Alarmed Latham and Kennett destroy SloMo

Furious stuff from the fringes of both sides of politics. Both Latham and Kennett are right. We should go hard lockdown for six weeks then open up with manic testing on every street corner, in every office and at every supermarket entrance through Winter.

Someone stick a sock in the Kock.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


  1. Stephen Morris

    On the other hand (via the BBC

    The lockdown, itself, however could cost lives.

    Prof Robert Dinwall, from Nottingham Trent University, says “the collateral damage to society and the economy” could include:

    mental health problems and suicides linked to self-isolation
    heart problems from lack of activity
    the impact on health from increased unemployment and reduced living standards

    Others have also pointed to the health cost from steps such as delaying routine operations and cancer screening.

    Meanwhile, University of Bristol researchers say the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths could be outweighed by the lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

    And the tipping point, they say, is a 6.4% decline in the size of the economy – on a par with what happened following the 2008 financial crash.

    It would see a loss of three months of life on average across the population because of factors from declining living standards to poorer health care.

    Surely this will be worse than 2008.

    It’s a grim calculus, but “letting it rip” might actually save lives.

    MIT might disagree, but they’ve been looking at Spanish Flu which killed productive young people.

      • Stephen Morris

        If you’re going to lock down, you might as well do it properly. As you say, there’s no point being half-arsed.

        But in years to come when the passion has subsided, economists might conclude that it would have been better – in terms of life years lost – to do nothing.

        Also, I don’t know if the Bristol calculation adjusted for “quality of life”. The months being lost to Covid19 are months at the very end of life (as shown in the BBC article).

        The months being lost by lock down will be younger, more productive, lives.

        This is shaping up as a Generational War. Younger people see themselves being thrown under the bus economically to protect aging Baby Boomers.

        As the saying goes, “Old men make wars for young men to die in.”

        It seems this is happening in the War Against the Virus.

        • GeordieMEMBER

          The fact that these issues can be identified mean we can also mitigate them.

          To do nothing is to fail completely and to do too little is to fail as well.

        • TrooDohMEMBER

          Yep, that is the key point. ScoMo has been the king of half-measures. From the travel bans (that were side-stepped by 30,000 Chinese students) to this half-pregnant semi-lockdown situation we’re in now.

        • truthisfashionable

          I hope I’m not the exception in seeing significant positives from this lockdown.
          Work from home was always a thing, but now knuckledragging managers have been forced into managing remote teams and finding it’s actually not so bad, hopefully they don’t forget as soon as the office are open again because finance is no doubt planning to reduce the floor space significantly next renewal because remote work works.

          I’m also hearing that a huge amount of people are now spending quality time together as a family. Even if the kids are a handful at times, people are remembering why they wanted them in the first place and realising how much they were missing.

          The desire for trinkets and toys will be interesting, those who have kept their jobs can still buy online, but may be realising they need nothing more when forced to stay surrounded by the stuff for a few weeks on end.

          For those who have lost their jobs, let’s hope their motivation can be turned towards the political system and other enemies of the workforce. ‘learn to code’ how to stop mis & disinformation campaigns across social media. Learn the political system and start talking about either taking over or starting a grass roots party.

          Opportunity abounds in this moment and must be taken because otherwise she won’t be right, mate. She’ll be very very bad for a very very long time.

          • okradovicMEMBER

            You are spot on. I spend 2.5 hrs daily on avearge on commute alone. This, alongside my introverted nature and the advantage of not having to be surrounded by corporate sociopaths (other than on the video conference calls), for me this is a dream come true. I just wish it was for different reasons. Not to mention the amount of time I get to spend with children. I just wish that once this is over, working from home becomes more of a norm.

          • Respectfully, just because there has been some positive from this, does not justify the overzealous lock-down.

        • Love your work Mr Morris. It is futile trying to stop this ‘thing’. Such a waste of time, money and effort. If it kills billions …. so what.

          Walked into a mower shop today for some chainsaw repairs. Was refused service for not washing/disinfecting my hands at the entrance. Was tempted to start chainsaw and inflict my own virus. Legally can i be refused service for not complying? And for anyone that tells me i should have adhered and be more community minded …. the ‘finger’.

        • Or better, do close to nothing.

