Predictions of when international flights may resume/bans lifted

[trevella]

If there is no longer the threat of serious complications and hospitalisations on a mass scale, there is no reason to be obsessed with case numbers.

People will continue to differ in their interpretations of "on a mass scale". Remember that Australia will be one of the very few countries to face the prospect of rising case numbers once 'free' borders open... if this year's death toll is considered unacceptable, then you're setting a pretty ambitious standard for yourselves going forward. Policymakers will want to make *very* sure that the exit can be managed before opening the door, and will have no real precedent to draw on. (NZ will probably be waiting to learn from Australia's).

And anyway, what makes you think that those who make the decisions will be able to instantly and perfectly accurately assess "the threat of serious complications and hospitalisations on a mass scale"?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

And anyway, what makes you think that those who make the decisions will be able to instantly and perfectly accurately assess "the threat of serious complications and hospitalisations on a mass scale"?

That would only seem possible if all of the data from all of the current trials is wrong? (The three major ones seem to indicate close to 100% effectiveness in reducing severity.)

 

[Pushka]

Because if the vaccine reduces the severity of the infection to less than a common cold they won’t care anymore.

But hospitalisation rates are low anyway. The reason why we have one in hospital is because they have the UK version and they haven't stated they are actually unwell. They just want them completely isolated.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

But hospitalisation rates are low anyway.

That only holds true if the virus can be contained We saw in Victoria what happens once it gets out and hits vulnerable populations.

The issue is also two-fold. It's not just hospital beds, it's hospital and other front-line staff... they all have to go into quarantine if considered as close contacts, which puts a huge strain on the remaining staff.

 

[oznflfan]

That would only seem possible if all of the data from all of the current trials is wrong? (The three major ones seem to indicate close to 100% effectiveness in reducing severity.)

Even so, hard to see some premiers even having remote possibility of one of their constituents even getting sick from COVID, let alone dying. Will be interesting times next 12-18 months. Come Sunday 3rd July 2022 I'm off somewhere for a month, and damn as hell sure it won't be Oz or NZ.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Even so, hard to see some premiers even having remote possibility of one of their constituents even getting sick from COVID, let alone dying. Will be interesting times next 12-18 months. Come Sunday 3rd July 2022 I'm off somewhere for a month, and damn as hell sure it won't be Oz or NZ.

I think it's partly about what the constituents want and expect? The vulnerable are looking to their governments to protect them and provide a meaningful existence (being able to visit family and friends, go out and about, etc). Health care workers the same.

If we take my elderly and at-risk parents as an example, they are looking for that protection now, but fully accept that once a vaccine is rolled out, their expectations will change.

 

[trevella]

That would only seem possible if all of the data from all of the current trials is wrong? (The three major ones seem to indicate close to 100% effectiveness in reducing severity.)

Only if you completely ignore transmissibility. Or did you fail to notice that this thing spreads fairly easily?

It may very well turn out that transmissibility is also significantly impeded by the vaccines. But it will be a long time before we actually know that. And longer for policymakers to be convinced.

If you think policymakers will err on the side of being overly optimistic, I think you're liable to be surprised.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Only if you completely ignore transmissibility. Or did you fail to notice that this thing spreads fairly easily?

It may very well turn out that transmissibility is also significantly impeded by the vaccines. But it will be a long time before we actually know that. And longer for policymakers to be convinced.

If you think policymakers will err on the side of being overly optimistic, I think you're liable to be surprised.

I get that. But does transmissibility matter if the severity is significantly reduced?

 

[trevella]

But does transmissibility matter if the severity is significantly reduced?

Yes. Of course it does. Because otherwise how do you protect the vulnerable (who will not suddenly cease to exist) without completely isolating them?

The whole point is that there is still too much that remains to be seen. You can't just point to trial results and then tell me what degree of protection will be afforded to an elderly population that continues to see repeated infections due to rampant transmission among vaccinated asymptomatic workers.

Serious cases will still occur, and in Australia's situation will start to occur more frequently. Which then makes it harder to explain moving the policy settings in the 'opposite' direction.

So when do *you* think the typical casual traveller will be able to enter Australia without any type of quarantine?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yes. Of course it does. Because otherwise how do you protect the vulnerable (who will not suddenly cease to exist) without completely isolating them?

The whole point is that there is still too much that remains to be seen. You can't just point to trial results and then tell me what degree of protection will be afforded to an elderly population that continues to see repeated infections due to rampant transmission among vaccinated asymptomatic workers.

Serious cases will still occur, and in Australia's situation will start to occur more frequently. Which then makes it harder to explain moving the policy settings in the 'opposite' direction.

So when do *you* think the typical casual traveller will be able to enter Australia without any type of quarantine?

Maybe I'm not understanding your issue... but if the severity is reduced, ie severe cases and hospitalisation is almost zero, there is no need to 'protect' the vulnerable with extreme measures like we are now. As I mentioned, my parents are willing to accept some level of risk, just like they do with the flu each year. At some point their life has to be meaningful. If there are a few outliers who still consider the risk to be too great for them, possibly they will need to isolate or shield, over and above any government measures. This is not about zero deaths, this is about mass deaths, like we saw in Victoria.

