Thursday update:
New cases in the community: 68 - 2 in Wellington (household contacts), the rest in Auckland
Total cases in the community: 277 - 14 in Wellington, the rest in Auckland
Links between cases: 154 epidemiologically linked, 123 unlinked
Number of locations of interest: 495 - these will be updated here every 2 hours
Number of contacts identified: 24,402
Portion of contacts followed up with by officials: 65%. Around 17.5% of contacts were only indentified on Wednesday
Portion of contacts tested: 71%
Contact tracing capacity: Training for new contact tracers currently underway (100 people trained on Wednesday). There will be 1400 contact tracers in call centres by the end of the day
Vaccination rate: 26% of eligible population fully vaccinated, 46% have had one dose. 73% of New Zealanders aged 30+ have either booked to have a vaccine or have had at least one dose
Vaccinations done on Wednesday: 87,772
Details: Case numbers aren't growing exponentially, cases are generally linked, people generally aren't getting infected by being at the same locations as infected people. IE New cases have only emerged from 13 of the 495 locations of interest
Strategy: Elimination remains the strategy. Goal is to up vaccination rates, so lockdowns don't need to continue to be a key response to community outbreaks
Lockdown: Government will provide an alert level update on Friday
Community cases in hospital: 15 - all stable, none in ICU
Testing: 41,739 tests processed on Wednesday
206 Comments
At what point would you institute a level 4 lockdown? After the horse has already bolted?
We've just seen 1 case turn into 277 in a few weeks. Pretty sobering and consistent with case numbers multiplying by 6 every week. Give it a fortnight of no lockdowns to wait and see and we'll be at ~10,000. Give it a month, ~360,000.
We've just seen 1 case turn into 277 in a few weeks.
Actually at the time case A was infected, which was probably the preceding Thursday/Friday, it seems like there were already about a dozen cases in the community. Then over the weekend, those cases went to large events, eg Bayleys and Mitre 10 conference events, and church services.
By the time case A went for their test on Monday afternoon, there were likely upwards of 50 people who had contracted COVID over the weekend. By the time lockdown started on Tuesday night, it's likely to have been upwards of 100 people.
So it's not like "1 person infected hundreds in a couple of days", it's actually "that 1 person was just the tip of an iceberg that was already exponentially growing once the data caught up with us".
Certainly the case can be made that we need easily accessible saliva testing that can provide quick results. If such tests were routinely available, we may have had someone else testing positive for COVID prior to that weekend, and the case numbers may not have gotten nearly this high. Even having the positive result back on Monday afternoon from case A and going into lockdown that night instead of Tuesday could have made a big difference.
Do not be surprised, what might have been comedy actually foretells a change in the makeup of our species.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsJFNQd62Wk
How much evidence from other countries does one need... there's mountains of it out there.
A CDC study that analyzed COVID-19 cases in Los Angeles found that un-vaccinated people are 29 times more likely to be hospitalised than vaccinated. Severe side-effects from vaccines are extremely rare. In NZ 23% of people are fully vaccinated, so we're not ready. In poorly vaccinated parts of the US hospitals are once again reaching breaking point. ICUs are struggling in a country with a much higher proportion of ICU beds per capita.
NZ, at this stage, will not cope. More people need to be fully vaccinated.
FULLY vaccinated of course is a moving goal post ... see Israel & now UK
"Britain is starting to plan for a COVID-19 vaccine booster campaign later this year after top vaccine advisers said it might be necessary to give third shots to the elderly and most vulnerable from September. .."
https://www.aol.com/news/covid-jab-protection-wanes-within-071716820-10…
As for evidence its well and truly early days (and that applies to vaccine side effects also)
My Dad in the UK is having his third jab (his booster) next week. He's had no side effects, and so far, is living relatively a normal life. I'm for one glad he is vaccinated, and that their vaccinations are so far ahead of us (only had my first this week - feeling great).
What solution would you recommend? Do you prefer no vaccine and forever lock downs? Or no vaccine and we get on with it (letting those who will die, die)? Or something else?
What's your point? Nobody thinks that vaccination is perfect, but it is definitely more protective than being unvaccinated.
"As for evidence its well and truly early days (and that applies to vaccine side effects also)"
How does that also apply to vaccine side effects? Please, tell me more about any other vaccine ever that has continued to produce unwanted side-effects months or years down the track. You really don't have a clue.
Doc, you can’t argue from a point of scientific literacy when your opposite is essentially illiterate. When they can pick up the Lancet and critically understand the data you may be on the same page. I want to smash my head into a brick wall with some of the antivaxxers.