          This could have included:

          Restricting visitors to aged care facilities and hospitals, where the virus vulnerable are
          Testing healthcare and aged care staff on a regular basis, and putting said staff on paid quarantine
          Promoting better hygiene – suggesting no more hand-shaking, and encouraging work from home for vulnerable workers
          Banning of or extensive health screening of travelers from Wuhan and other emerging epicentres.

          Just a few, low cost, practices that could have reduced exposure and ultimate death rates, without rattling the whole economy.

        • A substantial number of the people who are being hospitalised with this virus are relatively young. 40% under 55 in France.

          It is true that younger people are less likely to die, but they can still suffer permanent damage. How about permanent scarring on your lungs or some nice cognitive damage? And do we really know enough about this virus to understand the long-term effects? An apparently mild infection with the Epstein-Barr virus can lead to any one of several really nasty cancers. The human papilloma virus initially just causes warts, but is the main cause of cervical cancer, and what about the terrible long-term liver damage from hepatitis C? There are other examples.

          A vaccine may be a long way away, but testing is getting cheaper. If we test widely enough, we can quarantine the mild cases and asymptomatic carriers. That is what they did in the Italian town of Vo, where they haven’t had a new case since March 13.

        • Stephen Morris

          As he says right at the start, “Covid-19 is not Ebola”.

          From the BBC report:

          Every year, about 600,000 people in the UK die. And the frail and elderly are most at risk, just as they are if they have coronavirus.

          Nearly 10% of people aged over 80 will die in the next year, Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter, at the University of Cambridge, points out, and the risk of them dying if infected with coronavirus is almost exactly the same.

          That does not mean there will be no extra deaths – but, Sir David says, there will be “a substantial overlap”.

          “Many people who die of Covid [the disease caused by coronavirus] would have died anyway within a short period,” he says.

          Fleischman echoes this point at the very beginning of the interview.

          Covid-19 is not Ebola.

    • If saving lives was the reason the world is spending trillions of dollars – imagine how many lives could be saved with that sort of money spent on water sanitation and infrastructure in Africa and Asia.

      • Stephen Morris

        Every day when I get up I remind myself that in the next 16 hours I will kill several people. Every night when I go to bed I remind myself what I have just done.

        Most of my victims are vulnerable children.

        Every day that I refrain from writing a cheque to Save the Children (or some other emergency aid fund) I am inevitably permitting the death of a child – somewhere in some famine-ravaged part of the world – who might otherwise have been saved and gone on to lead a happy life.

        I’m not proud of it. I don’t make excuses for it. It’s just a fact of life. We all make such decisions. Usually we don’t think about them.

        When confronted with such arguments many people recoil in horror and say, “But, but, but, but, but . . . I have no moral obligation to act positively to prevent deaths.”

        But if we don’t have moral obligation to act positively to prevent the death of innocent children, why do we have a moral obligation to act positively to prevent the deaths of those elderly who might die from Covid19.

        • If government were to let old people die we’d probably end up with Pauline Hanson as our next prime minister.

        • Uranium GeoMEMBER

          Bhaha save the children having worked in some of the destitute backwaters the charity organisations operate in. I can say that there is almost zero benefit for the communities from organisations like save the children.

        • Look at it this way, if the ‘Save the Children’ children die before reproducing, you’ve actually saved many more children by doing nothing.

        • drsmithyMEMBER

          But if we don’t have moral obligation to act positively to prevent the death of innocent children, why do we have a moral obligation to act positively to prevent the deaths of those elderly who might die from Covid19.

          We should disband the police force if we have no moral obligation to act positively on crime. May as well disband the justice system as well, since nobody is going to be arrested.

          • Stephen Morris

            I suspect most people don’t support a police force out of some abstract commitment to fighting crime.

            They support a police force because they recognise it’s in their own best interests to have it.

            This is especially true of those with lots of property who also have a disproportionate influence on policy-making.

            It will be interesting to see if support for publicly funded policing remains high when the well-to-do have retreated to their private gated communities, protected by their private security services.

        • Because you have at least a 1 in 500 chance of dying from this disease and a 1 in 5 chance of being hospitalised based on our current understanding.

          • You really need to check your figures.

            If that is what you are basing your replies to, no wonder you are getting a tad hysterical on here. You represent the bulk that are numerically illiterate and posses no critical reasoning abilities.

