Cutting immigration is the best thing to have come out of this whole mess, so I, for one, am looking at the brightside.

Can’t agree more than with SilverofCanberra.

But further now, and learning the lessons from the dogmatists of public health, how about a new focus on the public health issues of HIV/AIDS and a refocus on the dangers to public health that the Gay rights movement is promoting!

Dan

Well, they, not we the sheep, have not "been so successful at suppressing the virus". It's still here, and they are still locking us down, still too stupid and pigheaded to realise that lockdowns do not work, and the virus will be with us, probably for ever, just like the other flu that people still die of because of old age, no vaccination or lack of personal responsibility. The second bit "been so successful at terrifying our population", is correct, and that's the way 'they' like it.

Restricted internal travel, probably illegal, is stupid and draconian, particularly when 'they' are still allowing people to come in, or return to the country bringing the virus with them. Yet, they continue doing it, and the universities still yell for the return if foreign students, mainly from the source of the WuFlu.

Does anyone think that these idiots in Canberra are up to the task of dealing with the more serious threat from Communist China as well?

Can Rhys Jones, a psychiatric nurse and university student, have the answers?

He thinks that (someone called 'we') needs to "decrease" the level of fear. Bit late for that, Jonesy: the fear has been thoroughly instilled ever since the WuFlu hit, and the politicians and the "experts" went into the headless chook performance. We have all the figures on death and dying - always have had - but the bullying, blocking and fear - have rendered the knowledge useless. The supermarket queues and bog roll hoarding are back.

What we need is not more opinions - we can do those ourselves - from people with no more expertise than we have - we need action. And the mugs we vote for election after election are not capable of that.

If ever there was another of those "unique opportunities" we are told that the virus has brought us, it is the opportunity to see how dictatorships arose from political incompetence in the past.

SilverInCanberra,

Hear, hear.

The person who is supposed to be leading the country but is, instead, leaving the job to state premiers, has been described by one commentator as, "... too stubborn, silly and self-conscious (as he always is) to admit he erred".

A covid fit for purpose strategy, requires mass vaccination of everyone, including super spreaders, "children'! And that also means we need to understand the clotting phenomenon. Which may be related to differing hormone levels? The outstanding difference between them and their oldies?

Then we need foolproof quarantine stations that simply don't allow noncompliant folk to drive off!

And for mine that is and always was, island quarantine! And too easy if the island locals are fully vaccinated!

Then we need to take a hard long look at gamed migration and only import those skills not actually available here! Training our own would seem much more preferable than the current thoroughly gamed system!

We need to automate whatever can be automated! And create an energy policy fit for the 21st century to enable that outcome.

Finally, in an overpopulated world that makes pandemics an almost guaranteed ever-present danger!

Moreover, we need something other than migration reliance for economic growth! That something is an attack and removal of poverty via cooperative capitalism at every opportunity! And real uncomplicating tax reform for starters!

A very wise visiting republican once said, at some point, complexity always becomes fraud!

And we have, arguably, the most completely convoluted complex tax system in the world? Which may serve the paper-thin interests of a cohort of the elite privileged? All while fornicating the country/national economy!

And only retained by the obstinate refusal of puppet pollies, who've clearly put narrow self-interests ahead of the country!?
Alan B.

Sadly the author only considered the risk of death (which indeed is relatively less of a problem), but ignored all the other symptoms and morbidities of the virus, including long term.

Exit strategy?

Firstly, medicines are on their way.
Now in testing, in about a year there will be pills available to quash the virus very early on.

But also, nature will do its own (especially with our prayers): sooner or later there will be variants that are even more infectious but far less virulent. Then will be the time to let the virus itself become its own vaccine, but as for now we are doing things about right, we just need a bit more patience!

Taking the objective long term view, the virus has probably done more good than harm. Simply stopping migration is a major plus, & it has proved we don't actually need high migration to function very well. If the pollies & bureaucrats get this message it will be a major positive.

Then it, & the arguments with China, will have thinned down the university sector. This is almost as useful as the reduction in migration, particularly if it sends a whole raft of poor quality people out looking for a real job, rather than brainwashing ever more kids. One also must wonder just how much intellectual property transfer this has supported.

Yes it has & will kill some oldies, & at over 80, & a few heart attacks behind me, I am probably more likely to be one of them than most. Granted I would rather go out instantly in a 100 MPH crash than coughing my lungs out in a hospital bed, but even then, it shouldn't hurt for very long.

Still I want to keep the international boarders shut, & shut a damn sight tighter than they are now. It is better to gain herd immunity, if that is possible, slowly than in a rush. People do not need to go to Indonesia personally to discuss business, unless it is funny business, & private international travel is not exactly necessary for a happy life. So just perhaps the final result could be positive.

