Why would they allow the travel? You know not to trust people.

As Dr House said so well: "People lie".

wellygary:

 

Interesting

 

We have an Ashley-update today, apparently it was supposed to be a statement. Perhaps we have a new case (imported?)

 

https://www.health.govt.nz/news-media/news-items/covid-19-media-update-9-june

 

 

 

 

 

No new developments. Relax.

Rikkitic:

 

wellygary:

 

Interesting

 

We have an Ashley-update today, apparently it was supposed to be a statement. Perhaps we have a new case (imported?)

 

https://www.health.govt.nz/news-media/news-items/covid-19-media-update-9-june

 

 

No new developments. Relax.

 

Yeah, He is laying down the new rules for those who are in 14 day quarantine/isolation  after returning to NZ

DS248:

 

It was not just Mon - Tue.  The 7-day average number of tests in NZ for last week was only 41% of the corresponding AU figure.

 

So, per capita,  we're doing about twice as much testing as Australia?

But I expect that testing numbers will fall. We're fairly sure it's not in the community. Given that the false-positive rate is much higher than the infection rate, we're going to waste a lot of resources to find very little if we continue with widespread community testing. It's much more sensible to test high-risk people i.e. those coming across the border, and those in contact with them (airport, Customs, etc staff). There aren't very many travellers nowadays, so numbers of tests will fall, even though we're testing all the travellers twice.

frankv:

 

DS248:

 

It was not just Mon - Tue.  The 7-day average number of tests in NZ for last week was only 41% of the corresponding AU figure.

 

 

So, per capita,  we're doing about twice as much testing as Australia?

 

But I expect that testing numbers will fall. We're fairly sure it's not in the community. Given that the false-positive rate is much higher than the infection rate, we're going to waste a lot of resources to find very little if we continue with widespread community testing. It's much more sensible to test high-risk people i.e. those coming across the border, and those in contact with them (airport, Customs, etc staff). There aren't very many travellers nowadays, so numbers of tests will fall, even though we're testing all the travellers twice.

 

 

 

Guessing you mean less than half?

The main resources being used for testing is human time in checking. In level 1 humans can  mingle and the virus can easily spread, especially in indoor events. So IMO we shouldn't relax testing in the community too far. It also provides a range of samples. Getting a second wave when relaxing the rules has been  common overseas, and we don't know there aren't virus particles out there in the community that someone may get infected with. Especially in areas which have had cases. There are going to be holes that the virus will exploit, which has has done previously, even though we supposedly had good systems in place before having to move into level 3, then 4.  The costs of missing cases IMO is extremely high, but the actual testing cost is proportionally very low when the government is doing it. Plus it keeps these testers in jobs etc. So it is a  win win IMO.

I'm pretty sure the others that relaxed and then had a 2nd run, Did not do so after hitting 0 for 2 incubation periods.

But at a level they considered a 'manageable' point in the process. When it clearly wasn't. 

There's a reason they put the onus on us to track our movements and continue hygiene when concerned. We followed previously. And if enough do now, increases the chance of it not happening

frankv:

 

DS248:

 

It was not just Mon - Tue.  The 7-day average number of tests in NZ for last week was only 41% of the corresponding AU figure.

 

 

So, per capita,  we're doing about twice as much testing as Australia? 

 

... 

The 0.41 is already per capita adjusted so it is less than halve the rate in AU, not double.  Apologies I missed the per capita bit as I had posted more detailed figures earlier this morning where that was made clear (  #2501042 ). 

wellygary: ...

 

Dumb in a Big way

 

"He said the Melbourne man, in his 20s, flew to Brisbane on June 1 when he was infectious and then took a second flight the next day to Bundaberg, where he picked fruit and lived in shared accommodation. Mr Miles said the man, who had been in contact with a known COVID-19 case in Melbourne, spent one night in Brisbane to socialise with about 15 family and friends on the south side of Brisbane. The next day in Bundaberg he worked one day with a number of colleagues. "Clearly there's a lot of work for our contact tracers to do," Mr Miles said.

