The journey that COVID-19 will take us on

[pritch]

Sounds like he has faith in masks and social distancing....

Infected essential workers are still allowed to travel to work.... one would assume they are still allowed to purchase petrol and food to effect the continuation of that process... cause good citizens don’t stockpile so there’s no way he has any more than several days food in cupboard..

We all know a lot of people will be in the position to self manage their illness and not even report it to authorities and just stay home and tell their loved ones not to visit for awhile. Because unless your seriously ill there’s nothing they can do for you anyway.
And that would explain how cases rocketed to 20,000 a day and just stayed there when statistically case numbers should have carried on in an exponential manner, doubling every three days...

He didn't have a 'proper' mask, he was wearing a bandana.

He is not an essential worker, he shouldn't need petrol, and he doesn't need to go to a shop, that supermarket will deliver.

I was assuming there would be a percentage of people would consider themselves too important to follow the advice of the Health Dept, I just didn't expect to meet one so soon.

[onearmedbandit]

I was assuming there would be a percentage of people would consider themselves too important to follow the advice of the Health Dept, I just didn't expect to meet one so soon.

Well considering the advice on the MOH website is that a negative test after 7 days is not required to return to work or school as I pointed out in the post I made at the same time there does exist a scenario where you could be out in public, be covid positive, and be following the MOH advice.

[TheDemonLord]

I feel sorry for you.
You’re obviously intelligent but you’re so far down the rabbit hole can’t see it.

Which rabbit hole?

It's not like Husa has already posted an article from the 1800s that outlined the liberal opposition to any form of compulsion (whether that is explicit Mandates or discrimination via the Vaccine Passports) when it comes to Vaccines.

I'm not sure you can call it 'A rabbit hole' if it's following in nearly 200 years of principle and tradition.

In this thread multiple people have put forward multiple 'reasons' why the Pass was implemented. Not a single one of the reasons withstood the scrutiny of the real world data. To make things more hilarious, is that I pointed this out before it was done.

Now we are still in red but mysteriously (might have something to do with falling polls and the wider population seeing Jacinda for the wannabe dictator that she is) we no longer need a Vaccine Pass.

This proves that (since the conditions are the same, we are still in red...) the reasons for the introduction of the Vaccine Pass were all Bullshit and it represents the single biggest affront to the Natural Rights of NZers in my lifetime.

[TheDemonLord]

He didn't have a 'proper' mask, he was wearing a bandana.

He is not an essential worker, he shouldn't need petrol, and he doesn't need to go to a shop, that supermarket will deliver.

I was assuming there would be a percentage of people would consider themselves too important to follow the advice of the Health Dept, I just didn't expect to meet one so soon.

Maybe he can't afford the Delivery fee?

Who are you to dictate to other people what they do and don't need?

How would you feel if someone took your Motorbike because you don't need it, there's Uber afterall.

[husaberg]

I looked at the documentation that accompanied the RAT test and it also confirmed the person who was originally affected should not perform a test on the 7th day, as they would most likely return a positive result as they still would have Covid-19, but as long as they felt ok they could leave isolation.

So therefore you could be covid positive (as my wife was on the 7th day) and return to work.

I would suggest the reason that the rat test indicates that is at that stage they are unlikely to be a potential spreader of the virus.
it's about risk and potential reward, Not what's remotely or even slightly possible.
This is why rules were tighter in the eradication stage than they are now. its a different goal.
The rat test is slower at picking up positive than a pcr is which is why they do it on 7 days.
As they have likely to have had it ten days by then.

The forum trolls on this site take great delight and now still try and make or the rules are now to soft and they know more yet forget no longer about eradication. So those same rules that they protested so much against previously are no longer being followed as it was changed from eradication a long time ago.

some people continue to test positive even after they feel well and are no longer infectious. If youÂ’re isolating after a positive RAT, thereÂ’s no need to test again at end of the seven-day isolation period - but remember to stay home if you still have symptoms.

If someone at higher risk of severe Covid-19 illness is a household contact and has a negative RAT for COVID-19, a more sensitive PCR test maybe needed. They could discuss this with their usual health provider.

Note for the forum trolls no test is 100% only an idiot or a misinformed dunning kurger victim makes out that they are or could be.
tests are only tools. Much like forum trolls in that regard.

[onearmedbandit]

I would suggest the reason that the rat test indicates that is at that stage they are unlikely to be a potential spreader of the virus.
it's about risk and potential reward, Not what's remotely or even slightly possible.
T

The reasoning matters not, I was just explaining how someone could see themselves as being covid positive, and be out at work etc, and still be following the MOH guidelines.

[husaberg]

The reasoning matters not, I was just explaining how someone could see themselves as being covid positive, and be out at work etc, and still be following the MOH guidelines.

I disagree the reasoning is very pertinent to what was being discussed,
Whilst you may not agree if you do or not, it matters not a jot to me either way.
I laid out the guidelines, and I have also explained why they are like that.I included the test regime and why.
if you make excuses for others that's entirely your prerogative. I will only point out the water you are drinking is poisoned.
The clean tested water is available if you look for it, rather than attempt to drink from puddles.

[onearmedbandit]

I disagree the reasoning is very pertinent to what was being discussed,
Whilst you may not agree if you do or not, it matters not a jot to me either way.
I laid out the guidelines, and I have also explained why they are like that.I included the test regime and why.
if you make excuses for others that's entirely your prerogative. I will only point out the water you are drinking is poisoned.
The clean tested water is available if you look for it, rather than attempt to drink from puddles.

Yeah once again it's clear you don't quite follow. Pritch described a situation where he bumped into someone who said he had covid and was out in public and he said he had questions regarding that. I explained how that scenario could be, that as far as the person knew they were still positive (like the RAT test indicated to my wife after 7 days) but were out in public AND following the MOH guidelines. Do you understand?

The reasoning about being very unlikely to transmit (lets say there were no chance of transmission) is irrelevant to the scenario. My wife could've been in that situation, the test indicated she still was still positive so she could've met someone at work/the supermarket/anywhere and said she 'has it' and been following MOH guidelines.

[husaberg]

Yeah once again it's clear you don't quite follow. Pritch described a situation where he bumped into someone who said he had covid and was out in public and he said he had questions regarding that. I explained how that scenario could be, that as far as the person knew they were still positive (like the RAT test indicated to my wife after 7 days) but were out in public AND following the MOH guidelines. Do you understand?

The reasoning about being very unlikely to transmit (lets say there were no chance of transmission) is irrelevant to the scenario. My wife could've been in that situation, the test indicated she still was still positive so she could've met someone at work/the supermarket/anywhere and said she 'has it' and been following MOH guidelines.

Yeah, what can I say you just must be so much smarter than me, you just operate on a completely different plane.
Here is an idea Fraser, how about you read what I post. Because I am well aware of what pritch posted, same as what you posted and also what R5650R posted also.
You are it seems are much less so. in conclusion, Just because you do not consider points to be relevant does not actually make points irrelevant.

[FJRider]

Oh you could get it without undergoing a Medical procedure?

No?

History being MADE. YOU are correct.

NO. You only need an injection or two. Hardly ... A medical procedure. But if you want to call it that ...

Oof. So clearly wasn't to promote Spending, which was your original statement which was a LIE.

Clearly ... they DIDN'T want UN-Vaccinated riff-raff contaminating the (obviously) more intelligent vaccinated portion of society. Their choice NOT too.

Same as every other lie about why the Vaccine pass was introduced.

It worked for ME. As already stated (by ME) .. PLENTY were REFUSED service ... because THEY had NO vaccine pass.

Which bit of that do you NOT understand .. ??

- Didn't stop infections
- Didn't increase vaccination rates
- Didn't increase spending

Private businesses were continuing to make money. Win win.

Those businesses caught allowing customers without passes to partake of their wares ... were shut down.

Bugger eh .. !!

A good plan though ... just didn't work as well as it was hoped. That UN-vaccinated Riff Raff needs educating.

The only thing it DID do, was to create a two-tier society. Were have I heard Socialists creating a 2-tier society before? Oh wait - Every. Fucking. Time.

I'm NOT a socialist ... so you wouldn't hear it from me. But I DID find the result funny.

Two-tier ... you mean those ALLOWED to avail themselves of the businesses that were open for business ... and those NOT ALLOWED ENTRY into those businesses ... because they CHOSE NOT TO BE VACCINATED.

In effect ... THEY created their own issue.


BUGGER ... eh .. !!

[onearmedbandit]

Yeah, what can I say you just must be so much smarter than me, you just operate on a completely different plane.
Here is an idea Fraser, how about you read what I post. Because I am well aware of what pritch posted, same as what you posted and also what R5650R posted also.
You are it seems are much less so. in conclusion, Just because you do not consider points to be relevant does not actually make points irrelevant.

Why mention R650? What I was referring to had nothing to do with what he said as I didn't even read his post.

Ok I'll try making this real simple for you, as it appears you need help with it.


Person A feels ill and does a RAT test, which yields a positive result.

They then isolate as per MOH guidelines for 7 days.

At the end of the 7 days they feel fine, and don't need a negative result as per MOH guidelines to return to work. They read the documentation that accompanied the RAT test that also says they don't need to perform another test at the end of the 7 days, as it most likely will be positive as they still have the virus in them, but as long as they feel fine they can return to normal life.

But they do a test anyway, and it's positive. So they think they still have covid but as they feel fine they can return to work. As per the guidelines. The following day they bump into someone and say 'don't get too close, I have covid'. And this person wonders why they are out in the community.

Please explain to me where and how transmission rate stops that exact scenario playing out? Sure in terms of risk it matters, but with regards to stopping that conversation taking place it plays no part.

[FJRider]

Please explain to me where and how transmission rate stops that exact scenario playing out? Sure in terms of risk it matters, but with regards to stopping that conversation taking place it plays no part.

If a POSITIVE covid result is given in a RAT test ... MY employer requires a NEGATIVE result from the RAT test before returning to work.


HIS policy I follow.

[onearmedbandit]

If a POSITIVE covid result is given in a RAT test ... MY employer requires a NEGATIVE result from the RAT test before returning to work.


HIS policy I follow.

lol big whoop, has nothing to do with MOH guidelines.

[FJRider]

lol big whoop, has nothing to do with MOH guidelines.

NEWS FLASH.


Ministry of Health do NOT pay MY wages.



And ... I get my pay ... working ... at home off shift ... or sick.

AND ... if I had Covid.


Which I DO NOT.

[onearmedbandit]

NEWS FLASH.


Ministry of Health do NOT pay MY wages.



And ... I get my pay ... working ... at home off shift ... or sick.

AND ... if I had Covid.


Which I DO NOT.

Seriously, what does this have to do with anything I'm discussing?