The balance between how many need to be vaccinated within Australia & worldwide before regular services can start building - is much more difficult than many think.
In Princess Fiona's post above (#3,470) the graphic shows one aspect of vaccination maths. There is a second side of vaccination maths - what is the risk on a small group basis (eg: a family of 5 say travelling overseas?).
In PF's post the vaccine example uses 95% which is the 'early stage figure'. However as time goes by that figure will either stay the same or reduce. Just as (using the UK for an example) only say 4,000/day were testing positive earlier this year and more recently the figure was over 20,000/day - the very same holds true for the vaccine tests.
At this extremely early stage (typically 12-15 months before the normal end of Phase III trials) the figure is looking great at 95% (in contrast to the AZ/Oxford figure's 62% for the 'non-error' planned trial). in a non-emergency use authorisation sense - the Phase III trial is around the 1/4 to 1/6th the typical duration. So just as the figures for those testing +ve for CV in the UK jumped to around 5x the early year figures - it is quite possible that the results for the vaccines will drop (not everyone in the trials have been exposed to CV in such a manner yet).
That's why the 62% 'real' figure for the AZ/Oxford vaccine is so concerning. The mis-information by some who used the WHO saying 'any vaccine that provides better than 50%' would be used - is not about 'early Phase III results' but final figures.
Virus Maths #2
Probability that a family of 5 getting vaccinated with a 95% (likely at best final) efficacy ALL being resistent/immue to CV = 77% (0.95^5). So extremely likely that at least one in a family of 5 is vulnerable to CV (100% - 77% = 23% that not all are immune/resistent).
Using the AZ/Oxford figure of 62%, 9% chance that ALL are resistent/immune - so greater than 90% chance ALL are vulnerable, guarantees that at least 2 are (99.9999% probability).
An understanding of these probabilities
should be common knowledge amongst the members & advisors of the medical panel - we can only hope that their communication with the 'National Cabinet' is crystal clear.
To do away with mandatory 14 day quarantine can be objectively calculated with numerous assumptions made. For example what is the cost on mental health vs social health? The vested interest groups (predominently businesses) unusualy are split.
Tourism & construction (mostly) want the borders open as soon as possible before more of them fail. Senior Q execs have around $20m personally riding on the earlier opening due to their long term options - if the opening is delayed then the chance of Q not going into Administration is zero without a Fed Govt bailout which would also have to go to Rex & VA. It would also expose the Fed Govt to a class action by all those who lost out on VA going into Admin - a case they would likely win.
Those businesses with a more domestic focus would like the international borders to reopen ONLY if there was a near zero risk of another state or national lockdown. Realistically that is an early 2022 timeframe at best.
Scenario A: Imagine a family of 5 coming from country ABC where the CV positive rate in mid 2021 is just 2%. (remember some countries at the moment are >10% tests coming back positive, & in a few cases >20%). Unless all arrivals must be vaccinated & have some form of proof that cannot be forged then we would see similar numbers arriving who are CV+ as in the flights arriving today = guaranteed infectious arrivals. There is still a 1% chance that 1 in that particular family of 5 is infected even if the entire family was vaccinated with the 95% vaccine - even though there is a 23% chance that just one of them is not immune. ( 1 - P(all immune)). So whilst low risk of carrying CV before getting on the plane - they are at 100% risk of catching CV if exposed sufficiently.
Scenario B: Same flight but this time there has been a massive vaccination campaign in country ABC (as per Princess Fiona's post probability). Now the risk of CV+ people being on the flight is halved. So instead of say the 9 people in NSW international hotel arrivals quarantine who tested positive on one day recently - it could be 3 to 4 - per day across the 550/day arrivals so for typical long haul flight (in this example) - expect 2 people. For our family the risk that it is one of them goes from 1 in 100 to 1 in 200. Still the family have high chance that one of them is not immune.
The two examples above cough/u/me that airlines/people don't get complacent & stop requiring mask wearing for the bulk of the time, maintain massively increased on board cleaning (which with full planes means more staff on board). Social distancing will not exist on normal flying - that is the case within Australia for some months now with full or near full domestic flights.
The next Federal election must be held by mid May 2022.
Sadly, do the maths
Meanwhile the 'lobby groups' for Australian education facilities have shown their power:
The 63 students - from China, Hong Kong, Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia - covered the costs of the charter flight and Charles Darwin University will pay for their quarantine.
It will be the 18-year-old Rifqi's first time living overseas. He travelled from Jakarta in Indonesia to study cookery at CDU.
A cohort of 63 international students touches down in Darwin from Singapore to commence two weeks' quarantine at the Northern Territory's Howard Springs facility.
www.abc.net.au
For some reason no main stream politician wanted to go on record about why International students should get in first!
So Rifgi's in Australia for Xmas whilst 34,000 Australian citizens & permanent residents can only dream of what it would have been like. A cookery course is more important after all.
With the growing backlog to return to Australia - it may make it even harder to leave vs the relaxation that began in August. The October arrivals/departure data should be out shortly. Remember there has not been any restriction on departures using a foreign passport which may go some way in explaining why the number wanting to return has been expanding - so dual nationals could rort the requirements, or try to.