What would those numbers look like if we didn't have a lockdown? That's the question you have to ask yourself.
In many European countries the death toll is 1500+ per million, despite some sort of (late, lazy and not strict enough) lockdown.
So the question you're asking is: is a few weeks of lockdown worse than having 7500+ kiwis die of Covid?
It's a fair point, especially if you look at it in a snapshot in time
But is is still a valid point in one or two years if we are still having a covid outbreak?
At what point, if ever, do the significant costs of lockdown - loneliness, anxiety, suicide, economic impacts, debt, negative impacts on the development of children - outweigh the benefits?
With all those costs factored in, which will also compound, do you still favour lockdowns in a year's time?
It is all relevant. We have a 4.3% hospitalisation rate in a controlled environment (i.e. lockdown). This number is around 1% to seasonal flu, and we do not control people flows in the flu season. Given a 3-4 days delay in getting the testing result, I think the L4 lockdown is still needed at this stage.
The hospitalization rate and death rate from flu drops substantially with lockdown. Your argument actually leads to the logic we should be locking down for flu season as well because of the remarkable lower rate of infection, hospitalisation, and death that is completely avoidable with a low social cost if most of those who could remote, do indoor exercise, activites & wfh do so with prejudice.
Absolutely - Level 4 lockdown is what has meant we're seeing new daises in the 10's vs the 100's - 1000's. There's no exponential growth. That's because of the Level 4 Lockdowns.
Also because these cases have gone through by in large younger groups, so we have better outcomes. You loosen restrictions now and let this into older generations and you all of a sudden see every ICU bed in this country full with people dying because of a lack of ventilators like what we've seen in other countries like the USA.
This shorter lockdown means we're at a point were we can already consider re-opening large parts of the country in coming days. If we hadn't done this. Wed be facing the same situation that Australia is right now. Very long half baked lockdowns extending for months and months on end.
It takes people a couple of weeks to die from the time they've been admitted to hospital.
Here again our friends in Britain have "done the research":
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare…
You are joking right? This virus is always up 14 days ahead, so the cases now were mainly infected prior to lockdown or are infections to other people in the household. If they hadn't gone into lockdown, Auckland would be anther NSW with mass death and others with other health problems like long covid. NZ is largely unvaccinated so there was no choice. NZ does not have teh health capacity to deal with an outbreak. Australia have better capacity as they are richer and have double the ICU capacity.
I think it will from here. A journalist finally asked the question I've wanted to know. At present, Jacinda and McIllray (whatever her name is), said they were not aware of any new non-household transmission of COVID occurring after lockdown started.
Also of the 400+ locations of interest, only 13 are known to have led to new infections. Put those two statistics together, and it seems the high case numbers are all from pre-lockdown, or household contacts of those people.
Jacinda keeps saying how she has evidence that the 'elimination strategy' is the best strategy. I want to see that evidence. Just like how there is evidence to support the elimination strategy, there is also much evidence to say that it ISNT the best strategy. Show me your evidence, and I will show you mine?
No one talks about mental health. No one talks about families being separated. No one talks about the small businesses that closed shop. No one talks about those who were poor, and now got even poorer.
Totally agree. The UK, US, Europe and now Australia are not pursuing elimination but we somehow think it will work here? How many billions of borrowed money will they throw at the lockdowns this time? We can't keep doing this, and were only ever supposed to do it once. I'm surprised more people aren't questioning it. But I suppose it doesn't affect people who are in the public service or on the wage subsidy. I think a lot of small businesses will go to the wall this time.
Australia tried to eliminate it and failed. Now they have a ~level 3 lockdown in at least a couple of states until vaccines are rolled out - this is our main alternative right now.
Neither the UK nor the US had the political leadership to go for something like elimination when they had the chance. Johnson and Trump both belittled it and ended up in Hospital close to death in return.
Love it... these numpties that think it's all good our approach cannot see the corollary.
The majority of us know for now that lock down is the only viable option until we get a handle on where Delta is heading..
Thing I'm most pissed at is the lack of urgency prior to this breakout on vaccination. Govt couldn't even spruik vaccination as they didn't have security of supply! NOW they see the predicament and the narrative is changed to vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate...
The evidence suggests that lockdowns are bloody fantastic for the economy. Unemployment goes down, house prices skyrocket. Health gains, economic gains, what's not to love? The question is why we would ever *leave* lockdown when the benefits are so apparent. If a four-week lockdown brings a 20% property increase, why not make it 10 weeks and go for the 50?
