Australian Reports of the Virus Spread

[Lynda2475]

And as drron recalled for some 5 decades just within his direct experience.

Again your are talking a comment about what has been happening in this pandemic and applying it to unrelated pre-pandemic situation.

I never raised any objection or issue of our pre-pandemic history of treating PNG patients onshore, my objection is to knowingly bringing covid positives onshore when Aussies who test positive cant board a flight. JY was only quoted saying he wasn't infectious well after my initial post but it is still a double standard as if an aussie wanting to fly home has a positive PCR too bad.

The programs which bring charity cases to Australia for surgery etc form many countries (not just PNG) have not been operating the way they did or at the same scale as prior to the pandemic.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Again your are talking a comment about what has been happening in this pandemic and applying it to unrelated pre-pandemic situation.

Again your misrepresent things. Australia treats PNG citizens in Australia now, as it long has. It debunks your statement that the PNG person who died in Australia was receiving special treatment that his fellow citizens would not get. Again you just jumping to a wrong conclusion. They have, they do, and they will continue to receive treatment in Australia pandemic or no pandemic.

Just as your recent statement was entirely wrong

" That wasnt what was being discussed until LTO twisted the conversation as he loves to do, picking things out of context and claiming things that were never said."​

You could just admit that you were wrong and made a false accusation. But no. Personally I find it highly amusing that you accused me of what you yourself actually did.

JY was only quoted saying he wasn't infectious well after my initial post

I will take that as an admission then that you had absolutely no knowledge then to base your accusation that Qld Health were knowingly placing Australians at risk. Just you jumping to a another wrong conclusion.

 

[Lynda2475]

will take that as an admission then that you had absolutely no knowledge then to base your accusation that Qld Health were knowingly placing Australians at risk. Just you jumping to a another wrong conclusion.

No not admitting that at all, I hadnt had time find the article that stated that covid positive patients were being brought in but here is one:

PNG man who died of COVID-19 was former governor and aviation pioneer

Former PNG governor Malcolm Kela Smith was medically evacuated to Queensland nearly two weeks ago after his condition deteriorated.

www.brisbanetimes.com.au

The pertinent bit being “Since the beginning of the pandemic, aeromedical crews have transferred a number of COVID-positive, and potentially COVID-positive, patients to Queensland.”

Which if you cared to look you could have easily found, but you were only searching for evidence to the contrary.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

On the point of PCR test before being allowed to board a repatriation flight home, I’m still against that lol We seem to have sufficient infection controls in quarantine and airlines seem to be of the view that infections don’t occur on planes

 

[dajop]

On the point of PCR test before being allowed to board a repatriation flight home,

In practice, there’s no need to do a PCR test before being allowed to board, the only requirement is to show to the airline a piece of paper that indicates you’ve tested negative to a PCR. In some places there’s a big difference between the former and the latter. Further adding to the futility of it all.

Or for the actual repat flights QF is doing the tests are actually done prior to boarding, hence results not in question?

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

In practice, there’s no need to do a PCR test before being allowed to board, the only requirement is to show to the airline a piece of paper that indicates you’ve tested negative to a PCR. In some places there’s a big difference between the former and the latter. Further adding to the futility of it all.

Or for the actual repat flights QF is doing the tests are actually done prior to boarding, hence results not in question?

Perhaps I’m mistaken, I thought the Federal Government/National Cabinet made a negative PCR test within a specified timeframe a requirement to board a flight (both repatriation and commercial) to Australia- futility, fraud, etc aside.

I know I’m in the minority on this point, but we are still getting imported cases under this requirement (ie in my view it seems pointless) - why bother stopping people going where they ‘need’ to go

 

[dajop]

Perhaps I’m mistaken, I thought the Federal Government/National Cabinet made a negative PCR test within a specified timeframe a requirement to board a flight (both repatriation and commercial) to Australia- futility, fraud, etc aside.

They did. But in practice that means showing a test result to the airline. Unless the labs have incorporated some robust security features into their test result documentation, and the airlines are looking for them (unlikely) I would not be at all surprised that there are a significant proportion of people in some countries presenting fake documents - particularly if they have secured a rare flight and have actually taken the test and tested positive. The incentive to defraud is high, given how difficult it is to secure a flight to Australia.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

In practice, there’s no need to do a PCR test before being allowed to board, the only requirement is to show to the airline a piece of paper that indicates you’ve tested negative to a PCR. In some places there’s a big difference between the former and the latter. Further adding to the futility of it all.

Or for the actual repat flights QF is doing the tests are actually done prior to boarding, hence results not in question?

Which also begs the question of the reliability and usefulness of any so-called Vaccination Passport.

 

[jakeseven7]

They did. But in practice that means showing a test result to the airline. Unless the labs have incorporated some robust security features into their test result documentation, and the airlines are looking for them (unlikely) I would not be at all surprised that there are a significant proportion of people in some countries presenting fake documents - particularly if they have secured a rare flight and have actually taken the test and tested positive. The incentive to defraud is high, given how difficult it is to secure a flight to Australia.

Yup and hence alot of positive cases coming in from India especially in Northern America....

