Australian Reports of the Virus Spread

[Pushka]

No it was never the fourth or 5th generation of transmission of the Parafield cluster.It was the virus description detected by genomic studies.

I distinctly recall Prof Spurrier stating it was into the fourth generation when the lockdown was announced. She wanted to stop fifth.
And also reported in the media
“Spurrier said the issue for South Australian authorities is they have found cases up to the fourth generation, and are now looking for cases in the fifth and sixth generations. “At the moment in South Australia we have done contact tracing to the fourth generation but the fifth generation is out there in our community, and we are getting up to the sixth,” she said.”

We know that not to be correct now.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

Ive not read anything about new mystery cases.

Not sure where you grab the mystery case watch figures you post, but the wording "since before" is very poor and doesnt make sense.

Either the cases are older than 28 days but occurred since Crossroads Outbreak (which wasnt a mystery case, linked very early to a Vic traveller) but doenst add up as it would mean a mystery case every 3 days or so since July which hasnt been the case.

Or it means 38 cases which are 28 days or older and happened before Cross Roads (the first mystery case after CrossRoads was Thai Rock), which is possible, but then what hapened to the handful of other mystery cases since cross roads.

Initially Crossroads was a mystery case. Hence the clumsy wording.

If you look at the daily reports there is a segment on the classification (eg overseas, linked, mystery - my terminology).

You will find the day before Crossroads that mystery was 361. Til 19/11 it was largely ok report and got to 395 (so 34 in total with all the reclassification in and out). Yesterday that number jumped to 433. The added 38 came from the linked section which went down by 38 best I can tell.

Using the two week and four week live reports (ie no pdf version) to determine ages up to 28 days

 

[RAM]

Given that SA did not apparently have a 'leak' from the hotel quarantine program previously - I hope much scrutiny is going into 'What changed? Why now?'

Complacency, a new employee etc etc?

A dual track needs to be employed here & hopefully this time will be different despite the previous 6 'learning experiences' seemingly disregarded Australia-wide.

# I have a strong suspicion that somebody dobbed in the 36yr old man & the employer, could be wrong & it could have been that there was no pizza sold for cash during the time he said he collected it & no cc transaction for him. Even more so if he said ordered it online....

The statement that it was not based solely on what this man said could well be smoke & mirrors. Leaving unsaid that the owner did not say he worked there - so we relied on TWO peoples' statements to introduce the hard lockdown.

Or potentially relied on 12 statements (guess of how many workers etc at the pizza shop).

So technically the authorities are not misleading the community - but in reality they are engaged in covering themselves at the expense of 'transparency'.

 

[drron]

Based on the evidence to date of what they knew when the lockdown was declared, then no I don't want SA and the rest of Australia shut down with such extreme measures on such little evidence of a such a remote possibility (ie looking at the history of the virus throughout the pandemic) when the other evidence they had to then was of a quite manageable outbreak.

As I quoted on the evidence they had Prof.Paul Kelly,the acting Commonwealth CMO, believed the lockdown was the right thing to do.He would be the most qualified CMO/CHO in the land being an acknowledged world authority on viral pandemics.
Hence I am happy to accept that the lockdown was justified.

 

[RooFlyer]

Spurrier backpedalled on today.

'Backpeddling' is a compete misrepresentation. She has changed her position based on new and better information (including, but not limited to, the lie).

Surprisingly SA Health seemed to unaware just how quick the virus will affect people living in the one household.

I think its risible and insulting that you would make that sort of comment about SA Health, but its consistent with prior comments about other health professionals, so there we go. We should alert SA Heath to forget all their qualified epidemiological expertise and tell them that the best knowledge is right here on AFF, I guess.

.but nothing has yet been revealed to justify the jumping to such a comprehensive lockdown.

You seem to be wilfully ignoring the facts of the situation that presented itself to the SA Health people at the time and which have been noted here a couple of times. In the face of that, and the lack of respect shown for SA Health authorities (who I doubt would characterise themselves as perfect or blameless) any further discussion is pointless.

 

[Pushka]

As I quoted on the evidence they had Prof.Paul Kelly,the acting Commonwealth CMO, believed the lockdown was the right thing to do.He would be the most qualified CMO/CHO in the land being an acknowledged world authority on viral pandemics.
Hence I am happy to accept that the lockdown was justified.

Then the onus is on authorities is to ensure that the evidence presented is completely accurate and researched and confirmed before imposing such measures. There is an obvious discrepancy in the information provided by the CHO from one day to the next. As indicated above. And the lie didn't really form the basis for exposing that discrepancy.

