Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
The host of the am show, Ryan, was roasting Hipkins today over MIQ and why the government are waiting to open up to Australia. He said there have been 2500 passengers from Australia since the lockdown started, all double vaxxed, zero covid cases from them
No. Ryan said zero after Hopkins had said three or four. They also expect that the 2500 will be ten times that within a few weeks. That is potentially 30/40 cases spread around the country into new areas and outbreaks everywhere. They don't want that on top of opening Auckland for xmas.
The interview annoyed me because neither listened to each other.
Points I picked up.
Yes, there is little difference between someone coming from Oz or moving around from Auckland but it will add to the problems.
The Govt approach is to expand risk piece by piece rather than all at once as overseas experience has shown distinct possibilities of a swamping wave. (I don't know if drip feeding things will stop the inevitable but whatever)
There is an expectation from the govt that the announced rules of 7 day self iso will likely change before they come in as risk levels etc change. (this is a positive but not much help for tourism in planning or marketing)
We still have an obsession with 'cases' as opposed to hospitalisations. I get that more cases = more spread = more pressure on health services but we are now protecting the holdouts and those under 12.That Ryan guy can be really thick at times and like many in the media can't think on his feet. His big argument was 'but they are double-jabbed' and when Hipkins corrected him that it doesn't mean they can't have or spread Covid he agreed then continued to say it.
I try not to watch this stuff but it was on while making coffee. It does my head in that one moment the media is trying to berate the govt for not removing restrictions and then if there is a case outside of Auckland berate them for being lax. No wonder the public is confused.
I really don't think that for non NZers (tourists) the 7 day self iso is a good idea in that it won't work as intended and it hamstrings the tourism market. It will attract visitor to family that live here and those people won't keep apart from each other for 7 days. Meanwhile aren't going to book a 7 day holiday that might take 14.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I try not to watch this stuff but it was on while making coffee. It does my head in that one moment the media is trying to berate the govt for not removing restrictions and then if there is a case outside of Auckland berate them for being lax. No wonder the public is confused.
^^^ This x100.
It's ok to support elimination (although misguided and wrong in my opnion),
It's ok want to manage the spread and reduce restrictionsit's not OK to demand measures to reduce restrictions, and then clutch at pearls because cases pop up around the country. FFS. Part of this is because the Govt is v e r r r r r y slowly walking back from elimination, when it's dead. The sooner they acknowlege that, the better; focus on effects (hospitalisations) and managing the threat to the health system. But politically they dont' seem comfortable admitting that things have changed fast (despite being opposed by a carload of clowns on fire right now EDIT: + Seymour)
-
@tim said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kiwimurph Hardly realistic that NSW and Vic etc will pose more risk to NZ than NZ. I thought we were moving away from elimination?
Fuck I'll say, what the hell is the benefit of a vaccinated person with a negative Covid test self-isolating? That makes 0 sense.
-
@no-quarter said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@tim said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kiwimurph Hardly realistic that NSW and Vic etc will pose more risk to NZ than NZ. I thought we were moving away from elimination?
Fuck I'll say, what the hell is the benefit of a vaccinated person with a negative Covid test self-isolating? That makes 0 sense.
No they make as much sense as a double-vaxxed person from Auckland with a negative test except for the very clear possibility that they will likely be dispersing through NZ more than Aucklanders and will add to the numbers that do move through the country.
I do get the point of the govt trying to phase in risk although my argument is whether you just reach the same point a little bit later and if there is much actual benefit in that.
The one thing they have been consistent in is trying (sometimes ham-fistedly) in avoiding yo-yoing back and forth and aiming for each change to come in incrementally. They point to other countries that opened rapidly and are now shutting down again.
I guess only time will tell which method is best. -
@crucial what is the actual goal here though, to just have a slow ember of cases for eternity. feels like we are just delaying the inevitable.
were highly vaxed likely most of the country will be in red. the plague rat anti vax scum will be locked up. so whats another couple hundred cases from aus going to do
-
@muddyriver said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial what is the actual goal here though, to just have a slow ember of cases for eternity. feels like we are just delaying the inevitable.
Just what I was wondering.If a slow ember can continue and morph into a controllable fire better than just pouring petrol on and walking away then that's good IMO. Just don't know how that models out.
were highly vaxed likely most of the country will be in red. the plague rat anti vax scum will be locked up. so whats another couple hundred cases from aus going to do
There is the factor of disbursement to consider. eg people will travel to places like Palmy and Gore where sane Aucklanders will avoid. A smaller petri dish is the short term aim.
-
@crucial I think the number of aucklanders travelling will be higher than australians so its hardly petrol be interesting to see an internal vs external migration stat, and you'd think you'd want covid going through whiles the vaccines effective if the ultimate goal is to build population resiliance. i think families will visit people and there certainly be travel to most parts of NZ
-
my work was to have our Xmas party in Kerikeri, so 20+ staff plus partners, doing stuff in the day, spending the night in a local motel, but as Northland will be in Red or Orange, and I know of at least 1 unvaxxed staff member and at least 2 unvaxxed partners, we have had to cancel.
