[mrlagmer]

It is interesting to read stuff like this. We never had it bad in Australia so when you read something like this it makes you thankful for how we have handled it. Amazing that we will have 80,000 people at a football game on Sunday.

[decafninja]

The Asian countries that fared relatively well - Taiwan/Japan/Korea/etc.etc. - I guess you could chalk it up to cultural differences, but what and how did Australia, a "Western" country that I reckon is culturally more similar to the USA and Europe than to say, Japan or Korea, do so well and differently vs. the USA? Correct me if wrong, but Aussie culture has an individualistic streak like the USA too, doesn't it?

[makomk]

Well, how hard countries were hit early on seems to heavily depend on distance from Italy and the amount of travel from there. There was a very noticeable gradient in Europe with Italy as the epicenter as I recall. (A lot of media coverage talked about Taiwan etc doing well despite lots of travel from China, but that seems to be a bit of a red herring - for whatever reason, almost all countries did pretty well at holding back the initial wave of cases from China, even the USA. Genomic tracing suggests it was Covid spreading from Europe to New York and then to the rest of the country that did the US in. Quite likely from Italy, given the timing of New York Fashion Week.) Then the countries with big initial outbreaks never really managed to recover, though dodging the worst of it initially didn't guarantee future success.

Australia and New Zealand are of course an awful lot closer geographically to Taiwan, Japan and Korea than they are to Europe - and there's a huge variation between all those countries in terms of the other things you might think affect Covid, like willingness to lock down, culture, level of testing, etc..

[vmception]

Geography, topology, authoritative control, non-porous border which was closed, mandatory two week quarantine for any exception

[shoo]

another factor could be how cohesive / fragmented the government response is -- maybe this is another facet of "authoritative control".

here's a crude model as a straw-man thought experiment:

australia has a federal government with some degree of control but the 8 local state/territory governments still get a reasonable amount of ability to make local decisions. The states often disagree with the federal government, and with each other, and have disagreed about the appropriate responses to covid in many cases.

Suppose the federal government has no ability to control anything. Each local government has a 95% chance of doing something reasonable in response to a pandemic and a 5% chance of doing something stupid. If we make the poor working assumption that each local government decides what to do independently of the others, then about 2/3rds of the time we would expect all 8 australian local governments to do something reasonable, and 1/3 of the time one or more local government will respond to the pandemic in a stupid way. So maybe we got to see the 2/3rds outcome in australia -- or perhaps we actually saw a 1/3rd outcome where stupid decisions were made that dramatically elevated risk, but we simply got lucky.

In contrast the US has say 51 local government regions, so there's about a 7% chance that they all do something reasonable and a 93% chance that at least one local government region does something stupid.

Then if it is hard or impossible to isolate the impacts of bad decisions to each local region, the impact of poor decisions in one region can help outbreaks spread in connected regions.

On another hand, a downside of having a strong central control of the entire country's response is that if that central response is stupid, then the entire country starts cohesively doing something stupid, whereas a country with more fragmented/decentralised decision making might fare a bit better locally.

[vmception]

that's a very interesting way of looking at it, but also in the US you would have very many people in a place with reasonable policies implemented that will simply go to a place with unreasonable policies

(assuming reasonable means policies that mitigate and slow down the spread of COVID19, but I'm not saying anybody else reading this has to subscribe to that thought or the idea that COVID19 is worthwhile to slow down)

[BelenusMordred]

Australia abandoned their own citizens abroad to thundering applause. No other country on Earth did that.

The number of people allowed back into the country is minuscule and right now, foreign business travellers get priority on flights because they can pay more for seats.

[rvn1045]

+ a small population of 25 million

[vmception]

yes thats useful context, I was mentally grouping that into topology kind of stretching that to the few areas where people live and how desolate the rest is

[lend000]

Those places all happen to be islands (South Korea being a political island). Regardless of population and density in the country, if you share land borders, you are subject to the whims of the least careful country on your subcontinent.

