New Zealand’s Omicron options

101 comments on “New Zealand’s Omicron options ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mpledger 1

   17 January 2022 at 3:01 pm

   How can so many people be getting to NZ positive when they are supposed to be having a negative test 48 hours before departure? There were 42 border cases today.
   • weka 1.1

     17 January 2022 at 3:08 pm

     Presumably they pick up covid in the two days after the test.
   • McFlock 1.2

     17 January 2022 at 3:24 pm

     Just ballparking the numbers, but not unreasonably outside the realm of false negatives:

     • So a few months ago we were running 40k+ arrivals a month.
     • 42 (today's count of MIQ positive tests) * 30 days in a month = 1260 positive cases a month.
     • 1260/40000*100 = 3.15%

     Which is much lower than the more pessimistic possibilities for RT-PCR false negatives, dunno about PCR. NZ requires either a pcr or rt-pcr preflight.

     tl;dr: It could just be a math thing: if lots of people come in, a few folks with false negatives will be with them.
     • weka 1.2.1

       17 January 2022 at 3:30 pm

       Who are all the 40,000/mth? ie what % is people returning to NZ still since the pandemic started, and how much is people coming and going?
       • McFlock 1.2.1.1

         17 January 2022 at 4:08 pm

         Oh snap, I completely misread that release. 40k/mnth was the year-ending that month, not the monthly total. The monthly figures were further down and, obviously, significantly lower.

         My bad. Damned day job starting up again, lol

         It does say "These losses were driven by non-New Zealand citizens with a provisional net loss of 9,100 over the year, compared with a net gain of 7,400 New Zealand citizens. Migration estimates in more recent months have greater uncertainty and are therefore subject to larger revisions than estimates for earlier periods."

         Not sure how much back-and-forth travel there would be, though.
         • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.2.1.1.1

           17 January 2022 at 5:12 pm

           The false negative idea is a good one, though.

           Looks like arrivals have been roughly 400 per day in January. But actually, the number of arrivals is not the number you need to work this out. You need to know the number of people who wanted to come to NZ and who were tested, but rejected due to a positive test result.

           The false-negative rate (FNR) of the Covid19 PCR test has been studied quite a lot, but I can't see a simple accepted number. Estimates have ranged from 1-30%, with this large study finding 9.3%.

           With 40 positive arrivals per day, at a 10% FNR, you would need to be having about 400 people rejected each day due to positive tests, if the 40 positive arrivals were all due to FN results. I have no idea if this could be, but probably not?
           • McFlock 1.2.1.1.1.1

             17 January 2022 at 5:40 pm

             No-oh I don't quite agree that false positives are relevant.

             False negative is the proportion of negative results that are incorrect, false positives the proportion of positive results that are incorrect. So if both are 10%, to get 40 a day 400 cases come in with 360 negative passengers, while 60 negative people are stuck outside with 540 positive people?

             But if the FN (sensitivity) is 10% but the FP (specificity) is 30%, 360 True-negative passengers come in with 40 false-negative passengers, but leave behind 420 true positives and 180 false positives (total left outside = 600, all tested people = 1000)?

             But the FN of 10% still can be the same 400 negative results, but only 500 people total tried to come in with 100 returning a positive test, that's only 30 people with a false positive and 70 people with a true positive.

             Or I'm just tying myself in knots, lol
   • Nic the NZer 1.3

     17 January 2022 at 4:59 pm

     For all variants there is known to be a lag between contracting and testing positive for covid. That is why the tests in MIQ are scheduled around days 3 and 11.

     There are known examples of infection showing up more than a week after exposure and subsequent infections without positive test or symptoms.

     Its unfortunate but thats what we are dealing with.
     • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.3.1

       17 January 2022 at 5:14 pm

       Yep, I reckon that is a more likely explanation. Plus travel itself might be a high-risk activity, in terms of picking an infection up.
       • Foreign waka 1.3.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 9:22 am

         Airplane air condition could be a major. Filters need to be exchanged after each route. Do you think anybody is doing this? It just takes one infected person…
     • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.3.2

       18 January 2022 at 11:25 am

       Ashley Bloomfield on RNZ today:

       With such big outbreaks of Omicron in countries travellers were arriving from, Bloomfield says the pool of potential cases in MIQ was larger.

       "But also they're at higher risk of getting infected while on route because there are just so many people travelling who are coming from countries where there are large Omicron outbreaks."
2. tsmithfield 2

   17 January 2022 at 3:11 pm

   Omicron is 91% less likely to cause death than Delta and half as likely to cause hospitalisation: eg:

   When people are hospitalised their stay tends to be shorter than Delta:

   https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/omicron-leads-much-shorter-hospital-stays-californian-study/

   https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/omicron-91-less-likely-to-cause-death-in-infected-patients-cdc-122011301204_1.html

   https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10396411/Omicron-variant-half-likely-cause-hospitalization-91-likely-cause-death.html

   So, it is becoming quite clear that Omicron is a much less severe disease than Delta.

   The main issue appears to be disruption to services. My wife's sister, who lives in Melbourne, told us recently that the supermarket shelves have been stripped bare for weeks due to insufficient drivers, and there have been disruptions to ambulance services etc because key workers are sick.

   So, it appears that the main focus should be on mitigating disruption rather than the disease itself.

