It is scientifically questionable whether it really is darkest just before dawn, but let’s use some licence because it’s certainly dark in Victoria and New South Wales right now.
But as Sydney and Melbourne endure their strictest lockdowns since the pandemic began, the larger battle of when Australia will start “living with COVID” continues to rage.
Delta’s fast incubation period and high transmissibility has killed the dream of COVID zero and herd immunity. This has meant that COVID-zero adherents have had to come up with another reason to delay opening up. Their latest? Opening with a high number of existing infections wasn’t part of the deal.
James McCaw was one of the authors of the Doherty report (but not the primary author, who was Jodie McVernon), and holds an honorary role at the Doherty Institute. He claimed that even with 70% to 80% of adults vaccinated (56% to 64% of all people), NSW wouldn’t be able to “open up” with high case numbers.
McCaw’s view was echoed by Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews and Steven Miles, Queensland’s deputy premier, in recent days. Andrews warned: “If you don’t actively suppress this virus then when you do open up, we will have scenes the likes of which none of us have ever experienced in our hospitals.”
McCaw said: “NSW needs to work to continue to reduce those case numbers and get the outbreak under control. There is a very, very clear and coherent relationship between the targets Doherty puts forward and the response required by NSW to help us get there.”
But McCaw was quickly contradicted by Australia’s Chief Medical Officer Professor Paul Kelly, who said: “The model itself remains the same; it’s a tweak to the assumptions.”
The McCaw/Andrews/Miles’ view doesn’t make a huge amount of sense given the transmissibility of the Delta strain. If Australia lifted restrictions at even 80% adult vaccination levels, there would inevitably be a rapid spike in infections, potentially upwards of 20,000 a day, regardless of the starting number. When we open borders, even to lower-risk countries, infections will inevitably be imported.
But there are two significant mitigating factors here.
First, vaccinations are more effective at preventing serious illness and death than infections, so we would see more mild cases, but not hospitalisations or deaths. We have seen a practice run in the past fortnight in NSW, where daily infections have increased by 300%, but ICU patients have increased by a more modest 41%, and this is with only 31% of adults fully vaccinated.
Second, vaccinations have been targeted towards the older and the at-risk (in NSW, 87% of the high-risk 70+ group have had at least one dose), which means the case fatality rate will drop significantly. In the UK, which followed a similar targeted vaccination campaign, the case fatality rate has fallen from 2% in January to about 0.3%.
While the Doherty modelling appears to have understated infection levels after reopening, the vaccination targets appear defensible given the countries which reached 64% vaccination levels (Canada and Iceland) were able to reopen with very low death rates (Israel is experiencing a third wave and has not yet even reached Doherty’s phase C target).
The arguments are becoming increasingly hostile as we move from the theoretical to the actual. Australia’s vaccination rate has morphed from slowest in the OECD to the world’s fastest (NSW is vaccinating people at a higher rate than even the UK was able to achieve).
By the end of October, Australia is likely to have completed 38 million vaccinations, or 76% of the total population. At that level, no Western country kept their borders or their businesses closed.
It is not without irony that while Australians turn out in record numbers to get vaccinated, state premiers try to come up with new ways to ensure they remain under lock and key.
Should Australia aim for zero COVID? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name if you would like to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say column. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
Time for a brush up in mathematics and mathematical modelling, Adam. Maybe ask James McCaw, whose expertise you here attempt to denigrate, despite having none yourself. Simple stuff first. Exponential is not the same as linear, stochastic is not the same as deterministic, rate (of infection for example) and actual number (of infected) are not the same (so you can get high numbers with low rates). And some health science: and long duration of an effect (time in hospital, say) has the same result as raising the instantaneous case numbers (eg. COVID patients spend 5-10 time as long in ICU as a typical ICU admission). And COVID is not comparable to seasonal influenza; it’s far worse. And we will not have an effective level of vaccination for a few months, and a lot of bad results can accrue in that time.
On quite a few occasions I have read Crikey articles and burst out loud (BOL?) with “who wrote this . . . ?” Same serial offender (Adam) on every occasion. Statistically significant, I assert.
State premiers, except for the one in NSW, are doing what they know works and because it’s not the end of October yet.
Crikey, sack this other-trucking self-interested a r s e h a t.
Its a claim without any evidence to back it up, either. Less than 25% of the Australian population is currently vaccinated, at the end of August, yet he thinks those numbers will triple in only 2 months? Utter delusion from a self-interested hack.