            It’s this hysteria that governments have had to respond to, not the facts.

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      Every country that toyed with the ‘let the virus rip’ ended up in lockdown. There is no exception. Once the number of dead gets sufficiently high, it will enter lockdown. Human society today simply will not tolerate letting 3%-10% of the population die in a few months for the sake of the ‘economy’, because when dead people lines the streets, there is no economy.

      So if you have to lockdown anyway, you should go early and go hard.

          • Look, even the experts who advocate lockdown explain that it is purely to avert ICU capacity being overwhelmed; the curve comes down anyway once herd immunity goes past a certain point. Lockdown delays herd immunity. If your particular curve, due to superior health care and a local environment not conducive to the virus, isn’t ever going to be as deadly as Northern Italy’s one, then it is vastly preferable to not incur the costs of economic crash.

            H&H seems to be infected with the political thought virus that printing money is a costless fix to any economic disaster.

            I hope for the sake of all humanity’s political lessons, that Sweden stays brave. As one economist there said, “it is not us who is conducting a risky social experiment, it is everybody else”.

          • Stephen Morris

            Just for the record, I am not suggesting weighing up lives against economic cost.

            I am suggesting weighing up lives against lives:

            ” . . .the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths could be outweighed by the lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

            And the tipping point, they say, is a 6.4% decline in the size of the economy – on a par with what happened following the 2008 financial crash.

            It would see a loss of three months of life on average across the population because of factors from declining living standards to poorer health care.”

      • Stephen Morris

        “Old men make wars for young men to die in.”

        If the young men die “soul by soul and silently” sometime in the distant future, then all the better.

        But I agree that if you are going to do lockdown then it’s better to do it early and hard.

      • “Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy says he believes the actual number of coronavirus infections worldwide is five to 10 times more than the 1 million cases reported.”

        Aka the mortality rate is 5-10x less than currently reported

        • Massively important point. It means that herd immunity arrives much earlier than “experts” going entirely by “confirmed infections” assume.

        • Only if all deaths are reported. Probably in the West, but that is not what he is referring to.

        • You fail to account for the 3 week lag between infection and death
          Obviously asymptomatic cases are not being tested so if we use two week lag and a conservative doubling time of 5 days then the deaths would be expected to be 8 Fold higher in 2 weeks time, wiping out the 5-10 fold lack of diagnosis. Estimates for SARS1 started at 4% and ended up at 10% (but was actually 15% outside china)
          Until we get serological evidence otherwise, we should work with the data we have. Basically we have a virus with a 2-5% mortality rate, with less than 20% asymptomatic cases. Thats in the same league as the Spanish flu if it infects 70% of the population. 100million deaths plus are on the cards. 10s of thousand of working age people would die in Australia. For all we know we will have drugs that reduce mortality by 90% in a months time. Then the economic cost of looking after millions of injured survivors needs to be taken into account. And that assumes that there wont be unforeseen complication of infection, For all we know the 20% of severe infections could develop autoimmune disease that attacks the heart or lungs.

      • Public hysteria propelled them to lockdown, against their first (and better) judgement.

        Once one lot of government did it, then the people of other countries expected their countries to do the same.

        It’s an interesting case in pandering to a unduly panicking public, against better judgement (and common sense).

        • Your kidding right. It was medics and scientists that were calling for lockdowns while Scumo and co were all wanting to attend massive public sporting events and protect their jobs, even after Wuhan, Italy and Iran were in disaster mode.
          It wasn’t till toilet paper got scarce that people started worrying.

          • Not all were calling for this.

            Where do you think the bulk of Western governments learnt about herd immunity from? It wasn’t from reading tea leaves.

            There was other action that could have been taken:

            Restricting visitors to aged care facilities and hospitals, where the virus vulnerable are
            Testing healthcare and aged care staff on a regular basis, and putting said staff on paid quarantine
            Promoting better hygiene – suggesting no more hand-shaking, and encouraging work from home for vulnerable workers
            Banning of or extensive health screening of travelers from Wuhan and other emerging epicentres.

            Just a few, low cost, practices that could have reduced exposure and ultimate death rates, without rattling the whole economy.

      • There was never the chance of 3-10% of the population from dying. Not even in the most extreme worst case scenarios as posed by epidemiologist or health professional, health academic.

