2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

Forums › Health and fitness › 2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

1 | ... | 1617 | 1618 | 1619 | 1620 | 1621 | 1622 | 1623 | 1624 | 1625 | 1626 | 1627 | ... | 2422

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766789 26-Aug-2021 07:14

https://i.stuff.co.nz/world/300390545/cook-islands-vaccinates-96-per-cent-of-eligible-adults

92% 1 dose 40% 2 doses in fiji

https://www.fijivillage.com/news/Govt-organising-a-national-vaccine-lottery-xrf485/

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766791 26-Aug-2021 07:20

WE have 6 sub-clusters and cases expected to peak tomorrow (Friday 27/8/21)

1. I need pretty diagram with joining lines linking

2. How do they know all these! It's like they can see the future (fodder for some dodgy posts on the net)

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/covid-19-coronavirus-delta-outbreak-government-battles-to-control-outbreak-as-cases-surge/Z6V2HM2PAVKZK5IFCWOQA7GYXM/

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766792 26-Aug-2021 07:25

DS248:

We are now nearing the end of the eight day of lockdown. Do you really believe that 'all of those three' days worth of cases (ie. includes 62 announced today) were 'likely' infected prior to the 18th? No one showing up yet who was infected in the last 8 days?

Personally I would expect a reasonable proportion of those announced in the last day or two were infected post-lockdown.

Also, note that the 'stats' in my plot did not have a base of '0'. But it is also why I said to focus on the numbers above 10-20 , not the very start of the curves. The NSW & QLD cases were treated in exactly the same way as the NZ data.

I did say likely.

What is your estimation of the lag between infection and becoming a stat? My guess is 2 days to get symptoms, a day or so to decide it may not be a Winter cold, arrange a test, get the test, get the result, stat gets recorded. Some may not get symptoms or get them a bit later. Some may infect the household (in lockdown) so thats more numbers, but from one pre lockdown case and all contained anyway, but still more stats recorded. A time arrives when we cease hoovering up pre lockdown cases and who they infected in the household to counting cases that got infected post lockdown, which is flatten the curve, which is probably around now. In the past, there was mention of we got x cases today but all are contacts, and all are in lockdown, so while thats an increase in stats, its not a spread. For mew, its about the spread in the community, I don't count household contacts as a spread as they are contained so are just numbers

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766793 26-Aug-2021 07:30

Scott3:

What is really key is the amount of transmission going on between households during lockdown. Essential workers, people in supermarket's etc. Doesn't yet seem to be any useful data on this, but we should be only be a few days away from the point where the number of people we are finding that got sick pre-lock down starts to decline.

Yep. That goes back to the days of "we got 40 cases today 35 are contacts, etc" The 35 are contained, its not relevant to spread, its the any others that were outside of bubble cases that are problematic.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2766836 26-Aug-2021 08:52

tdgeek:

Yep. That goes back to the days of "we got 40 cases today 35 are contacts, etc" The 35 are contained, its not relevant to spread, its the any others that were outside of bubble cases that are problematic.

Going back to lockdown #1, there were probably many undetected infections and small clusters that "fizzled out" due to the effectiveness of lockdown. There was less testing capacity, no genomic testing, less effective contact tracing. Kids "didn't get" Covid, so weren't being tested.

I don't think comparisons of numbers between then and now mean much - at least in terms of projecting what's going to happen.

DS248

1691 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2766840 26-Aug-2021 08:57

tdgeek:

DS248:

You seem to be confuting R0=5 and exponential growth. R0 is the value in the absence of any inhibiting factors such as vaccinations and lockdowns, etc. The effective R value in the current NZ settings will be a lot lower than 5 (unless the spread is occurring wholly within a subset of unvaccinated people not observing any physical distancing measures, which is not the case). Exponential growth in case numbers only requires an effective R value of greater than 1. The rate of growth will depend on both the effective R value and the serial interval between infections. The question is whether our current settings and compliance with them has reduced the effective R value to below 1.

My point was that we are getting cases each day and 8 days in, these are highly likely to be pre lockdown, so uninhibited from social distancing and other measures. You say thats not the case, so what you are saying is that all the cases we get are post lockdown. That subset of unvaccinated people that you mention are in my opinion where the cases are coming from. Get infected pre lockdown, later get symptoms or later see that you went to a POI, arrange a test, get a result, that takes days and days. Lag between taking action and seeing a result. In lockdown the spread will markedly reduce, thats when cases will flatten.

Your logic is interesting. First you say I said all the cases we are getting are not from pre-lockdown (which is your interpretation of my following post - nothing about that in the above post). From that you conclude that I am saying "all the cases we get are post lockdown"! Glass can only be empty or full?

What I did say was "Personally I would expect a reasonable proportion of those announced in the last day or two were infected post-lockdown." (Yes, most of those intra-household infections).

Anyway we should known more details later today assuming they do post the linkage diagrams etc.

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2766843 26-Aug-2021 09:07

Surely a better barometer is the LOIs from post-lockdown?

I mean there are still some coming through even at L4, and given how infectious this variant is, it's hard to imagine that we'll be OK with that still happening as we go down alert levels.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766857 26-Aug-2021 09:32

DS248:

Your logic is interesting. First you say I said all the cases we are getting are not from pre-lockdown (which is your interpretation of my following post - nothing about that in the above post). From that you conclude that I am saying "all the cases we get are post lockdown"! Glass can only be empty or full?

