4 ms·

I live in NZ and can assure you from the front lines of the revolt that we don't think we're going to stay locked down until the virus goes away. The game has

by abraae 5y ago

I live in NZ and can assure you from the front lines of the revolt that we don't think we're going to stay locked down until the virus goes away. The game has always been to play it by ear. That's been a great call so far, we've lived normal lives for the last year while incredible scientific advances have delivered vaccines. This is a long game, and we've done well in the first quarter. I hope the politicians continue making good calls as the game goes on. Don't assume that because we locked down hard that that will always be the path forward. That's your straw man talking.

chinathrow 5y ago
I wish you well. What I feel is a real problem in the makes is that you eventually have to open up again but with not enough folks vaccinated. And suddenly, you are in a situation many other countries have right now.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- account42 5y ago
  Definitely a concern for countries that have been able to lock down. Taiwan also had to rush to get people vaccinated when they had an outbreak recently.
- jamiepenney 5y ago
  Our vaccination program is ramping up nicely, even with the lockdown they're posting record numbers. Should be done by the end of the year, and if we can get this outbreak under control we'll easily get there before the next one.
mikedilger 5y ago
While not disagreeing with that, I think we can continue to eliminate. During level-4, the R value is clearly lower than 1.0 meaning the infection shrinks. And the infection is small since we locked down immediately when a community case was first found. Six weeks will probably do it... so long as we don't have (a) new cases coming in through the border, or (b) infected people flaunting the lockdown rules and spreading it faster than we can contain it. Indeed, if it blows out past a couple thousand or so, we will need to pivot.
- abraae 5y ago
  I agree, elimination still looks a good strategy, it's too early to give it up yet. If we can punch out the current outbreak (I'd put money on it, but not too much) and get back to zero then that will re-legitimise lockdown as a strategy for a bit longer. We've got a few "open 'er up and let it rip" friends and I just don't get it. There are so many potential game changers when you are an island. If a reliable saliva-based test appeared that produced results in say 2 hours we could reduce MIQ and use waiting booths at the airport. Even if it was only 99% accurate we could pool groups of 20 into rooms together while waiting for results. So many possibilities if we continue to think critically instead of politically.
  - ImaCake 5y ago
    A quick word on test attributes and why we still don't have a more rapid test than PCR. Tests for disease rely on two numbers: 1. "sensitivity" - the proportion of people with COVID who get a positive test 2. "specificity" - the proportion of people without COVID who get a negative test. COVID, despite the media attention, is a rare disease compared to the number of people tested. Say we have 10,000 people tested for COVID at the airport. We have 99% sensitivity and 99% specificity. And we know 100 people have COVID (1% prevalence) in this group. Our test would find 99/100 of the positive cases. But it would also find an additional 99 false positives! It also misses one true positive case. Which would be disasterous for the quarantine measures in place in Australia and NZ. In short, even a gold standard rapid test is not enough, although at 99% specificity and sensitivity it would be somewhat useful. This is a lot less intuitive than it looks. The companies pushing rapid antigen tests at the start of the pandemic would have know better, but they chose to lie to the public about this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity
- koyote 5y ago
  > During level-4, the R value is clearly lower than 1.0 meaning the infection shrinks Delta is a different beast. Here in Australia, Victoria managed to get the Reff rate down to ~0.75 during their OG outbreak last year with a strict lockdown. Delta has an R0 that is multiples higher than the OG strain so the same lockdown would not get it below 1. You can look at Victoria's current outbreak for evidence of this. Now that doesn't mean NZ can't beat it. A part from Auckland, the population density is very low and as long as compliance is high you might be able to just about get it back down again; especially if you manage to keep it out of large households and essential workers. I just wouldn't base my expectations on what worked last year as Delta is quite a different game.

by abraae 5y ago

chinathrow 5y ago

I wish you well. What I feel is a real problem in the makes is that you eventually have to open up again but with not enough folks vaccinated. And suddenly, you are in a situation many other countries have right now.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
account42 5y ago
Definitely a concern for countries that have been able to lock down. Taiwan also had to rush to get people vaccinated when they had an outbreak recently.
jamiepenney 5y ago
Our vaccination program is ramping up nicely, even with the lockdown they're posting record numbers. Should be done by the end of the year, and if we can get this outbreak under control we'll easily get there before the next one.

mikedilger 5y ago

While not disagreeing with that, I think we can continue to eliminate. During level-4, the R value is clearly lower than 1.0 meaning the infection shrinks. And the infection is small since we locked down immediately when a community case was first found. Six weeks will probably do it... so long as we don't have (a) new cases coming in through the border, or (b) infected people flaunting the lockdown rules and spreading it faster than we can contain it. Indeed, if it blows out past a couple thousand or so, we will need to pivot.

abraae 5y ago
I agree, elimination still looks a good strategy, it's too early to give it up yet. If we can punch out the current outbreak (I'd put money on it, but not too much) and get back to zero then that will re-legitimise lockdown as a strategy for a bit longer. We've got a few "open 'er up and let it rip" friends and I just don't get it. There are so many potential game changers when you are an island. If a reliable saliva-based test appeared that produced results in say 2 hours we could reduce MIQ and use waiting booths at the airport. Even if it was only 99% accurate we could pool groups of 20 into rooms together while waiting for results. So many possibilities if we continue to think critically instead of politically.
- ImaCake 5y ago
  A quick word on test attributes and why we still don't have a more rapid test than PCR. Tests for disease rely on two numbers: 1. "sensitivity" - the proportion of people with COVID who get a positive test 2. "specificity" - the proportion of people without COVID who get a negative test. COVID, despite the media attention, is a rare disease compared to the number of people tested. Say we have 10,000 people tested for COVID at the airport. We have 99% sensitivity and 99% specificity. And we know 100 people have COVID (1% prevalence) in this group. Our test would find 99/100 of the positive cases. But it would also find an additional 99 false positives! It also misses one true positive case. Which would be disasterous for the quarantine measures in place in Australia and NZ. In short, even a gold standard rapid test is not enough, although at 99% specificity and sensitivity it would be somewhat useful. This is a lot less intuitive than it looks. The companies pushing rapid antigen tests at the start of the pandemic would have know better, but they chose to lie to the public about this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity
koyote 5y ago
> During level-4, the R value is clearly lower than 1.0 meaning the infection shrinks Delta is a different beast. Here in Australia, Victoria managed to get the Reff rate down to ~0.75 during their OG outbreak last year with a strict lockdown. Delta has an R0 that is multiples higher than the OG strain so the same lockdown would not get it below 1. You can look at Victoria's current outbreak for evidence of this. Now that doesn't mean NZ can't beat it. A part from Auckland, the population density is very low and as long as compliance is high you might be able to just about get it back down again; especially if you manage to keep it out of large households and essential workers. I just wouldn't base my expectations on what worked last year as Delta is quite a different game.