Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 4 for 2 weeks rejected based on public health advice that L4 would not reduce more than L3 - thanks Dr Bloomfield. Current restrictions remain for 2 weeks.
If Bloomfield's public health advice is that L4 wouldn't do anything L3 can't do then that raises two questions:
- Who suggested raising it? A suitably qualified person? Someone for whom such a change would have no effect?
- What's the point of L4 if the more restrictive rules don't have a measurable effect?
It's the classic bait and switch of dishonest politicians. Leak a worse option, and then when you announce the one you wanted to do all the time you look like a hero.
They think people are stupid.
-
@antipodean Seems to me that Level 4 pushed the case numbers down in this current outbreak and now they've gone to Level 3 they're going up again.
So my guess is that if they went back to Level 4 they would push the numbers back down - as long as everyone obeyed the rules.
And that's the key clause.
Any good you did would probably be offset by the protests you'd spark.
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 4 for 2 weeks rejected based on public health advice that L4 would not reduce more than L3 - thanks Dr Bloomfield. Current restrictions remain for 2 weeks.
If Bloomfield's public health advice is that L4 wouldn't do anything L3 can't do then that raises two questions:
- Who suggested raising it? A suitably qualified person? Someone for whom such a change would have no effect?
- What's the point of L4 if the more restrictive rules don't have a measurable effect?
- A collection of epidemiologists and other experts.
- Probably none now hence why we aren't going back to it. Originally, a lot less was understood about Covid transmission, so those rules were an abundance of caution.
Perhaps there's something I'm not getting here.
Cabinet now takes submissions from random strangers, or these people are Bloomfield's staff?
Are these the same experts that developed the original rules? That ignored recent experience a couple of hours flight time away and didn't bother updating them?
This hardly seems a professional and competent response from my vantage point.
-
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 4 for 2 weeks rejected based on public health advice that L4 would not reduce more than L3 - thanks Dr Bloomfield. Current restrictions remain for 2 weeks.
If Bloomfield's public health advice is that L4 wouldn't do anything L3 can't do then that raises two questions:
- Who suggested raising it? A suitably qualified person? Someone for whom such a change would have no effect?
- What's the point of L4 if the more restrictive rules don't have a measurable effect?
It's the classic bait and switch of dishonest politicians. Leak a worse option, and then when you announce the one you wanted to do all the time you look like a hero.
They think people are stupid.
I haven't seen anything from any Cabinet ministers to suggest they were ever seriously entertaining it. If anything, my impression was that the experts were going public about the possibility of going to level 4 because the experts thought ministers weren't listening to them on that subject.
-
@chris-b said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean Seems to me that Level 4 pushed the case numbers down in this current outbreak and now they've gone to Level 3 they're going up again.
So my guess is that if they went back to Level 4 they would push the numbers back down - as long as everyone obeyed the rules.
And that's the key clause.
Any good you did would probably be offset by the protests you'd spark.
That aligns with my interpretation in NSW and Victoria. It matters not how restrictive they are if they won't be adhered to. And if you know that, don't risk burning out the will of the population on a fool's errand.
-
@antipodean Yeah - I don't think they're missing that point either.
If you look how cautious they were about letting the South Island etc. drop from L4 to L3 when we had zero cases - and then a few weeks later, they let Auckland drop - even though there were still plenty of cases.
I think they're balancing what the population will wear.
If the Auckland hospitals start overflowing with covid patients, then I think the population would accept the need for a circuit-breaker.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Level 4 for 2 weeks rejected based on public health advice that L4 would not reduce more than L3 - thanks Dr Bloomfield. Current restrictions remain for 2 weeks.
If Bloomfield's public health advice is that L4 wouldn't do anything L3 can't do then that raises two questions:
- Who suggested raising it? A suitably qualified person? Someone for whom such a change would have no effect?
- What's the point of L4 if the more restrictive rules don't have a measurable effect?
- A collection of epidemiologists and other experts.
- Probably none now hence why we aren't going back to it. Originally, a lot less was understood about Covid transmission, so those rules were an abundance of caution.
Perhaps there's something I'm not getting here.
Cabinet now takes submissions from random strangers, or these people are Bloomfield's staff?
Are these the same experts that developed the original rules? That ignored recent experience a couple of hours flight time away and didn't bother updating them?
This hardly seems a professional and competent response from my vantage point.
Cabinet receives advice from ministries/departments and elsewhere as a matter of course. The public service doesn't have a monopoly on expertise (or anything close to it) - universities, for example, are loaded with experts who are not public servants (although they are state-funded, they are also covered by different legislation).
