I feel grateful enough for the priority of public health. How far it dominates society is really very surprising.

Public health is a worthwhile priority in and of itself, to the point it now seems, it has arisen as the new order.

It’s impact on personal freedom is unprecedented. It’s most valid weapon urgency.

I think it’s more a question of should we trust doctors to rule. Most people trust their doctor in the quest for longevity.

Looks like they win.

Dan

Sorry Dr Young, but I have to disagree with your diagnosis. Models are never ever perfect! And as long as the emphasis has been on containing the spread! The spread will continue, hopefully with an acceptable level of casualties, you, me?

Models cannot predict lack of compliance! Nor what the illicit drug trade and addiction will do to border closures, lockdowns and subsequent transmission rates.

Covi-19 is now spread by infected humans, 6 out of 7 who may show no symptoms i.e., Asymptomatic?

Moreover, to your central point, confidence has never yet cured a transmissible disease!

I get that you want the economy restarted!? And here's how that may be done ASAP! First we need the 95% accurate, Israeli Saliva test (licence to manufacture) with verifiable results in seconds.

Then deploy it and pop up labs at all borders, i.e., at the nearest available bridge! And at the exit and entry points of all transport terminals, airports and Supermarkets. Assisted by photo I.Ds.

Those testing positive sent immediately to one of our currently disused refugee internment camps. And let the barbed wire and dog patrols ensure compliance.

Given the saliva sample can also be tested for illicit drugs at the mandatory testing point. They can also be caught in the same net.

Interred drug addicts to have their scrips doled out daily so they can't do what many do and routinely O.D. When three tests confirm a negative result, detainees allowed to return to their domiciles and workplaces.

Except maybe, the addicts? I mmean they are already over-represented and a huge impost on the health budget and social cohesion!

Six months cold turkey in a detention centre may be a better outcome, especially for ice addicts and suppression of that market?

Do just that much and the economy can fully reopen As soon as this model is in place!
Alan B.

Dear GrahamY,

Sorry mate but a paywalled link from the Daily Telegraph is hardly the thing to be using as proof that the Doherty Institute got anything wrong.

Do you have anything more open and substantial for review by the ordinary punters like myself?

The Australian Government has announced it will extend the human biosecurity emergency period under the Biosecurity Act 2015 by an additional three months.*

The emergency period, which has been in place since 18 March 2020, will now be in place until 17 December 2020.

Apparently “The extension of the emergency period was informed by specialist medical and epidemiological advice provided by the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC).”

What is this “specialist medical and epidemiological advice”?

The influence of the, unelected, members of the AHPPC is impacting on the freedom of all Australians, it’s way past time for transparency and accountability.

* Human Biosecurity Emergency Period Extended By Three Months. Elizabeth HartMinister for Health media release, 3 September 2020.

You are dreaming Graham if you think dictator self interested pollies/premiers are going to interpret data and make policy in a rational way. Look at the billions wasted on the gw scam only to cause electricity prices to skyrocket while causing China to laugh in our face. These irrational policies largely endorsed by cowardly Liberal pollies who know the IPCC data as being corrupt and the UN being a joke. So then we move to the Coronavirus, more than likely coming from a Chinese lab, sent throughout the world and the handling by Chinese defended by who. The who, who said their was no human to human transmission, said wearing face masks were a waste of time and called Trump racist for telling the truth and acting swiftly. Anyone that thinks a rational response was ever possible is dreaming especially when we have the press (the enemy of the people) backing and cheering evert draconian law and demonising any rational person questioning the stupidity of locking down healthy people.

Dear Elizabeth Hart,

Being essentially an anti-vaxxer you obviously have a problem accepting well informed advice to government.

But be that as it may the four areas this extension covers are;

Restrictions on the entry of cruise ships into Australia
Protections for the supply and sale of certain essential goods
Restrictions on overseas travel
Restrictions on retail stores at international airports

Are you really saying we need to open up to cruise ships again to restore our freedoms?

To me the measures above are entirely appropriate and would be supported by the wide majority of Australians.

The so called national cabinet has been nothing but an escape clause for the PM. He obviously knew he & the parliament were going to get the response wrong by an order of magnitude or three, & used it to try to spread the blame.

What it has done is show how little power the national government really has in such situations, & show how, although they are part of the decision making body, state premiers have no requirement to follow those decisions.