How can elimination have been the best strategy given the scene today. You might eliminate in NZ as before but you can’t eliminate the rest of the world. Therefore Delta could arrive here again through MIQ or customs areas, freight etc any time again, just as it has this time. The Prime Minister therefore misleads by omission. What the situation actually is, and yes there is little choice about it right now, is a strategy of elimination coupled to lockdowns whenever there is a border breach because that obviously means covid is no longer eliminated. For example if there should be transmission to the community by the three cases in Christchurch MIQ through a slip in the weekend, then the whole damn lockdown cycle starts all over again.
From where we are now, we essentially have 3 choices:
1. Elimination via hard (level 4) lockdown, then reopen to level 1 or 2 until vaccination rates are high enough to open up more.
2. "Flatten the curve" via a less strict (level 2 or 3) lockdown for about 3 months and hope hospitals don't get overwhelmed until vaccination rates are high enough to open up more.
3. Reopen now and watch people die
From these choices #1 seems the least bad option to me, it at least gives us the chance of reopening before vaccinations hit a high enough level as that's not going to be until November or December. Remember those under 30 aren't even eligible to book at appointment yet.
Don’t think there is any alternative as 1 either. But think about this. If the vaccinations reach the target, which is still unknown, regardless of when that may be, if those that remain unvaccinated are still in sufficient numbers to potentially overwhelm the hospital system. The government quite rightly prioritised keeping Covid numbers down so as not to compromise the hospitals so logically while potential of that risk remains so too does that priority and with it the need to resort to lockdowns. The only way out of that impasse has to be some good effort to bring hospital care etc up a level. Establish independent specialised covid treatment facilities in order to keep them out of hospital, at least until the ICU stage.
Yes to me that is as unavoidable as it is logical. So why didn’t our Prime Minister take the trouble to expand her explanation and information to encompass that likely scenario. Hope it wasn’t just because it would be unpopular to put it out there. New Zealanders have not only had on and off lockdowns they have had the potential of them hanging over them too for nigh on 18 months. The continuing of the good compliance to date will not be encouraged by either an increase in the tempo, uncertainty and being surprised by the unexpected.
One possible reason is they don't want to confuse people. If you talk too much, and in too much detail, about what is going to happen then you'll get people focusing on that instead of what they're supposed to be doing now. Obviously this government is all about the comms and messaging, and a big part of that is keeping it super simple.
Printer8
Agreed, but I would contend it is entirely their fault. Not only has it been too slow it was started too late. The government put its reliance on elimination and that being protected by border security. But there was no back up in case the border was breached. Instead ordering of vaccines was not prioritised and restricted to just one supplier. It was foolhardy to believe the border could remain watertight and there were enough previous slip ups to give notice to that. That failure by deciding there was no need to acquire vaccines early and in adequate quantities is the very reason a heck of New Zealanders find themselves unprotected by a vaccine right now.
Er mental health has been in the ditch before 2020 even arrived. Housing was hopeless. Kids being excluded from school just from the state of their birth. You could say we have been killing kids and adults for decades and the child abuse rates are actually far less now that we stopped sexually assaulting them, electrocuting them and overdosing them against their will to the point of near death en masse in institutions (and dropped down to only rates in the hundreds and dropped electrocutions altogether). You want some heart rending just look up ABUSE IN CARE. You are welcome to know the same issues that presented then are still around today with over 250,000 severely affected and the mental struggles become intergenerational so that is now 250,000++ kiwis heading to the ditch before 2020.
Can you provide stats on the problems over mental health from the last lockdown? I understand the stats showed nothing out of the ordinary.
Also what about the mental health problems created when a child loses their parent to covid, which has already happened in NZ?
NZ would have had over 10,000 deaths if we had been the UK, and the UK have a better ICU capacity per capita. Think of all the mental health problems caused by that, as well as the death, and long covid etc. Plus we would still have needed more lockdown, and the economic issues would have been even worse.
The only relevance of the stat is to give us some idea of vaccine hesitancy. I'm pleasantly surprised to see holdouts at only 27% and I expect this will fall as more and more people book in. 80% coverage of eligible people seems achievable, hopefully higher. This is our main way out of lockdown, or the threat of more lockdowns.
Seems accurate to me. Under 30s aren't even eligible to make a booking yet, so at minimum it's Sep 1 when they become eligible + 6 weeks to get the second dose. That's 7 weeks right there if everyone got the jab on the first day which obviously isn't possible.
When I booked I managed to get a slot in early September, but most centres didn't have slots until October. So add 6 weeks for the second jab and you're looking at mid November to early December, so 3+ months.
Firstly I don't have any mates that deliver Labour party material.