 

[drron]

Again your are talking a comment about what has been happening in this pandemic and applying it to unrelated pre-pandemic situation.

I never raised any objection or issue of our pre-pandemic history of treating PNG patients onshore, my objection is to knowingly bringing covid positives onshore when Aussies who test positive cant board a flight. JY was only quoted saying he wasn't infectious well after my initial post but it is still a double standard as if an aussie wanting to fly home has a positive PCR too bad.

The programs which bring charity cases to Australia for surgery etc form many countries (not just PNG) have not been operating the way they did or at the same scale as prior to the pandemic.

So this post can be interpreted as having no regard for the health of any PNG citizen. Treating severe Covid in PNG would be close to impossible especially if they needed ICU admission. So denying them transfer to Australia just because they are Covid positive is morally indefensible.

 

[Pushka]

Yup and hence alot of positive cases coming in from India especially in Northern America....

Five in one family on the one day, on the test done on arrival into Australia.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

We seem to have sufficient infection controls in quarantine and airlines seem to be of the view that infections don’t occur on planes

Well airlines may have a somewhat vested interest perspective on the topic as there are documented cases of in-flight transmission.

So while incidence does seem to be very low, in-flight transmissions do occur.

Abstract​

To assess the role of in-flight transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), we investigated a cluster of cases among passengers on a 10-hour commercial flight. Affected persons were passengers, crew, and their close contacts. We traced 217 passengers and crew to their final destinations and interviewed, tested, and quarantined them. Among the 16 persons in whom SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected, 12 (75%) were passengers seated in business class along with the only symptomatic person (attack rate 62%). Seating proximity was strongly associated with increased infection risk (risk ratio 7.3, 95% CI 1.2–46.2). We found no strong evidence supporting alternative transmission scenarios. In-flight transmission that probably originated from 1 symptomatic passenger caused a large cluster of cases during a long flight. Guidelines for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among air passengers should consider individual passengers’ risk for infection, the number of passengers traveling, and flight duration.​

​

Transmission of SARS-CoV 2 During Long-Haul Flight

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 During Long Flight

wwwnc.cdc.gov

And apart from transmission on planes it is quite likely that some transmission occur at airports and during transit. You might recall the case of a Pacific Islander that flew back to his home island from Australia via New Zealand and was found to be positive after arrival. In-flight or in-airport being the likely cause.

 

[Lynda2475]

So this post can be interpreted as having no regard for the health of any PNG citizen. Treating severe Covid in PNG would be close to impossible especially if they needed ICU admission. So denying them transfer to Australia just because they are Covid positive is morally indefensible.

My objection (again if posts read in their entirety and not odd bits taken out of the series) is on the basis that Australian's with Covid in many parts of the world have been denied the right to return home. Its about fairness.

I clearly stated if we can accept the risk of covid positive patients from PNG we can accept the risk of Aussies who want to return home who have had a positive PCR.

Start doing the right thing by Aussies and I couldn't care less who else we treat, but whilst ever we have ridiculously low caps on Aussie arrivals, and wont let Aussies with a poistive PCR (who also may not be infectious) come home we shouldn't be making exemptions for other countries.

Just like we need to make sure our most vulnerable dont get bumped out of their place in the vaccine queue for Politicians, Olympic athletes.

I cant believe no one else sees the hypocrisy in Qld closing borders to whole states because of 1 or 2 cases and requesting reduced international arrivals of Aussies but happily bringing in known positives.

 

[Gremlin]

My objection (again if posts read in their entirety and not odd bits taken out of the series) is on the basis that Australian's with Covid in many parts of the world have been denied the right to return home. Its about fairness.

I clearly stated if we can accept the risk of covid positive patients from PNG we can accept the risk of Aussies who want to return home who have had a positive PCR.

Start doing the right thing by Aussies and I couldn't care less who else we treat, but whilst ever we have ridiculously low caps on Aussie arrivals, and wont let Aussies with a poistive PCR (who also may not be infectious) come home we shouldn't be making exemptions for other countries.

Just like we need to make sure our most vulnerable dont get bumped out of their place in the vaccine queue for Politicians, Olympic athletes.

I cant believe no one else sees the hypocrisy in Qld closing borders to whole states because of 1 or 2 cases and requesting reduced international arrivals of Aussies but happily bringing in known positives.

As someone who has spent quite a bit of time in FNQ, I would say there is also another motivation. Australia has a de facto land border with PNG. It may not seem like it if you're sitting in Sydney or Melbourne or Perth, but for all intents and purposes there is a porous border with our nearest north neighbour. There are a steady stream of PNG nationals who regularly cross the border to access medical services, as well as other essential services, in the Torres Strait that are unavailable to them on their side of the border.

