[QUOTE=Telfer86;10881759]..........WA closed to everyone & QLD stating they will remain closed to Vic/NSW until 28 days of zero new cases (hasn't been achieved anywhere).........................[/QUO

I believe it's 28 days of no new community transmissions.

Your question is why, I for one, am glad that most people are happy for our STATE politicians to allow their decisions to be driven by the medical experts. I can see people having opinions that are driven by personal belief / political / financial position etc, but this!!!

I was Aeromedical at the time, we were clad up like surgeons, complete with booties. I'll be honest, we were ****ting out pants because we had young children and didn't know how it was transmitted. The fear and unknown lasted about 2 months when with a sigh of relief the news came, it's ok guys it's blood to blood, you can lose the protective gear and became limited to the paramedics only when the patient was bleeding. The grim reaper campaign went on for some time after that. International travel back then was only qantas and a minuscule of what it is today. (well before march anyway)

28 Days of no new community transmission from unknown sources. But if you read the Judges' comments in the Palmer trial, it goes above that even, to the point where if they don't know if there's unknown transmission or not they'll keep the border closed too...EDIT: And as a guide, NSW's best run in that regard to date has been 22 days, followed by 13 and then 10 days.

I just don’t understand how you can trust an expert who is paid to give advice to help the pay master spin their yarn.

Yes, just read the first few paragraphs and I agree, but you obviously didn't read much as you've have understood where he was heading with this and whom he was criticising.

"Science is probably the last bastion of true freethinking but is being swallowed by this make-money-get-profit world. Science and scientists are becoming more and more detached from the pure curiosity that once drove them, and they are embracing this notion of profitable science, which means that an idea must first be sold in order to be explored."

I wonder where this is heading......?

"In naturally profitable scientific fields, for e.g. pharmacology, biotechnology or applied physics, the price is lower, and usually consists on adjusting the direction of a certain study to the best economic outcome."

Well, I expected that! But what followed was also no surprise:

"........But what when there is no direct profit? Fundamental science, for example. To be able to sell it in order to get funding a scientist is frequently forced to bend or adjust the narrative used to describe its project. From that moment onwards, it doesn’t matter how hard he will then fight to ignore the adaptations used in the marketing plan. His focus, his scientific agenda is forever deviated, since he must present results in line with what was proposed. One good example is how climate change is frequently introduced into projects which have nothing to do with it."

And the same with this:

"We are embracing, in science and as scientists, the same values and rules of the financial markets. We have transformed it into the monetisation of science (see Horton, 2016). This means that no longer the primary goal of science is to increase knowledge for the growth and prosperity of mankind but to obtain profits and be economically strong, under present neoliberal economic principles" So those same neoliberal economic principles which are damaging our societies are also responsible for pulling down our higher education; surprise, surprise!

And on it goes with pointing out the present failures in the world's higher education systems. But I think your wedded anti science view has clouded your ability to read this with an independent mind, allowing you to jump to the conclusion that this piece supports your political views, but it doesn't. Sure, there are problems, but this piece doesn't provide evidence that the system has corrupted the science that is used to support the view on CC or CV. The argument on "peer" reviewed work is well known and there is a scientist in Melb who has taken it upon herself to shine a light on this problem and she has had a reasonable amount of media expose for it recently (last 6 mths or so). A lot of this "peer" reviewed work is out of very low level journals (and a reasonable % out of China) and are large part of the problem is the need for published "research" by Unis etc. So for peer reviewed work, it's the standing of the journal that matters, claiming peer reviewed means nothing if the journal is of low standing, and the highest standing journals guard their reputations because without them, they're are worthless.

However, conflating this issue with all climate science is pure rubbish, most of the direction on CC is coming from the likes of, Australia: CSIRO, BoM, previous Fed Gov Chief Gov Scientist, UNSW CC unit, US: NASA's Goddard Institute, NOAA, Academy of Sciences, US equiv of BoM, UK: Royal Society (oldest science org in the world), UK Academy of Science. Afaik, every reputable science org supports the consensus on CC. We are not talking bottom of the rung science, we are taking the top levels.

The article also points out the profit driven area of science these days, that being the bio / pharma areas. So who is corrupting the actual outcome of science, those at the bottom rung or the profit driven areas. Who provides the money for all of these web based anti CC stances? The fossil fuel and vested interests in not wanting any change that will impact their profitability.

I'm not wedded to CC, for the life of me I cannot see for me, an emotional benefit and definitely no financial benefit in accepting CC, or CV responses. Why would a normal person want to, with all of the negative outcomes of that acceptance. For me it's simple, the bulk to the science supports it. Unfortunately we now have to endure that fallout.

