Coronavirus | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact [email protected] // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT! Our inbox is full of email errors from members who have not updated their emails, please follow the instructions on how to update here
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Coronavirus

year of the tiger

Tiger Legend
Mar 26, 2008
7,432
2,394
Tasmania
Is it a case of people getting careless now that a vaccine is within sight?

Many reasons - attitudinal is certainly one but the virus has exposed the many weaknesses - structural, systemic and ideals in our leadership and governance systems and what drives us individually also.

We have failed to grasp or accept that this was always going to be a two year process to combat the virus and as a society were never willing to make the sacrifices necessary over this timeline- I am not just referring to Australia although we have done better than most.
 

Coburgtiger

Tiger Champion
May 7, 2012
3,568
2,130
Possibly but the 70% increase in transmission of this new strain is more likely.

I'm still keeping my powder dry on this apparent increased transmissibility of the UK strain.

There are a lot of reasons why one genetic variant could represent a large proportion of infections, some evolutionary, some of them purely mathematical.

What's known is that it has a few important mutations to genes associated with binding and detection.

It also is highly represented in new cases.

What's suspected is that it is highly transmissible, and there is some evidence for this, but as far as I can see, only one non peer reviewed study by mathematicians that shows this.

Definitely worth taking the precaution, but I wonder whether there are other causes (societal) in the UK that are causing the increased transmission which are being blamed on a couple of mutations.

I'd like to see a few controlled studies to show that this is some ultra strain of the virus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Althom

Tiger Superstar
Jul 23, 2016
1,080
960
I'm still keeping my powder dry on this apparent increased transmissibility of the UK strain.

There are a lot of reasons why one genetic variant could represent a large proportion of infections, some evolutionary, some of them purely mathematical.

What's known is that it has a few important mutations to genes associated with binding and detection.

It also is highly represented in new cases.

What's suspected is that it is highly transmissible, and there is some evidence for this, but as far as I can see, only one non peer reviewed study by mathematicians that shows this.

Definitely worth taking the precaution, but I wonder whether there are other causes (societal) in the UK that are causing the increased transmission which are being blamed on a couple of mutations.

I'd like to see a few controlled studies to show that this is some ultra strain of the virus.
When it first came to light Professor Kelly said that the apparent higher transmissibility may have been exaggerated by the fact that in the UK it was cold so everyone was spending more time indoors and it was approaching Xmas so more people were mixing in shops, pubs etc.
He seems to have changed his tune since though.
 
Last edited:

mrposhman

Tiger Legend
Oct 6, 2013
9,613
5,783
I'm stunned that masks on planes weren't already compulsory.

As for the pre-flight test, the devil is in the detail and they need to make sure they do have a way of validating the tests and ensuring there is a clear and easy way for people to prove the tests.
I went upto QLD for Christmas, the flight out of Melbourne was with Qantas and it was Qantas rules that you had to wear masks on the flight.

Flew back with Virgin, "advice" was to wear one but there wasn't a direction that you had to.

I'm still amazed at the amount of people that wear masks but fail to wear them correctly, seriously its not that hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
30,329
8,192
Melbourne
Awkward situation for Victorian authorities. Woman with the UK strain actually quarantined in Melbourne with the virus and was released after 10 days before flying to Brisbane.

The explanation kinda made sense but isn't going to sit well with everyone. Close contact - quarantine for 14 days. Actually test positive to the virus - quarantine for 10 days.

Brisbane might get lucky but maybe the protocols and/or testing need to be looked at.
 

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
14,978
10,465
Zero in Queensland today. Not sure it is as highly contagious as they are saying.

the longer this goes on, and the more I read, the more convinced I become we might as well have Rhys Stanley

as our last line of Covid defence?

The Guardian just now reporting a woman arrived from UK to Melbourne, tested positive to UK mutant Covid,

and somehow flies to Queensland 10 days later?

