9 ms·
Good luck to the average person getting it in the USA before March. Even with half the population refusing it because the anti-vax people might be even more cr
by ck2 6y ago
Good luck to the average person getting it in the USA before March.
Even with half the population refusing it because the anti-vax people might be even more crazy than the anti-maskers.
Which makes you wonder which country will have covid longest.
- lagadu 6y agoAll countries will have covid forever[0]: it's an endemic disease to nearly all continents now, much like the flu or aids. [0]for values of "forever" that don't go into the far future where viruses may have a cure or an effective form of erradication.
- peteretep 6y agoThe reason we have AIDS is because vaccination against HIV is very difficult and expensive. I don’t see how this generalises to all viruses? Several viruses have been eradicated, and several more have been effectively eradicated in countries with functioning healthcare
- idnefju 6y agoAustralia doesn’t have it. Wasn’t impossible, just had to stop air travel and lockdown for a period. Now the only people with COVID are returned Australian travellers from overseas who have to go on hotel quarantine
- paublyrne 6y agoIt's likely this will change next year when Australia lifts quarantining. It will be considered an acceptable risk given that most people will not be vulnerable to it.
- walkingolof 6y agoHelps to have no land borders, not saying Australia didn’t do a great job curbing it ..
- PurpleFoxy 6y agoDoes it really? Has it been found that a significant source of infections was illegal immigration? Or that without it there would not have already been internal spreading?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- iso1631 6y agoDoesn't matter. If you don't have covid, and nobody comes in, you won't get covid. But that's not feasible in most countries. Austrailia and NZ don't rely on a just-in-time cross border economy like the US and Europe. Goods arrive after being on boats which have been off shore for days or weeks. Compare with the US-Canada "border closure", where thousands of trucks, and their drivers, have crossed each way every day all year.
- Scoundreller 6y agoCanada-US could do what they already do with trains: crew change at the border. Or even trailer drop-off and pick-up for no-chance-of-personal-contact changes. They just choose not to.
- iso1631 6y agoThat's still orders of magnitude more goods crossing a border without a quarentine period than you get from air freight to Aus/NZ
- Scoundreller 6y agoI don’t think the issue is quarantining/isolation of goods, but the people transporting it. Canadian cross-border truckers arriving back from ??? USA are largely exempt from quarantine requirements upon return.
- geomark 6y ago
- wrinkl3 6y agoYeah but for how long? Unless Australia is willing to keep screening all arrivals and containing outbreaks indefinitely, Covid is gonna start circulating there at some point.
- taejo 6y agoThey could make proof of vaccination an entry requirement. Combine that with widespread domestic vaccination and you've got a very good chance of containing any infections that make it into the country.
- thinkingemote 6y agovaccination doesn't mean you cannot get the virus and spread it around. it protects you from the effects of Covid-19, the disease, caused by your body's reaction to the virus. Those vaccinated, because they have less symptoms, less coughing basically, might not spread it around as much, but we don't know that yet. Remember asymptomatic spreading is a big concern for this virus.
- nl 6y agoThis is getting downvotes, but it is at least somewhat correct. > it protects you from the effects of Covid-19, the disease, caused by your body's reaction to the virus. There isn't really evidence either way for this. To quote Nature[1]: "Tests on more than 43,000 people have shown that the Pfizer vaccine is 95% effective at preventing disease" > vaccination doesn't mean you cannot get the virus and spread it around. This might be true: "But none has demonstrated that it prevents infection altogether, or reduces the spread of the virus in a population. This leaves open the chance that those who are vaccinated could remain susceptible to asymptomatic infection — and could transmit that infection to others who remain vulnerable. “In the worst-case scenario, you have people walking around feeling fine, but shedding virus everywhere" [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03441-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03441-8
- weddpros 6y ago
- csjr 6y agoThis! I was thinking about this recently. How the politicians have failed to implement such simple policies?
- barry-cotter 6y agoBlame the World Health Organization. > Countries may gain time in the short-term as they limit travel to fight the new coronavirus pandemic, but the World Health Organization thinks overall that “it doesn't help to restrict movement," a top adviser to the U.N. health agency's chief said Thursday. https://www.euronews.com/2020/03/13/world-health-organization-don-t-expect-travel-bans-to-beat-coronavirus https://www.euronews.com/2020/03/13/world-health-organizatio...
- amanaplanacanal 6y agoIt probably depends on when you do it too. If it’s already widespread in your population, closing borders isn’t going to help much.