      • 3rd world ain’t got that choice. 10% mortality in densely over-populated ghettos. And we won’t care

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Exactly. Why anyone thinks there is seriously a “BAU” option here is beyond me.

        Even the ideas about isolating the high risk groups. Ignoring that probably accounts for a quite substantial fraction of the population, you likely have to maintain that isolation until a vaccine is found so they can be “un-isolated” safely.

      • Hysteria has led governments to lockdown.

        The lockdowns becomes the standard a hysterical public then expects from their governments.

    • Professor DemographyMEMBER

      Sometimes it pays to take these sort of academic opinions or ideas as guesswork and place it alongside the guesswork of other interested people. Being an economist is not some sort of ticket to any sort of expertise that could be compared to being a physicist understanding a nuclear reaction. The opinions of economists, even where they attempt to use data to quantify such impossibly abstracted downstream outcomes, are widely varied because precision is not possible in these realms. Do you know how many Drs and Professors are out there? Do we know how many we should listen to when they have differing opinions based on fingers in the air calcs?

    • Heart problems from a lack of activity? Are they fvcking serious? A six week lack of exercise from a lockdown and suddenly everyone is falling over from heart attacks? Gimme a break. If anything people should come out healthier from cooking at home.

      • Charles MartinMEMBER

        I’ve got two mates who swear blindly that they are putting on weight. I don’t understand how, unless they Uber Eating and drinking more than they used to. If anything, i’ve lost a keg mainly through not picking at a vending machine or biscuit tin at work. I’ll keep an eye on how many Coronas they sink on this afternoons virtual drinks.

        • okradovicMEMBER

          It’s called proximity of the pantry effect. I don’t eat breakfast and lunch mon- fri while at work (I.e. one meal a day fasting). Lost around 8kg in around 2 months. I can do that easily while in office because I am busy throughout the day AND I do not keep snacks around me. Coffee / tea only through the day.

          Now, in lock down, with pantry brimming with stuff and only a couple of meters away – go and stop me: grrrrr…. woof woof!

      • Fatter. Not healthier. Most people eat garbage. I have a theory on why most 35 plus women get that tubby Michelin Man keg on legs look. Too much wine and too little exercise. Imagine how much booze is being consumed now. Go long Weight Watchers.

    • DominicMEMBER

      The points raised by the Prof are all legitimate and they worry me, immensely. I worry for my children and their mental health these next few months — and what about all those kids sitting Grade 12 exams this year. Many of them will be rooted. My hope is that we flatten the curve quickly and then start to open up again as soon as possible — the key is to keep the borders shut IMO (but let the foreigners leave if they wish).

      The bottom line here is that there are no good options – it’s about choosing the least bad of them. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if, when the scores are tallied in the years to come, this episode has done more damage than WWII in terms of lives lost, lives ruined, relationships broken etc. The economic damage will almost certainly be greater too. Those expecting a strong rebound later this year are smoking crack. Govt assistance programs will almost certainly still be running this time next year.

      • There is a Buddhist belief than when one is unsure what to do … keep still. ‘Bring out ya dead i say’.

      • There will be a long list of PhDs written on this.

        Perhaps one could be: Hysteria, ‘scary’ numbers and numerical illiteracy in times of pandemics

    • Your issue is this: When people are dying left, right and center because we “let it rip”, guess what? No one is stepping out the door, because we are actually scared for our lives. And if we are not stepping out the door because we’ve let a virus rip, restaurants might as well be close, gyms might as well be closed and airlines might as well go bust. So the economy is busted anyway.
      Your only option is what Latham says – KILL the virus internally and keep the borders closed until a vaccine is found. This way, people have the confidence to step outside the door and it is a sustainable economy for the local people.
      The issue has always been our inability to accept that globalisation is finished. And because we do not want to accept the consequences of this, we continued on this path of keeping our borders open and now telling everyone to half-heartedly stay home.. the result here will be a long period of slowly but surely getting 60% of the people infected at a slow burn rate. Never actually stops the virus, but a slow burn so that only the people that were always going to succumb to the virus die, and no more than this. Then we expect that we will be able to open the borders and STILL enjoy globalisation.
      It’s the ultimate kitchen sink thrown with lives instead of money this time. If it goes on till Oct, it will not work because people will be so very angry. Bcnich was so right, look at the seething anger from everyone there.
      Sad thing is, if we don’t let the virus go through the population and the rest of the world does, it effectively makes us the “un-vaccinated” population, the bunch of people with no herd immunity to it. We are an island, not a separate planet… and what if a vaccine is not actually ever found?

