Geezwild - Latest Sport News, Australia News, New Zealand News and Pacific News

8-10 minutes Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

3 minutes Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

Lidia Kelly Australian officials closed Sydney’s iconic Bondi Beach on Saturday after thousands of people flocked there in recent days, defying social distancing orders to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, amid an unusually warm autumn spell.
Health Minister Greg Hunt said the crowds on the country’s most famous strip of sand were “unacceptable” as he reported the number of infections across Australia had risen to 874. The death toll was seven, unchanged from a day earlier.
New South Wales state police minister David Elliott announced Bondi’s closure, warning “this is going to become the new norm” if people did not comply with regulations that prohibit more than 500 people gathering at a non-essential event.
“This is not something we are doing because we are the fun police,” Elliott said in a televised news conference. “This is about saving lives.”
“We will be closing down the type of iconic activities that unfortunately we’ve come ... to love and adore about our lifestyle.”
Elliott said lifeguards who patrol the state’s many beaches will conduct head counts and, if there are more than 500 people at any one location, the beach will be closed and people ordered to move on.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced stricter rules on socializing on Friday, requiring indoor venues such as bars and restaurants to maintain a density of no more than one person per four square meters (43 sq f) of floor space. The overall limits of 100 people gathered indoors and 500 outdoors remained in force.
In Victoria, the state government responded to public pressure and revoked an exemption given to Crown Resort Ltd’s Melbourne casino from those tougher rules.
“We are practicing what we were told to do,” a Crown representative told Reuters by telephone.
Crown and Sydney rival Star Entertainment Group Ltd are licensed to operate a total of more than gaming 4,000 machines. Both introduced social distancing measures last week, including switching off every second electronic gaming machine and table, but their shares have tumbled on concerns about their future revenue.
The Australian response to the coronavirus pandemic, while unprecedented, has been less severe than in parts of Europe and North America where higher rates of infection have led to more sweeping public lock downs.
Schools in Australia remain open, with Morrison citing medical advice despite some criticism of that tactic.
However, Victoria state partially broke that national agreement on Saturday when it ordered public schools in the state to close for two days next week to trial the viability of online education for pupils.
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

The New Zealand dollar has been battered this afternoon, falling to an 11-year-low as it was caught up in the global selloff by investors seeking safety.

---

Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

4-5 minutes
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

ABC Health & Wellbeing By Emma Elsworthy and health reporter Olivia Willis With measures ramping up to control the spread of coronavirus, increasing numbers of people are being required to self-isolate in Australia.
You need to self-isolate in your home (or a hotel) if you think you have been in contact with a person infected with COVID-19, or if you arrived from overseas after March 15, even if you're showing no symptoms.
That's because it can take up to two weeks for symptoms of COVID-19 to appear — although most commonly they show after five days.
Self-isolation is not the same as social distancing, which just involves avoiding large crowds (but still going to work or school) and minimising physical contact.

If required to self-isolate, you need to stay at home to reduce the risk of transmission. No public places like work, school, childcare or university, and no public gatherings.
Police have the power to force people to comply with self-isolation, with fines of up to $63,000 for people who flout the rules.
Elsewhere, self-isolation has helped curb the increase of coronavirus transmission, with cases steadying in places like China and South Korea.

How to self isolate?

The goal of self-isolation is to put as much distance between you and other people as possible.
Only people who usually live in your household should be in the home, so it's important you don't have visitors during the isolation period. If you are in a hotel, you should avoid contact with other guests or staff.
If you're self-isolating but feeling well, there is no need to wear a surgical mask at home.
However, if you must leave the house, such as for a medical appointment, wear a mask if you have one to protect others.
Where possible, ask friends, family or neighbours who are not in isolation to pick up food and necessities for you, and leave them at your front door.
To minimise the spread of germs (especially if you live with others), you should regularly clean frequently-touched surfaces (like door knobs) and wash your hands — frequently and thoroughly.

Can I share a bed with my partner?

While you're in self-isolation, health authorities also advise against sleeping in the same bed as your partner.
People living with you are not required to be isolated as well, unless they also meet one of the isolation criteria (outlined above).
However, if you develop symptoms and are suspected to have COVID-19, they will be classified as close contacts and will then need to be isolated like you were.