Secondly it turns out the mailer was actually delivered in July, and the guy who ran screaming to the media about it simply hadn't emptied his mailbox since then.
So bit of an own goal there really.
Actually we are far far away from copying China. It takes us over a decade to get a new hospital and hundreds of millions to set up 3 more general beds (not ICU beds) and a couple of decades to realize the massive wage crunch on nurses is cancelling critical services and resulting in severe ward shortages to the point severe patient harm and death occurs. So far away. We don't even sanitize street surfaces and buses. So don't touch anything when you go out while delta's about ok, and with the ER services currently, best not to go out at all.
Over a year into the pandemic and people are still making these sorts of ludicrous arguments.
If you aren’t calculating the illness and death that will be caused by letting co is spread across the country, you aren’t calculating the full cost.
We have already proven it can be contained and have reaped the benefits for a year and have done better than every country that failed to control an outbreak
Delta only exists as a result of country after country failing to take early action to control the pandemic at earlier stages.
Your answer is let it spread uncontrolled until we get worse variants that spread faster and/or vaccines are less effective against?
Let’s just keep compounding our mistakes and make things progressively worse shall we?
Delta originated in India in late 2020, several months before their vaccination program began. It was even detected in the UK and US in late February 2021, at which point no more than a few million vaccines had been given in India
But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good story.
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-cases-of-variant-…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccination_in_India#Graph_of_cu…
Clinical trials of the Pfizer vax began in April 2020. If the vaccine puts selection pressure on the virus to mutate the spike protein then it's not unreasonable to think it may have originated in a vaccinated individual. The counter argument is that there were were probably 100 to 1000x more unvaxed people numbering in the millions who were infected with c19 at the time so it's also reasonable to conclude that the mutations originated in an unvaxed individual. I don't think that we'll never know.
It's speculated that the alpha strain of of the UK evolved in someone who had a weakened or compromised immune system. They were strong enough to combat the virus but not strong enough to properly rid it from their body, giving the virus a good long period to adapt to the host's immune system, then eventually it got passed on to others.
The Pfizer testing was done in the United States, Germany, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil and Argentina. I think it's extremely unreasonable to think the delta variant, which arose in India, had anything to do with this vaccine.
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-a…
There may well be real arguments about vaccines causing selection pressure, but Delta is not it.
Correct. If we dial back on the strategy we are following and if deaths (mainly of unvaccinated) begin to happen and increase in numbers, then the nay sayers will change their tunes and start criticising more and harder on why we dialled back. Let us continue with what we are doing, which at least is preventing deaths and minimising hospital stays.
Let us suffer a little now, rather than regret enmasse later.
Too true, being spoken to like a moron, by a moron is not fun. So, the correct thing to do is just zone out and get on with your life.
I'm in the 40-50 age group.
The statistics say so far that my chance of getting sick and dying from Covid19 is .2%, so 1 in 500. This is based on known Covid cases, but Covid cases are actually more like 10x the amount that have tested positive. So, my odds just lengthed to 1 in 5000, or .02%. I'm not fat, unhealthy nor do I have any underlying issues. The people with those issues make up most of that .02%.
Why is it exactly that I should be worried.
The 40 to 50 age group would be nasty. At least 30% overweight and have other heath conditions on top of that. Unfortunately I think it comes down more to genetics from the actual case feed back I have had. It can range from putting you in bed for 2 weeks with the worst Flu you have ever had in your life to practically you not even knowing you have it. What you don't know for sure is your risk profile and that's the biggest problem for me. If I knew that it would be no worse than a cold then I wouldn't get the jab and let my own body develop the immune response.
Nope, instead I read an article about Labour supporters still out and about distributing propaganda materials.
https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300391806/labour-lock…
Fully agree. She talks like we are complete idiots. I may not be the smartest kid in town, but I ain't no idiot.
I swear, if it was a youtube video, I would click that speed box and accelerate her speech by 2x speed. Then her speech would match back to how a normal person talks.
I disagree... her style is and always has been to filibuster and propagandise virtue rather than being clear and direct.
I'd imagine at their party meeting she would have similar delivery. In a world where clearness of objective may not be tolerable for majority, why would you want to speak in a clear concise manner!
Every single minister has come into the press conferences this week with 'But first, some good news about vaccinations!". It's the same news over and over again "We immunised a bunch of people!" but it lets you get some points onto the board before you get into the case numbers for the outbreak you shouldn't be having in the first place. Hipkins, Robertson and Ardern have all done this.