   Making RAT tests widely available as quickly as possible is absolutely necessary. Our government has said they will be available to the general public from early this year, but no sign of that actually eventuating yet.

   https://www.9news.com.au/world/coronavirus-australia-rats-rapid-antigen-tests-for-covid-have-been-free-in-many-other-countries-for-months/f24a1322-a63b-4663-81ff-6bcdc4392a80
   • weka 2.1

     17 January 2022 at 3:13 pm

     As I said in the post,

     The key thing here is that omicron can still cause problems even if it’s not causing as severe illness as delta. This is because it spreads much more easily.

     If people get omicron and it is less harmful, but many more people get it than delta, then the numbers of people needing hospitalisation or who die can still be large. It can still overwhelm New Zealand’s health system. It can still mean many people having to take time off work, and the flow on disruptions to life and the economy.
   • weka 2.2

     17 January 2022 at 3:14 pm

     It seems reasonable to hold back on the RATs until we really need them and in the meantime use the more effective PCR tests.
     • tsmithfield 2.2.1

       17 January 2022 at 3:18 pm

       The problem is that waiting until we really need them might be too late. Omicron will probably spread more quickly than we can get tests distributed. So I think it is better to get ahead of the curve and be ready.
       • weka 2.2.1.1

         17 January 2022 at 3:24 pm

         aren't they available at chemists now, restricted to specific purposes?

         If you let people buy them freely now they will use them instead of PCRs and this will affect how some people behave in terms of preventing transmission. That's not good.

         edited.
         • Julian Richards 2.2.1.1.1

           18 January 2022 at 9:30 pm

           From selected pharmacies only, and only available to non-jabbed people travelling on AIRNZ etc. That's it. No one else has access.
     • barry 2.2.2

       18 January 2022 at 3:54 pm

       There are lots of RATS on the market that are useless. The ones that are accurate enough to be useful are in short supply worldwide. The Ministry is importing them as fast as they reasonably can in competition with every other country that has suddenly thought the same thing.

       When they were available at $10 each we could have given essential workers one every day, and everyone else 1 a week (~$50 million a week). Now they would cost much more than that.
   • McFlock 2.3

     17 January 2022 at 3:56 pm

     Three links about the same californian study? Bit redundant.

     Anyway, to recap the argument that occurred a day or two back about that paper:

     • the observed risk reduction of death from omicron compared to delta is 91%, but could be anything between 99% (yay) and 25% (boo)
     • to put that study into NZ numbers, delta might kill 1600-odd NZers so NZ might lose 20 to omicron. Or 16. Or 1200. Or anywhere in between, with essentially the same likelihood.
     • If the omicron risk level compared to delta is at the higher end of that study's CI (so 75% of the death rate rater than 1%), and delta is possibly 120% as lethal as alpha, then if alpha kills 100 from a given number of infected people, delta would kill 220, and omicron could kill 75%*220= 165. Or omicron could only kill 2. But we don't know. So omicron could possibly have a similar mortality rate to alpha.
     • weka 2.3.1

       17 January 2022 at 4:07 pm

       how come we don't know yet with more accuracy?

       (and thanks btw, that's a solid comment)
       • McFlock 2.3.1.1

         17 January 2022 at 4:39 pm

         Largely because we only have two months of omicron data. The sad fact is we have to wait for people to die and collate the data or wait for it to be collated and become available. Parallel to that is the ability to get funding to do the work in the first place. Edit: oh, and ethics approval, business plans, researcher recruitment…

         There have basically been two identified generations of omicron going to terminal completion, if it uses the same timeframe as alpha (going from that PHE report on 28 days vs 60 days as a catchment for >90% sensitivity to from-not-with covid deaths). The more deaths we get, the more accurate the metastudies collating all research, and also maybe the larger the number of "participants" (dead people) in each study so there will probably be greater overall precision, too.

         The California study only had a mean followup period a week for omicron patients and of two weeks for delta. That'll cover most folks, probably, and some of either would have had a 30 day followup. But it hurts its accuracy a bit at the "true" ratio (the undiscoverable reality approximated by the study), and studies of similar data using historic cohorts will have the ability to do longer "follow-up", and be a bit more precise in relation to the other studies of the ilk.

         It's a solid study that adds to the sum of human knowledge, don't get me wrong. But it's early days.
         • weka 2.3.1.1.1

           17 January 2022 at 5:05 pm

           thanks, I assumed it was the limited time passed but wasn't sure if there were other reasons.

           When do you think we will have a better idea of the impact of omicron?
           • McFlock 2.3.1.1.1.1

             17 January 2022 at 6:07 pm

             How long is a piece of string?

             Few months for some really solid data to come through. I mean, cautious optimism at this stage, but not a cause for celebration or throwing caution to the wind. It could still turn pear-shaped. The study numbers are getting there, but the concern is the followup duration.

             Expect the best, but prepare for the worst – omicron running rampant might not be preferable to another few months waiting for another vaccine. Especially if the FDA decides the omicron one is close enough to the previous vaccines to forego a lot of the testing a novel vaccine might require – like the new influenza vaccine variants each year.

             And of course there is the omicron of Damocles at MIQ, just like we've had alpha and delta over the previous years. Sure, an escape might be inevitable, but much of medicine is about delaying the inevitable.