Hi Hasbeen,
Couldn't agree more. However there is no need to disrupt the lives of ordinary Australians to achieve those very sensible goals of decreasing immigration and reducing reliance on foreign students. Simply vote for politicians and parties that support these policies. In addition there are some very authoritarian activities taking place under the guise of "keeping us safe". Such as tracking our movements with "Covid safe apps", the proposal of "vaccine passports". The compulsory vaccination of people which we see beginning with the nursing home workers but is likely to continue to expand to the rest of us. If we wish to remain a free country we need to remove this excuse for government overreach.

I'd support compulsory Vaccinaionce, if there was a choice offered between types. People have rights, sure. But infecting other folks with a killer virus, isn't one of them!

Just because You're too obtuse to see that we need everyone vaccinated including kids, to achieve herd immunity. And something that needs to happen everywhere around the globe to give the virus no new host to replicate with!

Yuyustu a pill? Perhaps. But an injection that kills 99.99% of any coronavirus including the common cold? Almost certain? And possibly available at any pharmacist/district nurse etc? I've heard government ministers reject island quarantine, on the grounds we have no fit for purpose hospitals.

We could if we but fitted out a couple of ships as floating hospitals! Especially if they were powered by MSR thorium. Given anything else and the required energy demand, would be out of the question!

And given adequate maintenance and updates as required, could serve us for up to a century as hospitals, wherever needed! Or as tabletop aircraft carriers, if that were needed! we need folk able to think outside the box, not scarlet fools, rejecting sensible solutions!

Can't afford them? Could if we could just get those costly albatrosses off our necks, we call state governments? And in the process, liberate an additional 70+ annual billion!
Alan B.

Hasbeen. Couldn't agree more! Spoiled brat kids need some missing steel in their spines, that and the required skills could be acquired via compulsory conscription!? And confiscating their phones/personal transport for the duration!

Other than that, farmers who want harvest workers? Need more than anything else, comfortable and private, safe sleeping quarters and a policed, no drugs or alcohol rule!

Can't think of anything more discouraging than a rowdy drunk pestering other tired folks who just need a good night's sleep to earn a quid.

Heat is easier to tolerate if one can cool off under a quick shower or in air-conditioned SEPERATE PRIVATE, SAFE, sleeping quarters! Not in communal bedrooms and stacked in like sardines!

Other than that? Let's give the army a go at addressing rural staff shortages with conscript labour? Hey? And learn the missing teamwork and cooperation now needed as a pre-resiquite to special skills training?

Simply put, the quicker they get with the program the quicker it's over!

Those that think it's not for them could start thinking differently if the pre-training character/leadership building/self-reliant training is repeated as often as necessary? More so for the able-bodied lard asses!
Alan B.

Alan if this stuff gave real immunity I'd be with you in a flash, but it most certainly doesn't. Thus it can't promote herd immunity.

Israel is showing results that 45% of their recent deaths from the virus were fully "immunised" with this stuff. Great result.

I will not infect you, unless I were to visit you, which I guarantee not to do. If you then don't visit me, you will be safe, & so will I.

I don't go out much, & often it is only for a blast in one of the cars, with no stops along the way, so pretty safe. I do go to the local SS or near by village bakery for bread, but I & both venues are pretty careful. You have to take a chance for the finer things in life occasionally.

My only real danger is my home delivery of groceries. I can have no idea of the health of the "picker" who gathers them, but even worse for me is the delivery. The supermarket here uses a contractor for delivery, & it is staffed entirely in my experience by Indians.

These are nice people, & I have become friends with a couple of the drivers, but they are Indian. I have no idea, & would never ask of them, just how recently any of them may have had a humanitarian visit to their homeland, during their recent mass outbreak.

I have no faith in the totally inadequate isolation of returning travelers in hotels. These are more likely to incubate infection than isolate.

So that is my slight chance of infection. I believe this danger is much less than being injected with some concoction rushed into production to make money, rather than save a nation, or the world.

If you are foolish enough to take it, good luck, but don't accuse me of endangering you mate, you are waltzing into danger taking that stuff of your own free will. As I said, Good luck!

Dear Hasbeen,

How's it going old cock?

You claim: "Israel is showing results that 45% of their recent deaths from the virus were fully "immunised" with this stuff. Great result."

I can't find any reference to that figure so I'm wondering if you could supply one.

Also of the 30 people at the super spreader party in Sydney to only 6 not to be infected were those who were fully vaccinated.

That to me is a pretty solid reason to be happy with my choice to have the jab.

I can still be pissed off that it had to be one of the least effective by a long shot of the vaccines available to the rest of the world but pretty typical of this federal government unfortunately.

Hi SR

Not the one I quoted, but I found this.
https://www.google.com/search?q=orga...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Well I was planning on insulting you, but since you left this disclaimer, I'd better argue my thoughts on merit.