 

[Princess Fiona]

I have been dipping in and out of this thread for the past few days.
I think we need to be very careful and cautious about bringing contact tracing interviews into the realm of police interrogations or interviews that are subject to legal ramifications.
The primary objective of these interviews is to prevent the spread of COVID-19. They are consultations between patients and health care workers.
We are asking that people will be as truthful as possible about their movements so that anyone they can potentially have come into contact with can be traced.
Anyone who is vulnerable, “illegal” or otherwise feels threatened about the sharing with other authorities without their consent of the information they give will be most unlikely to give an accurate, truthful interview.
Note my comments are not specifically about the SA case but about the nature of contact tracing in general.
Be careful what you are asking for.

 

[Pushka]

I have been dipping in and out of this thread for the past few days.
I think we need to be very careful and cautious about bringing contact tracing interviews into the realm of police interrogations or interviews that are subject to legal ramifications.
The primary objective of these interviews is to prevent the spread of COVID-19. They are consultations between patients and health care workers.
We are asking that people will be as truthful as possible about their movements so that anyone they can potentially have come into contact with can be traced.
Anyone who is vulnerable, “illegal” or otherwise feels threatened about the sharing with other authorities without their consent of the information they give will be more unlikely to give an accurate, truthful interview.
Note my comments are not specifically about the SA case but about the nature of contact tracing in general.
Be careful what you are asking for.

Of course. But when the information from tracing interviews carries so much weight in locking down a state then the information needs to be completely verified and checked.

 

[RooFlyer]

Was that an AFFer on the ABC news tonight? I only caught the last seconds of an interview.

 

[Pushka]

Was that an AFFer on the ABC news tonight? I only caught the last seconds of an interview.

From SA? Not me . We were on the other night though. We are still a few minutes away so will keep a watch out. Any context?

 

[nutwood]

But didn’t Tas make their move before SA went into lockdown? There was so much happening it’s hard to remember. WA definitely moved first - the rest were a blur

Tas certainly made their move before SA went into lockdown. I had a work trip to SA booked for next week; flights, accommodation, car etc all booked. When I realised there could be potential complications, I contacted Tassie's COVID hotline. This was on Monday 16th. I was advised that I should apply for a new G2G pass if I was intending to visit SA. This was surprising as I've been back and forth to SA and NSW multiple times on the old one.
On the 18th, they announced the lock-down and I cancelled the trip. I've no problem with this as I believe SA's application of the precautionary principle was correct, given the evidence before them. What I'm not happy about is the subsequent actions, or lack of them, of the Tasmanian authorities. I haven't re-booked my trip because it is not clear what the Tasmanian position is regarding SA. Currently SA is listed as "medium risk". The listing was last updated 9.42 am on Thursday 19th!
The nature of COVID supports quick reactions but these should be matched with quick resets. I'm appalled that we are still holding SA visitors in quarantine. Surely a couple of interviews as to where they had been in SA would be sufficient to clear the situation up? There's over 1.5 million people in SA. Now we know there's not a fifth and sixth generation quietly spreading exponentially, the detected cluster is a minuscule percentage.

 

[DC3]

... I wonder if there is something in the contact tracing script that stresses the need that this is not about ATO, immigration etc, just the truth about contacts? ...

And that would ensure that people tell the truth.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Santa Claus is 'immune' to COVID-19, says Dr. Anthony Fauci https://trib.al/JSunKM7

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

View attachment 234177

Santa Claus is 'immune' to COVID-19, says Dr. Anthony Fauci https://trib.al/JSunKM7

Not sure that was the best thing for the nonpolitical CDC to say. But in the US - what could you say? (Rhetorical question as to keep in line with posting rules)

 

[jakeseven7]

 

[NZflygirl]

Based on the evidence to date of what they knew when the lockdown was declared, then no I don't want SA and the rest of Australia shut down with such extreme measures on such little evidence of a such a remote possibility (ie looking at the history of the virus throughout the pandemic) when the other evidence they had to then was of a quite manageable outbreak.

Then the onus is on authorities is to ensure that the evidence presented is completely accurate and researched and confirmed before imposing such measures. There is an obvious discrepancy in the information provided by the CHO from one day to the next. As indicated above. And the lie didn't really form the basis for exposing that discrepancy.

Just going to leave a clip here from Dr Mike Ryan from WHO from earlier in the year. In particular... “If you need to be right before you move, you will never win. Perfection is the enemy of the good when it comes to emergency management.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1239511147310546946

Given that SA did not apparently have a 'leak' from the hotel quarantine program previously - I hope much scrutiny is going into 'What changed? Why now?'

Complacency, a new employee etc etc?

