As the former deputy national medical officer, Nick Coatesworth, said yesterday, we have effectively eliminated COVID-19 in this country. We have ended up with a de facto elimination strategy instead of the effort to “flatten the curve” that we were originally promised.
In many respects this is an enviable achievement; it has certainly allowed us to enjoy a lifestyle that few countries have emulated over the past year. Yet, to some degree, we are now trapped by this success.
As some of us have been arguing for a full year now — armed with all the relevant scientific advice — we need to learn to live with the virus. It will be around for years, perhaps decades, maybe forever.
We cannot remain closed off to the world forever, and we are showing a reluctance to push the boundaries. We are being overly timid when vaccines, improved knowledge and better treatments should have us pushing back against this disease.
They key to progress is an adequate vaccination rate within our protected international borders. Surely once we have achieved that, we can take more risks with people entering our country, allowing people who are vaccinated to quarantine at home or for shorter periods, if at all, and allowing Australians to travel abroad, ending the overbearing system of government permits.
More than 3 million Australians have been vaccinated. Once that figure tops 4 million, likely in about a fortnight, it will mean that just about everyone over 65 years of age will have had at least one jab. That must get us pretty close to the minimum requirement we want, given the risk of serious illness or death is negligible for people under 65.
It might be difficult to have high vaccination rates in lower age groups for two reasons. One is our reliance on Astra Zeneca.
This is the vaccine we are making here and therefore have in the most plentiful supplies, but it is not recommended for anyone under 50. That is a major constraint.
For those of us caught in the twilight zone between 50 and 65 – too old to get Pfizer and too young for Covid to be a serious threat – the incentive for vaccination is not strong. Because our over-zealous elimination strategy means the virus itself poses almost zero threat – for now.
We are left to weigh up the infinitesimal threat of blood clots from Astra Zeneca against the infinitesimal threat of contracting COVID-19 and becoming seriously ill from it. The choice is so opaque as to induce inaction.
Our country is not learning to live with the virus, we are determined to live without it. So unless we are vulnerable, the case for taking insurance through a vaccine might not be compelling.
This would change in an instant if coronavirus was being transmitted in our community. Any fears about possible side effects from Astra Zeneca would dissipate in a moment.
Without the threat of the actual virus, we should not be surprised by a level of vaccine ambivalence. This is another reason governments need to be on the front foot when it comes to reopening society.
More Coverage
‘25 years jail’: warning over parking hack
Aussie drivers are being warned against a common parking trick that could land drivers in prison.
Join this idyllic writer’s retreat in Provence run by a Pulitzer Prize-winning author
La Gonette, the former holiday home of late British interior designer Robert Kime, has been reborn by an Australian author and American novelist.
Our national vaccination dilemma is a classic Catch-22. We will not open the nation’s international borders until most of the population is vaccinated; but the impetus to get vaccinated is not as strong unless we open up the country.