What I did say was "Personally I would expect a reasonable proportion of those announced in the last day or two were infected post-lockdown." (Yes, most of those intra-household infections).

Anyway we should known more details later today assuming they do post the linkage diagrams etc.

You said "(unless the spread is occurring wholly within a subset of unvaccinated people not observing any physical distancing measures, which is not the case)"

I say it likely is the case, on my basis that all cases are likely to be pre lockdown. You are saying that's not the case.

Agree re intra houshold. I guess my poorly worded posts is about seperating pre lockdown and any associated those same but post lockdown in household cases, as distinct from post lockdown randoms infecting other randoms

Dr A said yesterday that they will publish infection dates, that's being tabulated at the moment. So then we can see in household cases and pre lockdown cases (not important) vs in lockdown cases, very important

Sorry for me being clear as mud!

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2766868 26-Aug-2021 09:46

GV27:

Surely a better barometer is the LOIs from post-lockdown?

I mean there are still some coming through even at L4, and given how infectious this variant is, it's hard to imagine that we'll be OK with that still happening as we go down alert levels.

I think the best barometer for now is to trust what AB says at the 1pm presser (including answers given to questions from the media).

Even if assuming there's some degree of "spin" to how things are explained, there's no benefit IMO in either being pessimistic - which may encourage some people to give up because "lockdown isn't working" - and being optimistic - which may encourage people to lower their guard. And mostly, if too many people stop trusting the information being given, then things are going to fall apart completely.

cddt

1548 posts

Uber Geek

#2766884 26-Aug-2021 10:14

Fred99:

I think the best barometer for now is to trust what AB says at the 1pm presser (including answers given to questions from the media).

Even if assuming there's some degree of "spin" to how things are explained, there's no benefit IMO in either being pessimistic - which may encourage some people to give up because "lockdown isn't working" - and being optimistic - which may encourage people to lower their guard. And mostly, if too many people stop trusting the information being given, then things are going to fall apart completely.

And from what we've seen over the last couple of years, we're one of the only countries in the world where we can still trust our elected (JA) and appointed (AB) officials to tell us the truth. Let's hang on to that.

shrub

775 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#2766890 26-Aug-2021 10:31

Got one of those conspiracy letters in by box today. Apparently ill be dead in 3 years after the jab.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766892 26-Aug-2021 10:41

shrub:
Got one of those conspiracy letters in by box today. Apparently ill be dead in 3 years after the jab.

Best make the most of your three years!

I saw a sign in London that the End Is Nigh about 35 years ago. Still waiting.

wellygary

8312 posts

Uber Geek

#2766896 26-Aug-2021 10:49

DS248:

What I did say was "Personally I would expect a reasonable proportion of those announced in the last day or two were infected post-lockdown." (Yes, most of those intra-household infections).

Quite likely, but the key issue is whether they were already isolating (either at home or had been transferred to an MIQ facility)

There a 3 big bits of info we need (but wont get released publicly until the Cabinet decision tomorrow :(

1) the number of positive cases that have come from being close family contacts

2) The test result of those contacts from LOIs that had returned to other locations outside Auckland

3) The results from the rest of the contacts in Auckland..

BUT.. Its clear that Auckland are gonna be in Level 4 for at least another 2 weeks (likely 4)

In the previous outbreaks the 14 day periods stood out as milestones,

So I am expecting that Level 4 will remain everywhere until Tuesday Midnight, with a tentative step to level 3 after that.. with potentially Level 2 from Monday the 6th?, the big question is whether it will be a SI/NI split, or whether they will be confident about Wellington to allow just Auckland to remain in Level 4..

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2766898 26-Aug-2021 10:59

I'm picking SI could be L3 tomorrow. (Its pretty much L4 anyway with Macca's) All of the SI'ers that had been to POI's have tested negative. And L2 next Friday the 3rd. That gives 3 weeks at 4/3

DS248

1691 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2766899 26-Aug-2021 11:00

tdgeek:

You said "(unless the spread is occurring wholly within a subset of unvaccinated people not observing any physical distancing measures, which is not the case)"

I say it likely is the case, on my basis that all cases are likely to be pre lockdown. You are saying that's not the case.

Agree re intra houshold. I guess my poorly worded posts is about seperating pre lockdown and any associated those same but post lockdown in household cases, as distinct from post lockdown randoms infecting other randoms

Dr A said yesterday that they will publish infection dates, that's being tabulated at the moment. So then we can see in household cases and pre lockdown cases (not important) vs in lockdown cases, very important

Sorry for me being clear as mud!

One last quick point. You highlight the end of my sentence but not the "wholly'. Yes very few of the under-30's will have been vaccinated but we already know that at least one of those infected was, and almost certainly more were. I vaguely recall hearing a figure but from a quick check, can't find anything online. In the 30-60 demographic, the proportion of Pacific people in Auckland who are vaccinated is close to average. Across all NZ, 36% (~49%*) of the population have had at least one dose, and 20% (~37%*) are fully vaccinated. Auckland slightly higher. And the percentages considerably higher for older age groups.

* (Figures in brackets =#vaccinated/population 20 or older).

1 | ... | 1617 | 1618 | 1619 | 1620 | 1621 | 1622 | 1623 | 1624 | 1625 | 1626 | 1627 | ... | 2422