3 ms·
They've been getting broader testing underway and are employing it where there seem to be community breakouts, but I have to agree with your parent poster. Ther
by jddj 7y ago
They've been getting broader testing underway and are employing it where there seem to be community breakouts, but I have to agree with your parent poster. There has been community transmission, so stressing so strongly that travelers are the vector lead to complacency.
The messaging was bad. If you tell people over and over that it's only the travelers (but you only test the travelers) and downplay the community aspect then you're misrepresenting the risk.
People were, until very recently, continuing to host wine and dinner parties so long as no recent travelers were present. With travelers who arrived the day before the mandatory quarantine came into effect treated as being safe to invite.
People aren't rational in these situations, you can't give them such an easy mental shortcut or they'll take it every time.
Many Australians were coming home from countries with broader (at the time) testing, more extensive contact tracing and still fewer cases than Australia, but the community's eye was still being actively trained on them specifically, and not simply people as the primary vector.
- nl 7y agoI don't think anyone has said "it's only travellers". But yes, they absolutely present the biggest risk. Until March 23 (I think? Something like that) every single local transmission in Australia had been traced back to a traveller or a connection to one. The OP said "The stats reflect the testing criteria, not the true distribution here" and my argument is that actually the stats are probably pretty accurate and given how well tracing has worked and the limits on the number of tests available the criteria was pretty reasonable.
- jddj 7y agoSorry, you're right. The messaging was that it's primarily the travelers. My feeling is that the quarantines definitely should have gone ahead, but in justifying them to the public the govt. seemed to place a little too much emphasis, such that people interpreted (as they do, in a crisis) most significant risk as only risk.
- nl 7y agoI think the government had a bunch of libertarians in their ear complaining about "infringing on our freedom" to lock people in an enforced quarantine. This sounds ridiculous, but I know someone who said "This is a nightmare! Australia has taken away all freedoms" in response to the announcement. In that context (and I can well believe the LNP would have people like this) I think the emphasis on "the forced quarantine is limited to travellers" makes sense.