             On the plus side, resistance has been futile for the past 2 years, but we're still managing it. We might get a better vacine in time to head off the worst of the "mild" variant.
     • Tricledrown 2.3.2

       19 January 2022 at 12:06 pm

       Tsmithfield..Looking across the ditch 25 a day dying in nsw.

       Hospitals being over run .

       To say omricon is less deadly is just plain wrong.

       Omricon also because its so easily spread and breakthrough vaccinations has a massive increase in its ability to mutate having many times more oportunities.

       Rednecks , anti vaxxers are making a lot of false claims to undermine health initiatives.
   • Bearded Git 2.4

     17 January 2022 at 6:08 pm

     tsmith-The 3 sources you quote from are all from pro-business publications who have a vested interest in portraying Omicron as "mild". The real situation is far more complicated, as can be read in this very recent article (more recent than the studies you quote) in The Scientist.

     https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-mild-is-omicron-really-69610

     It is difficult to pick out key points from this article-it really has to be read as a whole-but one point it makes is:

     "In short, factors such as vaccination may have blunted Omicron’s blow, making it seem less severe than the variants that emerged before COVID-19 vaccines were widely deployed. That means that the Omicron variant shouldn’t be underestimated—a point recently underlined by World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who on January 6 said that it’s more appropriate to say Omicron is “less severe” than other variants than to call it “mild."

     The article supports weka's point (see above) that Omicron will generate large numbers of covid cases in hospitals.
     • Descendant Of Smith 2.4.1

       17 January 2022 at 7:20 pm

       Also has anyone done an assessment of not having had previous variants run rampant through the country i.e. because we haven't had those deaths then the impact may be higher which is then offset to a large extent by vaccination.
     • tsmithfield 2.4.2

       18 January 2022 at 10:21 am

       I agree.

       I think a number of factors are at play. Firstly, the virus probably has mutated to be a bit less harmful. Also, the world has now had a lot of experience with Covid through either vaccination or previous infection.

       Also, a lot of those who were going to die already have.

       So, new strains are likely to be less harmful due to a variety of factors.

       Who knows, if Omicron was the first variant it might have been deadly to a similar level as the original. But I guess it is difficult to tease out the effect of all the various factors.

       Probably the big test will be how it affects unvaccinated people who haven't been infected previously.
   • barry 2.5

     18 January 2022 at 3:58 pm

     Of course the UK and US are different from NZ as the unvaccinated have mostly already been exposed to a variant of covid. NZ is more comparable to NSW/Victoria. The hospitals are filling up with unvaccinated people and the death rate is higher than any of the previous waves.
3. tsmithfield 3

   17 January 2022 at 3:26 pm

   Note, that people in the UK have been able to order tests for 9 months now:

   https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-biden-free-rapid-covid-tests-what-can-learn-uk-rcna9621

   "For the past nine months, U.K. residents have been able to order a pack of seven rapid tests each day. Less sensitive than a lab test, the rapid antigen kits can give a result in 15 to 30 minutes and are carried out at home, rather than at a center where staff are required.''

   And this has been credited with reducing the spread of Covid:

   “Apart from the vaccine program, this is one of the things that may have made the biggest difference in the U.K.,” Irene Petersen, a professor of epidemiology at University College London, said of the rapid test distribution effort."

   Our government should be doing the same now rather than wait until the storm is here.

   One of the advantages we have is that we can learn from what has worked overseas. Except our government don’t seem to be great learners.
   • weka 3.1

     17 January 2022 at 3:31 pm

     We are in a really different situation than the UK.

     If NZ let free sales of RATs in NZ, do you think people would choose those instead of getting a PCR test? You know that RATs aren't as effective a test as PCRs right? Can you not see how that would put NZ more at risk?
     • tsmithfield 3.1.1

       17 January 2022 at 3:38 pm

       The thing is that when Omicron gets here testing accuracy won't be so important.

       I don't think I need to link to this because it was fairly widely reported, but in Australia, some testing laboratories had to close down testing services for a period because they were overwhelmed.

       Omicron changes the game.

       The issue will be more on minimizing the number of people in the community with Omicron to flatten the curve. Thus, if the RAT tests can be done at home, those who receive a positive test can just stay at home rather than go out into the community with the virus.

       If you think about it, requiring RAT testing to be done at a chemist is the height of madness. Potentially contagious people going out into the community to get tested when they could test at home and isolate without venturing into the community.
       • weka 3.1.1.1

         17 January 2022 at 3:52 pm

         Didn't think this need this much explaining,

         1. it makes sense to not have RATs for general use in our current situation (ie. delta, because we want PCRs to be used as much as possible due to it being a more reliable test).
         2. we have supplies of RATs in NZ and the government is buying more
         3. if/when we get to the point of needing to use them, we can.
         4. we're not there yet
         5. there are limited supplies, it makes more sense to keep them for when they're really needed.

         I'm guessing some of that. But it's been reported that we do have supplies in NZ, and we know that people can currently get them on an as needed basis eg for travel.

         I've not seen anything to suggest that the government won't use them for general testing if/when omicron is becoming widespread. Have you?
       • tsmithfield 3.1.1.2

         17 January 2022 at 3:54 pm

         Just knowing how ineffective governments are at actually getting things done.