I think Oz have been lucky. NZ have had a number if border workers test positive. This may have been a smaller cluster if regular testing employed previously. However it did enter a large family. Will wait for the results into their investigation of HQ.

 

[VPS]

Just going to leave a clip here from Dr Mike Ryan from WHO from earlier in the year. In particular... “If you need to be right before you move, you will never win. Perfection is the enemy of the good when it comes to emergency management.”

U https://twitter.com/shawnhils/status/1240126116234514433?s=21


I think Oz have been lucky. NZ have had a number if border workers test positive. This may have been a smaller cluster if regular testing employed previously. However it did enter a large family. Will wait for the results into their investigation of HQ.

We need more Mike Ryans in this world. Very impressed with the way he speaks and having worked in a number of emergency management responses, he is correct.

 

[NZflygirl]

We need more Mike Ryans in this world. Very impressed with the way he speaks and having worked in a number of emergency management responses, he is correct.

I haven’t watched much of the WHO. Tough enough keeping up with NZ & Australia but he is my favourite communicator. So on point!

 

[jakeseven7]

Victoria reopens borders to South Australia.

South Australians require a permit which is basically giving all of your contact details and location plans to the Victorian Government for contact tracing purposes. Effectively the permit is more like a registration.

Only people who are not allowed in are people who have been in a SA government defined hotspot location (And those people are already in quarantine anyway).

So for SA we await an update from:

- TAS (shut)
- WA (shut)
- QLD (shut)
————
- NT (open)
- ACT (open)
- NSW (open)
- VIC (re-opening)

 

[lovetravellingoz]

As I quoted on the evidence they had Prof.Paul Kelly,the acting Commonwealth CMO, believed the lockdown was the right thing to do. He would be the most qualified CMO/CHO in the land being an acknowledged world authority on viral pandemics.
Hence I am happy to accept that the lockdown was justified.

The transcript that I can read is that Kelly was supporting SA's right to implementing their measures, rather than stating that it was the right thing to do. He certainly supports speedy action, as I do. But it does not indicate that the lockdown as rolled out was the right thing to do.

Acting Chief Medical Officer’s press conference about COVID-19 on 18 November 2020

Read the transcript of Acting Chief Medical Officer Professor Paul Kelly's press conference about COVID-19 on 18 November 2020.

www.health.gov.au

Acting Chief Medical Officer’s press conference about COVID-19 on 18 November 2020
Read the transcript of Acting Chief Medical Officer Professor Paul Kelly's press conference about COVID-19 on 18 November 2020.

....
QUESTION:
New South Wales took a completely different approach to this, do you think South Australia's approach is proportionate based on the numbers? We only had two cases there today. Is this too hard, too fast?

PAUL KELLY:

It’s hard and it’s fast. Look, South Australia has made the decision on the basis of the information they have at hand, they know their system, they know their people, that is the decision they have made and we back them in terms of that decision.


....

QUESTION:

Has South Australia met the Commonwealth definition of a hot spot yet?

PAUL KELLY:

No, they have not. So the definition of the Commonwealth is, in a metropolitan area like Adelaide is 10 cases per day for three days. We have had 22 cases in three days.


QUESTION:

Will that definition be revised given South Australia's hard lockdown, and it's got less cases than the Commonwealth definition?

PAUL KELLY:

I am confident with my definition but look, there's a lot of testing being done at the moment, we will know more about what is happening in Adelaide in the coming days. The reality is, for public health, one needs to make decisions without all of the information in front of them. It is very easy to make a decision a week after you needed to make it. South Australia have made their decision today on the basis that they don't want to be thinking, in a week, I should have done something else and gone harder and gone faster. They have gone hard, they’ve gone fast, they’ve gone abroad, both in their public health response as well as the other measures that were announced today, and that will give them the best chance of getting on top of the outbreak.



....
QUESTION:
And just a follow-up, in terms of the virus and the genomic sequencing that’s being done in Adelaide, what do you know about how quickly this virus can spread? We heard from Stephen Marshall, some descriptions about it being highly infectious, more so than other strains, can you speak to that?

PAUL KELLY:

Yes, not all information is available yet but my understanding is that they are finding cases, secondary cases of COVID-19 within very few days of the previous cases. There is a range of options as to why that might be the case but at the moment we don't have any evidence that the virus has changed in any way to become more infectious or more dangerous. This is the same virus we have been dealing with, in fact, the coronavirus since it started virtually a year ago now, the first cases have now been understood to have happened, it has remained quite stable in relation to those sort of issues, in relation to the virus, how transmittable it is from person to person, how quickly it can cause disease, how serious that disease might be. The good news so far for those cases in Adelaide, there is only the two cases that are in hospital, both elderly residents of Adelaide.