Australia's greatest risk of catastrophic outbreak right at this very moment is likely not HQ going wrong, but spread travelling from the mainland of PNG to and through the islands of the Torres Strait and onwards to Cairns. Many extremely vulnerable Indigenous Australians are exposed to this risk - which is far higher for them than the risk of a typical nursing home resident in one of our capital cities. Qld Health, Qld Police and Australian Border Force are disproportionately allocating staff to managing both health and movement at the border. It is absolutely in Australia's national self-interest that PNG can be supported appropriately.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

As someone who has spent quite a bit of time in FNQ, I would say there is also another motivation. Australia has a de facto land border with PNG. It may not seem like it if you're sitting in Sydney or Melbourne or Perth, but for all intents and purposes there is a porous border with our nearest north neighbour. There are a steady stream of PNG nationals who regularly cross the border to access medical services, as well as other essential services, in the Torres Strait that are unavailable to them on their side of the border.

Australia's greatest risk of catastrophic outbreak right at this very moment is likely not HQ going wrong, but spread travelling from the mainland of PNG to and through the islands of the Torres Strait and onwards to Cairns. Many extremely vulnerable Indigenous Australians are exposed to this risk - which is far higher for them than the risk of a typical nursing home resident in one of our capital cities. Qld Health, Qld Police and Australian Border Force are disproportionately allocating staff to managing both health and movement at the border. It is absolutely in Australia's national self-interest that PNG can be supported appropriately.

Exactly.

​

Papua New Guinea nationals and traditional inhabitants from Australia who reside in the Torres Strait Protected Zone or in the 13 treaty coastal villages in and adjacent to the Torres Strait enjoy free movement in order to pursue traditional activities. This movement has been allowed through The Torres Strait Treaty which states that parties should act ‘in the spirit of mutual friendship and good neighbourliness’. Papua New Guinea nationals are able to access services from the Torres Strait and Northern Peninsula Area Health Service District in the Torres Strait Protected Zone whilst in the course of conducting traditional activities. Provision for this is sanctioned under the Queensland Health Policy – Management of Papua New Guinea Nationals presenting to Queensland Health facilities in the Torres Strait.​

​

And of particular note:​

​

Funding of Papua New Guinea nationals receiving treatment is the responsibility of the Commonwealth Government. Consequently, correct reporting of this group in Information System for Oral Health (ISOH) is important for full cost recover​

​

https://metrosouth.health.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/guide-treat-png-qld-oral-hlth.pdf

​

The Torres Strait region has been a life long interest of mine as my Great Grandfather was a goldminer in both PNG, and the Cape York Region as well as many Australian Goldlfields. And my grandmother was conceived and born in the region and her brother (my Great Uncle) is buried in the cemetery on Thursday Island a location I have visited to pay my respects as well as to connect with family history.

The indigenous people who live in the Torres Strait do not view there being a border for them .in the way that we would consider a border to be.

 

[RAM]

Yup and hence alot of positive cases coming in from India especially in Northern America....

and Australia and NZ and.....

Back when DFAT provided the rough break-up of 'vulnerable Australians' - by far the largest group were in India.

For some reason the Federal Govt stopped providing the break-up? Who'd thought.

 

[trevella]

What’s that whistling?

Is there such a creature as a weasel dog?

 

[suze2000]

Which also begs the question of the reliability and usefulness of any so-called Vaccination Passport.

Not if it was a notarised stamp in your passport that you have to pay for and has the security features of an entry visa. Or if it was incorporated into the e-data in an electronic passport like your biometrics are.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Covid positive does not necessary mean covid infectious.

The infectious phase is part of the overall period that a person can test positive.


The PCR Test typically will show someone as positive for longer than they are actually infectious for. The PNG case was declared to not be infectious while being treated in Australia. Knowing if a person is Covid Positive does not define if a person is a risk to others or not. It just flags that they may be, and not that they are.

Does a PCR “TRUE POSITIVE” mean INFECTIVITY OR VIRULENCE?​

What does viral culture tell about PCR positives?​

​

A PCR test might find the virus it was looking for. This results in a PCR positive, but a crucial question remains: is this virus active, i.e. infectious, or virulent? The PCR alone cannot answer this question. The CEBM explains why culturing the virus is needed to answer this question:​

​

“In viral culture, viruses are injected in the laboratory cell lines to see if they cause cell damage and death, thus releasing a whole set of new viruses that can go on to infect other cells.”​

​

That is, if the PCR detects the virus in the human sample, this detection might correspond to a virus that is now incapable of infecting cells and reproducing. Biologists can tell if the virus is infectious by injecting it into cells (culture cells). If these cells are not affected by the virus and the virus does not reproduce in them, then the PCR test found a virus that is no longer active.​

​

The meaning is that the PCR positive is a non-infectious positive.​

PCR positives: what do they mean? - The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine

Updated 23 September 2020 Article by: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Department of Physics and Technology, UiT The Artic University of

www.cebm.net

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Not if it was a notarised stamp in your passport that you have to pay for and has the security features of an entry visa. Or if it was incorporated into the e-data in an electronic passport like your biometrics are.

Well I would have faith that Australian Passports could be ok, but I would not be so confident that all passports worldwide would equally well checked.

And even here, someone from Australia may be vaccinated overseas. How to check?

All may be good but I could see the system being scammed as well. How much would an antivaxxer be willing to pay for fake vaccination certificate?


However if international travel is freed up for those who are vaccination it may well see an uptake in those willing to get AZ.