I find it easiest to wait until 1:10pm for the information I actually want to hear, given they can barely manage to show up on time to begin with.
The pedagogical evidence would suggest drivelling on for 30-40 minutes is not helping anyone.
Clear and consice is the best method. 3-5 clear points is about the maximum most people can handle.
What do we need to actually know?
1. x cases for today, meaning we will stay in
2. Level y until z date
3. We review on w date.
4. Stay safe and be kind.
She can then elaborate on more later for those who are interested.
Leading with "Good news" about how x people got vaccinated booked a vaccination is just politicking.
With all that verbiage, what chance has anyone of understanding much less those that would have switched off due to the politicking. She talks over Ashley and tries to use the information she has obtained from him to say what he should be. Grabs all the questions, even those directed at AB, sprouts a line of garbage and then hands to over to AB. It was much more informative when Hipkins gave his intro and then handed the stage to AB - lets have more of this approach.
With all that verbiage, what chance has anyone of understanding much less those that would have switched off due to the politicking. She talks over Ashley and tries to use the information she has obtained from him to say what he should be. Grabs all the questions, even those directed at AB, sprouts a line of garbage and then hands to over to AB. It was much more informative when Hipkins gave his intro and then handed the stage to AB - lets have more of this approach.
Well there is some interest in observing the rather clear change in our prime minister’s persona. Firstly the high ratings in the polls engendered a quite obvious degree of over confidence and now just any confidence at all on display looks rather unconvincing. Silly really because polls are founded on quicksand. Secondly questions involving bad new are neither welcome nor as easily deflected as before. Unless of course they have first been orchestrated. Thirdly the good news is overshadowed by the bad news. And that too applies to our prime minister and it shows. The previous fluff and feathers presentation looking more like peacock plumes in a funeral parlour.
It has a rating of 9.4/10 on IMDB. That is way better than the Shawshank Redemption, the Godfather, Tiger King, or the Hunger Games.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12511606/
A Sequel Nobody Asked For
"Still think David Tennant should have played Ashley Bloomfield. Putting an unknown in the role was a wasted opportunity."
Agree. They had a commendable "elimination at the border" strategy but surely that process was designed to simply hold Covid at bay until we were all vaccinated. So why was our vaccination programme so slow in coming? It should not have been a measured "roll out" but should have been initiated and undertaken as rapidly as possible because our MIQ process was always going to be breached at some point and we knew months ago that the Delta variant held a whole new level of transmissibility. What's done is done so no use finger pointing really. We now need to vaccinate like crazy and be able to know who has Covid and who hasn't by having better Covid testing access. Personal saliva test kits would achieve this so I'm not sure why Ministry of Health are still just "considering this option".
Unite against COVID 19
New Zealand’s stance on ‘people’s vaccine’ for Covid undermines its principled reputation
Also, not sure you can say that there hasn't been any LOI transmission since L4 given that three supermarkets in West Auckland were closed due to exposure events as recently as the 21st and the notice only went out in the last day or two.
Now we're at serious risk of the exposure events triggering infections in the 'don't care, won't get tested, L4 is just a day off work' deadshit community, and this would be all post L4. We won't know that hasn't happened for at least a week. It almost makes me think what was apparently said has been misinterpreted or misreported.
Yip, it's a very big risk. On the other hand, of the 400+ known locations of interest, only 13 have resulted in transmission.
So even though there were a few supermarket places of interest post-lockdown, there's reason to be optimistic that no transmission actually resulted, especially if everyone was wearing masks and socially distancing.
I can tell you from visiting those Countdowns that this hasn't been happening. If you've got essential goods suppliers becoming LOIs in areas with low compliance and customers who are less than enthused than following the letter of the law when it comes to the health orders, then it is extremely premature to declare there's been no post-L4 transmission at LOIs.
I would suggest that given some the behaviour I've seen and been told about at those stores, there's a high chance that these idiots won't get tested, will keep mixing bubbles, won't wear masks and keep transmitting it between themselves while we're patting ourselves on the back. At L3 all hell could break loose.
"Few Js in the park with the lads late at night, no one will call the cops if we keep the sounds down" and no one is the wiser until one of them heads to a bottle store and we're back at square one. It's worth noting the Westgate store has way more customers than the North West one, which I suspect is largely down to the proximity of the West Liquor a few metres away. That's the kind of mindset you're dealing with. Anecdata on Facebook also suggests that some members of the public are deliberately coughing on staff and one may have had a facemask removed by an irate customer.
Do we really think this is the kind of person who is going to be following lockdown rules, or actually get tested when they do get it? Or who cares about where their kids are at all hours of the night? Of course not. These are the LOIs that matter.