[ceejayoz]

Vietnam’s doing well despite plenty of border. There’s clearly more than one variable at play.

[lend000]

Of course. But even in Vietnam's case, geography is clearly playing a major role. Policy differences can explain variation within SE Asia, but all of those countries have spikes at the same time, and are in a relative bubble of land travel in the continent (major border with China, which is more or less COVID-free due to authoritarian measures, lowly trafficked mountain ranges and undeveloped regions, and a thin strip connecting to Malaysia).

Seems like the main factors for success are: 1. Geography 2. Density 3. Freedom (or lack thereof) 4. Masks 5. Money

[decafninja]

I'm not too familiar with Vietnamese culture, but I'd probably chalk them up to the "Asian culture" factor which in general tends to be more collectivist than most Western countries.

Isn't Vietnam a highly authoritarian country too?

[refurb]

As someone who has lived in developing Asian countries to say there is a more collectivist culture isn’t accurate. Just look at the level of pollution (I’ll dump my trash here because who cares?) and “it’s not illegal if you don’t get caught” attitude.

I would say there is a much greater acceptance of control than in the West. If the govt decides to lock an apartment building up with residents inside to control Covid you won’t here many protests.

[flukus]

> f you share land borders, you are subject to the whims of the least careful country on your subcontinent.

Only if a nation is incapable of controlling their land borders, and that doesn't have to mean fully closed.

All of those countries have had outbreaks and a single case in a country is enough to negate any advantage being an island brings, all have successfully controlled the virus even after it got a beach head.

[jjcm]

I’m one of the rare ones who had covid in Australia, but also spent time in the states during the pandemic so I’ve seen both sides, and experienced how a positive case is addressed here in Aus.

Australians care far, far more. I saw more people wearing masks on Sydney trains at zero cases than I did in a US supermarket at the peak. Politics don’t play into whether or not you wear a mask in Australia. In addition, Australian’s have made sacrifices for the greater good of all in the past (giving up guns for example). This just isn’t a thing in America. While both are western countries, there are major differences in mindset.

When I tested positive in Australia, I was immediately moved to my own private apartment dedicated for covid patients, free of charge. I wasn’t allowed to leave, but was fed and had doctors visiting me twice a day for vitals. I had very mild symptoms through all of this, but they treated it very seriously. In America they just send you home. Australia invested more up front to keep the curve low.

Despite having some complications with the duration of my stay, which lead me to be quarantined for 31 days[1], I vastly prefer Australia’s approach to the pandemic.

[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-15/sydney-man-covid-poli...

[colpabar]

>free of charge

As an American it is absolutely astounding to hear about things like this. My girlfriend fell off her bike last year and needed stitches and before we let the doctors at the hospital do anything, we were on the phone with her insurance agency to try and figure out the cheapest way to get them. Of course we had no idea what it would cost in the end, so we had to worry for the next few weeks until we got the bill.

[dominotw]

> than I did in a US supermarket at the peak.

Where was this though? I am in chicago and even now I've never seen anyone in a grocery store without a mask. All the store require people to wear masks and have mask policies.

which supermarket was this ?

> . In America they just send you home.

https://www.health.qld.gov.au/news-events/news/what-happens-...

> If your symptoms are manageable without medical supervision, your doctor will instruct you to look after yourself at home in isolation.

https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/what-do-if-you-have-coron...

> I have received a positive test result for coronavirus (COVID-19). What should I do?

> If you test positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) you must immediately go home and isolate

Why were you put up in an apartment if you only had 'very mild symptoms' when they advice everyone else to isolate at home?

[perardi]

Also in Chicago here.

I, too, have seen 100% mask compliance in grocery stores.

And when I was downstate for a non-COVID family medical emergency during the December peak, I saw 100% compliance…in the grocery store. The gym? Ha. Nary a mask in sight. They actually scoffed at me when I asked when I went in for a day pass. And this is a franchise of a national gym.

And from friends’ experiences, you had to go all as far as Indiana to experience maskless in Meijer.