I know it wouldnt feel like it to any tigers who couldn't attend the 2020 premiership,

but I reckon so far, luck has made a significant contribution to preventing the *smile* really hitting the fan.

How does this unfathomable, random incompetence keep happening? Or is it hysterical incompetent inaccurate journalism?

do the authorities make up stories about quarantine workers being vectors, to cover incompetent human error?

and there we are, back to Rhys Stanley.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

MD Jazz

Tiger Legend
Feb 3, 2017
6,248
3,311
As you have too. You've been constantly spreading info that VIC *smile* up everytime. Any response to that with the current outbreak, or are you still Gladys is awesome but the VIC system is *smile*?

Yes, there was a major outbreak but credit should be given for having a much better system in place now to react to outbreaks.

The Vic system was *smile*. NSW have managed multiple outbreaks well. VIC have managed the recent outbreak well. The NSW team have *smile* up the quarantine and its hard to understand how they are still *smile* it up. But they have managed their *smile* ups without shutting down their state.

As an aside we are looking at putting on an admin person. We have a short list of 10 we have interviewed. Almost every one of them have had job loss or reduction of hours directly as a result of covid in VIC. I wonder if it is the same in NSW? Either their employer has shut down or let them go. NSW have been constant in their messaging and policy and relied on their ability to manage outbreaks. Perhaps they just got lucky. Lets hope the whole country continues to be lucky.

And lets hope we get a national strategy around hotel quarantine, its clear the risk surrounding it. Australia is in an enviable position, we get quarantine right and eliminate community transmission and we'll have a local tourism industry that will go gangbusters. The feds have dropped the ball as far as leadership on quarantine goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
14,978
10,465
have I got this right?

if you return from overseas without Covid, you do 14 days of quarantine in the CBD,

but if you return with Covid, you're out in Queens St, or Pitt St, or Swanson St. with your bags, in 10 days?

Is this real?

I was only joking about Rhys Stanley for CMO, but he could be a safer pair of hands?
 

Brodders17

Tiger Legend
Mar 21, 2008
12,456
1,932
have I got this right?

if you return from overseas without Covid, you do 14 days of quarantine in the CBD,

but if you return with Covid, you're out in Queens St, or Pitt St, or Swanson St. with your bags, in 10 days?

Is this real?

I was only joking about Rhys Stanley for CMO, but he could be a safer pair of hands?
i think the point is once you have it and then dont have it you are safe.
if you test negative you could still then test positive anytime up until about 14 days after exposure.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
14,978
10,465
i think the point is once you have it and then dont have it you are safe.
if you test negative you could still then test positive anytime up until about 14 days after exposure.

.......... and in a massive reform to our quarantine,

positive cases have to test negative before hitting the most populous streets.

If I think of health officials as fishermen, Its quite easy to create a comical, but disturbing mental picture of their nets, and how they identify opportunities for continual improvement.

Ive maintained from the outset of this thing that 1. our leaders and systems have done a relatively very good job and 2. The lack of creativity on policy at all levels on almost all things Covid, has been spectacular.

 

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
13,293
3,918
Camberwell
have I got this right?

if you return from overseas without Covid, you do 14 days of quarantine in the CBD,

but if you return with Covid, you're out in Queens St, or Pitt St, or Swanson St. with your bags, in 10 days?

Is this real?

I was only joking about Rhys Stanley for CMO, but he could be a safer pair of hands?
14 days is the incubation period for COVID , the period after which we can be certain a person has not contracted he virus after exposure to it. The 10 days period is the time that is deemed for a person with COVID to be contagious after contracting it. They are different things

it was explained by the NSW CHO today as reported below in the Age

Why can COVID-19 cases be released from isolation after 10 days? A short explainer​