Fair is fair. On balance the lockdown approach of NZ, given its isolated position and ease of control over ins and outs that that isolation conveys, worked pretty well compared the alternatives. Even now, a 1 month lockdown seems to be the best out of bad options we realistically have. NZ government has show wisdom in choosing the option and cautious in not finishing it too early.
But NZ lagging behind in vaccination is a major failure. This is were NZ government needed to show their capabilities to do things. And they have failed.
I guess that NZ government has also failed to really enhance the health sector capabilities in the time that they had.
We sure do, and we are still non the wise of what is the exit strategy. Given how expensive L4 lockdowns are, it is astonishing that NZ was so relaxed for its vaccination up to very recently. Probably due to low stock of vaccines.
All is reasonable to deduce though is that before a major portion of our society is vaccinated, the government is likely to continue using L4 lockdowns as a primary tool. This is because L4 LD is the only response that does not require capabilities to be shown by government. All other responses (isolation measures for ins and outs, scale and speed of testing, contract tracing etc) seems to be slow and unreliable in absence of lockdown.
Also the L4 LD cost is paid in future, when Jacinda is elsewhere. We are printing money to pay people for staying home. That bird will come to the roost sometimes in the future.
That's exactly right. The excuse they gave last time was that our health system was not up to it. So, we had to have these lockdowns to flatten the curve while they planning and getting prepared.
Well, that was 18 months ago, and during that time they have done absolutely f*** all. I know people that are racing around in hospitals right now 'trying' to get something together so that they could support some incoming patients. That should have been done ages ago, and nothing has been done again.
Now we get the same lame old hard and early slogans, and lockdowns which are just excuses hiding the idiocy of these guys that just cannot get anything done whatsoever.
All of this f***ing around not allowing GPs to vaccinate and making up booking systems that don't work or are unusable is again just hiding the fact that they did not order vaccines or even think about it early enough or get anything organized. The longer they drag out the vaccine progress the better they will hide the incompetence of not actually having a vaccine to administer.
We are actually the slowest in the world, and we were told we were the first, the gold standard. We are sitting hear being preached to that this is the best in the world. No, it's the worst performance of any vaccination process anywhere.
Even the slow vaccine rollout has an upside. We've been able to watch other rollouts, and see the various studies etc. Ultimately we have have greater confidence about the vaccine's safety that countries that were (by necessity) early adopters. The Pfizer vaccine only just got full FDA approval.
If a serious side effect of Pfizer was discovered by the early adopters then we would have switched to a different vaccine. Is that so hard to imagine?
Does this upside justify being slow to get our order in? Probably not. But it's always good to see the positive aspects of a situation you find yourself in.
No because correlation does not prove causation. By and large the vaccinations will be far far safer than the disease and vulnerable people e.g. with allergies always have to check for ingredients (with medication, alcohol, vaccinations, beer, tacos, those weird things they call friuzz energy balls). The vaccinations were tested far far before the rollouts and the rollouts have by and large shown a lot of standard population correlation but then so has plotting 5G against the covid outbreak density. You could be severely obese with a heart clot, blocked veins and one step on deaths door all before vaccination and they will still record it against the case log. Hence different countries with different health profiles also have different case results. Just be glad we don't follow the American diet.
You seem to be stating the obvious, which is fine but doesn't invalidate what I said. Also, Pfizer was in clinical trials for 7 months before being approved for emergency use in the UK. Not sure if that fits your definition of "far far before rollouts" but it doesn't fit mine.
Btw I've had my first Pfizer jab, before the current outbreak even, and will get my second soon so not an anti-vaxxer :-). But I was happy to have the luxury of watching other countries use the vaccine for a good while before it was my turn.
Amen. Add to it more accountability on the Government here, we are fortunate to be here in New Zealand as is this writer.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/24/why-were-happy-hobbits-in…
Dont browse
UK High School students to have weekly, two Rapid Lateral Flow covid tests on return to school. https://www.bbc.com/news/education-51643556
Grandkids over there have been doing that as home testing since they went back to school earlier this year. It takes 30mins to get a result. It has also being a requirement for family member working in daycare. The latter family member has had 2 staff colleagues contract covid, but measures in place resulted in it not infecting any others. UK found pre-schoolers went backwards in their development after the first lockdown in 2020, so govt decreed all preschools had to stay open when the 2nd lockdown happened. Has any thought been given to either of those - RLF tests, and effects of lockdowns on preschoolers who usually attend daycare, in NZ?