[felipemnoa]

I would guess that he was not in a city.

[dominotw]

which supermarket doesn't have mask policy. Some store in middle of nowhere represents "US supermarket" ? .

[kbenson]

"Supermarket" doesn't mean large chain store, it just means large store containing both food and household items. Plenty of locales have local supermarkets, either as singular stores or small regional chains. Whole Foods started this way. It was six years after the first store that they first expanded outside Austin, and their growth was fueled by buying lots of these small chains.[1]

I would say it's not only possible, but likely that some of these chains used a pro/con mask stance to distinguish themselves in certain regions of the U.S.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_Foods_Market#History

[Rebelgecko]

Everywhere I go had a mask policy posted but that doesn't mean it's actually enforced. If I had a dollar for every person I saw "wearing" a mask that wasn't actually covering their mouth and nose, I'd have retired last year

[decafninja]

I always thought Australian culture had its individualistic streak like American culture. I guess I was wrong, or at least it's a different flavor of individualism.

[mrec]

I didn't get the impression that individualism was the USA's problem here, so much as political tribalism. Mask-wearing seemed to get established very early on as a tribal marker, and everything else followed from that.

[decafninja]

I guess political tribalism was certainly a big factor, but I always thought it was something that amplified an already existing characteristic for "rugged individualism", as in, a tendency for people not liking being told what they can or can't do.

It exists to various degrees in pretty much any culture (even highly collectivist cultures like some Asian countries), but in the USA, I think it's seen as a bedrock upon which the country was founded on and successful with. I don't disagree, and I think this individualist go-get-em culture contributed to some of the country's successes, but in times like this, it certainly shows its dark side.

You could chalk up the whole US healthcare system fiasco to this too.

[donw]

Tribalism was certainly a significant factor, but I would wager that inconsistency played a bigger role:

- Major political figures publicly flaunted their own mask mandates and lockdown rules, with zero consequences.

"The rules are for you, not us" is not how you get people to come together to fight a pandemic.

- Media condemning social gatherings as super-spreader events, while at the same time, endorsing only very specific riots/protests.

- At the start of the pandemic, everybody wanted masks.

The CDC then stated masks were ineffective.

After that, if you tried to get ahold of masks, you were attacked for doing so. I personally witnessed this tens of times. The same people then flipped around and attacked you if you didn't wear a mask.

It was straight out of the last scene in Orwell's 1984. It was spooky.

Later, the CDC came out and said, "Hey, we lied to you to guarantee a supply of masks for medical personnel. But you should totally trust us now!"

- Media in the US was and is literally nothing but fearporn, which has largely bifurcated the population into "living in terror" and "fresh out of fucks to give".

There's plenty more examples, but I'll stop here.

The inconsistency would have been workable if it wasn't for the violence and anger. Your ability to publicly change your mind without sacrificing credibility inversely correlates to the violence of your opinion.

[ShroudedNight]

> At the start of the pandemic, everybody wanted masks.

> The same people then flipped around and attacked you if you didn't wear a mask.

I'm of the opinion that the CDC definitely shot itself in the foot w.r.t. the mask issue initially, but I feel it's important to note that the especially belligerent individualists wanted masks when they thought they would protect themselves, but were completely uninterested in their use when they were determined to primarily be effective as a form of source control to protect others.

[throwawayboise]

100% spot on. Almost exactly how I saw things go where I am, including the flip-flopping on masks/gloves.

[richardw]

Perception from SA is that Australians are fairly strict rule followers. Personally I’d like more of that, but some friends didn’t like it at all.

Doggy bags discouraged: https://www.foodsafety.com.au/blog/are-restaurant-doggy-bags... (That would astound most SA’ns)

First mandatory cycling helmets: https://www.mondaq.com/australia/crime/899922/are-cyclists-i...

[kbenson]

Yeah, not allowing leftovers for meals bought to be taken with you would not go over well in the U.S. either, for multiple reasons.