By Natassia Chrysanthos​

There has been some concern and confusion since this morning's revelationthat a positive COVID-19 case was released from isolation in Victoria after just 10 days, and without a negative test.
NSW Chief Health Officer Kerry Chant has explained why that was the case. Essentially, a 14-day quarantine period applies to people who may have been exposed to the virus (such as close contacts or returned travellers) because that is the general incubation period for infection to reveal itself.
But when someone actually has COVID-19, a different isolation requirement sets in. The guidelines were established by the Communicable Diseases Network Australia, and they change depending on whether the person had a mild or serious case.
The returned traveller reported this morning, who first arrived in Victoria and travelled to Queensland, had a mild case of COVID-19. Dr Chant explained what rules applied and why:
"The guidelines require that you have 10 days in isolation after your [COVID-19] symptoms. So you flip from quarantining 14 days to [minimum 10 days] when you are a case.
"For mild cases you were able to be discharged if you were 10 days from your symptom onset and you had been free of symptoms for 72 hours before.
"The reason that was necessary is that we found cases where you can detect the virus in people's noses and throats, three months and even four months after the infection. What we're also observing is sometimes they may be negative at a certain point, but then you get a runny nose or something, and then if you get tested at that time, you can sometimes have the remnants of the virus come out.
"Because of that, you would have people permanently locked up. That's why the Communicable Disease Network looked at the evidence. That was that people are most infectious in that beginning bit, the pre-symptomatic time-frame."
That explains why some people can be released after 10 days so long as they have been free of symptoms for 72 hours. It also explains why a negative test was not required before cases left isolation and entered the community - a positive test at that later stage does not necessarily mean they are still infectious.
"Obviously there is a different set of criteria if you have been hospitalised, there are much more stringent guidelines," Dr Chant said. That different set of criteria also applies to people who were in intensive care or have had more intensive lung involvement.
Of course, these requirements have now shifted in light of the new mutant strains appearing overseas and arriving on Australian shores. "The Communicable Diseases Network Australia guidelines have been renewed and we will further discuss that situation today," Dr Chant said.
But in short: the minimum isolation period for positive mild cases has been lengthened to 14 days and a negative test will be required before people enter the community. Those who still test positive after their symptoms have passed will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
"In NSW we've now re-instituted PCR testing on all negatives, but we are also making sure that we have the timely genetic genome sequencing, so again that can inform the decision-making," Dr Chant said.
"If you are negative, you will be able to [leave isolation], but we will extend the period to 14 days, not 10 days, as a precaution. We will test you before you go out and if you're negative, we will let you go out.
"If you are positive, we have a case-by-case assessment with experts who will do things like [assess] whether you have antibodies in response, whether the PCR marker is showing whether you're infectious," she said.
Such measures will alter the way that mild COVID-19 cases, such as the woman who travelled to Queensland from Victoria, will be treated in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
14,978
10,465
14 days is the incubation period for COVID , the period after which we can be certain a person has not contracted he virus after exposure to it. The 10 days period is the time that is deemed for a person with COVID to be contagious after contracting it. They are different things

it was explained by the NSW CHO today as reported below in the Age

Why can COVID-19 cases be released from isolation after 10 days? A short explainer​