      • And most people don’t want to kill their parents even if they are an ancient 65 years old. Only have to see how many working and younger people are dying also.

      • Have you heard of HIV. We treat it with drugs.
        We just need to buy time to produce and test them.
        This virus doesn’t kill people till the immune system kicks in and over reacts. It should be easy to push the balance in our favour.

      • When a flu is let rip, people go out.

        When people know how deadly riding a car can be, they still ride in cars (even for fun!).

        The difference is education and context.

        Education and context with COVID-19 is wanting. Enter, hysteria.

    • Re: your comment about doing what saves more lives. Unfortunately we don’t value all lives equally or even how they are lost equally. Lives lost from corona will be seen more like a murder and less like dying peacefully in your sleep (or random civilians in some far off war).

  2. GeordieMEMBER

    Well that is just gobsmacking ignorance on the part of David K. Has he not had to go down the street and see more than three-quarters of businesses closed? Does he thing a complete lockdown means you can’t even leave your home for food and medical needs? How can he rationally state that we are more or less fine to do this continuously to some undefined date in the future were we may be able to transition to open local economy again?

    If this is what your average Colin and Deb Auzzie is swallowing for insight into the pandemic in the Australian economy, no wonder people aren’t following social distancing rules and not sweating about the downside risks to them personally.

    • “Most of the economy is still going”.
      From the Castle “Tell ‘im he’s dreamin.”

    • Not just David K.. The whole of the Australian media has been too far behind this. What this has highlighted is that as long as they are solely responsive to the press releases from the media and coms teams at parliament house they will never be of use to the public. When shows such as Sunrise give time to such poisonous dunderheads as Hanson, Latham and Kennet just for conflict and LOLs it only further creates greater consusion.
      (Before all the usual apologists for Hanson and Latham jump on me they could get LVO, Kelvin Thomson or William Bourke on to discuss immigration. They don’t because they aren’t interested in the issue, they are interested in the sound and the fury and the spittle and the TV ratings that it brings.)

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      If you go hard and go early, you can partially reopen in two weeks, and everything opens with some additional precaution in a month.

  3. As expected from Koch – isn’t he part of Port Power, a football club that has been reliant on AFL handouts for years?

  4. matthewMEMBER

    I inverted the whole situation the other day and thought what would you do to make things worse.First allow 43 planes a day in from China at the beginning.Second allow the unis to bring students in via the back door.Then not secure vital medical supplies.Then continue to all ow cruise ships to dock and disembark.Then encourage enormous lines at Centrelink.Then allow potentially the most irresponsible group to keep working ie the construction sector(young men many of whom are on drugs).Then encourage parents to send children to day care.I am sure there are other additions to the list but you get the picture.
    Didn’t know where to put this but here is as good as any place.The gold coast hospital has had the majority of their masks stolen They were not under lock and key .The police are now investigating.Also one of the junior doctors was asked to see someone with pneumonia(had not been confirmed covid)and was told there was a shortage of protective gear and that they were not elligable for it.He subsequently became unwell .Thankfully his testing was negative

  5. happy valleyMEMBER

    Wonder whether dear leader Xi is having a RALOL every day, at what has been done to the West?

    • lol even UK who had been on the fence with their 5G network is now seething at the CCP. Nothing like a life threatening virus to unite all against commies.

  6. Sunrise: crap morning show for boomers so Koch can give out sht financial advice and ripoff pensioners.

    Sam armytage has a good pair though.

    • No actually her pair of lungs are currently smoke damaged.

      Koch is making a bit of a d1ck of himself lately – time to go! Natalie’s the only level head out of the whole mob.

    • blacktwin997MEMBER

      You know what would make Sunrise watchable? Naked jelly wrestling featuring Sam Armytage, Jane Bunn and Caty Price for the duration of the show.

      Followed by a segment ‘Suburban Burnout Bloopers’ featuring publicly submitted urban circle work mishap videos then file footage of Kochie getting hit in the banjo with a cricket bat for 5 minutes solid.