         I would feel much more comfortable if the tests were already distributed to be readily available at short notice.

         The other thing is that our current testing methods may not be any more effective if you think about it. The PCR tests are undoubtably more accurate, but that may not mean a lot if infected people aren't tested in the first place.

         People who are mildly ill may not bother going to get a PCR test due to the long queues that can develop from time to time, as we have all seen. And the fact that the tests are a bit icky and uncomfortable which is likely to put people off.

         Something that can be done quickly and easily in one's own home seems likely to have much better compliance, and may overall give a better result that what we currently do.

         The other thing is that testing at home means not going into the community with the virus compared to the PCR test that requires people to travel.
         • weka 3.1.1.2.1

           17 January 2022 at 4:06 pm

           Are you saying that RATs should be freely available now?

           Or that they should be ready to be made freely available at short notice when we need them?

           If the latter, what makes you think they aren't?
           • tsmithfield 3.1.1.2.1.1

             17 January 2022 at 4:15 pm

             I think they should be available now.

             It is obvious that Omicron will be here soon enough.

             Making the tests available isn't as simple as flicking a switch and it all happens. Having the tests available now will allow systems to be tested and problems ironed out. Waiting until the shit hits the fan means that there could suddenly be chaos with delivery of the tests as various problems are found.

             As mentioned above, I think there could be an overall net gain if people are easily able to test at home and avoid going into the community with the disease. Because results are much faster there is also a gain in how quickly people can isolate, and also I think compliance could well be higher because they are much more convenient.

             The accuracy of RAT tests is about 85%:, so not too bad.

             https://www.nytimes.com/article/at-home-covid-tests-accuracy.html

             So, they are fairly good, and combined with the points above, perhaps they would be overall better than PCR tests when everything is taken into account.

             Remember, we are entering into a phase now where the presence of Covid is given and elimination isn’t really an option anymore. So, effectiveness trumps accuracy IMO.
         • Tony Veitch (not etc.) 3.1.1.2.2

           17 January 2022 at 7:21 pm

           Just knowing how ineffective governments are at actually getting things done.

           Ah ha, your bias is showing!
           • tsmithfield 3.1.1.2.2.1

             18 January 2022 at 10:15 am

             I did say "governments" as in all governments.
     • Julian Richards 3.1.2

       18 January 2022 at 9:33 pm

       I hope you keep the same idealology when omricon hits and is rampant. Will be interesting.
       • McFlock 3.1.2.1

         18 January 2022 at 10:32 pm

         When a disease is "rampant", there is a need for more rapid and numerous tests to feel out any edges of the outbreaks and take some of the load off medical staff.

         When a disease is largely eliminated, the requirement is fewer tests but with more effective sensitivity, so as few cases as possible slip through the contact-tracing and isolation gaps.

         So, "disease rampant" and you have a sniffle in the morning that might just be hayfever, take a RAT and figure out if you should go to the gym that day.

         "Elimination conditions", if you have any reason for doubt, take a PCR and isolate until you get the results.
       • weka 3.1.2.2

         18 January 2022 at 11:02 pm

         I hope you keep the same idealology when omricon hits and is rampant. Will be interesting.

         Why? Clearly different tests are needed at different times and for differing reasons. What McFlock said.
         • Julian Richards 3.1.2.2.1

           19 January 2022 at 8:58 am

           Because its a very basic preventative healthcare measure, that should be available now. Plain and simple.

           You guys can argue to the moon about when and how.

           So why are Vodafone using these tests in NZ for their call center staff? Why are the medical profession using these tests for their staff? Why is airnz using these tests for their staff? Why can all NZ'ers not have access, as some business now does?

           Oh that's right, it's different for them.
           • Julian Richards 3.1.2.2.1.1

             19 January 2022 at 9:05 am

             You also both continue to conventionally ignore the Ministry of Health position statement on covid19 infections and testing:

             [deleted]

             [you have to provide a link when copy and pasting. Please post again with the appropriate link. – weka]
             • weka …

               19 January 2022 at 9:18 am

               mod note.
               • julian richards …

                 20 January 2022 at 1:10 am

                 I have provided this link previously, you know this, you requested it.

                 This link was blocked for public access by the ministry of health. https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/ministry_of_health_position_statement_on_the_management_of_unvaccinated_individuals_in_healthcare_settings.pdf

                 I provided another link for this document that was leaked. https://www.nzccp.co.nz/assets/Untitled-attachment-01200.pdf

                 The MoH conveniantly changed this position statement to a 2.0 version after it was leaked https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/ministry-health-position-statement-management-unvaccinated-individuals-healthcare-settings-25nov21.pdf

                 In case you still do not believe this to be true: https://fyi.org.nz/request/17762-revisions-to-covid-19-position-statement-on-pre-consultation-testing
                 • weka …

                   20 January 2022 at 8:50 am

                   I have provided this link previously, you know this, you requested it.

                   I don't. Moderation is a separate process from commenting. I have to read a huge amount on site. No way would I remember everything. Often moderation looks at comments out of context and sees things like people making claims without back up and I just ask for that.

                   And, I don't ask just for me. We require people to provide a link every time when quoting. Every time. If you can copy and paste a quote, you can copy and paste a link.