That aint helpful for business.
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
my work was to have our Xmas party in Kerikeri, so 20+ staff plus partners, doing stuff in the day, spending the night in a local motel, but as Northland will be in Red or Orange, and I know of at least 1 unvaxxed staff member and at least 2 unvaxxed partners, we have had to cancel.
That aint helpful for business.
That's down to trying to do a group thing with unvaxxed people involved though. Sucks but I guess the odd few may change their minds as it dawns on them how much they miss out on.
-
@muddyriver said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial I think the number of aucklanders travelling will be higher than australians so its hardly petrol be interesting to see an internal vs external migration stat, and you'd think you'd want covid going through whiles the vaccines effective if the ultimate goal is to build population resiliance. i think families will visit people and there certainly be travel to most parts of NZ
You do get that adding those coming from Oz to Auckland travellers is a higher number than just Aucklanders alone though?
It's not like they get absorbed into the overall number. -
@nzzp said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
I try not to watch this stuff but it was on while making coffee. It does my head in that one moment the media is trying to berate the govt for not removing restrictions and then if there is a case outside of Auckland berate them for being lax. No wonder the public is confused.
^^^ This x100.
It's ok to support elimination (although misguided and wrong in my opnion),
It's ok want to manage the spread and reduce restrictionsit's not OK to demand measures to reduce restrictions, and then clutch at pearls because cases pop up around the country. FFS. Part of this is because the Govt is v e r r r r r y slowly walking back from elimination, when it's dead. The sooner they acknowlege that, the better; focus on effects (hospitalisations) and managing the threat to the health system. But politically they dont' seem comfortable admitting that things have changed fast (despite being opposed by a carload of clowns on fire right now EDIT: + Seymour)
The government (as in, the PM and other ministers) have specifically acknowledged that the elimination strategy is dead and the plan now is living with Covid while minimising negative outcomes. Minimising negative outcomes is the reason for the slow movement through the various changes. I didn't see the AM show this morning, but if Hipkins was asked about returns from Australia based on no Covid to date among double-vaccinated returnees, Barry Soper asked basically the same question yesterday in the press conference including stating the numbers, and the DG's point was they don't want a potential stack of mini-outbreaks seeded across the country pepperpot-style from overseas travellers while the traffic light framework is bedding in and the Auckland boundary is removed. If the numbers of travellers are significantly increased, there's no useful way of predicting how many will be infectious because the current figure will not extrapolate neatly.
Also, there is nothing close to a consensus among experts or the public on how fast to move through the various steps – for everyone who wants it move faster, there is another person who thinks it's moving too fast, even among the experts. I'm organising some events in Christchurch in December and January, and I welcome Aucklanders, but others in the South Island seem to have the fear of plague-ridden hordes ravaging the rest of the country.
Hipkins also said that a particular concern for cabinet is not yo-yoing - some of the caution around dates is trying to be in a position that they don't have to roll anything back, or as little as possible at least.
-
@godder without going totally crazy, I can understand urging some caution. But if the country has essentially hit the vax target, why can't they make their move a little quicker? I assume those of us in Auckland are in that camp, whereas the rest of the country who have lived a relatively normal life on the backs of our sacrifices are quite keen to stay closed up
-
@canefan an abundance of caution I guess. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle if it goes pear-shaped, and not wanting to yo-yo either.
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan an abundance of caution I guess. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle if it goes pear-shaped, and not wanting to yo-yo either.
Do you know if these tests will be sufficient to be let out the Auckland prison over Xmas?
-
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Do you know if these tests will be sufficient to be let out the Auckland prison over Xmas?
Nasopharyngeal PCR tests will continue to be used as the primary diagnostic test, but this will be supplemented by saliva-based PCR testing, rapid antigen testing and rapid PCR tests.
That's not concrete but obviously shows the preference is still there for the standard nasal swab. The references to surveillance testing in the press release suggest rapid antigen testing might be aimed at that more than statutory obligations but I guess all will be made clear in the new Covid framework order once published. The legislation doesn't prevent it though, so it's an option at least. The current level order doesn't even allow for PCR saliva testing for domestic travel, so that strikes me as more likely than going straight to antigen testing.
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan an abundance of caution I guess. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle if it goes pear-shaped, and not wanting to yo-yo either.
Is yo yoing still going to be a thing with a population vaxxed close to 90%?
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan an abundance of caution I guess. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle if it goes pear-shaped, and not wanting to yo-yo either.
Is yo yoing still going to be a thing with a population vaxxed close to 90%?
Seems to be elsewhere in the world even with higher rates. It's also only 76% of the whole population, still need the 5-11s on board. If we can get to actual 85% or even 90%, that would be much closer to delta burning itself out.
I think there's also no useful way to predict volumes once MIQ isn't required, so that's probably weighing on the mind a bit. Parts of Australia and elsewhere in the world are open when people can look at international travel again, so just going for a holiday isn't out of the question, not to mention business trips etc.
-