You’re right, mhaze, you didn’t say “only the vulnerable.”

But you implied that everyone else should’ve been out “building herd immunity.” Which sounds noble until you remember that herd immunity only works after mass infection - or mass vaccination.

"Of the 28000, 96% were elderly and those younger had comorbidities. Healthy adults under 60 were effectively immune."
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=23631#400037

And COVID wasn't chickenpox. It overwhelmed hospitals in developed countries and left tens of thousands with long-term damage.

The idea that we should’ve let it rip to protect the vulnerable by infecting everyone else was speculative at best - and catastrophic at worst. Sweden tried something close. It backfired. Their death toll soared, and they still had to lock down later. Meanwhile, Australia kept deaths incredibly low until Omicron, when vaccination levels were high enough to soften the blow.

Your "do the sums" line about Victoria ignores that it was hit earlier and harder, before most people were vaccinated, because we were trying to protect the vulnerable.

As for masks, the Cochrane Review has been widely misused (even the authors have said this). It doesn’t prove masks don’t work - it shows the limits of study design in real-world conditions. Meanwhile, lab and observational data still support the effectiveness of N95s and widespread usage.

But none of this really matters, does it?

Because this was never just about masks or herd immunity. It’s about a worldview - one where public health is tyranny, cooperation is cowardice, and anyone who complied “sacrificed liberty.”

And yet… Australia saved tens of thousands of lives. Hospitals didn’t collapse. People got vaccinated. Kids went back to school. The economy rebounded.

No government got everything right. But that’s not a reason to mythologise a handful of fringe protesters as the moral centre of the nation.

That’s the original article’s sin - and all this noise is just a long-winded attempt to defend it.

You can keep pretending this was 1984. Most of us lived through it as 2020 - messy, flawed, human. And we got through it together.

"Sweden tried something close. It backfired. Their death toll soared, and they still had to lock down later."

False and false. Sweden never locked down later. And the Swedish excess death toll shows that their policy worked.

"it shows the limits of study design in real-world conditions"

Well some of us live in the real world.

"Meanwhile, lab and observational data still support the effectiveness of N95s and widespread usage."

That was never in doubt. Correctly worn, masks work. But in the real world outside the lab or the surgical theatre, they were worse than useless. A report from the CDC said that masks had to be changed every 3 hours or whenever they were touched. Also that they had to be so tight to the face that they left an indent when removed. But none of that happened in the real world. Indeed, governments were telling people to wear the masks and pull them down to eat and drink. But touching them even once meant their efficacy was eroded.

"And yet… Australia saved tens of thousands of lives. Hospitals didn’t collapse. People got vaccinated. Kids went back to school. The economy rebounded."

How do you know lives were saved? That's just unverifiable assertion. People got vaccinated under duress and then stopped when the dangers were no longer suppressed. And the economy did rebound. But only after adding 100's of Billions of dollars to the debt we'll be handing on to the next generation.

Your idea of success and mine are very different.

And all for a virus that was not much worse than a bad flu.

Indy,

Thanks for your comment. It's genuinely nice to be on the same side of a debate for a change.
_____

That’s selective history, mhaze.

//Sweden never locked down later. And the Swedish excess death toll shows that their policy worked.//

That’s selective history. Sweden didn’t impose a full lockdown like Australia, but they did introduce restrictions - school closures, gathering limits, travel advisories - and their own health authority later admitted mistakes, especially in protecting aged care. Their excess deaths in 2020–21 were much higher than Norway, Denmark, or Finland. Saying their “policy worked” only holds if you ignore their neighbours’ far better outcomes.

//Masks had to be changed every 3 hours… governments told people to pull them down to eat and drink… efficacy eroded.//

No serious researcher claims real-world mask use was perfect. But imperfection doesn’t equal useless. Lab studies, observational data, and population-level trends all point to the same thing: widespread mask-wearing reduced transmission. Dismissing them as “worse than useless” is the very definition of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

//How do you know lives were saved? That's just unverifiable assertion.//

We know because counterfactuals are the bread and butter of epidemiology. Compare countries: Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea kept deaths extraordinarily low early on, before vaccines. The contrast with the US, UK, and Brazil isn’t speculation - it’s lived reality, written in the numbers.

That’s not speculation, that’s how we measure lives saved.

//All for a virus that was not much worse than a bad flu.//

This is the myth that refuses to die. COVID killed millions in just a few years. Seasonal flu never came close to overwhelming ICUs in developed countries, nor did it leave millions with chronic complications. Even now, the long COVID burden dwarfs what influenza leaves behind. To call that “not much worse than flu” is to flatten a mountain into a molehill.

In short: Sweden’s “success” vanishes once you compare it properly. Masks weren’t perfect, but they mattered. And the “bad flu” line is denial, not debate.

We've been through all this a few times before.

"We've been through all this a few times before."

Yes we have. and you still don't get it.

"Compare countries: Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea kept deaths extraordinarily low early on, before vaccines. The contrast with the US, UK, and Brazil isn’t speculation - it’s lived reality, written in the numbers."

So you want to compare three countries that, due to geography ,were able to institute quarantine with countries that couldn't. Nothing to do with lockdowns. Good to know.

That’s quite the pivot, mhaze!

//So you want to compare three countries that, due to geography ,were able to institute quarantine with countries that couldn't.//

Ah, so we’ve gone from claiming that the lockdowns didn’t work to acknowledging that the lockdowns did work - but only because of geography.

Geography helped, yes. But quarantine alone doesn’t explain the outcomes.

If it were just about being an island, then the UK - also an island - should’ve matched Australia. It didn’t. If you want to credit “geography,” you also need to explain how Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea (all densely populated and close to China) also had far lower death tolls early on than the US or Brazil.

What those countries had in common wasn’t location. It was coordinated public health policy: fast testing, clear communication, targeted restrictions, and yes, lockdowns where needed.

You want to pretend Australia’s success had nothing to do with decisions, just geography and luck. That lets you avoid admitting that millions of Australians who followed the rules did the right thing, and that lockdowns, for all their flaws, bought time for vaccines and saved lives.

But the numbers still tell the story:

- Australia’s COVID death rate in 2020-21 was dramatically lower than countries without similar restrictions.
- That gap only closed after vaccines rolled out.
- It wasn’t just luck. It was choices.

So yes, mhaze, we’ve been through this before. And the evidence hasn’t changed. What’s shifted is the framing - from lockdowns being tyranny to working because of geography.

You don’t get to have it both ways.

"Ah, so we’ve gone from claiming that the lockdowns didn’t work to acknowledging that the lockdowns did work - but only because of geography."

Lockdowns weren't the same as national quarantines. Lockdowns didn't work. Quarantines worked for a time, until they were lifted.