  7. Toil and Trouble

    Koch is just a bought and paid for ego spruiking BS. Turn the volume up on the Lathams and the Kennetts to drown out the Kochs. There is no debate. Just lock us down.

  8. Stephen Morris asks “why do we have a moral obligation to act positively to prevent the deaths of those elderly who might die from Covid19.?”
    There’s validity to that argument, but….I’m not sure we know that those are the only people it will kill, left to its own devices. We don’t even know if once ‘cured’ an infected person is immune from another attack.
    If we knew what this sucker was going to do it might be easier to make moral decisions. But we don’t. And that is the most valid reason for ‘lock the place down’ and let’s take it from there.

    • Plus if those elderly overrun the hospital system then others who need hospital services for other reasons will die.

      • Think countries have already solved for that by having a SOFA score to admit people into ICU.. i.e. older people will be the ones to get the boot as they have a lower likelihood of surviving.

    • GlendaFMEMBER

      ‘Stephen Morris asks “why do we have a moral obligation to act positively to prevent the deaths of those elderly who might die from Covid19.?”
      There’s validity to that argument, but….’
      Wow, all of a sudden people like you are, without any shame, making decisions theoretically about who should die so that others don’t have to live through an economic shock!
      I’m gobsmacked!!!! Are you capable of putting youself in another shoes? Are you capable of imagining if someone who had the power was placing you personally in that group how you would feel? Are you ready to bury your older loved ones?
      It’s always a great argument until you personally are staring down the barrel!!!

      • Stephen Morris

        Glenda, as I tried to explain above, all of us actually make such decisions every day.

        It’s just that we don’t acknowledge making them.

        Tonight when I go to bed I will remind myself that by sitting and writing comments on Macrobusiness instead of writing out a cheque to an aid agency I almost certainly caused the death of a child who would otherwise have survived and led a fulfilled life.

        We drive such thoughts from our minds. But that doesn’t mean we are not making the decisions.

        In years to come when the passion of Covid-19 has died down the calculus will be done and it may well show that inaction would have saved more life-months than action.

        The critical conclusion of the Bristol analysis was that:

        ” . . .the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths could be outweighed by the lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

        And the tipping point, they say, is a 6.4% decline in the size of the economy – on a par with what happened following the 2008 financial crash.

        It would see a loss of three months of life on average across the population because of factors from declining living standards to poorer health care.”

        Is it more compassionate or less compassionate to look at that and act accordingly?

        • Thanks for that, Stephen. I’ve been looking for something that laid it on the line that clearly.

      • Shades of MessinaMEMBER

        It’s what most celebrated wartime leaders have had to do at some point I guess. Some will perish for the majority to survive.

        Valid discussion point but geez I wouldn’t want to be the one making that decision…..

        • Generals send soldiers to die all the time to gain a greater objective. Just part of the calculus of war. Problem is, we’ve all become so soft and self-absorbed we can’t face the hard choices anymore. Of course, the retail politician can’t stomach being the one to sentence grannies to death in pursuit of the greater good. No one gets re-elected for that, hence no one makes the hard choices and we end up with sub-optimal outcomes and for what?

      • We could all sacrifice more, pay more taxes so we have more ICU resources – but we don’t.

        We could all drive around more safely at 30kmph and radically reduce road fatalities – but we don’t.

        We could put more more into a lot of other things to reduce deaths – but we don’t.

        Why is this any different?

        “But, but, feels!”

        I’m only hearing selective morality.

  9. IMO the build up to 7500 ICU beds is being done to get this over and done with as soon as possible without overwhelming our health system. I expect lock downs to be gradually removed once the testing for hydroxychloroquine is completed in a few weeks’ time.

    Doctors will have plentiful access to test kits. Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to be prescribed very early on to minimise chances of needing hospitalisation.

    We are just buying time to get us into a position of readiness.

    • matthewMEMBER

      Not convinced about hydroxychloropuine.Seemed to be good against the influenza virus with same mechanism of action in Vivo.Well you know it didn’t work in vitro.Also trials small numbers not enough detail.In addition you cannot tell me that of label utilisation of these agents isn’t in full swing already and look at the results.Even if they were to work(which I doubt)it will be months before we know doses timing etc.Basically don’t hold your breath.

