Lock it all Down

Originally posted by Treefern: ↑

Sure thing. Just keep in mind this is a best guess, is subject to modification as new data emerges, and there is also a small probability I could even be wrong

To my eye, the medicos and Government are playing a deep game, and it all revolves around winter.

It took them awhile to come to terms with the nature and scale of the tsunami that was coming (I am still going to the footy this Sunday, wtf?), but it didn't take them long to adjust and put the screws on.

Phase 1 is to make sure that they have their foot on the throat of Coronavirus in the community before we hit winter. I've read some stuff from the northern hemisphere suggesting that Covid-19 is simply nastier in winter (probably more due to our weakness that its strength), but 100% guaranteed that it will do better against us when we already have a cold, or even worse the seasonal flu.

If we let it roll over us heading into winter it would be catastrophic, and I think all of the policies and all of the rhetoric and even the unspoken strategies have been around spring and the return to warmer weather.

That's why we've been told that we'll be indoors for 'several weeks at least'.

It's also why the Prime Minister has been constantly telling us "at least six months".

It's also why the packages have been funded for six months.

It's also why the Federal Budget has been postponed until six weeks into spring.

Phase 2 is to keep everybody away from each other during winter. I expect the Prime Minister's daily rhetoric to move from a constant "we are doing a great job together, there are early signs we are managing to control its spread" to things like "now that we have Coronavirus by the scruff of the neck, now is not the time to let go, because Winter is almost upon us, and we are all at risk during winter. Winter is coming," and "our packages announced to date are all funded until the spring and I intend to maintain our rigid defense against Coronavirus all the way to the Budget in October where we will reassess their need and effectiveness", etc. He'll start to use the words 'Winter' and 'Spring' and awful lot every time he speaks to us.

Phase 2 will be a lot easier under our current settings given that fewer crowd/recreational places are as appealing in winter (like beaches and parks). If we hit winter with zero imported cases and minimal traceable cases then we can keep an eye out for community outbreaks and have half a chance of locking them down. (If we haven't got it where we want it by winter, they might look to introduce stuff like home diaries of movement and/or sign-in books at businesses, etc to allow them to fence in any community outbreaks).

Phase 3 begins in October where the Government assess how the strategy has worked in stemming the spread of the virus over the colder months. They then hand down a Budget which will be timed, if we have managed to get through winter without disastrous outbreaks, loss of life etc, to coincide with the first easing of restrictions. I don't know what these would look like, I'm guessing it would start somewhere in hospitality (for several reasons). The Budget will have some modelling built in that represents an expectation of increased revenue from a spring/summer uptick in economic activity, but there will I think also be funding for some of these packages that we've got running already to be either continued as is, or at least phased down over a period.

The level of easing of restrictions in October will be dependent on how successful phase 2 has been in proving we can keep a lid on outbreaks, but at best they will be modest. If Phase 2 has been a disaster it is likely that they will keep the screws on until Spring of 2022, but it will have to be a shocking winter for us I think for it to go that far, and it will need to still be lingering in mid-Spring in any event.

"How do we return to a more normal life where lesser risk groups essentially 'volunteer' for infection by a disease which is, lets be honest, a lot more severe and dangerous than the flu? A not inconsiderable number will most certainly die."

Yep. That's the bottom line. We can't stop that from happening really. The only thing we can do is keep it as close to a "not inconsiderable number" as we can and as far away from "a catastrophic, society-deforming number" as possible. Most of the well-known medical spokespeople and qualified commentators have already said as much at one time or other, that we can't stop Covid-19, we can only mitigate its destruction which is designed first and foremost to:

1) minimise loss of life due to a lack of proper medical care, and
2) minimise the loss of our frontline health personnel.

There are a couple of pretty obvious candidates for targeted easing of restrictions:

- schools, universities
- hospitality (small restaurants, al fresco, bars,pubs, clubs with house limits, etc).

Because Covid-19 will still probably be in circulation, some of these people will die yes, but in warmer months with comorbidity risks being cotton-wooled it will be considered a manageable risk. In any event there will still be some strong distancing measures in place to prevent it from going gangbusters, it might be pulsed on and off (1/2/1/2/1/2wks etc) or whatever to overcome the lag in our statistics. Assuming we get through Winter 2020 in reasonable shape, this easing I think would still be reined in again for Winter 2021, which probably gets us either to a vaccine or treatment by June 2022 (preferably much sooner, and an earlier arrival of a treatment obviously changes the outlook above).

But yeah, people are going to die no matter which way we go.

That's my best guess at this time, under the assumption that a universal treatment (and certainly not a vaccine) won't be available any time soon.

Expand

thanks for the informative reply. Don't worry we are all guessing but not many give it that much thought which I appreciate. I'll just add my take on your points.

Take a look at #Ecuadorenemergencia, you'll see ol' King Covid doesn't mind a summer break. I'll leave the subject of who did/didn't do what. That will be ripped apart by others. Suffice to say it was well known but minimised.

Those articles in a previous post suggest a flattened curve won't reach herd immunity, especially in 6 months so, if that is the goal, then infections will need to increase markedly soon. That approach will see more deaths than I feel is justified but it will end quicker.

Phase 1 if herd immunity or near it is the goal, the impression I get is it would need to start soon but last at least 6 months which is why I've been thinking May to July, and it continuing at a slower burn til October. Happy to change view though. Elsewhere it moves quickly once restrictions lift even a little and the sooner it begins the sooner it will burn out or slow, the sooner oldies can be safer and more freedoms. I'm not being glib, I'm fully aware of the potential human cost. This says it better than me,

We had been assuming Australia was ‘flattening the curve’ to achieve herd immunity with minimal deaths and within health service capacity. As of Sunday night, it seems we are instead more severely squashing the curve.
How do we know this?
Statements by Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy reveal it: “we have had a somewhat slowing of the growth in the epidemiology curve, but it’s not enough. We have to slow it further.
And we have to stop the thing that’s worrying us most, which is community transmission... And hopefully these early signs of flattening will mean that we can keep going in getting a reduction in the rate of increase every day.”
If we were flattening the curve to achieve herd immunity without over-burdening the health system, we would let the number of cases rise to a level that our health services can manage, and let the population become infected at a manageable rate.
Australia’s daily COVID-19 case rates are currently beneath what is necessary to ride the epidemic out to herd immunity – if that is our goal.
https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/where-is-the-data-on-whether-australia-aims-to-squash-or-flatten-the-curve

So it does seem by that that it agrees with your view, fast tracking herd immunity is fraught with problems imo. If that is the case and they are planning to keep their foot on its throat, keep infections low throughout as we await vaccine and treatments, then Morrison will have a massive tick from me. If people can trust they have their back then the economy will do ok. Trump will destroy confidence creating fear with his recklessness.

As I say, I think it is fair we lay folk have a view, it's our butts on the line and the discourse helps come to terms with it even if it gets heated. Whatever the case we'll likely find out this week. and I'll look forward to the day we can all argue about franking credits instead.