What if I'm suspected or confirmed to have COVID-19?

It's important to monitor for symptoms including fever, cough, sore throat, tiredness and shortness of breath.
If you develop symptoms during the isolation period, you should arrange to see your doctor for an assessment.
(Remember, you need to telephone your local health clinic or hospital before you arrive, to tell them your travel history or that you have been in contact with a potential case of coronavirus.)
If you're suspected or confirmed to have COVID-19, you may be required to self-isolate at home (rather than hospital) if you're well enough.
In this case, you should wear a mask while you're inside your home when other people are present.
Other people living in the home should consider staying elsewhere. If that's not possible, you should stay in a different room from them and be separated as much as you can.
Use a separate bathroom, if you're lucky enough to have one, and wear a surgical mask when you're in communal areas like the lounge room or kitchen.

How do I get home from the airport when I self-isolate?

You should wear a mask on the trip home from the airport, whether you are showing symptoms of coronavirus or not.
It's recommended that you use personal transport, such as a car, to minimise exposure to others.
If you need to use public transport, taxis or ride-share services, it's important to avoid direct contact with other passengers (and drivers), and to practice good personal hygiene, in addition to wearing a face mask.
If you are showing symptoms of the virus and have not been tested, you should call your doctor or the National Coronavirus Helpline on 1800 020 080.

Can I go outside while in self-isolation?

Try not to leave the house — but a walk around the block with a mask is relatively low-risk and can be a welcome relief once a day.
If you live in a private house, it is safe for you to go outside into your garden or courtyard.
If you live in an apartment or flat and have access to a common garden, balcony or courtyard, wear a surgical mask while you're out there.

What do I do while I stay home?

It's important that you look after your mental health during this time, including maintaining a normal routine as much as possible.
Exercise each day is advisable, and can be done in the privacy of your room using YouTube exercise tutorials or by walking around your home or garden.
Reach out to friends and family using the telephone or social media to stay connected and relieve loneliness.

What are the rules of self isolation and how is it enforced?

So far most people asked to self-isolate have been willing to comply and there are yet to be any reports of people facing criminal charges for refusing to do so.
However, the police do have the option to impose some hefty penalties for those who repeatedly refuse.
In New South Wales, breaching an order to isolate carries a maximum penalty of $11,000 and six months' imprisonment.
In Queensland, you can be fined up to $13,345 and face other penalties, while in South Australia, the maximum penalty for failing to comply is $25,000.
In Western Australia, those ignoring a public health order face imprisonment of 12 months or a fine of $50,000; in Tasmania the maximum fine is $8,400.
The Commonwealth also has the power to issue a "human biosecurity control order" under the Biosecurity Act.
If such an order is imposed, individuals who fail to comply face penalties of about $63,000, five years in prison, or both.
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By Kath Sullivan The Federal Government will waive $715 million worth of fees and charges for domestic airlines, as Australia's aviation industry buckles from the fallout of the coronavirus pandemic.
The support package, announced on Wednesday, will refund and waive aviation fuel excise, air service charges and domestic and regional aviation security charges.
Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack said the "major relief package" would be backdated to apply to charges from February 1, returning almost $160 million to the industry.
"Providing this assistance not only helps our airlines, but the entire aviation industry, regional Australians in particular and other industries such as tourism and trade, which rely on aviation," Mr McCormack said.
The Government has not set an end to the support measures and Mr McCormack said it will continue to work with the aviation industry as it faces ongoing challenges associated with the pandemic.
It comes after Qantas said it would ground 150 aircraft and regional airline Rex announced a voluntary trading halt to the ASX.

Regional airlines with 'only weeks of reserves left'

Rex had been calling on the Government to waive domestic aviation charges and provide a sovereign guarantee for new bank loans sought by regional lines in order to continue operating.
It said small regional carriers had "only weeks of reserves left" and without government intervention, irreversible damage would occur to the across the industry.
In an open letter to the Deputy Prime Minister, Rex's chief operating officer Neville Howell called for urgent action.
"Rex does not believe that Rex, and all other regional carriers, will be able to pull through this crisis without significant assistance if the health authorities' projections prove accurate," Mr Howell wrote.