                   There are a range of reasons for this. One is that we need to see quotes in context. Some people intentionally or unintentionally misrepresent what is being said. Links enable others to easily see the context and comment on interpretation. This is a key part of why we have robust political debate here rather than a bunch of people arguing their reckons.

                   Here are two rules to remember:

                   1. always provide a link when copy and pasting.

                   2. when asked by a moderator, provide back up for a claim of fact. Back up isn't only a link, it must include a quote and/or explanation that explains your position. If it's a video or audio, it must include a time stamp. The onus is on the person making the claim to provide back up, it's not on moderators or readers to have to read a whole article or watch a whole video and try and parse what argument is being made.

                   I'm copying this comment into the back end so that next time I see you not doing either of those things I can move straight to an educational ban.

                   I'm sick of wasting my time explaining this to people who should already know. Count this as a ban warning.
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 8:57 am

                     and to be clear, the educational ban length will be relative to how much time you spend here. If you're only here once a week, expect the ban to be some weeks long.
                 • weka …

                   20 January 2022 at 8:52 am

                   dude, I'm not going to read four articles while I'm busy with my morning.

                   I have no idea what I deleted, and now you've just put up a link without the quote.

                   Make your case if you have one.
           • weka 3.1.2.2.1.2

             19 January 2022 at 9:22 am

             citation needed for all those claims.

             It's been very well explained in this thread,

             • quality RATs are in short supply globally
             • they're not as reliable as PCRs
             • they're better off being used once we have an outbreak
             • in the meantime there are clear rationales for using PCRs instead
             • using RATs now increases the risk of community transmission because of the number of false negatives, and people thinking they aren't infectious when they are and going out into the world

             In the face of that,

             Because its a very basic preventative healthcare measure, that should be available now. Plain and simple.

             Why? Obviously you want them available, but I'm not seeing a rationale, especially one that outweighs the above. Most places in NZ don't even have covid in the community.
             • julian richards …

               20 January 2022 at 1:17 am

               So you're good with business having access to these tests right now (AIRNZ, Vodafone, GP's etc etc) and not the general public. Very odd. Why are you OK with big business in NZ having access to these tests whilst the general public is banned??

               Of course a preventative healthcare measure has a role in the community right now. Of anyone, I would have thought you would understand and support preventative healthcare! What a rediculous position to hold @weka and why you fight against this is extremely perplexing.

               And yes my family would like access to these tests to help protect a very ill family member. A simple quick test.
               • weka …

                 20 January 2022 at 8:54 am

                 don't put words in my mouth. Adding this to the educational ban warning above. If you want to know what I am good with, ask. But don't even manipulate my comments to further your own agenda.
                 • Julian Richards …

                   20 January 2022 at 9:09 am

                   I did ask- "So you're good with business having access to these tests right now (AIRNZ, Vodafone, GP's etc etc) and not the general public. Very odd. Why are you OK with big business in NZ having access to these tests whilst the general public is banned??"

                   Are you OK with this, is this acceptable?
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 9:28 am

                     That's a bullshit argument technique that tries to position someone into a particular place. If you want to ask what I think, ask what I think about vodafone whatever, don't start with the asumption of what what I am good with.

                     beyond that, I still have no idea what you are on about. I asked for citations, you ignored that, and now you want an opinion from me on something that has no substance other than your reckons. Nope.
               • weka …

                 20 January 2022 at 8:56 am

                 more perplexing is your inability to understand the counter arguments and address them.

                 I asked for evidence of your claims, you didn't provide any, I'm not going to bother responding to your random reckons in the absence of evidence.
                 • Julian Richards …

                   20 January 2022 at 9:05 am

                   I provided the links as evidence of the direct qoutes from the Ministry of Health.

                   And you've kept them deleted?

                   From the Ministry of Health document sent to all NZ Medical professionals, linked to multiple times above. :

                   “Rapid Antigen Tests are less sensitive than RT-PCR but have been shown to accurately identify most
                   infectious individuals”.

                   “When there is high COVID-19 vaccine coverage (i.e., above 80 percent of eligible people are fully
                   vaccinated), transmission is more likely to occur from a vaccinated than an unvaccinated individual.”

                   “Developing a separate pathway for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals will not prevent the risk of
                   inadvertently seeing an infectious person (regardless of vaccination status)”

                   “Testing of individuals for COVID-19 can provide a high degree of reassurance that an individual does not have
                   active infection.”

                   “Asymptomatic infection is the issue, not the vaccination status of the patient.”
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 9:27 am

                     And you've kept them deleted?

                     You're still not getting. The onus is on YOU to do the work, not on me. I'm giving you a lot of guidance here on what YOU can do to fit in with how things work, and you still think I'm going to run around fixing your arguments? There's no easy way for me to make the deleted part visible again, and I see no reason to spend any more of my time on this. It's up to you now.
                   • Julian Richards []

                     20 January 2022 at 9:30 am

                     Thanks @weka 👍

                     Now the links are provided and direct qoutes from these links. Do you think its good for big private companies to currently have access to rapid antigen tests whilst the gen public is banned, considering the direct qoutes provided from the Ministry of Health?
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 9:35 am

                     here's the link you provided for that quote. It's broken.

                     https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/ministry_of_health_position_statement_on_the_management_of_unvaccinated_individuals_in_healthcare_settings.pdf
                   • Julian Richards []

                     20 January 2022 at 9:46 am

                     As I explained l…. They blocked public access! Its not broken, its blocked.