Mr Peabody, the article doesn't support your view, you've conflated it with your beliefs.

Edit: "A good read on the scientific experts of today! " Yeah nah. It isn't a read of scientific experts today, it's a comment on the declining "standards" of science in general, just as you have varying standards of aviation around the world REGARDLESS of the same regulatory standards worldwide. Imo your comment is further evidence of your misunderstanding of the article.

So I guess that's the paid experts on both sides of the fence, that means the side of the fence you sit on as well? Because one way or another they are both paid for their opinion, however public health experts are nowhere near at risk if the disagree with their paymasters, which is not the case for the private arena.

You need look no further than "religion" for the answer to those questions.

Just some general comments on peer review (academic, not science)

Tonight I’m in the process of peer reviewing (rejecting!) a paper for one discipline’s annual conference. I don’t know the author(s). They won’t know who reviewed their paper.

Peer-reviewed journals within disciplines are usually rated (category A, B & C in the discipline I’m most familiar with). It has to be much higher quality research to get published in a Cat A.

I’m going to respectfully disagree. I think public service is more susceptible to corruption. Anyway, your point that you can’t believe anyone holds true. Hence just follow the statistics and formulate ones own opinion on the state of play.

I too find myself referring more and more to government websites, source documents and scientific papers.

The difference between those and what appears in the media is disappointing to say the least.

I am afraid that our CMO let the cat out of the bag.

I really feel for the CHO and Premier when it comes to non-quarantined requests to attend a funeral.

If you say NO you will be heartless. But if you say YES, well, we all know how likely “social distancing” is expected to succeed at a funeral.

A single COVID case at a funeral could easily become 50-100 in a day, and next you know it, you have Melbourne in July. There are usually a lot of elderly and vulnerable people at a funeral. So you, as Premier, or CHO, will get to feel like Dan for the next 6 months at least, because you gave her an exemption.

Yeah. True. Unless, of course, it’s a “very significant“ funeral.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-...icant/12132614

Yep. Been there, seen it, bought the T shirt! :suspect:

I guess the “crossing state border from a hot zone without quarantine” factor was not involved in that one.

But your point is well noted. Poor form.

What’s the QLD definition of a hotspot? ACT has a better record than QLD. All because 1 person from NSW flew from Canberra into Brisbane. But you can sail a super yacht from Melbourne for maintenance that could be done in Melbourne, lie on the paperwork about not stopping anywhere and be allowed to stay.

As each day passes, the Sweden model looks like it was the more rational option. Let’s also not forget that Covid is not Ebola. Listening to the media, you’d be forgiven for thinking they were one and the same.

Seems Queen P house is falling down around her receiving a flogging in the media today, Queen P wouldn't allow CMO to do a conference without her as thats her spot on the TV but now CMO stands alone at press conference to take the heat, 3 ministers quit. The thing that gets me our PM has allegedly had a phone call to plead to QLD to allow a daughter attend a funeral who comes from ACT (over 60 days without a case) and she reverts to "I'm being bullied" seems she cant handle the heat. Then for the ultimate slap in the face admits to giving the wealthy special treatment Tom hanks brings nothing to Australia really but "because we need the money"! open your border let the business operate to what they were.

QLD GOV is a disgrace to our nation, another family had to get a Go Fund Me page going so they could pay for the quarantine to see their dying son, this is having real effects on peoples lives.

Coronavirus Australia: Queensland’s border rules cruel, hypocritical state … unless you’re Tom Hanks

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...090a?width=650Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk welcomes the AFL grand final – and more than 400 hangers-on, to Queensland, left. 'Crew' aboard Victorian Mark Simonds' superyacht sail in against the rules, but can stay, top. Meanwhile, the borders are policed, and requests for exemptions to attend funerals denied. Pictures: News Corp/Channel 9/News CorpAh, Queensland.

Outrageously hypocritical one day. Horrendously cruel the next.

How else to explain decisions being made around the NSW border – which, by the way, is open to Queenslanders.

They are welcome in Byron, and in Bondi.

No quarantine required. Just come on down.

But just try being getting into Queensland, henceforth, the callous state.

Ray Hadley has been leading the charge on this, on radio 2GB in Sydney.

Yesterday, he had a man who is 39 years old, and dying from cancer. He lives in Brisbane.

His four children, aged seven to 13, live with their Mum, across the border in NSW.

They want to see their dad before he dies.