The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) collates a lot of material for Cabinet meetings - https://dpmc.govt.nz/ . They have a Covid-19 group here https://dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-units/covid-19-group .
There are also some Covid groups mentioned here: https://covid19.govt.nz/alert-levels-and-updates/independent-advisory-groups/ .
-
@broughie said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@billy-tell it’s facts mate. Review the stats and you would understand. Your isolated in NZ. Covid equals death to you guys. It’s not teh case.
I’m not in NZ. But thanks anyway. you’re
The most important risk factor is age. And that is not something that anyone can alter through being more healthy etc. I’m guessing you are not >65 years old.
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Classic announcement of an announcement - Friday will bring targets/milestones, the outline of a new Covid protection framework (which presumably will replace levels), decisions on enhanced business support.
It's a constant stream of announcements that announce announcements to announce things will happen soon but the details will be confirmed in another announcement but we'll announce when that announcement will take place in another announcement.
I guess they have to at least try to look like they're doing something when all they're really doing is waiting for people to be vaccinated.
-
@anonymous said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Classic announcement of an announcement - Friday will bring targets/milestones, the outline of a new Covid protection framework (which presumably will replace levels), decisions on enhanced business support.
It's a constant stream of announcements that announce announcements to announce things will happen soon but the details will be confirmed in another announcement but we'll announce when that announcement will take place in another announcement.
I guess they have to at least try to look like they're doing something when all they're really doing is waiting for people to be vaccinated.
After another announcement. Or two. Friday sounded big though.
-
@chris-b said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean Yeah - I don't think they're missing that point either.
If you look how cautious they were about letting the South Island etc. drop from L4 to L3 when we had zero cases - and then a few weeks later, they let Auckland drop - even though there were still plenty of cases.
I think they're balancing what the population will wear.
If the Auckland hospitals start overflowing with covid patients, then I think the population would accept the need for a circuit-breaker.
The fact that they aren't overwhelmed and the numbers are relatively stable, people are going to increasingly wonder what the fuck we are locked up for
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@chris-b said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean Yeah - I don't think they're missing that point either.
If you look how cautious they were about letting the South Island etc. drop from L4 to L3 when we had zero cases - and then a few weeks later, they let Auckland drop - even though there were still plenty of cases.
I think they're balancing what the population will wear.
If the Auckland hospitals start overflowing with covid patients, then I think the population would accept the need for a circuit-breaker.
The fact that they aren't overwhelmed and the numbers are relatively stable, people are going to increasingly wonder what the fuck we are locked up for
Numbers are significantly higher than when they were suppressing them at L4 though and it's pretty much an exponential thing - my expectation is that we will be having several hundred cases per day this time next month.
On the plus side for the Auks (misery loving company) - I'll be pretty surprised if the rest of us haven't joined you in whatever level of lockdown.
I hope to be pleasantly surprised!!!
-
Well for all these L2.95a breaches and border breaches we hear about I bet there is several more we don't.
I see 2 'influencers' were at that party in Auckland and have both been dropped by thier management companies.
-
@chris-b said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@chris-b said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean Yeah - I don't think they're missing that point either.
If you look how cautious they were about letting the South Island etc. drop from L4 to L3 when we had zero cases - and then a few weeks later, they let Auckland drop - even though there were still plenty of cases.
I think they're balancing what the population will wear.
If the Auckland hospitals start overflowing with covid patients, then I think the population would accept the need for a circuit-breaker.
The fact that they aren't overwhelmed and the numbers are relatively stable, people are going to increasingly wonder what the fuck we are locked up for
Numbers are significantly higher than when they were suppressing them at L4 though and it's pretty much an exponential thing - my expectation is that we will be having several hundred cases per day this time next month.
On the plus side for the Auks (misery loving company) - I'll be pretty surprised if the rest of us haven't joined you in whatever level of lockdown.
I hope to be pleasantly surprised!!!
How long have we been in L3? Has there been an upsurge in cases over that time? I can't recall such a surge
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan fuck, 67 days since start of this outbreak...Seymour seems to be getting alot more traction than National!
Well he has a fully functioning brain for starters
-
@tewaio why wouldn't a public heath expert (which Dr Bloomfield is - that's his medical specialty) present public health advice that higher is better? He also acknowledged today in response to a question of "when would 90% be reached" that modelling gave them forecasts (4-5 weeks), but actually it's down to individuals to go and get vaccinated.
Meanwhile, looks like the police have caught up with one of the clowns:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300432470/covid19-police-arrest-man-over-party-on-aucklands-north-shore