Personally I think the ban on travel will be extended until 17 June. By that point our vulnerable and front-line staff will be vaccinated, and we'll also have 6 month's data on severity from the UK, Europe and USA. If the latter proves the manufacturers' claims, I think the border will start to open up. By September/October next year, when the government plans to have everyone that wants it vaccinated, there will be relatively free movement, and 'at home' quarantine if pax are specifically required to do it for some reason.

 

[oznflfan]

Maybe I'm not understanding your issue... but if the severity is reduced, ie severe cases and hospitalisation is almost zero, there is no need to 'protect' the vulnerable with extreme measures like we are now. As I mentioned, my parents are willing to accept some level of risk, just like they do with the flu each year. At some point their life has to be meaningful. If there are a few outliers who still consider the risk to be too great for them, possibly they will need to isolate or shield, over and above any government measures. This is not about zero deaths, this is about mass deaths, like we saw in Victoria.

Personally I think the ban on travel will be extended until 17 June. By that point our vulnerable and front-line staff will be vaccinated, and we'll also have 6 month's data on severity from the UK, Europe and USA. If the latter proves the manufacturers' claims, I think the border will start to open up. By September/October next year, when the government plans to have everyone that wants it vaccinated, there will be relatively free movement, and 'at home' quarantine if pax are specifically required to do it for some reason.

I see your point, but roll forward the travel ban to 17th Dec and you may be closer.

 

[trevella]

Maybe I'm not understanding your issue... but if the severity is reduced, ie severe cases and hospitalisation is almost zero, there is no need to 'protect' the vulnerable with extreme measures like we are now.

You keep saying the "if" part like it's a done deal. It's not. And severity will remain a function of infection numbers, even if the coefficients change.

 

[drron]

We really won't know if severity is reduced until a lot more People have been vaccinated plus a significant time since vaccination has passed.
There are people who after having a flu vaccination develope a severe flu and even die from it.Though the incidence is reduced.

The results from C19 vaccinations is going to be more like the flu and not the same as polio,smallpox, measles vaccination etc.The H1N1 strain of the flu still exists.It is thought to be the strain responsible for the 1918 pandemic.It keeps mutating and has caused many outbreaks since.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

You keep saying the "if" part like it's a done deal. It's not. And severity will remain a function of infection numbers, even if the coefficients change.

Still to be determined long term... but the initial findings of the three major vaccines have all claimed close to 100% reduced severity.

I don’t see how severity is linked to infection rates? 1000 people getting infected could mean 1000 people with reduced severity.

If the severity is only reduced in 90% of cases, then yes, the more infections, the more likely you will have a severe case requiring hospitalisation. But that’s the balance and risk many are willing to accept, like the flu shot.

 

[Pom-DownUnder]

You keep saying the "if" part like it's a done deal. It's not. And severity will remain a function of infection numbers, even if the coefficients change.

yes, but that 99.9% survival rate will be behind a 95% vaccine efficiency rate, making the mortality rate go down to about 1 in 20000 infections, and the infections will decrease due to the length of time people will be transmissible (think a few days rather than weeks / months)

at that point there is zero reason to keep the borders shut as you will legitimately be in the territory of safer than the flu

 

[trevella]

yes, but that 99.9% survival rate will be behind a 95% vaccine efficiency rate, making the mortality rate go down to about 1 in 20000 infections, and the infections will decrease due to the length of time people will be transmissible (think a few days rather than weeks / months)

at that point there is zero reason to keep the borders shut as you will legitimately be in the territory of safer than the flu

You might very well turn out to be right. But it'll take more than just that to get the borders open again. Including a national government that is proactive in seeking open borders.

 

[drron]

And if anyone thinks that the chance of flying to Europe for the next European summer you may well be disappointed.
Here is Spain's experience.

Spain will register people who refuse Covid vaccine, says health minister

Database could be shared across Europe, says Salvador Illa

www.theguardian.com

So by June 2021 only ~ 40% of Spaniards are expected to be vaccinated.Only 40.5% in a poll said they would be vaccinated immediately.
At the end of that article 1 in 5 Health care workers in Italy are said to have refused the vaccine.
I doubt those numbers will convince the government to let in Europeans quarantine free.Nor any Australian who goes to Europe and wants to return.

 

[oznflfan]

Planning summer 2022 in Europe, thinking 70% likely. If not bumming around Indonesia and Malaysia would also be OK, closer to home, and cheaper.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

Need to stay safe for a while after the first dose....lol

Emergency nurse tests positive for COVID-19 eight days after vaccination

An emergency nurse in the United States has tested positive for COVID-19 just eight days after getting the vaccine.

www.news.com.au

 

[Pushka]

Need to stay safe for a while after the first dose....lol

Emergency nurse tests positive for COVID-19 eight days after vaccination

An emergency nurse in the United States has tested positive for COVID-19 just eight days after getting the vaccine.

www.news.com.au

Way too soon for it to take effect. Antibody production doesn’t start until around day 7.