Permission denied.

Denied!

Scott Morrison tried to intervene. He is an evangelical Christian, but you don’t have to be, to ask for mercy in this case.

Okay, said Queensland. One of the children can come over the border, and he’ll be driven to his father’s beside to say goodbye for one hour, and then it’s back to NSW with him.

And why?

Nobody can explain it.
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...a31d?width=650Traffic at the NSW-Queensland border. Picture: Jason O'BrienCovid is not rampant in NSW. What are the chances of this man’s children having it and spreading it? Minuscule.

Then, today, another case: Sarah is 26 years old, and she was raised in Queensland, but now lives in Canberra.

Her father was dying.

She applied for permission to see him before he died.

She didn’t get her exemption until Friday. It was too late. He died on Wednesday. So she won‘t ever see him again.

Well, at least she could go to the funeral, and be with her family, and pay her respects.

She took her exemption paperwork and went to Brisbane, and straight into hotel quarantine.

From there, she applied for an hour’s release to attend the funeral.

Denied!

But not just denied: the bureaucrat in charge told her she shouldn’t even be in Queensland. Why not?

Because the exemption was to visit her dying father. And he’s dead, so, you know, what are you even doing here?

The inhumanity boggles the mind.

Again, there is essentially no Covid in Canberra. What chance that she’s infected? None. Why can’t she quarantine with her family? Distance herself at the funeral for an hour?
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...06b0?width=650The Lady Pamela at a Gold Coast marina after millionaire construction magnate Mark Simonds and his family sailed her up from Melbourne for maintenance. They were fined and quarantined, but they can stay. Picture: News CorpPeople are carrying on like the rest of the country has been to Chernobyl. Like everyone else is toxic. But we know that‘s not actually the case.

Which brings us to the shocking hypocrisy.

Tom Hanks flew into Queensland this week. He’s not in hotel quarantine. He came on a private jet. So if you’re famous, in you go.

It also helps to be rich.

We all know the story of the millionaire family from Victoria who sailed up to Queensland on a luxury yacht, saying the boat needed maintenance.

They hopped off at Eden to get coffee. They weren‘t crew, as they claimed, but a man, his wife, their kids, and a friend, who is Lindsay Fox’s daughter.

They were fined, and forced into quarantine, but they’ve been allowed to stay in Queensland, which was of course their goal.

And why? One of them is a major sponsor of the Geelong Cats.

They want to go to the footy.
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...a2ad?width=650The AFL’s Gold Coast hotel quarantine bubble. Picture: SuppliedSpeaking of footy, who are all the people allowed into Queensland, on the guise of being with the AFL?

We’ve been told that James Sutherland – former boss of Cricket Australia – is there.

How did he get an exemption to travel? He is on the board of the Geelong Football Club. And he’s apparently got “experience with touring sports teams.”

There are a heap of wives, kids, support staff, hangers-on as well.

Ah yes.

If only you were the second cousin of an AFL commissioner’s son, you too could be in Queensland. Beautiful one day, acts of beastly cruelty the next.

Caroline Overington

Weird all these people complaining about queensland border rules, scummo comes onto national TV with crocadile tears for about how he personally asked for an exemption for someone. Completely ommitting that he is preventing australians returning to australia. I know someone who missed the last weeks with his mother life and her funeral because the national border laws which are his domain is preventing thousands of australians return

Its all politics, like tom hanks he has had covid why is he quarantining again then, why because its the rules

Its wierd that suddenly NSW gives a **** about a QLD after years of putting **** on it for being the "redneck state" and now they all want to come here,

Not sure where you have been living for the last few decades but QLD has always been popular with NSW, Victorians so yes we do want it open. You are very correct it is the redneck state that’s why we like to just visit for short amounts of time But never want to live there.

Lots of NSW & VIC residents couldnt care less if it never opens again.
Her day will come,just sit back & watch.

Unfortunately as has been mentioned by another poster it’s the “the red neck state” she will have brain washed them all. I think she will win Oct 31st.

Her ministers are jumping ship. It’s obvious they don’t think she will win.

Her intellect is even less than I would have imagined. Pulling the bullying card, what a crock!

Bet she regrets stepping up to the big league.

Victorian support for Dan has all but collapsed:

https://www.news.com.au/world/corona...7eeeb9de8f8e67

QLD Labor would be paying close attention...

Problem is the Victorian election is over 2 years away, and he knows it.

The next Vic state election isn't until Nov 2022.

I doubt he's jumping at shadows about a poll over 2 years from an election.