- fakedang 6y agoThat was in March. The messaging from Jan was pretty much the same, if not even more lax. The WHO is to be blamed significantly for not communicating properly.
- ChrisRR 6y agoAnd are you going to keep your borders closed forever? And i guarantee some people still have it. There's no way it's been eradicated completely. All it takes is for one infected person to visit 2 people, and those 2 people to visit 2 others.
- prawn 6y agoAnd presumably that's been happening for months, yet there are limited outbreaks and they are swiftly contained through contact tracing and quarantine. Victoria was swamped yet has not had a case for 30 days now. Cross-border travel varies depending on the status of each state, but is tracked and quarantine enforced at various levels if it's available. Testing is freely available and fairly fast. Nationwide, there is currently one locally acquired case over the last 7 days, and 74 from overseas in the same period. Presumably we'll bubble with NZ at some point and carefully go from there, plus see how the availability of vaccines starts to change the equation beyond that. In my circles, people are keen to travel again, but everyone is pretty matter of fact about the situation and curious about timings rather than desperate to open up.
- zebrafish 6y agoYou should provide sources for claims like this or at least claims stated in this way. The actual real truth is, like most things with this virus that showed up a few months ago, nobody knows for sure.
- akmarinov 6y agoThe US vaccination plan has vaccinating non-essential (read average) people starting at around May-June, so no way it happens in March. Doctors, the elderly and other more at risk groups will get it before that.
- learc83 6y agoThe US vaccination plan is state by state. In many states people working in food service and grocery stores, people under 60 who are overweight, have high blood pressure, asthma etc... will be offered the vaccine in phase 2. It’s not just doctors and the elderly, it’s a huge chunk of the population. And depending on how many people actually want the vaccine and how many are approved it’s possible that healthy, under 65, non essential workers could start being offered the vaccine.
- ghaff 6y agoIt varies by state but I expect most will at least roughly follow CDC guidelines. There will probably be variance in who is considered essential and who gets it after essential works, at risk, and 65+. At least some places are looking to start vaccinate younger people who are more likely to spread and only then do other older age groups.
- learc83 6y agoPretty much every state has a publicly available vaccine plan that you can read. The variance is pretty big even though it mostly follows the same progression. My stepdad can get the vaccine in phase 1b in his state, but not my mom. The state over from her my mom could get it in phase 1b, but not my stepdad. My fiancée's parent's can't get it until phase 3 in their state, but they could both get it in phase 1b in my parent's state.
- ghaff 6y agoRelatively small differences in the rules can certainly affect one's position in line quite a bit. For example, an otherwise not at particular risk 60 year old is actually going to be pretty close to the end of the line in a lot of places (even though they may count as "elderly" elsewhere).
- jacquesm 6y agoGood chance that there is significant overlap between anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- vixen99 6y agoGeneralized category labelling is not helpful though it may be enjoyable. We can ignore stalwarts of either extreme camp while taking note of, for instance, the measured tone of the Danish study on mask wearing.
- ketamine__ 6y ago...
- bluGill 6y agoMost people working without air conditioning are in a job where they should have a mask that is a lot more uncomfortable than a simple N95! There are a lot of chemicals that a N95 won't filter and those are typically used by the types of people who don't have air conditioning.
- briefcomment 6y agoCan someone explain why it’s not enough to just vaccinate people who want to get vaccinated? Doesn’t that cover everyone who wants to avoid covid19?
- einarfd 6y agoNo vaccine is ever 100%, you will see that some vaccinated people do get sick. In addition you have people that can't be vaccinated, these are still at risk. But if you vaccinated enough people, the successful vaccinated will act as a kind of firewall and hinder the sickness from effectively spreading.
- briefcomment 6y agoBut comments above state that the vaccine doesn't effect spread. If that's true, then vaccinating everyone would not address any of those points.
- ghaff 6y agoIt hasn't been proven to affect spread (because that wasn't tested for). But it's generally assumed it does to at least a degree.
- tgb 6y agoIt's also much harder to test spread. You'd have to do repeated follow-up of all participants with frequent testing. When you have 40,000 participants, that's a significant concern. Trials like these are called "large, simple trials" since at that scale it's impractical to have a complicated study design at that scale. In addition to the pure expense, it's difficult to comply consistently with the protocol if it's complicated and you need to implement it at dozens or hundreds of sites. And recruiting people becomes harder and harder as you need additional follow-up, and attrition is higher (and likely biased: you're more likely to take your test if you think you might be sick). So it's entirely reasonable to just study symptomatic cases in these trials.
- 6y ago