Which in itself is strange label given Trump is tripled vaxed.
Its going to get interesting and this thread which started on talking the science could go more political.
Derpus
George Gregan (70)
Its the whole binary thing. All humans fall into two groups, left or right, and there's no room for nuance. Everything you believe is determined by your group.
Never mind left and right don't actually mean anything. You just gotta hate the other side.
Best be careful of anything The Oz says about governments not of a hard right persuasion. When The Australian was launched in the mid-60s it was a wonderfully broad paper, the likes of we hadn't seen in this country. It's since shrunk into a mouthpiece of right-wing apologists or sad old cynics.
I can't recall "herd immunity" ever being a public health policy in Australia. Happy to be corrected.
dru
Tim Horan (67)
It relates to to getting vaccination rates high enough to protect society. https://campaigns.health.gov.au/immunisationfacts/community-herd-immunity. (Not the "let it rip" thinking early on of some countries.)
We thought we achieved it, but Omicron has pushed requiring the third shot to be fully protected. The reality of SARS-2 has tested the theories around the herd, they still work, but only on a shifting base.
formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
An interesting point.
I did a DDG search on the issue and didn't find many politicians and CHOs coming out in strong support of "herd immunity" as a definitive policy to beat covid.
commentary seems to have come from the "expert class" in Australia.
Those who spoke in favour of it seem to be limited to Morrison (who later said the opposite), Gladys Berejiklian, and Professor Paul Kelly.
The targets of % of the population to be vaccinated do seem to be predicated on the basis of herd immunity. Differing targets were universally accepted by National Cabinet, States, and the Feds.
It seems "herd immunity" is honoured in practice if not explicitly stated as a weapon against covid.
formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
Dru you are an eternal optimist.
Third shot?
Israel - 4 shots.
USA - Fauchi "we may need to boost again".
NSW - Dr Kerry Chant flags 4th shot today.
Victoria - close to mandatory 3rd jab and a reduced time frame between jabs.
The constantly changing health advice certainly doesn't engender absolute confidence.
dru
Tim Horan (67)
Optimist? Don't think so.
I do wonder if the 3rd shot is simply picking up on early effectiveness before it wanes away, three times over. But that is not what we are hearing from the studies, albeit they are only reported by a few. The authorities are not discussing the issue heavily and WHO is much more focused on 1st and 2nd jabs across the world.
I mentioned earlier that I suspect that the manufacturers will be working on vaccines that are specific to the developing/current strains rather than things like Pfizer and A-Z which are more generic being developed around the founding Wuhan strain. Both delta and omicron were a bit of a curve-ball in terms of development. I see that becoming annual and likely combined with the annual flu shot.
New strains are emerging and will continue to do so. This initiates "change". Then our knowledge of that change increases which leads clearly to developing advice. Changing advice if you will but either way it would be weird if policy was not adjusting to what is happening.
Herd immunity is not coming from the prevalence of omicron infection either. Personally I think it foolish to expect absolute confidence with SARS-2. This said it does look NSW has passed peak omicron and that IS something to be optimistic about.
formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
dru
Tim Horan (67)
Interesting report. Did you note the dates on the graph? May 30 to Nov 13. WHO recognised Omicron as a variant of concern on 26 Nov. Campbell's conclusion is consistent with that: "Natural immunity with or without vaccine provide robust protection against hospitalisation in the age of delta". Which is unfortunately not the age of omicron.
What we have seen is that neither previous infection nor vaccines provided robust protection against catching Omicron (Pfizer and Moderna better than AZ) - BUT the vaccines (all of them) do provide a reduction in hospitalisation and ICU. And perhaps delta did as well, though that did come out in the study.
Interestingly in going forward if having had delta (which is a very small percentage of the population that have had SARS-2) can be expected to provide immunisation, and Swan's expectation that future strains a likely to come from delta, there is positive information there.
Omicron remains a spanner in the works whichever way you look at it. If I get a chance I'll have a closer look at the original study, not till the weekend though. It's solid research, FF (Folau Fainga'a).
formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
Mr Andrews said he hopes National Cabinet will today decide to change the definition of "fully vaccinated" to three doses. (9 News)
Yet another change in definitions. A cynic would argue that they are making it up as they go along.
Or, as Michael Dobbs said in House of Cards, “You might very well think that - I couldn't possibly comment.”
Yet another change in definitions. A cynic would argue that they are making it up as they go along.
Or, as Michael Dobbs said in House of Cards, “You might very well think that - I couldn't possibly comment.”
Trying to maintain a meaning for the term fully vaccinated is pretty dumb because it is going to keep changing over time because we are going to need recurring booster shots. Ultimately the definition will most likely be "has received at least three COVID vaccinations with the most recent in the last six months" or words to that affect.
They should be making it up as they go along. They are dealing with an evolving situation with little history. This desire to have them make one decision and set of rules and never change it is ridiculous.
formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
I accept the need for things to change as circumstances change.
However I get really irritated at the call to accept "health advice" as all-knowing and therefore must be followed, because this time we are right.
Remember "two weeks of lockdown to flatten the curve"? Or Victoria's multiple lockdowns because this time it will work?
Or the initial statements that vaccines will prevent the passing and receiving of covid, when that is now seen to be patently false?
Not to mention the bans on Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine existing well after serious work showed them to be effective treatments.
The latest change in the science is announced by the Wall Street Journal of all sources:
There’s ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable
So Novak could be playing in Melbourne right now and be no threat to public health.
A threat to the vaccinate or perish narrative so beloved of CHOs, Premiers, and Morrison yes, but a health threat no.
dru
Tim Horan (67)
You, yourself, have posted a report that says otherwise. Or at least that the reality is far more complex.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
If you’re going to continue to spread medical misinformation that has been proven to you time and time again to be as such, then there’s really nothing left but to brand you a liar…
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
I suppose I’m just a decent human being…
dru
Tim Horan (67)
The narrative that comes from this is a powerful force to a solid cohort, albeit minority. A cohort that we should do what we can to see shrink and to fight from growing. It absolutely impacts the effectiveness of the health drive at a societal level. We should all care. And be concerned.