2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

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

1 | ... | 673 | 674 | 675 | 676 | 677 | 678 | 679 | 680 | 681 | 682 | 683 | ... | 2429

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2497853 4-Jun-2020 07:57

complicated article about hydroxychloroquine data, WHO

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2497856 4-Jun-2020 08:04

tdgeek:
Handle9:

I'm sure the engineers losing their jobs view it as a complaint for the sake of it.

What is the logic in allowing one group over the other? It doesn't appear to be risk.

Economic boost to Wellington and NZ and employment. And more to come if NZ is seen as a safe haven, the economy is now the priority. Some here advocate watertight borders for a long period, some see Level 1 as too soon, whatever anyone says its wrong. Its all bad news stories now, a bit of glass half full wont do any harm at times

So jobs in Wellington are more important than jobs in Nelson? Does there seem to be more or less risk coming from Samoa or the US?

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2497862 4-Jun-2020 08:19

Handle9:

So jobs in Wellington are more important than jobs in Nelson? Does there seem to be more or less risk coming from Samoa or the US?

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The criteria they applied IIRC was special skills, timeline issue and benefit to the NZ economy. It seems that two high profile movies, the money involved, met that criteria. Id assume the $ and jobs far exceed Nelson. I guess they could have just banned the film. Im sure there are other workers, jobs, money that can come in, and that seperated couple, so do we have a tight border policy or not? We seem to, but we also seem to have a need to take advantage of large doses of help to our economy. If its just about risk, why dont we allow everyone to come here, doesmt matter why or where from, we just quarantine them all. Either way, whatever happens is a problem. Its too soon, its too late, its too restricted, its not restricted enough, all through this crisis thats been the way it is. The current rules ban the films, but they have been exempted due to the benefit to NZ. Its a balancing act and its always wrong, yes I get that

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2497925 4-Jun-2020 08:54

Batman:

complicated article about hydroxychloroquine data, WHO

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine

A brief summary:

There are concerns about the data used in a couple of studies, which suggest that administering hydroxychloroquine to covid-19 patients significantly increases the fatality rate. Both of these studies used data provided by Surgisphere, a company which claims to have data from round the world, but generally speaking can't/won't say what countries, let alone hospitals, the data comes from. Some aspects of the data seem dodgy, and it is now being audited. The company and principal, who was a coauthor in the papers, also seem dodgy.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#2498009 4-Jun-2020 10:49

tdgeek:

[

The criteria they applied IIRC was special skills, timeline issue and benefit to the NZ economy. It seems that two high profile movies, the money involved, met that criteria. Id assume the $ and jobs far exceed Nelson. I guess they could have just banned the film. Im sure there are other workers, jobs, money that can come in, and that seperated couple, so do we have a tight border policy or not? We seem to, but we also seem to have a need to take advantage of large doses of help to our economy. If its just about risk, why dont we allow everyone to come here, doesmt matter why or where from, we just quarantine them all. Either way, whatever happens is a problem. Its too soon, its too late, its too restricted, its not restricted enough, all through this crisis thats been the way it is. The current rules ban the films, but they have been exempted due to the benefit to NZ. Its a balancing act and its always wrong, yes I get that

Its not the issue of "allow everyone to come here, doesmt matter why or where from, we just quarantine them all". Its the inconsistency of applying the law (or the exceptions to the law).

If you have a consistent message and you apply it properly then there are no issues - everyone knows and understands the rules and regulations.

Its been consistently inconsistent since the outset.

Dont travel far from home, dont do reckless activities - but its okay for Ministers to do this. Fishing in a tinny is dangerous but fishing off a kayak is not?

You can have groups of ten up to 100 people - but not if you're a place of worship.

Schools are okay to attend (and mix bubbles) but only for safe/essential workers at Level 3 (what, cos their kids are less risky with their parents having been more community facing than the rest if the population????). At Level 2 all kids can attend despite the perceived risk of CT???

Community sport is okay to resume - but only in groups of 10 (and no spectators cos thats too many people). But professional sport is okay to resume (businesses cant have all their employees work and train together but sportspeople cam)

No border exemptions for people coming from Covid-free places (American Samoa, Antartica) but border exemptions from the most infected country in the world.

We can move to Level 1 when there is 28 days of no CT - but the last CT was more than 28 days ago and it still needs to be re-reviewed next week.

Its maddeningly inconsistent.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

KrazyKid

1247 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 616

#2498017 4-Jun-2020 11:04

They have said the whole time that the response will be data led. It's now reported in a leaked cabinet paper the criteria for L1 is 28 days of no CT, but Bloomfield said it's actually been almost two months since the last CT case.

It will be interesting to see what the next batch of released cabinet papers say. You would assume the medical advice received recommended Level 2 for 6 weeks (3x 14 day cycles) which would have brought us nicely to the week starting 22 June.