[makomk]

I think it's a lot easier to get people to go along with measures like this when they actually seem to work, which might make it hard to disentangle cause and effect. Certainly, Europe seemed to have a hell of a drop in lockdown compliance once it became clear they weren't going to eradicate Covid or go away any time in the foreseeable future. Also, the media reporting focuses on the success stories and the people who comply when things are going well and the opposite when it's not working - Australia and New Zealand had their fair share of quarantine hotel escapes and government screw-ups in their precautions, some of which they got more lucky with than others, but because it was a success those didn't make it into news coverage elsewhere so much.

[wyattpeak]

I don't think we are particularly individualistic, at least in the cities. Moreso as you head out into the bush, but that's true everywhere.

I suspect it's a hangover from our earlier days, which were recent enough they still live on in popular culture. Also it's not an image we've exactly tried to suppress, since outside of an event like covid it's generally seen as a positive thing.

[stevenjohns]

Most of what you're saying is misleading at best.

> I saw more people wearing masks on Sydney trains at zero cases than I did in a US supermarket at the peak

That's because NSW had legislated the wearing of masks on trains until a couple of weeks ago. It wasn't voluntary, it was either wear a mask or get fined. And since the mask mandate was taken off -- surprise, surprise -- the overwhelming majority stopped wearing them on trains.

> Australian’s have made sacrifices for the greater good of all in the past (giving up guns for example)

"Giving up guns" never happened, what did happen was the forceful buyback of self-loading weapons from law abiding people who followed the law and turned them in. The people who didn't follow the law -- that is, the people who are actually responsible for the violent crime in the first place -- kept their guns and that's why self-loading firearms continue to be seized today from drug dealers and gangsters.

For some general statistics:

1. The number of homicides (and all violent crime) went up after the 1996 firearms buyback[0] and didn't go down until the police took actual action against crime in 2001

2. We have more firearms in 2021 than we did in 1996[1] and, surprising only some, less crime

The major difference in the Australian mindstate is how both major parties are centre-left so it's rare for major issues to be politicised, instead we just have politicians supporting the same things and bickering over otherwise trivial implementation details.

[0] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AUS/australia/murder-h...

[1] https://www.smh.com.au/national/more-guns-in-australia-now-t...

[taxicabjesus]

One speculation I've read is that Australian/Japan/New Zealand's very-bad 2019 flu season was SARS-CoV-2 before it could be diagnosed. My understanding is that most cases of "flu" are suspected, not laboratory-confirmed.

Just found this October 4, 2019 NY Times story: Australia Just Had a Bad Flu Season. That May Be a Warning for the U.S., https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/health/flu-australia-amer...

From this NY times article: "This year’s Australian outbreak began in April [2019], two months earlier than usual, and persisted into October."

COVID-19 cases in the US probably started November-ish. COVID-19 was found in US blood samples from December 2019.

I had a day with an odd headache sometime around December 2019 or January 2020. I suspect I had a case of #EarlyCovid. Lots of other people in North America were super-sick in November/December 2019 and January 2020. Others have been using the hashtag for longer than I: https://twitter.com/search?q=%23EarlyCovid

Edit: At least 4 downvotes in 16 minutes. This indicates many of you do not believe SARS-CoV-2 could have been spreading before it was isolated in Wuhan China in December 2019, or that I and many others might have had a case of non-diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 before tests became available in the US in March 2020.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pande...

"A September 2020 review noted "The possibility that the COVID-19 infection had already spread to Europe at the end of last year is now indicated by abundant, even if partially circumstantial, evidence", including pneumonia case numbers and radiology in France and Italy in November and December." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pande...

What does it mean if the COVID-19 timeline is wrong?

[viraptor]

While not impossible, there are a few things that I think would need good explanations:

- labs would get more flu swabs which test negative - there would be enough globally to make someone suspicious

- why did we see only one strain of covid initially if it was already spreading early (and as I understand it the strain hierarchy always points to the Wuhan one on top)

- we haven't seen the cases drop completely without special measures in any country (there's a drop in summer, but only partial) - why was Australia pretty much covid free initially with all the assumed 2019 cases?

