[crocos]

Originally Posted by Nich

We'll never know if lock downs actually worked to slow the virus. But they certainly worked to boost suicides by 7x and bankrupt over 50% of SMEs. So I'll eat my hat and never say government is ineffectual ever again.

Zero idea on the SME impact though I do know it's been considerable here in AU. Ditto I have nothing on the suicide stats. However from a "get it done" POV, the sooner and harder places have locked down the quicker they have recovered. NZ being a great example, but even compare the Aussie states: WA and SA locked down early & hard, and while still isolating externally are internally back to business as usual.
QLD and NSW locked down not as hard and it took longer to get case numbers under control. NSW had some shitty luck with cruise ships and then started easing up too early, which is why their numbers are climbing again.
VIC was starting to get it's shit together with the L3-lite lockdown it initially did, but hiring idiots (security guards) rather than getting the ADF in caused some spread, and then VIC started letting up WAY to early - it's no surprise we're back to masking up. At least it's mandatory this time.

Originally Posted by Nich

Here's a daily dose of sanity to stem the fear mongering and forces that are turning us into stool pigeons.

Nich you've got a bit of cheek calling out about fear & uncertainty then trying to add more to the trash-fire. And calling Coleman unbiased is like saying the Proud Boys aren't racist, though I grant he's a VERY slick talker.

Originally Posted by Nich

Remember to not pay the numbers too much attention:

Fun - you're criticizing the results based on the numbers found but then saying to ignore them? Dude, pull ya head out.

Originally Posted by Nich

- The PCR tests are still wildly inaccurate: https://www.health.gov.au/resources/...e-pcr-platform

Read through this. Seems to work well from actually reading this. Not perfect by any rate - but the ones failed on are extreme dilutions, far less diluted than typically used, though if someone was only just recently infected it's possible that effective dilution level is likely - but they've said all along that C19 isn't readily detectable early, it's one of the major issues with it.
False positive rate is acceptably low.
To call the tests "wildly inaccurate" is itself wildly inaccurate.

Originally Posted by Nich

- Australia accepts any old test anyway in the interest of expedience even though there is little evidence of their accuracy: https://www.tga.gov.au/covid-19-test...-professionals

Uh, that's so very much not what that says. It's a "trust but verify" approach, which DOES leave opening for error and variance, but the approaches are very rigorously reviewed and requires ongoing test results to be monitored

Originally Posted by Nich

- Australia's mining magnates are still China's bitch: https://www.theguardian.com/australi...covid-19-tests

Your statement: Yes, nothing has changed there
Regards the actual too&fro with BGI, BGI are an equipment & training supplier in the Australian context - they're not actually performing the tests and the testing on their kits was on-par with the reference kits already in use. Only issue is political BS and if Foster is a corrupt fucker (he probably is IMO) using this as a chance to make bank.

Originally Posted by Nich

- China is running the largest global DNA dragnet and COVID is an opportunity to increase its data collection https://www.aspi.org.au/report/genomic-surveillance

And none of the companies used in Australia (no idea about elsewhere) have known links to the Chinese beyond equipment & consumables. Is it possible? Yes, but in this case I actually consider it unlikely.