"If regional carriers collapse, so will many regional communities for which the air service is their lifeline."

Mr Howell argued Rex was "one of the few airlines in the world and the only Australian carrier that has continued to maintain uninterrupted profitability when faced with the series of severe global economic and environmental shocks of the past two decades, including war, fuel prices above $US120 a barrel, volcanic ash, GFC, the worst drought in 120 years, catastrophic bushfires [and] crippling pilot shortages".
The Regional Aviation Association of Australia's (RAAA) chief executive Mike Higgins has told the ABC he "100 per cent endorses everything that Rex has said".
Mr Higgins said the airline reflected the concerns of many of the RAAA's member organisations and added that the falling Australian dollar was further crippling his industry which relied on aircraft, parts and maintenance from the US.
Late last year the Productivity Commission made clear that the market for domestic air services in Australia was highly concentrated with Qantas Group, Virgin Australia Group and Rex accounting for more than 95 per cent of all domestic regular public transport flights.
Airlines around the world have struggled since the outbreak of COVID-19 with many asking for government bailouts.
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By political reporter Nour Haydar Almost 100,000 coronavirus testing kits are on the way to Australia as the Federal Government prepares to announce tougher restrictions on social gatherings to stall the spread of the virus.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison is expected to unveil the stiffer rules on indoor crowds today, after convening back-to-back meetings of the National Security Committee and the National Cabinet late last night.
The agenda also included deliberations on the latest advice from the nation's chief medical officers on what additional measures are required to protect elderly people in residential aged care facilities and remote Indigenous communities.

More tests boost stock levels

Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt said 97,000 tests will reach Australian shores this week to bolster the nation's diminishing stock levels.
"Our best scientists and medical experts are working around the clock to secure the supplies we need to test for and tackle the coronavirus epidemic," Mr Hunt said.
So far, more than 81,000 tests have been undertaken with 414 Australians returning positive results.
Mr Hunt said alongside importing more internationally manufactured kits, the Government is focused on expanding the use of alternative tests recently developed in Australian laboratories.
"The aim is to have more tests and more types so we can avoid any disruption in the large-scale testing regime we have in place in Australia," he said.
The Doherty Institute in Melbourne has created an in-house testing method made from different components to the international commercial testing kits, which the Government hopes to roll out to other labs.

Defence to help manufacture essential supplies

Late on Tuesday, Defence Minister Linda Reynolds also revealed members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) would be used to help ramp up domestic production of fast-depleting medical equipment.
Around a dozen ADF personnel will assist the Victorian manufacturer Med-Con to make supplies including surgical face masks, sanitiser, goggles and gowns.
"These skilled soldiers are with the company's existing staff on production, maintenance and warehousing tasks," Senator Reynolds said.
"The Defence support will fill a short-term gap while Med-Con Pty Ltd recruits and trains supplementary staff."

Economist: Time for interest-free loans

ANU Professor of Economics Warwick McKibbin argues the second round of stimulus must include zero-interest "income-contingent loans" for households and businesses.
"When people go to university, they can borrow against the government and pay it back when their incomes rise; we should be doing that in this case right across the economy," he said.
A $17.6 billion economic stimulus package was announced less than a week ago, however, rapidly changing domestic and global circumstances have prompted the Government to begin crafting a second package.
Professor McKibbin says the prospect of a depression cannot be ruled out and sensible policy choices are necessary to prevent businesses from permanently shutting down.
"It's not the amount of money that's being spent that matters, it's how it's allocated," he said.
"The next round has to really focus on this idea that we need the Government to provide income to everybody in the economy to keep spending, moving, but also to keep production continuing."
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By  Nassim Khadem As the week rolled on and more countries had locked down their borders to stem the rapid rise of coronavirus, predictions grew about entire industries — and economies — coming to a halt.
Sydney-based aviation consultant Peter Harbison, who is chairman of the Centre for Aviation, was among those making headline-catching calls.
By the end of May-2020, most airlines in the world would be bankrupt, he said, calling for "coordinated government and industry action" to avoid a catastrophe.
"The likely prospect is that we emerge from this crisis — whenever that might be — with 20 or 30 airlines worldwide," Mr Harbison told ABC News.
"The airlines that do survive are the ones that governments prop up."
The Morrison Government has now announced $715 million of measures specifically aimed at airlines, including waiving certain fees and charges paid by the major carriers.
For Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce, who in a recent note to staff described coronavirus as the "single biggest shock that global aviation has ever experienced", it is welcome relief.
Airlines across the world, including Qantas and Virgin, have been suspending routes and telling their workers to take unpaid leave.
On Tuesday, Qantas and Jetstar announced international capacity would be cut by about 90 per cent, and domestic capacity by about 60 per cent, until at least the end of May.
This would result in grounding about 150 aircraft and comes on top of the airline's previously announced changes to services.
Qantas's 30,000 employees will be managed with a mix of paid and unpaid leave.
Virgin Australia has also slashed more flights in response to falling demand for travel.
Last week, the company announced it would cut capacity by 7.7 per cent over the rest of the year, with international flights hit the hardest.
The airline has also stopped bonuses, lowered its marketing spend and cut chairman and board director fees.

