I can't see any reason to think poorly of you for what you wrote.
I don't have any answers on how to better deal with this situation we've globally found ourselves in, but I genuinely believe that people being better informed is a step in the right direction.
That means keeping accurate records of infection rates. That means not scaling back on testing to produce lower infection numbers. That means being clear about what RAT and PCR tests can and can't do and not pushing the RAT tests when they struggle so much with the omicron variant.
I can't decide which was a more frustrating phase to be in, the phase when we were (allegedly) trying everything we could to try to contain the case we have and prevent spread of infection while simultaneously letting people travel in from known sites of rampant infection and then wondering where all this virus could possibly be coming from, or the current "let 'er rip" phase where the number of new infections is skyrocketing and supply chains are breaking all over because 40% of the workforce are in isolation for testing positive or being a close contact of a confirmed positive case.
Right now, here in Australia, they who must be obeyed are looking at changing the definition of a "close contact" and making new policies for people in isolation to be allowed to return to work because too many people are potentially sick and that's starting to get inconvenient.
I'm afraid to suggest that if the barista at the PM's favourite cafe tests positive, or if the staff at the supermarket where he buys his toilet paper are found to be infectious we should just classify them as "to important to isolate" and send them to work so the PM can go about his daily life without the inconvenience of having to face how his country is being overtaken by sickness.
~L~
I don't have any answers on how to better deal with this situation we've globally found ourselves in, but I genuinely believe that people being better informed is a step in the right direction.
That means keeping accurate records of infection rates. That means not scaling back on testing to produce lower infection numbers. That means being clear about what RAT and PCR tests can and can't do and not pushing the RAT tests when they struggle so much with the omicron variant.
I can't decide which was a more frustrating phase to be in, the phase when we were (allegedly) trying everything we could to try to contain the case we have and prevent spread of infection while simultaneously letting people travel in from known sites of rampant infection and then wondering where all this virus could possibly be coming from, or the current "let 'er rip" phase where the number of new infections is skyrocketing and supply chains are breaking all over because 40% of the workforce are in isolation for testing positive or being a close contact of a confirmed positive case.
Right now, here in Australia, they who must be obeyed are looking at changing the definition of a "close contact" and making new policies for people in isolation to be allowed to return to work because too many people are potentially sick and that's starting to get inconvenient.
I'm afraid to suggest that if the barista at the PM's favourite cafe tests positive, or if the staff at the supermarket where he buys his toilet paper are found to be infectious we should just classify them as "to important to isolate" and send them to work so the PM can go about his daily life without the inconvenience of having to face how his country is being overtaken by sickness.
~L~