This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Pies4shaw wrote:Yes - it's about encouraging people to make the correct choice in the interests of public health generally. If the disease had a 40% fatality rate, people would just get the test because they'd have a very immediate interest in wanting to know whether they need urgent treatment. But here you have a disease that we know, statistically, will kill lots and lots of people but the chances of it killing any particular person are low - you want every particular person to make the choice to have the test in the interests, for the most part, of not killing other people. That's not a situation in which it is remotely sensible to charge people - why would you, eg, spend $15 to take a test that might protect Stui but is likely to be little interest to you - you'll know if/when you need medical treatment and taking the test won't alter that.
Thus, the idea that people should just "find $50" is moronic. You "find $50" in pressing circumstances because you want to feed your child or get your mother urgent medical treatment - you don't do it to prevent the abstract possibility that people you have never met in a place you have never been might get ill.
I can somewhat relate to that. I was in the pharmacy to get a couple of scripts filled and saw the tests on the shelf.
I had a fleeting notion of grabbing a couple so my mother and I could do a test before going to my Daughters for Christmas Lunch.
Then when I saw it was $15 each, I thought well both mum and I are triple vaxxed and my daughter and her partner double vaxxed, I'm basically throwing away $30 that I could use to buy a bottle of wine for lunch.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
At chemist warehouse they are a packet of 2 for $25, I got my daughter a pack when she was exposed at work because she was upset, and the walk up can take a day to get back
They really should lock the qld border right now no one in or out!!! Another week to be safe!
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Australia has topped 5,000 new cases in a day for the first time, quite comfortably. Hospitalisations are up about a third in the last week - they're still (temporarily) only about 60% of the "Delta" peak (which was 1,541 in late September).
I got a test last Thursday, 5 min from home, only 1 person in front of me! There is a couple near us that never have more than 20 people waiting, the drive through is pretty packed though
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Pies4shaw wrote:Yes - it's about encouraging people to make the correct choice in the interests of public health generally. If the disease had a 40% fatality rate, people would just get the test because they'd have a very immediate interest in wanting to know whether they need urgent treatment. But here you have a disease that we know, statistically, will kill lots and lots of people but the chances of it killing any particular person are low - you want every particular person to make the choice to have the test in the interests, for the most part, of not killing other people. That's not a situation in which it is remotely sensible to charge people - why would you, eg, spend $15 to take a test that might protect Stui but is likely to be little interest to you - you'll know if/when you need medical treatment and taking the test won't alter that.
Thus, the idea that people should just "find $50" is moronic. You "find $50" in pressing circumstances because you want to feed your child or get your mother urgent medical treatment - you don't do it to prevent the abstract possibility that people you have never met in a place you have never been might get ill.
I can somewhat relate to that. I was in the pharmacy to get a couple of scripts filled and saw the tests on the shelf.
I had a fleeting notion of grabbing a couple so my mother and I could do a test before going to my Daughters for Christmas Lunch.
Then when I saw it was $15 each, I thought well both mum and I are triple vaxxed and my daughter and her partner double vaxxed, I'm basically throwing away $30 that I could use to buy a bottle of wine for lunch.
Exactly, and no one would judge that as anything other than sane, normal human behaviour. The behavioural economics of the situation in two posts.
Hospitalisation, the backlog of delayed treatment, supply chain disruption, worker shortages, business shutdowns, productivity loss, etc., can obviously cost a lot more than free tests. Are the Aussie media and businesses making a song and dance about this?
A step closer to quantifying how much milder Omicron actually is:
The same analysis said that accounting for immunity in the population meant a 25% to 30% lower risk of visiting A&E with Omicron and around a 40% reduction in needing to stay in hospital for more than a day.
Prof Neil Ferguson, one of the researchers, said: "It is clearly good news, to a degree."
However, he warned the reduction is "not sufficient to dramatically change the modelling" and the speed that Omicron is spreading meant "there's the potential of still getting hospitalisations in numbers that could put the NHS in a difficult position".
