Finally something we both agree on 👍

By my geometry, cases would be the bottom of the pyramid but yes, I don't disagree with the premise. The focus should be on hospitalisations and ICU admissions.

Of course that gross fatality rate is for a sample aged 16 - over 80, what the study doesn't show is deaths broken out by age group. You would expect to see a markedly different set of numbers for the 70+ cohort.

If you want to get a real world understanding of the impact of the vaccines, look at the ICU admissions (severe illness). Based on that study the difference between a vaccinated population and an unvaccinated one in Israel (population ~ 9 million) is about 1,800 ICU admissions (you'd need about 4,000 ICU nurses to service that).

Even just splitting into 50+ and under is enough to see a huge different set of data.

https://assets.publishing.service.go...riefing_20.pdf

That document has a good data set in Table 5. But you must only compare within an age group, or you get weird outcomes.

“Of course that gross fatality rate is for a sample aged 16 - over 80, what the study doesn't show is deaths broken out by age group. You would expect to see a markedly different set of numbers for the 70+ cohort.”

Agreed. Conversely the numbers for younger people would go in the opposite direction. Thereby bringing into question the need to vaccinate and expose this cohort to added risks.
The idea of protecting the elderly and clinically vulnerable is something we should have embraced from the beginning.
The absolutism that we are attempting now is without merit.

I'm just checking in here to say " hey I'm still here you bastards" (Steve McQueen, Papillon) ................ unvaxed.....sorry:ok:

Your focus when it comes to any disease is generally on the most vulnerable group. Nobody really gives two hoots about whooping cough or RSV in adults, and nobody uses the whole population to determine the critical case fatality rate for those diseases.

And you vaccinate outside of the most vulnerable cohort for a couple of reasons.

One, to try to manage the incidence rate. That is of interest to you in order to mitigate the likelihood of exposing the vulnerable, vaccinated or not.

Two, because it is never a great idea to have large vaccinated and unvaccinated populations co-existing when a disease is pandemic. Doing so creates a reservoir for the development of mutations.

The issue I have with that study, if you are using to prove covid is somewhat deadly or not.

Out of the 1.2million odd participants, only 10,500 were confirmed as contracting covid.

The outcomes are measured in Cumulative Index, which is the number of occurances relative to the total population. Not incidences relative to infected population.

Since no information is supplied as to how at risk or exposed to covid the whole cohort are there is no baseline for infection rate. The infected 6100 UnVax and 4460 Vaxed, does not reflect how susceptible they were to covid, or exposure.

The IFR for this group is close to 0.5% UnVaxed and 0.2% Vaxed.

The mistake you made is Adding up the already "cummulative" figures for you're stats.

This study is purely to prove viability of a vaccination, not to prove anything to do directly with Covid.

[QUOTE=MickG0105;11095309]Your focus when it comes to any disease is generally on the most vulnerable group. Nobody really gives two hoots about whooping cough or RSV in adults, and nobody uses the whole population to determine the critical case fatality rate for those diseases.

And you vaccinate outside of the most vulnerable cohort for a couple of reasons.

One, to try to manage the incidence rate. That is of interest to you in order to mitigate the likelihood of exposing the vulnerable, vaccinated or not.

Two, because it is never a great idea to have large vaccinated and unvaccinated populations co-existing when a disease is pandemic. Doing so creates a reservoir for the development of mutations.[/QUOTE

Valid points in theory. In practice however, consider the exponential rise in the significant numbers of infections in places like Israel Iceland Canada with such high vaccination numbers. I put to you that the reservoir for the development of mutations will exist even after vaccination. The Israelis are currently reporting a Relative Risk Reduction of 39% in transmissions hence their 3rd shot booster initiative.
On your first premise, the viral loads in vaccinated infected individuals are as high as non vaccinated. It is generally accepted by experts that transmission will continue as is evidenced by real world statistics.Therefore any success with an attempt to mitigate the likelihood of exposing the vulnerable through these particular vaccines is doubtful at best. Don’t misunderstand me for I comprehend the need to mitigate and I accept the moral undertones of your points. What I won’t accept is exercises in futility.
As I have stated previously. We need to gain a clearer picture of the real nature of this problem and the real absolute protections from these vaccines.
The numbers from those graphs don’t lie. 4.9% infection rate reduced to 3.8% after vaccine. 0.38% IFR reduced to 0.14% after vaccine.
These are the real numbers. Yes they show effectiveness. Enough to stop thousands of deaths probably not. Introducing added risks to younger people through the use of vaccines would be appear to offer little to no protection for the vulnerable so why do it. Waiting on high vaccination numbers before ending lockdowns will yield questionable improvements in outcome. Measurable but insignificant when you compare the damage both on a human and economic level that lockdowns are causing.
So vaccinating has now moved away from sensible medical intervention and has become a political trigger to end lockdowns.
Silly don’t you think?