Call for foreign ownership rules to be relaxed

Aviation industry experts had said that without government intervention, the airline sector would have faced a bigger threat than it did during previous international catastrophes including the 9/11 terrorist attacks, SARS and the global financial crisis.
Australians are now so fearful about the spread of coronavirus — which, according to the WHO, has to date caused 170,000 infections and more than 6,500 deaths around the world — that demand for air travel isn't expected to recover, possibly for some months.
Mr Harbison predicts that Qantas and Virgin will go on, since the Morrison Government has moved to protect these iconic brands that employ tens of thousands of workers.
But Mr Harbison said while Qantas is in a better financial position than many airlines in the world — with $1.9 billion in cash, plus a further $1 billion in undrawn credit facilities — "it's losing a lot of money right now".
For him, while stimulus helps, the long-term solution is to relax foreign ownership rules.
Currently, the Qantas Sale Act 1992 limits aggregate foreign ownership in an Australian international airline (including Qantas) to 49 per cent.
Mr Harbison says when airlines are restricted from merging across national boundaries, the winners are offshore government-owned airlines.
He points to the major Chinese airlines, US airlines that have enormous lobbying might to demand even bigger subsidies and national European airlines as some of the likely survivors.
But Transport Workers Union national secretary Michael Kaine said it was not the time to be making fundamental structural changes, such as relaxing foreign ownership rules.
"You don't do that in response to a specific external threat," he said.

Recovery could take months as Aussies stop travel

In the past month, the share prices of travel-related businesses, including Qantas and Virgin, have tanked.
On Tuesday, Qantas shares closed down another 5.3 per cent at $2.86, bringing its total losses to 60 per cent since the year began.
Ratings agency Moody's had earlier this month suggested that assuming that residents choose to holiday domestically, Australian and New Zealand carriers may suffer less than European airlines.
"While the length and depth of the outbreak are still highly uncertain … Qantas has both the commitment and flexibility to protect liquidity and limit leverage," it said.
Aviation consultant Neil Hansford thinks with or without government intervention, Qantas will be just fine.
It's Virgin Australia that will struggle, he says, if domestic demand continues to fall alongside the international declines.

"Whatever the method, the Australian Government don't want to let Virgin fail in the way Ansett failed, because it's just too many jobs," Mr Hansford said.

But even with the help announced, he said Virgin Australia could still be in a vulnerable position.
"What can you do for an airline when people don't want to travel?" he asked.
"We've scared the bejesus out of the whole nation, and no one wants to do anything."

"Until you can get the community to travel, throwing money at airlines is just like sitting in the gutter ripping up $10 notes."

Mr Kaine had called for the Federal Government to immediately step in and protect jobs.
He said apart from airline ground staff, there were "thousands and thousands of workers" in related businesses such as cleaning, catering and security that needed assistance.
Despite uncertainty surrounding coronavirus, he said: "The one thing all the experts agree on is it will end.

"It's unclear as to what the public reaction will be in the medium and long term," Mr Kaine said.