However politically there is no choice but to change early if the good news of no cases continues. That will be 4 weeks (2x 14 day cycles in level 2).

From memory the last few cases in May were nurses who got it from work, a young child in a covid household, or historical cases testing positive well late so we will have managed 28 days without a worrying case by that point as well.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2498020 4-Jun-2020 11:07

ockel:

Its not the issue of "allow everyone to come here, doesmt matter why or where from, we just quarantine them all". Its the inconsistency of applying the law (or the exceptions to the law).

If you have a consistent message and you apply it properly then there are no issues - everyone knows and understands the rules and regulations.

Its been consistently inconsistent since the outset.

Dont travel far from home, dont do reckless activities - but its okay for Ministers to do this. Fishing in a tinny is dangerous but fishing off a kayak is not?

You can have groups of ten up to 100 people - but not if you're a place of worship.

Schools are okay to attend (and mix bubbles) but only for safe/essential workers at Level 3 (what, cos their kids are less risky with their parents having been more community facing than the rest if the population????). At Level 2 all kids can attend despite the perceived risk of CT???

Community sport is okay to resume - but only in groups of 10 (and no spectators cos thats too many people). But professional sport is okay to resume (businesses cant have all their employees work and train together but sportspeople cam)

No border exemptions for people coming from Covid-free places (American Samoa, Antartica) but border exemptions from the most infected country in the world.

We can move to Level 1 when there is 28 days of no CT - but the last CT was more than 28 days ago and it still needs to be re-reviewed next week.

Its maddeningly inconsistent.

i tried very hard but could not find anything wrong in this post - except for maybe "it's ok for Ministers to do this" - are you referring to AB + PM photo selfies? also sounds like the list could be much longer! i heard the app doesn't do anything to reduce workload of contact tracing?

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2498021 4-Jun-2020 11:09

KrazyKid:

They have said the whole time that the response will be data led. It's now reported in a leaked cabinet paper the criteria for L1 is 28 days of no CT, but Bloomfield said it's actually been almost two months since the last CT case.

It will be interesting to see what the next batch of released cabinet papers say. You would assume the medical advice received recommended Level 2 for 6 weeks (3x 14 day cycles) which would have brought us nicely to the week starting 22 June.

However politically there is no choice but to change early if the good news of no cases continues. That will be 4 weeks (2x 14 day cycles in level 2).

From memory the last few cases in May were nurses who got it from work, a young child in a covid household, or historical cases testing positive well late so we will have managed 28 days without a worrying case by that point as well.

I read in the Papers that nothing has improved in our capacity for contact tracing. maybe that's why we are still in Level 2?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2498024 4-Jun-2020 11:12

frankv:

Batman:

complicated article about hydroxychloroquine data, WHO

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine

A brief summary:

There are concerns about the data used in a couple of studies, which suggest that administering hydroxychloroquine to covid-19 patients significantly increases the fatality rate. Both of these studies used data provided by Surgisphere, a company which claims to have data from round the world, but generally speaking can't/won't say what countries, let alone hospitals, the data comes from. Some aspects of the data seem dodgy, and it is now being audited. The company and principal, who was a coauthor in the papers, also seem dodgy.

There's no good evidence that (hydroxy)chloroquine is an effective c-19 treatment.

In some third-world countries they're handing out chloroquine and ivermectin. At best it's almost certainly a placebo and I expect that "leaders" promoting its use know it is - but handing if handing it out gives hope to people that they're "doing something".

They ("Surgisphere") used the same data collection method in a very poor study that suggested Ivermectin could be an effective treatment for severe cases of C-19.

Neither probably work - it's wishful thinking of the worst kind - now that it's politicised.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#2498027 4-Jun-2020 11:14

Batman:

i tried very hard but could not find anything wrong in this post - except for maybe "it's ok for Ministers to do this" - are you referring to AB + PM photo selfies? also sounds like the list could be much longer! i heard the app doesn't do anything to reduce workload of contact tracing?

Nahh, I was referring to the Health Ministers indiscretions. Photos for the PM + DGH are casual contacts rather than close contacts (as per the definition) and the risk of transmission would be incredibly low.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

Oblivian

7345 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2117

ID Verified

#2498033 4-Jun-2020 11:40

tdgeek:

The criteria they applied IIRC was special skills, timeline issue and benefit to the NZ economy. It seems that two high profile movies, the money involved, met that criteria. Id assume the $ and jobs far exceed Nelson. I guess they could have just banned the film.

https://mch.govt.nz/criteria-finalised-nz-screen-production-grant

Note the mention of how much is put in, and how they get a cut of the profits.