With the PM worried about the economic disaster developing, & all state premiers interested only in looking good in the eyes of their state voters, the "cabinet" is another disastrous talk fest, doing nothing useful.

About the only thing good to come out of the whole fiasco is that most people now realise how lucky they are, not to live in Victoria.

SteeleRedux, the media release I cited says: "The human biosecurity emergency declaration ensures the Government has the powers to take any necessary measures to prevent and control COVID-19 and protect the health of all Australians. These powers have been used on a limited basis on expert medical advice."

Any Australian is entitled to question the extent of those powers...

For example, up to December, the human biosecurity emergency will have been underway for nine months, how much longer can it be extended? According to the Biosecurity Act 2015 these extensions could be endless, as the Governor-General may extend a human biosecurity emergency at the behest of the Health Minister. (Chapter 8, Part 2, Division 2, 476 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2020C00127)

It's been suggested the AstraZeneca vaccine could be ready early next year, with the UQ vaccine expected in mid-2021.[1]

If the human biosecurity emergency continues to be extended, is it possible Australians could be coerced to have these highly questionable vaccine products? It seems the potential is there... My reading of the Biosecurity Act 2015 indicates people could be at risk of five years imprisonment and/or a $66,600 fine if they refuse the vaccine.[2]

I suspect not a lot of people know that, or about the Biosecurity Act 2015. I'm interested to know who was behind this legislation, which was underway at the same time as the No Jab, No Pay bill which was enacted as law in January 2016.

References: (See post above.)
1. CSL to manufacture 81m COVID-19 vaccine doses by mid-2021. AFR, 7 September 2020.
2. See the Biosecurity Act 2015, Part 3, Division 2, Subdivision C, 74 When individual is required to comply with a biosecurity measure (1) (e) section 92 (vaccination or treatment) and (2) and Note 1: A person who fails to comply with a biosecurity measure that the person is required to comply with may commit an offence (see section 107), and Division 4, Subdivision C 107 Offence for failing to comply with a human biosecurity control order...Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years or 300 penalty units, or both. A 'penalty unit' is $222 under Commonwealth law, multiplied by 300 equals $66,600, Notice of Indexation of the Penalty Unit Amount: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020N00061

Dear ElizabethHart,

You either think Australia has a biosecurity issue where the lives of tens of thousands of Australians are at risk or you don't. If you don't then you are among the fringe dwellers. If you do then why isn't an extension the correct thing to do leaving aside the over reach you seem to think the legislation contains?

I'd suggestive whole response was totally misdirected.

We should have focused on trusting the people to take measures to ensure their own health, and welfare.

We all have come to appreciate models are only as good as their input. On the evidence and past experience with climate modelling, every model spewing alarmism should be ignored immediately.

Governments are not elected to keep people healthy.

They are elected to act in our interests.

Was allowing us, without any official negation anywhere, to be told 150,000 people will die, out by a factor of 1450 to 1, in anyway responsible.

The problem is not just modelling. Alarmist modelling and their terrifying predictions are a symptom of todays society and its stupid focus on attempting to make everything safe.

The discussion, by experts, about modelling, should be looked as merely treating the symptom.
The real discussion should be about returning an acceptable risk and personal responsibility to the community.

Experts can't discuss that nor can our politician. Communities can.They only have to be listened to, and not ignored. Why trust only experts?.

I'd have said an acceptable risk would have been a death rate that was comparable to the annual flu death rates would have been acceptable. I would have suggested discussion on that focus would have been appropriate when death rate data was accumulating and that was about
3 months into the 'panic'.

It was around that time I had a letter published in the CM calling for 'the lockdown to be shutdown'. The CM editorial called for the same.

Soon after Fox commentators and participants started down the same track. I didn't listen to radio but I'd say the same probably occurred.

That was the community talking.

It was at that time the 'goal posts' moved from containment to eradication.
A discussion on this or acceptable risk never ever took place anywhere.

At least our politicians are not yet as bad as in Sicktoria, The Police State, but they are on their way.

SteeleRedux, I think Australia's, and much of the world's, response to this virus has been disproportionate and ill-targeted.

Sweden is an interesting outlier. In this regard, consider my BMJ rapid response: Looking at Sweden, COVID-19 and vitamin D... (13 July 2020), i.e.

Most of the reported COVID-19 deaths in Sweden are in the elderly - is there a problem with vitamin D deficiency in this age group?