 

"There's two flights, the contacts in Brisbane, who will have to be tested and quarantined, those who travelled on the transport from Bundaberg airport and those in the shared accommodation and those working with him on the farm."

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-06/coronavirus-cases-queensland-fruit-picker-public-health-alert/12309468

Fully agree, "Dumb in a Big way".  Incomprehensible.

To give them some credit, the follow up has been rapid once the case came to light on 6 June.  This will be the type of action we will need in future if there are any new local cases. 

So far seem to have been lucky though, with as yet no further cases (up to mid-day 9 June).

https://www.health.qld.gov.au/news-events/doh-media-releases/releases/more-than-250-tested-following-bundaberg-covid-case

More than 250 tested following Bundaberg COVID case

7 June 2020
More than 55 people have tested negative to COVID-19 after coming into contact with an infected farm worker in the Wide Bay region.

The man, 24, remains in isolation under clinical supervision in Bundaberg after being diagnosed with the disease on Friday.

He travelled from Melbourne to Bundaberg, via Brisbane, last week to work on a fruit farm.

More than 250 people have so far been tested following the man’s diagnosis, including 147 at a pop-up clinic set up at the farm-worker accommodation.

Chief Health Officer Dr Jeannette Young said 57 people had tested negative, including 15 close contacts in Brisbane and 42 co-workers in Bundaberg. The remaining results are due over the next 24 hours.

...

https://www.health.qld.gov.au/news-events/doh-media-releases/releases/tests-negative-following-bundaberg-covid-19-case

Tests negative following Bundaberg COVID-19 case

8 June 2020
More than 119 people have tested negative to COVID-19 after coming into contact with an infected farm worker in the Wide Bay region.

The man, 24, remains in isolation under clinical supervision in Bundaberg after being diagnosed with the disease on Friday.

He travelled from Melbourne to Bundaberg, via Brisbane, last week to work on a fruit farm.

Chief Health Officer Dr Jeannette Young said 119 people had tested negative so far, including 18 close contacts in Brisbane and 101 co-workers in Bundaberg. Results are continuing to come in.

“We’re very happy with the results so far, and with the great response from the farming business, the patient’s contacts, and the Wide Bay community,” she said.

“But we have a lot of work to do before we can be confident there has been no further transmission. We’ll continue with our rapid response to this case, and our contact tracing to try and find every person the patient had potential contact with since arriving in Queensland a week ago.

“As a precaution, we plan to do a round of follow-up testing later this week.”

Queensland Health is contacting passengers aboard two flights – Virgin VA313 (Melbourne-Brisbane) and Virgin VA2905 (Brisbane-Bundaberg).

From Bundaberg, VA2905 flew to Gladstone. Close contacts identified on the Gladstone flight are to remain in quarantine for 14 days. They will be closely monitored by the Central Queensland Public Health Unit.

...

freitasm:

Nearly 75% of the 136,000 cases were reported from 10 countries, mostly in the Americas and South Asia.

Satellite images of Wuhan may suggest coronavirus was spreading as early as August

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/08/health/satellite-pics-coronavirus-spread/index.html

Not firm evidence & still not peer-reviewed but is conceivable.  And is in line with other recent reports including one from a couple of days ago indicating potential cases in the UK as early as Nov 2019.  Also, I seem to recall a similar case(s?) in France reported couple of weeks ago?

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52935644 

And now a third market model alternative, the "New Zealand consensus" (ex Beijing vs Washington Consensus)

https://thediplomat.com/2020/06/a-new-consensus-about-how-to-best-govern/

(but have to get down to the bottom of the article)

mattwnz:

 

Guessing you mean less than half?