Sorry you can't film here anymore. We'll add it to the handout tab the citizens are about to pay out for the next 8 years as expected

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2498090 4-Jun-2020 11:57

Oblivian:

tdgeek:

The criteria they applied IIRC was special skills, timeline issue and benefit to the NZ economy. It seems that two high profile movies, the money involved, met that criteria. Id assume the $ and jobs far exceed Nelson. I guess they could have just banned the film.

https://mch.govt.nz/criteria-finalised-nz-screen-production-grant

Note the mention of how much is put in, and how they get a cut of the profits.

Sorry you can't film here anymore. We'll add it to the handout tab the citizens are about to pay out for the next 8 years as expected

Thats fine, doesn't bother me. Its not about cuts to us, its about the millions that go directly to the Welly economy. Thats why each time this happens, the Govt of the day tries to keep them here, as for some people, such as National then and Labour now they want this economic boost. But if its not that important right now, then they could have been declined I suppose.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2498101 4-Jun-2020 12:21

ockel:

Dont travel far from home, dont do reckless activities - but its okay for Ministers to do this. Fishing in a tinny is dangerous but fishing off a kayak is not?

Well, no, it was NOT OK for Ministers to do it either.

[quoted]

You can have groups of ten up to 100 people - but not if you're a place of worship.

[/quoted]

...because the 10 to 100 people related to restaurants and bars, where people were to be seated, separated from other groups. Places of worship don't do that.

[quoted]

[/quoted]

The risk for children of essential workers being infected is probably higher than other children (assuming they remained isolated), so you want to keep the two groups separate. And there's a benefit of having those children at school, in that essential workers don't have childcare issues. At Level 2, the risk of CT is low enough to be accepted.

[quoted]

[/quoted]

Again, risk/benefit tradeoff... professional sportspeople can go back to work, which is a benefit that is absent from community sport.

[quoted]

No border exemptions for people coming from Covid-free places (American Samoa, Antartica) but border exemptions from the most infected country in the world.

[/quoted]

Yeah, I don't quite understand this. I guess that there's a bazillion dollars riding on the film, so there's been some arm-twisting. I guess you could call this a risk/benefit tradeoff as well.

[quoted]

We can move to Level 1 when there is 28 days of no CT - but the last CT was more than 28 days ago and it still needs to be re-reviewed next week.

[/quoted]

I guess the situation has improved faster than anticipated... that they did expect some cases of CT to pop up, and hadn't actually planned for a zero-CT scenario, hence the review date is more than 28 days after the last CT. In hindsight, an earlier review date would have been better. And, presumably it takes a bit of effort to get the review people and information together (despite not having much to review), so it's too difficult to move that meeting forward.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2498118 4-Jun-2020 12:30

Fred99:

frankv:

There are concerns about the data used in a couple of studies, which suggest that administering hydroxychloroquine to covid-19 patients significantly increases the fatality rate. Both of these studies used data provided by Surgisphere, a company which claims to have data from round the world, but generally speaking can't/won't say what countries, let alone hospitals, the data comes from. Some aspects of the data seem dodgy, and it is now being audited. The company and principal, who was a coauthor in the papers, also seem dodgy.

There's no good evidence that (hydroxy)chloroquine is an effective c-19 treatment.

Right. But the Surgisphere data said that it would *increase* the fatality risk. So the WHO canned a study to prove/disprove the hypothesis that chloroquine is an effective c-19 treatment.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#2498119 4-Jun-2020 12:32

frankv:

[quoted]

You can have groups of ten up to 100 people - but not if you're a place of worship.

...because the 10 to 100 people related to restaurants and bars, where people were to be seated, separated from other groups. Places of worship don't do that.

But you can have a funeral or tangi with up to 100 people???? There is no consistency.

[quoted]

Schools are okay to attend (and mix bubbles) but only for safe/essential workers at Level 3 (what, cos their kids are less risky with their parents having been more community facing than the rest if the population????). At Level 2 all kids can attend despite the perceived risk of CT???

The risk for children of essential workers being infected is probably higher than other children (assuming they remained isolated), so you want to keep the two groups separate. And there's a benefit of having those children at school, in that essential workers don't have childcare issues. At Level 2, the risk of CT is low enough to be accepted.

So schools were glorified childcare centres after all?? And the times when essential workers were operating (level 4) those essential workers didnt have childcare issues but under Level 3 they did. It should have been all children back to school or no children back to school. Merely a risk/benefit tradeoff.

Yes there are risks and benefits for each and every example - as there are for the general structure of deciding on Level criteria and whether there should be easing. And the decisions made (including remaining at Level 2) are to reduce the risk to near zero. But the benefits have only been taken into account on a haphazard inconsistent basis.

Even now the Cabinet papers indicate that we have met the criteria for Level 1. Even the DGH states that the last CT was some time ago and the last case he was concerned about was weeks before that. The data to support is there. The decision needs to be made but for blind ideology and dithering.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

1 | ... | 673 | 674 | 675 | 676 | 677 | 678 | 679 | 680 | 681 | 682 | 683 | ... | 2429