"Before insulting me, I ask you to firstly point out the errors in my thinking and secondly to identify a better strategy. There may well be better paths available that I have not thought of and it is possible that there are errors or misunderstandings in my own thinking."

1/ "Firstly, we need to decrease the level of fear so the Australian people will support whatever measures are taken."

If you reduce the amount of fear, you will inadvertently increase the amount of complacency, which will result in more community transmission; and more deaths.

2/ Early Treatment - Yes it sounds like a responsible course of action but the more people we have getting treatment the more the hospital staff are placed at risk, and carry the burden for everyone else.

3/ Vaccines - "Most will eventually catch the virus and recover and enjoy relatively long term natural immunity."

- You can't have natural immunity to a virus that isn't natural and was made in a lab as a bioweapon. Also you said 'most' not 'all'.

4/ Open the borders - Which one's? State borders or international borders - because you can't have it both ways.

- If 99% of the country has to be held ransom for the 1% of cafe society individuals who didn't want to be here, and expect to trickle back indefinitely, then borders will have to be closed now and then, because the virus ALWAYS escapes our containments.

- You can't have international arrivals, and also be free from lockdowns, end of story.

[Cont.]

5/ Stop Testing - Well we can't stop testing as long as risk to the community exists. Even if we closed international borders we'd still need to test so that that those who make the decisions in our best interests have all the relevant info available to them to make the best decisions.

"The health authorities and politicians are not distinguishing between people who test positive and people who are sick."
- It seems you want everyone TO GET COVID, and then gain natural immunity. I don't want COVID, and I don't want the vaccine.
Your plan sucks.

6/ Stop all the unnecessary mask mandates, business restrictions
No, they exist for a reason.

You want to know something?
Many of us have parents, and you're advocating killing them by opening borders and reduced restrictions to create a greater risk, and then pushing vaccines which might also kill them.

You talk about low risk.
You're asking millions of people to play Russian roullete with a gun that has 6700 chambers and one bullet in it.
- Someone will die for your stance -
Are you planning of going to that persons funeral?

I'm going to be honest.
You come out grandstanding about how positive it is to try to kill my parents - I wish you were in a hospital with covid, struggling for your own life.

You see media like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J59zTPkEAj4

Why would I put ANY Aussie citizens who are stangers to me, their best interests ahead of my own, my families or the nation as a whole's best interests?
They didn't even want to be here.

People in planes and limos, people who didn't want to be here, and people like Alan Joyce who have raped our nation with handouts during covid and who only care about profitability over the nations health.
These are the ones who caused this mess.

"Also of the 30 people at the super spreader party in Sydney to only 6 not to be infected were those who were fully vaccinated.
That to me is a pretty solid reason to be happy with my choice to have the jab."

From today's ABC (so it must be right)...

"Three residents at a Sydney aged care home where two workers tested positive for COVID-19 last week have contracted the virus. All three residents were fully vaccinated". Two of them were hospitalised.

oops

Why do those who agree with & are going to or have had the jab want everyone else to have it? Surely if they & probably their loved ones are thus, to their mind, protected, why does it matter to them. The only reason I can imagine is they are a bit nervous about it, & want everyone else in the same boat.

Personally I will only have the jab when a "proper" vaccine has been developed & tested in the usual way, say 5 to 10 years if I am still around.

Other wise I am perfectly happy to volunteer for a proper test of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine as I believe these, & new ones in development are our best defense now & into the future.

Meanwhile I wish those who want it get the jab ASAP, & allow those who don't want it do their own thing, including use Ivermectin.

Dear mhaze,

You really are a shocker aren't you.

This is what you put in your post.

“"Three residents at a Sydney aged care home where two workers tested positive for COVID-19 last week have contracted the virus. All three residents were fully vaccinated". Two of them were hospitalised.”

Firstly they gained their infection from a positive staff member who wasn't vaccinated. Secondly vaccinations in the elderly are notably less effective due to diminished immune systems. Thirdly two of them were taken to hospital only as a “precaution” and were “were not showing symptoms and were in "good spirits".”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-04/nsw-covid-19-aged-care-outbreak-spreads-three-infected/100266238

You really can't help yourself can you.

Dear Hasbeen,

You have been reading too much Clive Palmer rubbish. Perhaps a few reputable medical journals might be more helpful.

“But Chaccour said he had watched in distress as countries throughout Latin America adopted the drug as a treatment for Covid, largely relying on spurious data, and warned Australia against doing the same.

“People have been injected with veterinary formulations of the drug,” he said. “Evangelical groups have walked into Indigenous communities and injected people with veterinary ivermectin as a way to ‘help’. I get messages from unknown people sending me photos of sheep ivermectin and asking how much they should inject to treat or prevent Covid. This can be very, very harmful. You need to consider all the consequences before pushing this drug in Australia in the absence of good evidence.”