Oopps. The work experience kid has been left to run the 43Inches login this evening.

Where do you get these numbers from?

In your original post you mentioned figures of;

In the study notes it says only 10,561 were infected in total. From what I can see you added up the already cumulative numbers. If you add the 6100 and 4460 you get the 10,560 as mentioned.

This makes all your other numbers way out.

Since all subjects received testing you could safely assume the IFR a calculation of 32/6100, 0.52% for the unvaxed and 9/4460, 0.2% for vaxed.

The infection rate for the entire cohort was 10.500/1,200,000, 0.8%. Which proves nothing as the cohort does not come from the same locations rather all over Israel. There is no evidence of how many were exposed to covid and how many were affected by other factors such as self isolation procedures etc.

All that is proven is that for number of infections the vaccinated did far better than unvaccinated in surviving.

BTW, do you know what the "At Risk" numbers are about?

Looks like one of the adults is back in charge of the 43Inches login...

More trying to use phone while watching TV vs at PC desk.

This is a national emergency, 43Inches! Tantamount to a war (but don't use that language in the presence of Mick, who wants to pretend the nationhood power of the Commonwealth, along with the other far-reaching powers of the Commonwealth, does not give Scotty from Marketing the power to control and run the response to C-19).

Surely you shouldn't be diverting your attention to trivia like watching TV.

YAS SAH!

Back to my station.

I really don't know, or even dread to think what SloMo would do if he took the power upon himself, there would be power but also, responsibility. No more sitting back and blaming Dan for his woes. I picture his current thought process kinda like Bilbo and the ring.

And Mr Potato heads cranium might actually explode with glee at the thought of that power.

If you want to gain a clearer picture with real world data then maybe a study from six months ago isn't the best source. If you want up-to-date real world data, the Israelis maintain an excellent COVID-19 dashboard that is updated every 8 hours.

This latest surge in infections that they are seeing, at least 50 percent of the cases are coming from less than 20 percent of the population; the unvaccinated. And of those active cases progressing to serious illness, that is, requiring an ICU admission, over 70 percent of those are unvaccinated.

​​​​​​In terms of actual deaths, the Israeli's have seen the Case Fatality Rate drop from its pre-vaccine peak of 0.09 percent to currently 0.024 percent. For the Israelis that's a difference of 350 deaths a week. Translated to our population, that's the worst part of 1,000 deaths a week.

But you do you. Everyone has clearly differing views.

These days, they're all purchased as investment properties! Owner occupied ones are simply for dodging capital gains tax..

Hang up the wings, zero is here to stay.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw-...14-p58iqs.html

They had us for a moment there.

The premiers are drunk on power. We will never have our freedoms back like in 2019. Get used to it, if you were able to leave Australia now is a pretty good time to. It will be a mad max world here this time next yr.

Which section of the Australian Constitution do you think would be contravened?

.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2b9122762.jpeg

Vaccination passports
 

As had been said several times before, vaccination passports aren’t new.

I came across my old vaccination record the other week (passport sized pale yellow booklet): smallpox, cholera, yellow fever, typhoid, and another I’ve forgotten.

Had to show this before you could gain entry to many other countries. Not vaccinated = no entry.

Not a medical record; just vaccinations.

Holy snappin' duckshyte! 1,500 deaths in 6 months? That's like, what? 3,000 deaths a year?

That's less than half of that caused by voluntary tobacco smoking, according to the ABS and Cancer Council. Guess they'd better ban the durries, now, too!

Ciressna is right though. No Premier, except Gladys most likely, is going to accept a thousand cases a day in a 70-80% vaccinated population. The Democratic Peoples Republic of Westralia, Af-Danistan and Queen-P's-Land have all pinned their re-election campaigns on the "But only I can keep (kept) you safe!" mantra. They - particularly McGoose - will never tolerate such case numbers, even if every man, woman and child in the Country is double-vaccinated against Covid.