I think he'll lose that election but that should be based on the bungling of hotel quarantine, not the steady easing of restrictions which, while unpopular, is our best chance of avoiding a third wave.

Very interesting that a poll commissioned specifically for the Vic State Liberal Party shows that, whilst another poll today from prominent pollster Roy Morgan shows Dan Andrews at 70% approval rating:

70% of Victorians approve of the way Premier Andrews is handling his job

Interesting that even LNP voters are giving Dan a slightly less than majority approval. A majority want the curfew, the restaurant takeaway, the 5km restrictions to remain, although a slight majority wish to see an exemption to visit immediate families.

This poll shows Dan’s approval rating is even slightly higher than Scott Morrison’s was last week.

I find it hillarious that even after the vitriol on here and in certain parts of the media directed at the Labor state government they’re mostly holding up and solid, whereas the NSW State Coalition government, which people here and in the media tell me is doing the best job and is so good, almost collapsed yesterday because they couldn’t agree on whether or not slaughtering koalas en masse is a bad thing?!

Sweden had/has NON voluntary recommendations. Including no travel until recently.

Current are:-As of 29 March, the Swedish Government has decided to ban all public gatherings and events with more than 50 people. The aim with this legislation is to prevent situations where large numbers of people from different parts of the country come together in the same place.

Examples of public gatherings and events are demonstrations, seminars, religious gatherings, theatre performances and concerts. Sports events, dances and fairs are other examples.



On 1 April, the Public Health Agency issued regulations and general guidelines regarding our shared responsibility to prevent transmission of COVID-19. Everyone has a personal responsibility to prevent transmission. You should avoid any large social gathering such as parties, weddings, funerals and other events attracting many people at the same time.

It is also of utmost importance to keep a distance from others at e.g. sports grounds, gyms, shopping centers, public transportation etc. People older than 70 should limit all close contacts with others.

Prior to all events and public gatherings, the Public Health Agency recommends that the organisers do a risk assessment.



According to the general guidelines published by the Public Health Agency, public transport operators should:

• provide enough services to avoid crowding,
• limit the number of passengers per vehicle, and
• inform their passengers about how to minimise the risk of disease transmission.

Businesses and organisations in Sweden must take note of the recommendations of the Public Health Agency of Sweden or County Medical Officers and do what they can to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This means that:

• Shops and shopping centres must do what they can to limit the number of people on their premises at any one time. They should come up with alternative arrangements for checkout queues and advise customers how far apart they need to stand
• Employers can also ease the situation for their employees by:
  - supporting employees who are on sick leave. Anyone confirmed positive with COVID-19 should stay at home for at least seven days after falling ill. Before returning to work one should have completely recovered and have had at least two days with no fever.
  - adapting the workplace so that staff are not at risk of infection
  - arranging for the staff to be able from keep a physical distance to each other
  - making it possible for staff to regularly wash their hands with water and soap or use alcohol-based hand rub.
  - making it possible for staff to work at home where possible
  - adjusting working hours so that staff can avoid travelling in the rush hour
• Associations and clubs should postpone annual meetings and other similar meetings if possible, or hold meetings digitally.

It is important to keep a physical distance from other people, both indoors and outdoors where people gather, e.g. restaurants, shopping centres, bathing places, beaches, camping sites and open-air cafés and restaurants



As from 14 June activities such as sports games, matches and tournaments without spectators will be permitted for all ages. The decision applies to all professional sports, at all levels, for both men and women. However, there are certain conditions to take into account. Tournaments should

• primarily be held outdoors
• comply with the legislation in the Public Order Act chapter 2, section 1-3 §§ regarding public gatherings which are limited to 50 people. Further information is available from the Swedish Police (in Swedish).
• limit the number of spectators and avoid crowding
• only permit close contact considered unavoidable in order to be able to practise the respective sport.

It is important that both participants and spectators are free of any symptoms.

For all other exercise and sports activities the same rules as before are applicable, i.e. these activities can continue, but the one responsible for the activity must take action to minimise the risk of transmission of COVID-19.

You are allowed to travel within Sweden in connection with sports games, tournaments and other sports activities. However, it is of utmost importance to keep a distance from others and to follow the general guidelines concerning travel within Sweden.



Restaurants, bars, and cafés around the country need to take special precaution regarding the risk of crowding of people in queues, around tables, and at buffets or bars. Visitors must be able to keep at a distance from each other.