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/13/what-is-ivermectin-and-should-we-be-using-it-to-treat-covid-19

SR,

It's becoming increasingly difficult to tell whether you miss the logic of an issue because its too hard for you to contemplate or because you just can't bring yourself to admit that the facts are different to what you want them to be.

You preened yourself that getting the jab was a smart move based on 6 vaccinated people who were exposed to the virus not getting infected.
I showed you a situation where 3 vaccinated people exposed to WuFlu did get infected, thus disproving your original assertions.

I know its standard operation procedure in SR-land to disseminate when shown to be wrong, but you used to be so much better at it. Now its just so transparent.

Dear mhaze,

How on earth did it disprove my original assertion? That the only 6 vaccinated people at the party remain infection free? It didn't.

The assertion that this is reasonable grounds to be happy that I chose the jab is also not disproved but your "oops" moment.

The inference that those at the party had more robust immune systems enhanced by the vaccine (than those patients at an old folks home) and thus able to ward off the infection is also sound.

Blood hell mate, where has your basic common sense gone to?

Oh dear, SR, why is this so difficult for you.

You thought that the fact that 6 vaccinated people didn't get the virus when exposed to it justified your decision to get the jab.

But 3 (now 5) vaccinated people getting the virus when exposed to it shows your justification to be invalid.

It doesn't mean getting the jab is wrong, just that the rationale you used to justify that decision is invalidated by subsequent events

Dear mhaze,

Well that blathering hardly moved the debate along one iota did it. Not that I expected any different.

I got the jab because the reasons including trying to do my bit to lower the chances of others in the community contracting Covid justified it.

What happened at the party certainly helped to validate that decision.

So an unvaccinated staff member brings the virus into the facility where the residents have mainly been vaccinated with a product which reduced infections by 60% and severity by 80%, and all seems to be going pretty much to script. Yet you in your idiocy have determined it was a failure on all counts.

Damn.

If I was so tainted by right wing ideology as you that this was the only approach open to me I would be checking myself in somewhere.

It really is just bananas.

This is how problematic Covid is in aged care facilities.

“Aged care residents form a distinct vulnerable population with single-facility attack rates of 45% [95% CI 32–58%] and case fatality rates of 23% [95% CI 18–28%]. Of the cases, 31% [95% CI 28–34%] were asymptomatic. The rate of hospitalization amongst residents was 37% [95% CI 35–39%]. Data from 21 outbreaks identified a resident as the index case in 58% of outbreaks and a staff member in 42%. “
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00051-1/fulltext

Your flippancy on this issue is hardly edifying is it.

So we're agreed that vaccinated people can get the virus? Contra what you originally asserted. Glad you got there.

Dear mhaze,

Oh now you are getting as bad as shadowminister, claiming things that were not asserted at all because you feel a bit miffed you have been done over yet again.

Really childish mate.

"So we're agreed that vaccinated people can get the virus? Contra what you originally asserted. Glad you got there."

Of course 'vacinnated' people can get the virus.
It must of been about a month ago they first either admitted it or implied it during one of the daily pressers;
- They're not hiding this inconvenient truth anymore as far as I know.

If SteeleRedux thinks that after the jab his immune system will be strengthened and make him more protected against catching the virus, and that if he does catch the virus his symptoms will be less severe;

- Then he should be able to get his jab without criticism from those who are not having it.

Likewise if mhaze thinks that the vaccine won't make any difference in protecting him from covid, and that the risks associated with the vacinne are less than the risks associated with covid, or whatever he believes;
If he doesn't want the jab, then he too should be free to not get the jab without criticism from those who are having it.

Now, this would be great in a perfect world, but
Unfortunately we live in the real world, no-ones free from criticism and everybody criticises everything;

So what of it?

What's the actual danger to those who do get the jab by those who don't have it?
- How are the vaccinated put at risk of harm by the vaccinated?

And conversely
What's the actual danger to those who don't get the jab by those who do have it?
- How are the unvaccinated put at risk of harm by the vaccinated?

- I've actually heard arguments on both sides too.

Obviously the vaccinated people think we need some kind of herd immunity.
I'm not sure how this really works, because this vaccine doesn't make you immune.

On the other side I've heard that unvaccinated pregnant women who are exposed to vaccinated people can spontaneously abort, etc.
- Sounds fairly serious if true.

I haven't been keeping up on the facts.
I don't know whats true and what isn't.
- Does anyone? -

- I made an error in my previous comment -

Where I stated:
'risks associated with the vaccine are less than the risks associated with covid'
should have instead said
'risks associated with the vaccine are GREATER than the risks associated with covid'

Many probably knew what I meant, but I just thought I'd clarify and acknowledge the error