As I referred to previously, look at a country like Iceland, that is significantly vaccinated and extrapolate their case percentages to our population, and see what you get. Do the same for the UK and the numbers aren't that different. Around 7000 (Iceland) - 10,000 (UK) cases per day in a vaccinated population.

As of today, the UK has 89.4% of their adult population with one jab, 76.7% have had two, and they're racked up 26,750 cases, and (only) 61 deaths (Source). Our population is ~38% of the UK's so, there's 10,000 cases right there. And 25 deaths.

Iceland - a global leader in vaccination has 64 new cases (Source), with our population being 7422% of theirs, so 4,700 new cases with their 14 day average being 396.2, or for our population, 7,500 a day...

Israel, by all reports one of the first countries to introduce the nationwide vaccine is around 78% of eligible people double-vaccinated (Source), yet even they racked up 4,100 new cases on Saturday (Source) against a population of 9.0M (34% of ours), so an Australian-equivalent 12,000 cases / day!

Covid-Zero? We've got no hope, nor does any other country, but so long as we have state leaders - and their lapdog CHO's pushing a Covid-Zero agenda - Australia as a nation has got stuff-all chance of an internal reopening, no matter what our vaccination numbers are.

And then, what's the outcome of that? Indefinite lockout of NSW? Temporary lockout of Victoria? Permanent G2G passes so the DPRW knows who's coming and going, and where you will stay while in the DPRW and (of course) being able to track you via their G2GNow app, that they now mandate you must use?

I'm not sure it'll be introduced nationwide, but in the event some states require you to have it, but your home state does not, then s.117 would apply, as was found by Stephen.J in Henry v Boehm and covered in the Street judgement, which is currently the litmus test for s.117 cases. The reason s.117 would apply is simple, because (for example) if WA required all incoming travelers (but not citizens travelling within WA) to have a Vaccine Passport, the "disability or discrimination" would not be equally applicable as the WA resident was already in that other state. Being WA.

Most importantly our Politicians, senior bureaucrats and CMO’s all have their jobs still. In fact, no job keeper for them as they have had 2 pay rises in 18 months. Heck, most get to avoid hotel quarantine and move about rather freely. Funny thing that. I mean, they are such important people (in their own eyes).

I think Australia’s population will (barely) tolerate this lockdown **** until Scotty’s magical 80% vaccination figure is reached. After that, well who knows. Hopefully millions will descend upon each politicians home and demand their freedom that way.

Yeah 1500 deaths sounds like the high end anyway, once vaccination reaches 75%+ combined with Australias sparse population outside the city centers it will not spread like it is in those countries. I will definitely "call bollocks" to any suggestion lockdowns are necessary after that. The sad thing is we could have hit the targets by now, or kept the virus out with some simple smart measures. Sydney is as overrun by covid as Kabul is with Taliban.... It's just band-aids on shotgun wounds until the vax target is met.

Sydneys death rate is already way down on last year and compared to Melbourne. One simple reason the vulnerable and older are mostly vaccinated and isolated, with better protocols to keep them safe.

It is weekend in the UK. We don’t die as much at weekends, it is a reporting thing. UK death rate is 635 a week and rising gently.

I'd be interested to know if the daily death rates are "due covid" or "with covid". Because now that the virus is so wide spread the chance of dieing "with covid" is much higher but the virus is not the underlying cause of death. This is a genuine question, as it directly relates to how deadly the actual virus is, and I don't know how the UK reports deaths in the mainstream. The monthly mortality figures definitely make the distinction, but they are analysed before release a month or two after.

PS after checking some reporting websites the realtime data is based on whether a person had tested positive within 28 days before or had covid listed on the death certificate. Both in no way are an effective method of determining whether covid actually caused the death. The mortality stats will definitely be very important here to understand what is happening. In past instances without vaccinations Covid on the death cert was about 20-30% higher instances than Covid as the underlying cause of death. For those confused by it, the Death certificate will list the main cause of death, plus anything else that "may" have contributed, covid will be listed if infected, but not determined to be the cause. These numbers are then put in a database using a digitised medical code with no explanation. J128/U071 is died from Pneumonia/cause Covid.

Or we could do it the traditional way and have an Election

I think this will go beyond partisan politics in the months ahead when vaccinations rates high and citizens still losing their livelihoods and freedoms. Vietnam-era Moratorium marches come to mind. Significantly bigger as this bureaucratic and governance train wreck continues with a disease that once vaccinated, younger generations will accept as being largely non-fatal to them.