Can’t sack a board member.
However, a worthwhile editor would refuse to print his self serving advertorials.
Which is why they appear here.
Constantly.
Sa Liberal Steve Marshall has now declared his mouth is attached to the rears of Killer Glady and Morri$sinner and SA people are terrified as Marshall begins his Berjikkillthem Morrisn plan to live with covid for state residents, it’s open slather in the race for which state infected by Berjikill can rack up the most deaths and diseased.
Thank God their is at least one ‘Crikey contrarian’ voice is the sea of blowhards on this site.
Of course, out there in the real world, beyond Crikey, everybody knows lockdowns have reached the end of useful purpose.
Only regimes such as Iran, where they wont allow vaccines yet, are now using them for population control.
Some of the commenters here should move to Iran once the borders are re-opened, they have a system of government that would suit them.
‘in’ the sea of blowhards on this site
No peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles from epidemiologists to back up your assertion.
So, your comment has no impact here.
Well Crikey is not a high-impact journal.
But to your point, just google “are lockdowns worth it?” – you will find a wealth of contradictory material.
All peer reviewed, all using high standard academic research methodologies.
I know which ones I believe.
Iran has administered at least 19,894,523 doses of COVID vaccines so far.
https://graphics.reuters.DOT/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/iran/
If you could see beyond your tattered IPA script you’d know that the last thing Iran would want is a reduced population – a shia island in a sea of sunnis.
It is 2nd in population (83M) only to Egypt (100M) – despite the bloodshed of the US backed Saddam war on the nascent shah-free nation.
Perhaps the correct address can be posted…
https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/iran/
Yes just 5.3% vaccinated so far and moving at a glacial pace, deliberately
In a country experiencing 600 deaths a day
Explain ‘deliberately‘ – some dark plot to undermine nation growth?
Half the population is under 25 and that cohort has been fairly keen on breeding, for at least 250,000 years.
We should be aiming for at least the same vaccine levels Australia has for childhood diseases, so that COVID Cases are outliers. It is unlikely we will ever be rid of COVID-19 per se, and we may still still catch COVID, but we want to be in a position where the few who do catch it aren’t on ventilators. For instance, my son caught whooping cough at school despite being vaccinated. He had a persistent cough, but it wasn’t stereotypical as it was mild. A clever GP did the swab, and we found he had it. With medication he was able to recover. Nobody else in the family got it.
To achieve this, our vaccinations in each and every community need to be above 90 percent, not 70 percent as paraded by the Liberals.
Until then, lockdowns with an aim for COVID Zero are the only way we can stay safe.
The headline is more extreme than the article. So are the Adam S articles just clickbait for Crikey? The headline is nonsense in that if you open up and are dead as a result you are ‘not living with Covid’ either. A loss of the abstract concept ‘freedom’ does not have equal value to the loss of your life. Such things always require a balance.
There is actually a difficult discussion to be had about the future, but this article does not lead into it. Some issues:
My concern is what the next variant might look like and how fast it will go through the population. I’m not advocating endless lockdowns but I haven’t heard anybody talk about what the plan is for the next major variant. The Doherty modelling only covers the ones we know about….
Can we ever plan for all contingencies?
I would reckon dedicated quarantine facilities would be a good first step.
Such facilities should incorporate medical treatments and be not too far away from major health hubs, but far enough away to offer some protection to those big population centers.
For example, the “Centre for National Resilience” in Mickleham near Melbourne gets it pretty right at about 45 klms.
Newsflash, almost no vaccine currently in existence protects people from infection 100%. What vaccines have always done is to allow the body to mount an immune response quickly enough that it can eliminate the virus before it has time to reach levels that can cause disease symptoms, as well as massively reducing the chances of it reaching levels at which it can infect others. That is how Herd Immunity comes about.
Clickbait yes but remember the scrawler is a businessman, and it’s profits and money before your health chump
Good points.
Another point is that if being vaccinated does not stop you spreading the virus (common consensus does seem to be that it offers a reduction) then the unvaccinated have a problem.
Normally with enough people vaccinated, the unvaccinated get some protection from the high level of vaccination.
This may not be the case with Corona (there’s more research to be done).
This will be a difficult conversation, to what degree do the vaccinated compromise their lives to protect the unvaccinated?
Before anyone accuses me of being dictatorial – I am not in favor of mandating vaccination.
Where did you get him from? The IPA or something similar?