Latest reported deaths in Sweden are 5,526 (pop. 10.23 million), with 1,428 deaths in people over 90. 2,300 deaths are reported for people in the age group 80-90. So that’s 3,728 of the deaths. Then there are reportedly 1,194 deaths in the age group 70-79. That’s 4,922 deaths across the age group 70 to over 90. There are 379 deaths reported across the ages 60-69. And 156 deaths in the age group 50-59. With a total of 69 deaths across the ages of 0-49 years.[1]

So most of the deaths are in the elderly age group 70 to 90, i.e. 4,922 deaths, people who are also likely to have comorbidities.

Some previous studies have identified vitamin D deficiency in Swedish nursing homes, see for example "Vitamin D deficiency was common among nursing home residents and associated with dementia: a cross sectional study of 545 Swedish nursing home residents"[2], and "Vitamin D deficiency in elderly people in Swedish nursing homes is associated with increased mortality"[3].

Considering Sweden as a whole, it seems most of the population remains alive and not adversely affected by SARS-CoV-2 in the prime of their lives. Perhaps Sweden has made the right decision not to grossly disrupt its society and the lives of millions of people with draconian lockdowns?

Internationally, the focus now should be on finding effective treatments and strategies for the sick, i.e. generally elderly people. And recommending long-term practical preventive measures for the population generally, to reduce the prospect of the illnesses which exacerbate the effects of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and enhance health, e.g. promoting optimum vitamin D levels.

See my published BMJ rapid response for references: https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2475/rr-12

Dear ElizabethHart,

You still haven't addressed my particular question to you.

Do you think this extension to these four areas of Federal Government responsibility was warranted at this time or not?

Restrictions on the entry of cruise ships into Australia
Protections for the supply and sale of certain essential goods
Restrictions on overseas travel
Restrictions on retail stores at international airports

As to Sweden it shut its high schools and universities. Substantial parts of its heavy industry also closed. Even so the impact of loose social distancing rules saw a heavy toll on lives and on health budgets. Its economy shrank by a greater amount than any of its Scandinavian neighbours. Given vitamin D deficiencies are a feature of these countries it is evident that it is not a significant factor in Sweden's relatively high toll.

SteeleRedux I thought I made myself clear, I'm concerned that "The human biosecurity emergency declaration ensures the Government has the powers to take any necessary measures to prevent and control COVID-19 and protect the health of all Australians. These powers have been used on a limited basis on expert medical advice."

I'm concerned about "any necessary measures", and I think I'm still allowed to have that concern...

In regards to the four areas you've listed, restrictions on overseas travel is a concern, particularly for those people who are stuck overseas. For example, a report in The Australian yesterday discussed a pregnant woman and her partner who have been bumped off flights. Apparently the "Australian High Commission is inundated with similar tales of desperation, so much so all it can offer is to direct bumped Australians to join the local homeless at shelters".* Not a very nice situation to be in, particularly with financial worries.

As for your comments on Sweden, time will tell. As for your comment on vitamin D, that's your opinion.

* Coronavirus: 'Grab a couch', the only help offered to stranded Aussies. The Australian, 14 September 2020.

'As to Sweden it shut its high schools and universities'

are you lying again Steelie or just twisting facts to fit your narrative?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-schools-idUSKCN24G2IS

For those of us who have followed the climate modelling debates over the past 25 years, this is all very familiar.

Modellers become so enamoured of their models that they start to confuse them with the real world.

They come to the models with a preconceived notion as to the likely 'answer' and when their model delivers that answer, that merely confirms in their mind that the model is correct.

When the errors in the models are discovered, the modellers assert that they already knew about them and secretly fixed them.

When reality finally hits that the model forecasts were hopelessly wrong, the modellers then advise that their forecasts weren't really forecasts but just 'pathways'. The IPCC went down a similar road when they finally changed their forecasts into 'projections' after decades of failed forecasts.

The problem with this is that the authorities are mesmerised by the forecasts. They came out of a computer so how could they be wrong?

And now that its clear to even the dimmest of minds that it was all a charade and the lockdowns were based on faulty data, its too late. The whole system is locked into the process. Too many people, from the medical fraternity to the pollies to the media, were all boosters for the policies and to now reverse course is unthinkable to them.

The whole thing is a disaster unlike anything this nation has ever seen.