By Natassia Chrysanthos​

There has been some concern and confusion since this morning's revelationthat a positive COVID-19 case was released from isolation in Victoria after just 10 days, and without a negative test.
NSW Chief Health Officer Kerry Chant has explained why that was the case. Essentially, a 14-day quarantine period applies to people who may have been exposed to the virus (such as close contacts or returned travellers) because that is the general incubation period for infection to reveal itself.
But when someone actually has COVID-19, a different isolation requirement sets in. The guidelines were established by the Communicable Diseases Network Australia, and they change depending on whether the person had a mild or serious case.
The returned traveller reported this morning, who first arrived in Victoria and travelled to Queensland, had a mild case of COVID-19. Dr Chant explained what rules applied and why:
"The guidelines require that you have 10 days in isolation after your [COVID-19] symptoms. So you flip from quarantining 14 days to [minimum 10 days] when you are a case.
"For mild cases you were able to be discharged if you were 10 days from your symptom onset and you had been free of symptoms for 72 hours before.
"The reason that was necessary is that we found cases where you can detect the virus in people's noses and throats, three months and even four months after the infection. What we're also observing is sometimes they may be negative at a certain point, but then you get a runny nose or something, and then if you get tested at that time, you can sometimes have the remnants of the virus come out.
"Because of that, you would have people permanently locked up. That's why the Communicable Disease Network looked at the evidence. That was that people are most infectious in that beginning bit, the pre-symptomatic time-frame."
That explains why some people can be released after 10 days so long as they have been free of symptoms for 72 hours. It also explains why a negative test was not required before cases left isolation and entered the community - a positive test at that later stage does not necessarily mean they are still infectious.
"Obviously there is a different set of criteria if you have been hospitalised, there are much more stringent guidelines," Dr Chant said. That different set of criteria also applies to people who were in intensive care or have had more intensive lung involvement.
Of course, these requirements have now shifted in light of the new mutant strains appearing overseas and arriving on Australian shores. "The Communicable Diseases Network Australia guidelines have been renewed and we will further discuss that situation today," Dr Chant said.
But in short: the minimum isolation period for positive mild cases has been lengthened to 14 days and a negative test will be required before people enter the community. Those who still test positive after their symptoms have passed will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
"In NSW we've now re-instituted PCR testing on all negatives, but we are also making sure that we have the timely genetic genome sequencing, so again that can inform the decision-making," Dr Chant said.
"If you are negative, you will be able to [leave isolation], but we will extend the period to 14 days, not 10 days, as a precaution. We will test you before you go out and if you're negative, we will let you go out.
"If you are positive, we have a case-by-case assessment with experts who will do things like [assess] whether you have antibodies in response, whether the PCR marker is showing whether you're infectious," she said.
Such measures will alter the way that mild COVID-19 cases, such as the woman who travelled to Queensland from Victoria, will be treated in the future.

yeah thanks that all makes sense,

except the absence of an exit test for a positive case

until now.

what's the opposite of the precautionary principle again?
 

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
13,293
3,918
Camberwell
yeah thanks that all makes sense,

except the absence of an exit test for a positive case

until now.

what's the opposite of the precautionary principle again?
Yes I wasn’t really commenting on whether the protocols are correct or not just what the difference between the 14 days and 10 days is.

I am not qualified to know what is the right or wrong time period except that I have heard it said that people can still show as positive for weeks and months post infection but actually not be contagious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
14,978
10,465
Yes I wasn’t really commenting on whether the protocols are correct or not just what the difference between the 14 days and 10 days is.

I am not qualified to know what is the right or wrong time period except that I have heard it said that people can still show as positive for weeks and months post infection but actually not be contagious.

yeah fair enough.

im losing my *smile* a bit. had my 3rd attempt to see my first born for the first time in a long time stymied at the 11th and a half hour.

Im making it about me, which it isnt.

I got to go to the GF. im being a sook.

I'll shut up o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
13,293
3,918
Camberwell
yeah fair enough.

im losing my *smile* a bit. had my 3rd attempt to see my first born for the first time in a long time stymied at the 11th and a half hour.

Im making it about me, which it isnt.

I got to go to the GF. im being a sook.

I'll shut up o_O
The separation of families is a really hard part of all of this. So many of the people who have got caught in NSW were just seeing family.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Midsy

I am the one who knocks.
Jan 18, 2014
2,995
752
49
London
Zero in Queensland today. Not sure it is as highly contagious as they are saying.
Good luck.
One in fifty people have Covid in England, and in parts of London it's one in twenty.

Coronavirus - BBC News - BBC.com

www.bbc.com › news › coronavirus


Get full coverage of the Coronavirus pandemic including the latest news, analysis ... The mayor says in some parts of London 1 in 20 people has Covid-19, as he ...
Sadiq Khan is a complete *smile* and will make anything about him. He has been the worst Mayor London has had in my 25 years here. He’s like a Tom Morris or Sam McClure but in the wrong job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user