                     I then provided the link to the leaked doc.

                     I then provided the link to the altered version after it was leaked.

                     I then provided evidence of this in a further link questioning why it was altered after it was leaked.

                     You're still refusing to answer the question, again as it seems to go against your narrative that you've continued to push.

                     [one day ban for wasting my moderator time – weka]
                   • Julian Richards []

                     21 January 2022 at 8:49 pm

                     Mate, I had respect for TS for the longest time (had read long before commenting), but your childish ban, foul language and refusal to engage in the question postured shows how you've shifted. See ya.
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 10:02 am

                     As I explained l…. They blocked public access! Its not broken, its blocked.

                     I then provided the link to the leaked doc.

                     I then provided the link to the altered version after it was leaked.

                     I then provided evidence of this in a further link questioning why it was altered after it was leaked.

                     You're still refusing to answer the question, again as it seems to go against your narrative that you've continued to push.

                     Next time. Put it all in one comment. And if you run the same argument a week later, you have to put it up all again. Or link back to your original comment. SO WE KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

                     Now, I was just about to post and say that the reason I've spent so much time on this this morning is because we want opposing views here. So it irks to see you now accusing me of not wanting that.

                     The purpose of the site is to publish posts, and to invite robust debate. But those opposing views have to be presented in a competent way.

                     I've given you a lot of guidelines here on how to do that, my suggestion is to take some time to look at what I am saying and get on board with how it works. When you come back and have something to say, put up a comment, your own views, back them up with evidence, quotes and links. Watch what other people are doing, and what moderators are saying.

                     Again, we want robust debate here and that depends on people putting up opposing views in ways that are easy to understand and respond to. The onus is on the person making the argument and counter argument. You have the potential to be a good commenter here, you just need to up your game around the how.
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 10:04 am

                     mod note.
                   • weka …

                     20 January 2022 at 10:09 am

                     Also, in the time I've spent on moderating you this morning, I could have a post nearly ready to put up. You can imagine how happy I am about that.
   • Bearded Git 3.2

     17 January 2022 at 6:10 pm

     tsmith….are you really putting forward the UK as a model to follow in relation to controlling Covid. You must be kidding.
     • tsmithfield 3.2.1

       18 January 2022 at 10:16 am

       Yes, they got into this mess because their response was hopeless at the start.

       However, since then, they have had plenty of practice at dealing with Covid. So, there is a lot we can learn from them.
       • Bearded Git 3.2.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 12:16 pm

         The article I shared earlier in Open Mike on TS today says that 97-98% of people in the UK show evidence of having had Covid. Incredible.
         • Tricledrown 3.2.1.1.1

           20 January 2022 at 9:37 am

           So thousands dying every day is OK. Hospitals over run Doctors and Nurses dying medical staff burnt out and leaving.

           Boris's comment let the bodies pile up.

           The tories have bungled the whole response now are removing mask wearing.

           Dumb and Dumber comes to mind.

           Then looking at the excess death rate in the UK will be interesting.

           Tsmithfield what planet are you on.
   • Hanswurst 3.3

     17 January 2022 at 10:08 pm

     Here in Germany, we have testing centres with RATs (at least in the small-to-mid-sized city where I live) at a density of every couple of blocks or greater in town and the inner suburbs. Results are delivered after 15 – 20 min., variously as a print-out, via email or for presentation in an app. They are free for any individual, nominally on a daily basis (I managed to get my wires crossed one day and had myself tested twice; long story – well, short but very boring. No questions were asked). Some institutions – schools, for instance – also do their own testing. Anyone returning positive RAT result is required to undergo a PCR test, and isolate themselves forthwith, pending the result of the latter, which is nominally guaranteed within 48 hours, but in practice can take a fraction longer (or so it would seem).
     • weka 3.3.1

       17 January 2022 at 10:54 pm

       what happens after a positive PCR test?
       • Hanswurst 3.3.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 9:08 am

         Self-isolation for seven days, assuming one has been without symptoms for at least 48 hours and returned a negative test, otherwise for 10 days (also assuming no symptoms for 48 hours). The same applies to close contacts (persons who were in contact with the infected person within 48 hours prior to the positive test or the onset of symptoms, whichever came first). That is the standard procedure, but one is legally obliged to inform the health department immediately on receiving a positive PCR result, and everybody affected is compelled to follow their instructions – or to challenge them legally, but in practice, of course, no legal challenge is going to be resolved before the 10 days are up.
     • Ed1 3.3.2

       18 January 2022 at 9:48 am

       That does seem a good arrangement – I do not have a link but the accuracy of self-administered tests has been questioned in the past – people may tend to see the result they want. to see. Small limited contact facilities do however still involve some public exposure; on the plus side they also ensure that testing results can be advised to central databases.
       • Hanswurst 3.3.2.1

         19 January 2022 at 12:38 am

         All of the testing facilities that I can think of within a couple of minutes' walking distance of my place (that's six of them) are outdoor facilities where the tests are administered through a street-facing window, usually from tents or other temporary structures. Because of their sheer numbers and long opening hours, there is usually also minimal queueing, so the risk of infection is heavily minimised.

