Australia Lockdown

mymatelookslikephilstamp

mymatelookslikephilstamp

Active member
Just reading yesterday/today that Australia have re-locked down Victoria for 6 weeks, because of a record surge in new cases.
They had a total of 2 deaths in Victoria yesterday, and have had a total of just over 100 deaths in total across the country during the entire coronavirus situation, in a place with a population of 25 million people, and it is double the size of Europe. Anyone dying is obviously terrible, but people will and do die every day from various causes (I've not seen any information on underlying conditions, or age of those that passed away). That is an incredibly tiny tiny percentage of the population (Victoria has 7 million inhabitants).

3000 people die of flu each year in Australia and there has never been a lockdown. Does this reaction not seem over the top? Are Australians expected to remain in lockdown indefinitely until there are zero cases?

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/07/asia/melbourne-coronavirus-lockdown-intl-hnk/index.html
 
They obviously see a danger looking at what's happened across the globe, 65,000+ dying here for instance, and they're taking measures to try to prevent it happening there.
 
I think locking down until zero cases seems quite a good idea when there is such a low amount in transmission across the country.

What would be the benefit of leaving it another few weeks if the numbers are increasing? Wait for 20 to die and lock down or 500? What is a sensible threshold, because containment/ control/ lockdown will be implemented at some point.

I don't have any comorbidities or risk factors so i feel confident if it was let loose i would be ok- but 65,000 excess deaths in the UK so far seems a high cost for a wait and see approach to then lose control of cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top