All visitors should sit at tables when they eat or drink, they are not allowed to stand at a bar or similar. Staff should serve food and drinks at the tables. Unless it creates queues or crowding, guests may order and pick up their food at a counter. Take-outs can be handled as usual, as long as it does not lead to crowding or close contact between people.

The person in charge of the venue is responsible for maintaining routines minimising the risk of disease transmission. This can for example include local guidelines about access to hand washing facilities (soap and running water) for staff and guests.



Businesses and organisations in Sweden must take note of the recommendations of the Public Health Agency of Sweden or County Medical Officers and do what they can to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This means that:

• Shops and shopping centres must do what they can to limit the number of people on their premises at any one time. They should come up with alternative arrangements for checkout queues and advise customers how far apart they need to stand.
• Employers can also ease the situation for their employees by:
  – supporting employees who are on sick leave. Anyone confirmed positive with COVID-19 should stay at home for at least seven days after falling ill. Before returning to work one should have completely recovered and have had at least two days with no fever.
  – adapting the workplace so that staff are not at risk of infection
  – arranging for the staff to be able to keep a physical distance from each other
  – making it possible for staff to regularly wash their hands with water and soap or use alcohol-based hand rub
  – making it possible for staff to work at home where possible
  – adjusting working hours so that staff can avoid travelling in the rush hour

• Associations and clubs should postpone annual meetings and other similar meetings if possible, or hold meetings digitally.

And with that, they've achieved 86,200 cases, 5,850 deaths against a population of 10,100,000. That works out to 0.85% of the population infected and 0.05% of the population dying from it.

Applying those percentages to Australia's 25.5M population and you'd get: 217,000 cases and 14,772 deaths. Now, the statistical value of a human life is ~$4.6M AUD, so the statistical value of those deaths is only $67.9B AUD. I say "only" because the financial damage of the Government response to COVID is well over $100 Billion dollars so far. And it's still doing up... And that's not including the "human toll" families locked out of funerals, the mother who lost her unborn baby, the FIFO's (like me) who are on the cusp of losing their jobs because they are locked out of the state they work in, the small businesses and cafes who will go under...

But, hang on a minute, doesn't Australia still allow tobacco smoking? Which causes lung cancer? Which is almost entirely preventable by not smoking? In 2019, there were 8,684 deaths from Lung or Bronchial cancer. Almost all of which could have been prevented by banning tobacco.

Reckon they'll do it? :rolleyes:

Sweden Mindel may not be the best. Australia has low to zero casss but yet we close our entire country off to each other it’s pure madness. Australia should be open to all within Australia. Victoria understandably remain **** off but get them open ASAP. Put the job advert up for contact tracers increase that work group give them all the resources they need. We are killing our country each week this goes on

I love a good typo! :D:}

And if NSW is successful, that's probably what we'll do.

Only Sweden have just ramped up testing, many early deaths were not tested.

$4.6m is on a normal day - it takes one woman nine months to create a baby, how long does it take nine women?

Guns in Australia were/are pretty much banned - it did reduce mass shootings.

Need to dig a bit deeper.
The number of people allowed in each State from overseas is set by the States, not the Feds.
The excuse is that they do not have enough hotel accommodation to quarantine greater numbers.


It is not confined to Oz,

Ok, then let's look at the Seppo's: 6,587,971 total cases & 196,303 deaths against a population of 328,200,000. 2.00% infected and 0.06% dying from it. If you don't like the Seppo's, pick any country you like and run the same numbers. Here's the UK too: 358,138 Cases, 41,608 deaths against a population of 66,650,000. 0.54% Infected, 0.06% of their population died "from COVID". Maybe another "random-big numbers country" might help seal the deal: Brazil: 4,239,763 cases, 129,575 deaths against a population of 212,559,000. 1.99% infected, 0.06% dying from it. Or WITH COVID might be a more appropriate moniker.

That 0.06% Of Australian's would be 15,300 deaths. Yep, for a notional "average working Aussie". Except the problem is, most of those dying from COVID are not "normal working Aussies", they are "elderly, retired Aussies with Co-Morbidities" and as such, would be "valued" at less, thereby rendering the opening of the economy even more important on a cost/benefit ratio.

EDIT: Just found a newly-released guidance note from the Dept of PM & Cabinet, it's now $4.9M, but also $213,000 per "life year". If someone want's to plug the average age of our COVID fatalities into Excel vs the Average age of death in Australia you might be alarmed at the cost/benefit ratio. IT makes CASA's reasoning to AD's etc look like the Gold-standard!

EDIT 2: Fixed the quote attribution

Seriously?

I love these brain teasers. "9 months?"