         They are not saved to a central database, and there is zero chance of that happening, since Germany, for reasons that are probably obvious, is generally orders of magnitude more paranoid about privacy than New Zealand. I imagine places like Holland would be much more keen on that sort of data integration. The advantage of the official tests is that it reduces the likelihood of people's falsely claiming to have had themselves tested.
4. Blazer 4

   17 January 2022 at 5:49 pm

   An interesting test you can conduct to see how effective the mask you are wearing is=flick a lighter or light a match and see if you can blow it out through the mask.

   If you can=as much use as an ashtray on a….. motorbike.
   • RedLogix 4.1

     18 January 2022 at 12:06 pm

     When you blow outward – all of the air you expel leaves through your mask – any mask.

     In order to blow out a match or lighter you will have to purse your lips and actively direct your breath in a narrow jet. If you doubt this, try extinguishing the flame with your mouth wide open. The presence of a mask however will act as a diffuser, breaking up the narrow jet leaving your lips and making it almost impossible to blow out the flame at any distance.

     This is probably the dominant action of masks, they prevent jets of fine droplets being expelled beyond your personal 1.5m social distancing and arriving in concentration near another person's face.

     But given how tiny virus's are compared to the filter pores in any mask, it's a lot more debatable about how effective masks are as filters in the sense most people are thinking of them.
     • Blazer 4.1.1

       18 January 2022 at 12:12 pm

       I don't doubt what you say…and I also don't doubt that all masks are created…..equal.
       • Garet 4.1.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 3:44 pm

         N95 masks with an exhalation valve for example.
     • Tricledrown 4.1.2

       19 January 2022 at 12:15 pm

       N95 masks are 100% effective if worn properly.

       Surgical masks 53%

       Cloth masks 35% depending on construction.
   • barry 4.2

     18 January 2022 at 4:12 pm

     A mask may not stop the virus passing through, but it may stop aerosols being created.
     • McFlock 4.2.1

       18 January 2022 at 4:29 pm

       Some uk anti-maskers reckoned a mask was like trying to contain a fart with your pants.

       Someone else linked to a study that demonstrated that while pants might not contain the smell, they do stop a lot of the bacteria-laden aerosols released by said fart, lol

       Can't remember where I originally saw it, but this is the sort of thing.
     • Tricledrown 4.2.2

       20 January 2022 at 9:52 am

       N95 and kn95 masks have chemicals in the fabric to repel and nuetralize airborne partials plus they are built to keep out very fine particals.

       If worn properly they will last for 25hrs of use.

       Ffs can we have a fact checker to put out correct information.

       The ant vaxxers keep pushing misthruths misinformation.

       Why would medical staff use kn95 masks if they didn't work .Our health system would have collapsed by now.
5. DS 5

   17 January 2022 at 7:12 pm

   Honestly, Red Light would not be enough to stop Omicron if it got out (I'm not overly worried about this MIQ worker). We need a nationwide lockdown.
6. Koff 6

   17 January 2022 at 9:02 pm

   Interesting series of Qs and As about Omicron (link below). The real life data about this variant's severity is hard to nail down because most people in countries where data is being collected have been vaccinated, if it is compared to previous variant waves. One salient point is that if Omicron is half as severe as Delta and Delta is twice as severe as Alpha, which makes Omicron still potentially more severe than the earlier variants…. to the unvaccinated or partially vaccinated or those with co-morbidities anyway.

   https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/16/no-intention-of-getting-infected-understanding-omicrons-severity.
   • RedLogix 6.1

     18 January 2022 at 1:02 am

     Another comparison.

     The charts below show one way to do this. They visualize the main COVID metrics relative to the peak of the last wave before the population was widely vaccinated. In this representation of the data, if confirmed cases increase but hospitalizations and deaths increase to a lesser extent, it will mean that the many reported cases are leading to fewer severe forms of the disease, and fewer deaths.
   • adam 6.2

     18 January 2022 at 2:30 am

     Wow a few things wrong with you comment, each variant so far has got more transmittable, but less severe. Which is line with how Sars-1 acted historically.

     The big problem has been the 40 odd years of deconstruction/smashing of the public health sector, by government after government with the last two being really bad. It just can't handle a pandemic.

     At this point I think the public health system can't even handle this becoming one more endemic disease. Which is where their looks like it's going to end up.
     • barry 6.2.1

       18 January 2022 at 4:09 pm

       Rubbish, Delta was both more infectious and more severe. It behaved differently due to the large number of people with antibodies when it hit.

       SARS-1 disappeared before it had a chance to mutate significantly.
       • adam 6.2.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 7:39 pm

         I think you may have to read the WHO reports on Sars. The out break in the middle east makes very interesting reading.

         As for your semantics comment, the impact of Delta was less severe. I'm not seeing any reporting otherwise, are you?
7. adam 7

   18 January 2022 at 2:44 am

   Boosters are not a black and white fix weka.

   My opinion is long term, just not good practice and not going to work.

   We should be looking at other options, like early treatment and isolation in flair ups for people in the high risk group. We are fast moving to this being just one more endemic disease we have to learn to live with.