A friend who works at a NZ based export processing plant said that they have been temperature tested everytime they went to work since, the first lockdown. Are NZ companies being more proactively responsible than the govt?
Post vaccination symptom reporting has been mandatory since day 1. Just call up any Pfizer employee at any level and tell them a range of things that any placebo or nocebo could give you. Such as a decreased libido, stuffy nose, and throat dryness. Then order some wine and counteract those effects. Protip it will annoy those employees a great deal because they have to report all cases known to them and match them against records.
And yet a fever is one of the things considered to be a symptom of covid. So allowing people with a fever to remain at work where there can be 100's of others, it a better solution, in your eyes? At the place of work I referred to anyone with a fever isn't allowed in the door - they are sent home. It's called risk management in an essential industry.
https://www.institutmolinari.org/2021/08/19/44-times-more-deaths-2021-s…
The numbers speak for themselves I think.
I think the PM said yesterday that about 11 were vaccinated. Israeli data and recent studies suggest that Pfizer vaccination will enhance Delta symptoms ie make disease more severe (ADE); https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.22.457114v1.full.pdf. I believe the vaccine should thus be used only for the elderly and we should treat Covid with therapeutics, like we do with AIDS. The inventor of mRNA technologies, Dr Robert Malone holds this view, particularly as this vaccine is still experimental and may be dangerous. The CDC are requiring more testing on pregnant women although Labour want to force it on doctors and female port workers.
The paper title is; "The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant is poised to acquire complete
resistance to wild-type spike vaccines", so they are basically saying that Delta has become almost immune to the vaccines based on the original Covid strains. In another recent July 2021 Vietnamese study one vaccinated doctor infected 30 or more other vaccinated health workers two months after he was double "vaccinated" with our Pfizer vaccine. His nasal viral load was 250 times higher than those that got the Alpha, or original Covid strain, which is maybe why Delta so infectious. What worries me therefore, is that in two months time NZ will erupt with cases, like Israel did, ie this vaccination is useless.
What conclusions did this study draw? Its beyond my reading level
It means that in terms of virus mutations we’re a cat’s whisker away from having a vaccine which doesn’t protect you, but makes the disease worse. What’s not discussed in the paper is the phenomena of “original antigenic sin”. Mistakes being made now in the current vaccination campaign may not be fixable with a new vaccine.
PS. Thanks for posting that paper sunchap - really interesting, albeit scary stuff.
Do you realise that the World Health Organisation chief scientist could be facing the death penalty in India for talking smack about ivermectin.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2021/06/india-could-sentence-who-chief-sc…
What exactly is not reputable? Here's the web page of the Indian bar association. You can see they're pressing charges in their latest press release.
That the WHO and FDA for that matter are beholden to commercial and political interests. The process is known as regulatory capture. Those institutions won’t always make the best health and welfare decisions. Policymakers need to seek advice from unbiased scientists and clinicians who scrutinise the primary literature rather than blindly trusting what the WHO or FDA says.
No no, ill get my vax. I sort of feel it is in my interests as an individual although I do have serious doubts as too whether it will be in our long term interests as a society. If that makes sense. Game theory etc. I certainly don't buy into mass delusions unlike your self who just allows their belief system to be evolved & mounded to suit the current ideological trends. Peace.
Why isn't the government doing something practical? Tell people what to do if they get sick. Tell people how to boost their immune systems. Take zinc and vitamin D supplements. Get proper sleep. If you get sick with covid you can reduce your chances of hospitalization surprisingly by gargling dilute povidone-iodine solution. It’s not pseudoscience, there are randomized clinical trials showing that works. Check out this link https://c19early.com/
Read about the protocols for early treatment here https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Allian…
You can buy vitamin D, zinc, povidone iodine, melatonin from the chemist. You can do something practical to protect yourself and your family.
fat pat
And I bet you believe those emails from Nigeria about your inheritance of millions of dollars.
Quick Google of those involved in covid19criticalcare.com raises serious alarm bells regarding their credibility.
They are also the group that support Ivermectim - most strongly rejected by the FDA who were alarmed by their claims.
Take your misinformation elsewhere.
That's a supremely retarded comment. Those clincians have over 1000 peer reviewed papers between them. You've been sucked into the propaganda machine which attacks reputable doctors and scientists. Think about it. What's the evidence for the aforementioned treatments - dozens of peer reviewed randomised clinical trials! What's the cost/benefit analysis? Well even if they did nothing for covid they wouldn’t hurt you, but it's quite likely given the positive clinical trial data, that the treatments work. So at an aggregate society level recommending those treatments would keep people out of hospital.