 

The main resources being used for testing is human time in checking. In level 1 humans can  mingle and the virus can easily spread, especially in indoor events. So IMO we shouldn't relax testing in the community too far. It also provides a range of samples. Getting a second wave when relaxing the rules has been  common overseas, and we don't know there aren't virus particles out there in the community that someone may get infected with. Especially in areas which have had cases. There are going to be holes that the virus will exploit, which has has done previously, even though we supposedly had good systems in place before having to move into level 3, then 4.  The costs of missing cases IMO is extremely high, but the actual testing cost is proportionally very low when the government is doing it. Plus it keeps these testers in jobs etc. So it is a  win win IMO.

 

I agree. But the bottom line is we can't say we have eradicated it. The PM and Dr Ashley have already said its likely there will be more cases. We need to live with that. We can only test who wants testing in the wider community. I think we need to chill and get on with life. If a case or cases sneak in or are in we can manage that. Its time to focus on the economy, sporadic cases can be dealt with

Oblivian:

 

I'm pretty sure the others that relaxed and then had a 2nd run, Did not do so after hitting 0 for 2 incubation periods.

 

But at a level they considered a 'manageable' point in the process. When it clearly wasn't. 

 

 

 

There's a reason they put the onus on us to track our movements and continue hygiene when concerned. We followed previously. And if enough do now, increases the chance of it not happening

 

That's the difference. +100

wellygary:

 

 

 

Dumb in a Big way

 

"He said the Melbourne man, in his 20s, flew to Brisbane on June 1 when he was infectious and then took a second flight the next day to Bundaberg, where he picked fruit and lived in shared accommodation. Mr Miles said the man, who had been in contact with a known COVID-19 case in Melbourne, spent one night in Brisbane to socialise with about 15 family and friends on the south side of Brisbane. The next day in Bundaberg he worked one day with a number of colleagues. "Clearly there's a lot of work for our contact tracers to do," Mr Miles said.

 

"There's two flights, the contacts in Brisbane, who will have to be tested and quarantined, those who travelled on the transport from Bundaberg airport and those in the shared accommodation and those working with him on the farm."

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-06/coronavirus-cases-queensland-fruit-picker-public-health-alert/12309468

 

 

 

This sort of thing is only going to delay any hope of a trans-tasman bubble occurring IMO. It is so easy for this sort of thing to happen when things aren't that watertight, and relying on trust. Luckily in NZ when we had restrictions more people than they expected followed them, which is how we were able to potentially eliminate it quicker and more effectively than they estimated via their modeling. 

 It was interesting to see Judith Collins on TV last night discussing having a bubble with  islands in the pacific, and how much they need our tourism money, and how some  closed off their borders well before NZ did.IMO it makes more sense to start out our bubble this way. But I am guessing that they would want a far lower risk tolerance. So suspect  we have to prove we have truly eliminated it for a sustained period. 

mattwnz:

 

This sort of thing is only going to delay any hope of a trans-tasman bubble occurring IMO. It is so easy for this sort of thing to happen when things aren't that watertight.  It was interesting to see Judith Collins on TV last night discussing having a bubble with  islands in the pacific, and how much they need our tourism money, and how some  closed off their borders well before NZ did.IMO it makes more sense to start out our bubble this way. But I am guessing that they would want a far lower risk tolerance. So suspect  we have to prove we have truly eliminated it for a sustained period. 

 

To be honest I dont see a huge value in the bubbles.

Pacific: No islanders want to come here now and ski. Yes, Kiwis can go there and tourist, I favour that for their sakes. Small, poor, a few Kiwis can make a difference

Australia: Why? Kiwis that go there add nothing to the NZ economy, apart from negative balance of payments. How many Aussies will come here?? A few, not many I feel. Ski fields only

So, if not many will travel either way and if we only get the benefit of a few ski bunnies, its probably safer to not have it. That keeps NZ tourists seeing local deals, all air routes are now operating, and local tourists are about 50% of total tourism, that will be more now if there are deals, Last long weekend there was a LOT of activity.