Australian Reports of the Virus Spread

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's the first mention I have heard about a rapid test being deployed by an Australian public health response


It is just done on those considered most likely to have been infected. Household contacts and the like. Any that were detected that way then allowed the tracers to prioritise tracing contacts of those people.
 
Appreciate it was done as a first and backed up by PCR. When was this implemented/mentioned by Victorian authorities?

Since pretty much the first case. Jeroen Weimar has mentioned during some of the pressers when he has described what is done.

I am pretty sure they started doing this during the last outbreak in Vic as well.
 
Read our AFF credit card guides and start earning more points now.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

The odds may just be in our favour. I really hope the media were as inaccurate as they often are with crowd sizes, and may have over-estimated the numbers 🤞

Approx avg of last 5 days = 130 cases. Given different days to symptoms, if any, then I'll use 5 days as the potential number of cases walking around in the crowd.

So 650 cases tested positive out of 5,000,000 in Sydney = 0.013% of population

I've seen figures of the Sydney crowd size ranging from 5,000 to as high as 15,000.

So what number would be expected to have been carrying CV:
  • if 5,000 then 0.65 people, ok 1 person :)
  • if 7,500 then 0.98, so 1 person :)
  • if 10,000 then 1.3, so 1 person :)
  • if 12,500 then 1.6, so 2 people :(
  • if 15,000 then 2.0, so 2 people :(
Using the words spoken by that great philosopher, Dirty Harry, "So do ya feel lucky?"

Given the way Delta has been behaving this time around, and never being a roulette player, not particularly. I would like to be very wrong though.
You only need one case who is a superspreader and even if there is no one else infected that could be worse than several orders of magnitude number of cases who are less infective. Unfortuately … add to that these people won’t get tested isolate or observe restrictions in any case so trace/track risk
mitigation goes out the window.
Potential disaster.
 
You only need one case who is a superspreader and even if there is no one else infected that could be worse than several orders of magnitude number of cases who are less infective. Unfortuately … add to that these people won’t get tested isolate or observe restrictions in any case so trace/track risk
mitigation goes out the window.
Potential disaster.
Based on the images of the Sydney protest - no masks, no social distancing, etc. - 1 would be more than enough.
 
Since pretty much the first case. Jeroen Weimar has mentioned during some of the pressers when he has described what is done.

I am pretty sure they started doing this during the last outbreak in Vic as well.
Every positive-potential positive backed up by PCR and genomic sequencing. The latter being accurate and truthful (as compared to many people during this pandemic)
 
Every positive-potential positive backed up by PCR and genomic sequencing. The latter being accurate and truthful (as compared to many people during this pandemic)

.Yes of course. This has been the case since March 2020.

I was talking about where the rapid test as an additional measure, and stated that the normal test was still done. The rapid test is used to save the 6-8 hours waiting for the PCR. But being a lot less accurate they would not rely on it.

All positive tests are attempted to grow a live virus for genomic testing. It is not always possible.
 
Rapid tests should absolutely be deployed in Sydney at the moment - the reluctance on that is frustrating.

My understanding is that while they sometimes report false positives (inconvenient), they don't report false negatives (problematic).
 
And then there are still the idiots out there View attachment 254015
Is it justified to lock down as hard and aggressively with vaccines distributed & available to the most vulnerable?

I am not a nutjob (at least, I don't think so...), to me it's a perfectly valid question.

Not sure there is a lot of difference between Melbourne's previous settings and Sydney's current ones?
 
Is it justified to lock down as hard and aggressively with vaccines distributed & available to the most vulnerable?

I am not a nutjob (at least, I don't think so...), to me it's a perfectly valid question.

Not sure there is a lot of difference between Melbourne's previous settings and Sydney's current ones?
I'm not sure its worth getting into state based comparisons, but its clear that the current settings in NSW are not working. When something is not working it's time to try something different.

The issue with vaccines is that they still haven't made it to all the most vulnerable, let a lone had time to take effect. And unfortunately it is not just the most vulnerable who are getting sick, going into ICU, and dying. And that's just with the relatively low infection rates. There's no way you can let the virus run and end up in a very desperate situation.

I think what NSW needs is stricter settings and, more importantly, faster vaccination. It's worth the other states slowing their vaccination to get the outbreak in NSW under control. Big focus on the higher risk LGAs and work outwards from there.

A vaccination containment strategy is still going to take many months to work, though
 
A new idea - all the other States and regional NSW can feed Sydney, please drop off the food at the State border/Greater Sydney boundary, so we can shut down critical food supplies/logistics in Sydney - NSW will organise a team of ADF to pick up and deliver home to home. (quip)
 
Is it justified to lock down as hard and aggressively with vaccines distributed & available to the most vulnerable?

I am not a nutjob (at least, I don't think so...), to me it's a perfectly valid question.

Not sure there is a lot of difference between Melbourne's previous settings and Sydney's current ones?

The lockdown settings might be similar in NSW as they are/were in Victoria. The difference is compliance. And that probably partly comes down to experience. We've had a lot more lockdowns here in Vic... we understand their reason, we understand how they work, and we understand that a short lockdown with good compliance is better than one dragging on for months.
 
Not sure there is a lot of difference between Melbourne's previous settings and Sydney's current ones?

Greater Melbourne has had many different lockdown settings. In part to see what worked, and in part depending on the severity of the outbreak. Also the lockdown settings tend to be varied within the lockdown period.

The current settings in Greater Melbourne which were gone straight to this outbreak, are on the hard side, but are less than the most severe used in the Second wave. ie Construction is still happening, no curfew and various other differences. However compared to Greater Sydney restrictions on households are tighter. This time too Regional Vic has been included (People from the MCG and AAMI came from far and wide).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top