Is it too soon for a Shaun Micallef comedy sketch ripping off the world leaders arguing over who's not doing their fair share in this population cull target.

Not confirmed, ruthless Dan considering an all Melbourne curfew, just listening to 3aw. Whatever it takes to squash 20 nagging cases. More to come in the presser I guess.

Yeah the difference is you have a CHOICE if you want to go to a country that has those vaccination requirements and you don't want to get vaccinated. It is not the same as if you need to buy groceries, or fly domestically. A vaccination passport in the domestic sense will see riots and protests.

Speaking of riots and protests - I haven't seen any riots or protests in the UK with groups chanting "END THE FREEDOMS - BRING BACK THE LOCKDOWNS" .....

Judging unscientifically by my tram ride home from work yesterday (anecdotes are not data), there is a significant minority who are not complying with the spirit of the rules in Victoria. Not doing at 20 cases per day does not seem to have worked out well for NSW.

No one is being forced to vaccinate. There will come a time that you will have problems of access to places and jobs without appropriate vaccination. This is entirely legal, like mandating safety equipment or already as vaccinations required for day care attendance etc. Things that are required by basic rights will not be able to restrict, such as access to basic health care (hospitals). But a shop/doctor/airline/library/restaurant etc etc... could place requirements to be vaccinated to enter.

https://business.gov.au/people/customers/refuse-service

Right of refusal of service is acceptable for safety grounds, and also comfort of other clients. You could refuse entry to someone that is physically offensive in odour.

Yes I agree the chance for discrimination increases with any restrictive process. So vaccine passports, well who knows, there's also the worry that these "passports" turn into "national ID" cards. Something the Coalition has been pushing on for a while, which starts to encroach on police state technology. In the US the actual amount of restriction from businesses is low, it really serves no purpose other than block a member of the community from buying your product.

Most people and businesses would already not want anyone obviously sick on the premises and they would be asked to leave or barred entry.

ACT 19 cases yesterday so things are taking off there. Lockdown extended another two weeks until early Sept.


As for any talk of lockdowns after reaching 80% vaccinated, pure irresponsible idiocy. WA premier talking of it and by the sounds of it the NSW chief health officer Kerry Chant. And it sounds like the NSW premier agrees. Where is the leadership.

Vaccine passports...

So again we have Scomo showing national leadership. Open to a vaccination passport "but has to be done by the states."

No wonder we are a continent of 8 countries.

And mandating vaccines for employers. Oh, it will be a "reasonableness test". Gee that will give confidence to an employer to have a decision in the best interests of their business knowing that they might lose their house if an employee sues and wins.


and Darwin and Katherine now locking down.

As has been said earlier, he could take the reins, but oh the responsibility.

He really is showing he should be in opposition with Albo, who is even worse at saying anything that might resemble a policy or stance. "oh the states and businesses can handle that", when it goes pear shaped I can blame them and earn brownie points. If it works I can claim I set that up.

I remember a few months back, " oh the poor citizens of the states, locked away, they should be open like NSW with gold standard contact tracing". Now "The only way out of this is swift hard lockdowns...."

Melbourne going into night time curfew for 2 weeks……All borders to reopen.. forget it!

If we get to 80% and they decide to still lockdown, then it will be total anarchy to the point of storming parliament. Us, the public can do no more. Our duty has been done. Our freedom is 100% deserved. I'm sounding like Maximus.

UNBELIEVABLE - GLADYS just reported on 7 deaths and she said regrettably 1 15 year old and was going to leave it to Chant to give the details

From the ABC just now - Six of the deaths were aged in their 70s and 80s and one was in their 40s in what was the highest number of daily fatalities NSW has recorded since the pandemic began.

A 15-year-old boy who contracted pneumococcal meningitis and COVID-19 also died but Sydney's Children Hospital confirmed the virus was not the cause of Osama Subuh's death. YET GLADYS REPORTED IT !!!!!! This is getting beyond a joke.

43In - You will have litigation from here to eternity if you mandate vaccinations. Can you see the stupidity in your statement? If there are ramifications for not getting vaccinated - then you are being FORCED.

It is like the religious concept of God giving you "free will". The dogma goes like this from apologists - "You don't have to accept Jesus - God gave you free will - but you you don't accept Jesus when you die you will go to HELL and be tortured"