      • There are anecdotes of Hydroxychloroquine working in various countries. Many countries are undergoing the same trials.

        If Hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work we will still make use of the many millions of testing kits, masks, etc, that are about to become available to us. We will become something resembling Hong Kong or South Korea in getting on with life with caution.

      • I don’t think Plaquenil is going to be the wonder drug people are hoping for. Some of the info I’m reading from US ED docs is that it doesn’t seem to provide any benefit. Have heard those who do need it for their autoimmune conditions are having trouble accessing stock, which suggests that others are already been panic buying. If so, would expect a sudden surge in Torsades or liver failure cases which are known side effects.

        • It’s not going to work of severe cases most likely. Antivirals need to be given as early as possible. Short terms side effects are minimal
          At the same time convalescent plasma and anti IL6 drugs are sowing promise in controlling the cytokine storms.

    • With the Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin combination (or any similar combination) the patient needs to be in hospital and have their heart rate constantly monitored. This puts a limit on the number of people who could be given the treatment at any point in time. It is not something where people can just sit at home and take the pills.

      • I wasn’t aware of that. We are equipped for that though. The bottleneck is ICU beds.

    • Someone posted this this morning:
      “I think this is the beginning of the end of the pandemic” – Dr. Stephen Smith

      Dr. Stephen Smith: More person has received five days or more of the hydroxychoroquine-azithro combination has been intubated. The chance of that occurring by chance according to my sons Elan and Hunter who did some stats for me are .000 something. It’s ridiculously low. It’s ridiculously low however you look at it. We were looking at selection bias in this situation. But I cannot think of a reason why. If all else is equal why people that received 5 days or more or even four days or more of this hydroxychloroquine-azithro regimen wouldn’t get intubated… It’s a game-changer. An absolute game-changer. I think this data goes to really support the French data… Laura, I think this is the beginning of the end of the pandemic.

    • better off taking zinc daily, just be careful not to overdose. It reduces lung inflammation which produces lots of mucus and fluid you need to cough up

      • Zinc and Vitamin D are common deficiencies that play a key role in the TH1 lymphocyte response that keeps the virus (and your immune system) from getting out of control. Small regular doses are best. Both are tightly regulated and don’t benefit from large doses.

  10. Watch this.

    Even using the “Diamond Princess”, surely a worst-case environment, as the basis for modelling, this pandemic could hardly be much worse than seasonal respiratory diseases.

    The epicentres of COVID-19 are epicentres for “almost everything”!!! There are higher risks of death from almost every common disease, plus many other common causes of death, at those epicentres! “National aggregate” data conceals likely co-factors that would help intelligently contain the spread without total lockdown.

    So far it appears that Infected Germans are 34 times less likely to die than infected Italians. Norwegians, 19 times less likely. This can’t be explained purely by Intensive Care being better. Northern Italy is on record as having 20,000 premature deaths per annum from air pollution.

    Even if the Chinese data used at the start of that presentation are unreliable the general argument is completely supported by other data. (And the presentation deals with the believability of the Chinese data, in later slides, so don’t stop watching it at the start because of “use of dodgy Chinese stats”. They might be not much less plausible than other nations against which they can be compared).

    You don’t have to listen to the narrator read the slides, you can mute him, speed read the slides and be done in a few minutes.

    • The Diamond princess may be a bad example as it looks like infection was spread via fomites rather than inhalation.
      As you see with so many medics dying, Location of the initial infection and viral dose make a huge difference.
      Most cases in Wuhan were reportedly spread between families. Confined space may give you a big dose direct to your lungs that produces a more severe outcome than picking it up from the guy who coughed on your food tray 10 decks below.

      • The fomite / inhalation factor could be offset by the demographics (old heavy).

        Still not a wild worst case scenario example.

        But doesn’t suit the hysteria.

        Hysteria is fun (until someone loses their job and doesn’t qualify for Centrelink).

    • I stoped watching when the moron claimed the risk of catching the virus was 0.01% or whatever. Dude clearly doesn’t understand basic math, let alone exponential growth.

  11. If Jeff said “you need to learn from my mistakes” he would earn some respect. Otherwise he is just another idiot with a pointless point of view from his comfy armchair, (not saying he’s wrong, just don’t give him credit for sitting at the back of the classroom grumbling)