Nobel prize winner and discoverer of the HIV virus, Luc Montagnier, has stated that our Pfizer vaccine is creating variants and recommends zinc, vitamin D and ivermectin instead of this barely tested jab; https://thenewamerican.com/french-nobel-prize-winner-warns-vaccines-fac….
https://www.newswise.com/factcheck/debunking-the-claim-that-vaccines-ca…
There you go its debunked as being false.
"According to the CDC, a growing body of evidence suggests that fully vaccinated people are less likely to have asymptomatic infection and potentially less likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.3 Stopping the spread of COVID means slowing mutations of the virus too. "
As a prescription medicine it legally can't be imported into NZ without a prescription. It's liable for confiscation by customs - I bought some perfectly innocent herbal pills (mberry miracle fruit tablets, they block sour taste receptors on your tongue so lemons etc taste only sweet) that came in a blister pack from Australia and needed them at short notice. They didn't arrive for a week, and when they didn't turned up, it was clear that customs had opened the packet to inspect them.
Vaccine conspiracy Bingo again, so soon. This time it was a real short one. Surprised me with the twists but I thought the hesitancy drivel would have more of a showing. Relieved though that the faith will cure it square has been mostly untouched until I read articles about Destiny Church. That is a real worry for vaccination outreach in NZ. The large part who actively do more harm like the alt treatment nutters and nature cure fraudsters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zeQ458FPAo
What to watch for:
Covid illness rates among vaccinated people increase over time, approaching rates in unvaccinated people.
What it means:
1) Waning immunity, or
2) Immune escape variants
Is it happening?
Yes
Possible solutions:
1) Booster shots to infinity – a real-time experiment on the human population with no clinical trials to demonstrate safety, or
2) Stop the vaccination push until we can develop better vaccines that do not have this problem. Accept natural infection in the meantime.
——–
What to watch for:
Elevated incidence of vascular problems, neurological problems, and/or other symptoms among vaccine recipients.
What it means:
Vaccine biotoxicity, likely due to spike protein.
Is it happening?
Yes, although the risk/benefit tradeoffs vs. covid itself for various risk groups are still somewhat unclear.
Possible solutions:
Limit vaccination to high-risk groups, while continuing development of vaccines that don’t have this problem.
——
What to watch for:
Positive correlation between vaccine coverage and Covid-19 caseload, in comparisons between nations or regions.
What it means:
Vaccine-enhanced viral spread (likely due to suppression of symptoms in the absence of infection prevention, in effect creating more asymptomatic carriers)
Is it happening?
Unclear, but the fact that many of the world’s most vaccinated countries currently have the highest caseloads is reason for suspicion.
Possible solutions:
Stop the vaccine rollout to the rest of the world until we have vaccines that are not “leaky” in this way.
——-
What to watch for:
Worse Covid-19 disease outcomes in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated people. (Or possibly also worse outcomes when infected with other, similar viruses.)
What it means:
1) Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) via. viral infection of immune cells, or
2) Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) via. immune overactivation (cytokine storms etc.), or
3. Original antigenic sin (ingrained antibody production pathway for original virus precludes adaptation to new variants)
Is it happening?
No clear data yet; some evidence from molecular modeling that it is possible, and limited clinical indications (e.g. vaccinated patients with severe illness not responding to MATH+ treatment protocol). Past attempts to develop coronavirus vaccines suggest a high risk of ADE, and it may appear during waning immunity or upon emergence of new variants.
Possible solutions:
Stop vaccination campaign, focus on prophylaxis (e.g. widespread ivermectin use?).
—–
What to watch for:
Increased incidence of autoimmune disease among vaccinated people.
What it means:
Vaccine-induced autoimmunity (i.e. self-targeting antibodies)
Is it happening?
No evidence yet ; however autoimmune problems can take years to develop.
Possible solutions:
Stop vaccination and boosters.
——
What to watch for:
Accelerated emergence of Covid-19 variants of concern in regions with a high vaccination rate.
What it means:
Vaccine-driven viral evolution.
Is it happening:
Quite possibly, e.g. https://twitter.com/ConeyLinguist/status/1427654829439078406, although definitive proof will be impossible for this one.
Possible solutions:
Develop less leaky vaccines; avoid vaccinating during periods of high viral prevalence.
It would surprise me a lot, as the technology is not able to do that. Microchips are simply embedded RFID devices able to report their ID number if energised by a nearby scanner. They don't have batteries to be able to store information or communicate via GPS/bluetooth/RF. Mobile phone or bluetooth card tracking is much more viable, that is what governments are looking into it.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.