   That said, not sure we can under this economic model, to many vested interests wanting a quick buck. And they got fear, the media, and our pollies in their back pocket – to make sure they get that quick buck
   • weka 7.1

     18 January 2022 at 10:41 am

     Agree with much of that adam. I don't see the boosters as a black and white fix. More like an imperfect tool that we have in front of us right now that we can use alongside many others. An important one though.

     I assume the public health thought is that eventually there will be a more effective vaccine that needs updating maybe once a year.

     We are fast moving to this being just one more endemic disease we have to learn to live with.

     I see little reason for NZ to shift radically from its current approaches while we are still so successful at harm minimisation. This doesn't ignore the harm being done by the response itself, but there are many things there we could improve without throwing out the central premise. We could be looking after people much better at the social and economic level, but as we know we should be doing that anyway and haven't been pre-covid.

     Omicron may or may not force our hand, time will tell. Its possible that we will adapt and a new response will emerge that is still inline with the current kaupapa.

     I agree that it's likely we will eventually settle into a pattern of endemic viral infection, probably with peaks and waves, and if we get lucky it will by then be actually mild. I don't think we are there yet, it's pretty clear from medical and modelling people that much harm is being caused by omicron. Some places may end up being ok and others not, there is a lot to learn there still.

     We should be looking at other options, like early treatment and isolation in flair ups for people in the high risk group

     Are you suggesting that vulnerable people should be isolated within society once covid is endemic here?
     • adam 7.1.1

       18 January 2022 at 7:30 pm

       Are you suggesting that vulnerable people should be isolated within society once covid is endemic here?

       Yes, in flair up. And their choice to go into isolation or not. I also think we may need to change how we do best practice with cancer treatment and such.
       • weka 7.1.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 7:52 pm

         what do you mean by 'in flair up'?
         • adam 7.1.1.1.1

           18 January 2022 at 8:04 pm

           When it moves to the endemic stage there will be flair ups, when Sars Covid-2 is in the community. Like flu season.
8. tsmithfield 8

   18 January 2022 at 11:44 am

   Something that should be done is to mandate the use of surgical standard masks instead of the cloth ones that so many people wear. Surgical masks are just so much more effective at preventing virus spread.

   https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/15/are-cloth-masks-effective-for-covid-surgical-masks-vs-kn95-explained.html

   IMO allowing the use of cloth masks reduces the whole exercise down to the level of virtue signalling, in that it is a feel good thing that people do, without it actually achieving much.
   • Puckish Rogue 8.1

     18 January 2022 at 11:46 am

     Its like the old 'duck and cover', pretend something helps and it helps keep the population compliant
     • tsmithfield 8.1.1

       18 January 2022 at 1:19 pm

       Exactly. And the change I suggest could be done without stuffing up anyone's lives any further, other than for the fact the surgical masks look a bit more fugly than the designer cloth ones.
       • Puckish Rogue 8.1.1.1

         18 January 2022 at 3:15 pm

         They also smell bad
   • Jimmy 8.2

     18 January 2022 at 3:28 pm

     Cloth masks and homemade masks have always been a complete waste of time. God only knows why Jacinda put out that video of making a mask at home. Her advisers really should have not let her do that.
     • barry 8.2.1

       18 January 2022 at 4:07 pm

       Bullshit. If 2 people are wearing cloth masks then the odds of the virus passing between them are reduced a lot.

       Surgical masks are better, but if you want to be protected from an unmasked person sneezing in your face then you need an N95 mask and eye protection.

       It is about some protection versus being bulletproof.
       • tsmithfield 8.2.1.1

         19 January 2022 at 9:43 am

         The surgical masks are more than twice as effective to the cloth ones according to the link I posted.

         So, what is the problem with making the mandatory? It should be possible for those making the cloth ones for the fashion-conscious to include a surgical liner inside the mask so it complies with requirements.

         This is a very simple step that would have a real effect on reducing transmission, which is likely to be even more important when Omicron arrives.
       • Jimmy 8.2.1.2

         19 January 2022 at 11:35 am

         Cloth mask – think of a chicken wire fence trying to keep out mosquitos.
         N95 are the way to go or a surgical mask if not. Cloth a complete waste of time – but they do look good!
         • tsmithfield 8.2.1.2.1

           19 January 2022 at 11:58 am

           Agreed. The cloth masks are little more than virtue signaling by those who want to appear that they are doing something.
   • McFlock 8.3

     18 January 2022 at 3:47 pm

     Worst case, it's like self defense training with rubber weapons. The reflexes are honed.

     95% might be able to strangle an outbreak by itself (in conjunction with vaccines etc), but even knocking infections down almost 40% instead of 95% can help tracers address a small outbreak. As long as transmission isn't so fast the contacts expand faster than the ability to count them.
9. barry 9

   18 January 2022 at 4:04 pm

   When Omicron gets out we will all get it (although not all will have symptoms). We could have a short sharp spike (like the UK) where it all happens in 6-8 weeks – but that means 20% off work at any one time; or we can slow it down to spread it over 3-4 months. This still means a lot of people off work, but more manageable. Either case will result in a lot of unvaccinated people getting sick and dying.

   Ideally we would want it over with before winter, but we want to delay it a bit to give people time to get boosters. So March – June.

   Then we get to find out what happens afterwards. Will Delta come back? Will there be another variant? Will Omicron persist as a seasonal (nasty) cold?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS