Scott Morrison has explained why he’s unimpressed with the virus eradication strategy NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is pursuing.
Scott Morrison has revealed why he’s not impressed by a complete eradication strategy for COVID-19 and how Australia is delivering world-leading results without a tougher lockdown.
The Prime Minister has outlined a 30-day countdown to consider reopening some pubs, cafes and large gatherings,
Despite predictions Australia is on track to eradicate the virus in parts of the country, the Prime Minister said virus suppression, not eradication, remained the government’s preferred strategy.
“We are not in eradication mode. Nor are we in the other mode which would just see some sort of herd immunity approach,’’ he said.
“These are not the approaches that we are following in Australia. We are not in the Sweden end, nor are we at the New Zealand end, when it comes to how we are approaching things.
The reason for the strategy was to ensure the economy was not needlessly damaged, killing jobs and livelihoods.
“I can assure you no one wants these restrictions in place any longer than they have to be in. It’s one of the reasons we don’t go for that complete eradication strategy,’’ he told the ABC’s 7.30 program.
“It’s very elusive. And the costs to those livelihoods are very significant, with no real clear additional benefit, at least from the evidence we’re getting at the moment.
“You can win the health war and lose the economic war, but you’ve got to deal with both of them at the same time.”
Infections diseases physician and ANU Professor Peter Collignon said Australia may be matching New Zealand’s celebrated response.
“If you look at NZ epidemic curve and compare it to Australia, I am not convinced NZ is doing better than us in Australia, despite their total lockdown for weeks. We seem to have achieved the same result but with measures not as stringent,’’ he said.
Asked why not pursue eradication now that it was in sight, Mr Morrison conceded it was a possible by-product of the suppression strategy but the trade-off with jobs was too high.
“The eradication pathway involves an approach which would see even more economic restrictions than are currently in place and that is not seen to be, a wise, in our view, the trade-off in how we are managing the two crises that we are facing, the economic one and of course the health one,’’ he said.
“We like our freedoms, we like to be able to do what we want to do. We like having a barbecue, we like going out, we are very social beings Australians and we really miss it and we miss our kids being able to get together and go to school and be with their friends, and we miss all of that. But the suppression path is the best Australian path.”
But the team of epidemiologists tracking the pandemic at the Doherty Institute for the government has warned lifting restrictions is fraught.
“What is absolutely clear is that if we relax all of the current measures that would turn into an explosive outbreak and we would be in a very poor situation very quickly,’’ Melbourne University Professor James McGraw said.
However, he added he had never believed a short, sharp lockdown alone would work.
“Some six weeks ago, there was a lot of talk about a two week or a four-week lockdown. From my view, it wasn’t a particularly realistic idea,’’ he said.
“What would that do? It would delay everything by a bit but it wouldn’t help in the long term.
“We’ve now got to a critically important state in our society where we are suppressing the infection and we are keeping our hospitals under control.
“But we can’t stay like this forever. This is a very strange way of living.”
Prof McGaw said the way out of the COVID-19 era was clear.
“The next big thing is where do we go from here?’’ he said.
“The whole world is wondering where this goes. Even if we manage to eradicate the disease in any given country, even if we manage to in Australia, which may or may not be likely, we know there is an epidemic spreading around the world.
“It’s almost implausible to imagine this virus going extinct globally. Which means it will be here to stay. It will become a part of our everyday life.”
Prof McGraw said the lesson of the 1918 influenza pandemic was also a reminder that viruses mutate.
“Over a period of nine months, there were three massive waves of infection that caused a lot of deaths,’’ Prof McGaw said.
“What is less thought about is for the next five or six years, there were elevated levels of disease activity from the same virus as it settled down to become … part of our ecosystem. Continuing to mutate and change but the same virus.”
Professor Jodie McVernon, the epidemiologist who has led the team advising the national cabinet, said the community needed to consider the implications of our success in suppressing the virus.
“If we are all still susceptible to this virus, if we don’t have immunity, life as normal is not a real option because the virus will come back from somewhere,” Prof McVernon said.
“We can’t isolate ourselves from the world forever. So as we go back to mixing, it will still be with physical distancing, increased hygiene measures in place, it will be with reduced group sizes in place, and all of those things will continue to reduce the risk.
“We just need to get that in our consciousness as a society,’’ she said.
Source: News.Com.AU