[taxicabjesus]

1. Flu cases numbers are estimates. Flu cases have disappeared, presumably on account of everyone getting SARS-CoV-2 instead.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/faq.htm https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-...

2. Figuring out if a person has a strain requires genetic sequencing of samples that tested positive for generic COVID-19. I don't know when this became possible.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/how-are-covid-19-v...

3. Some populations are healthier than others. I think 'Special measures' are mostly theater.

[viraptor]

> 1. Flu cases numbers are estimates. Flu cases have disappeared, presumably on account of everyone getting SARS-CoV-2 instead.

The flu statistics are estimates based on a few sources - some including testing. There's still a number of swabs from people with flu symptoms being tested. In the proposed situation, the labs would register a large number of tests for flu coming back negative for both flu and common cold. There are people whose job is to notice trends like that.

2. It doesn't matter when the testing became possible. If multiple strains existed before, we'd likely see some "sibling" strains and common ancestors to the Wuhan and X strain. Both the siblings and X seem to be absent.

3. If you're ready to put the fall of infections right as the lockdown were implemented to a coincidence / healthy population, then I'm not sure it's even worth discussing the other aspects.

Btw, the context here is Australia. (You posted links to CDC)

[taxicabjesus]

I was just found a tab on my phone with this CNN article:

CNN Exclusive: WHO Wuhan mission finds possible signs of wider original outbreak in 2019 - https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/14/health/who-mission-china-intl...

The investigators found evidence of 13 virus strains in Wuhan in December 2019:

> As a result, they were able to gather for the first time 13 different genetic sequences of the SARS-COV-2 virus from December 2019. The sequences, if examined with wider patient data in China across 2019, could provide valuable clues about the geography and timing of the outbreak before December.

> ...

> Prof. Edward Holmes, a virologist at the University of Sydney, in Australia, said: "As there was already genetic diversity in SARS-CoV-2 sequences sampled from Wuhan in December 2019, it is likely that the virus was circulating for a while longer than that month alone."

The point I'm trying to make here is that there's certainly a lot of facets of the pandemic that haven't been properly explained.

[projectileboy]

I’m not totally sure why you’re being downvoted, it’s an interesting question. My niece in Seattle had a very bad “flu” for about three weeks early last year, well before the initial wave in the Pacific Northwest. I hope we will eventually learn a bit more about how and where this started and how and where it spread, so that we can do a better job next time. (Putting aside the obvious ways the US and other parts of the world chose to deny reality, there still is much to learn.)

[tharkun__]

I can completely believe this. Unfortunately we can't prove any of this but personally I think my team was at least exposed to Covid in early 2020 as well. We had a guy in our (small) team room out sick from Thursday to Monday and he reported being 'floored' and coughing his lungs out. His SO got the same a few days after. Nobody else really got sick but given the close quarters and what we know about aerosol spread and incubation periods now, I think we were practically bathing in virus soup.

[flukus]

> One speculation I've read is that Australian/Japan/New Zealand's very-bad 2019 flu season was SARS-CoV-2 before it could be diagnosed

This is complete BS on par with 5G conspiracies. We know how quickly this virus spreads if left unchecked and someone would have noticed the excessive amount of dead bodies piling up. We also know it spreads very well via air travel, it would have been all over the world not long after it was spreading wildly across Australia. And if we had some sort of immunity already from a bad flu season, then why did it spread so fast when we did have outbreaks? There's absolutely no way this virus was spreading in Australia in mid-2019.

The idea it was in Australia earlier is created by people that don't like the solutions we used so they work backwards to create other explanations, quite often paired with a large dose of American Exceptionalism. Things Australia did that worked: Border closures (intenrally and externally), contact tracing, masks and lockdowns.

[taxicabjesus]

(note to self: comment above quickly went to -4, then saw at +2, now at -1, so at least 14 votes.)