"Whether it takes three or six months [to recover], it will occur."
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

Exclusive by political reporter Stephanie Dalzell The dental divide between rich and poor Australians has continued to grow, with revelations millions of Australians avoid food because of problems with their teeth.
A quarter of people with access to public dental care do not have the minimum amount of teeth needed for their mouths to function efficiently.
The figures from the Australian Dental Association (ADA) also revealed tooth decay and gum disease was on the rise.
Sunshine Coast resident Callie Westbrook was left with just 12 adult teeth at 37.
She spent six years on and off the Queensland public dental waiting list after pregnancy began stripping her teeth of vital calcium in 2012.
"Little issues developed into bigger issues that became even bigger issues that ended up being a whole mouth problem, because there was such a long time between visits and the wait times were just extraordinary," Ms Westbrook said.
She remembers a six-month period in particular when she was knocked back for emergency dental care despite having an abscess — a painful collection of pus often caused by bacterial infection.

"It was beyond excruciating. It is the only thing you can think about," she said.

"I remember more times than you can shake a stick at, at two o'clock in the morning on the phone to my mother sobbing my eyes out going 'Mum I can't do this, Mum I can't do this'."

Public patients facing worse outcome than private

The latest snapshot of Australia's oral health shows people on public dental waiting lists typically have far worse outcomes than those who can afford private care.
About 33 per cent of the millions of Australians eligible for public dentistry avoid food because of problems with their teeth, compared to about 20 per cent of other Australians.
The 24 per cent of people who can access public dental care and do not have the number of teeth required for the mouth to function properly compares to just 5 per cent of other Australians.
The number of adults with untreated tooth decay has also increased since 2018, from 25.5 per cent to 32.1 per cent.
ADA deputy chief executive Eithne Irving said it was a reminder that the oral health of Australian adults was tracking in the wrong direction.
"There's been calls for the Government to put the oral health and the mouth back in the body, because a lot of people are missing out," she said.
"Having adequate teeth is absolutely essential to being part of society."

Some Australians waiting more than two years for care

As the number of wealthy Australians and social media influencers forking out millions each year — or posting endorsements — in exchange for the perfect selfie smile grows, about 8 million others need public dental care just for the basics.
The ABC has obtained waiting times from each jurisdiction, which showed pressure across most of the states and territories.
The median wait time for public dental care in Tasmania was about 21 months, while the latest figures from the ACT, Western Australia and South Australia revealed people in those jurisdictions were all waiting about a year on average.
In New South Wales, there was an average wait time of six months.
In Victoria, the average wait time was 18 months while in Queensland, the median wait time was 19 months.

The Northern Territory Health Department did not provide the ABC with the latest wait times, instead referring it to the latest figures on record from 2017-18, which show a median wait time of 26 months for public dental care.
Ms Irving said the waiting times could not be directly compared between the states and that posed a big problem.
"We don't have a minimum data set about waiting lists," she said.
"Each state and territory reports their waiting times in a different way. This needs to be addressed so we can get a more accurate picture across the country of the waiting times."

Question mark over federal government funding

The states and territories run public dental clinics but receive federal funding for adults under a national partnership agreement (NPA).
The current $350 million agreement began in January 2017 and is due to expire in June.
In a statement, a spokesman for Health Minister Greg Hunt said decisions about the agreement were a matter for the Government and would be considered in this year's budget.
"States are responsible for the delivery of public dental services and the management of waiting times," he said.
"The Commonwealth has provided assistance to states and territories over a series of NPAs. This funding is designed to provide additional services on top of those provided by states and territories. Under these arrangements, states continue to be responsible for the delivery of public dental services."
Opposition spokesman for health Chris Bowen said that was unacceptable.
"The Federal Government must recommit to the national partnership agreement urgently, Australians need to know they can get their teeth fixed when necessary," he said.
"Too many Australians avoid dental care already, we need to be doing more, not less."
Ms Irving said if the NPA was not renewed, tens of thousands of Australians would miss out on vital treatment.
"The ADA believes if the national partnership agreement is not renewed, around 180,000 patients each year will miss out on the necessary dental treatment, that will equate to around 720 patients every day who don't get the dental care they need," she said.
Tony McBride from the Victorian Oral Health Alliance said the Government was putting services at risk.
"It's only three and a bit months until the agreement finishes. And that will put a lot of strain on services that are funded by that slice of money," he said.
"Even people who don't rely on public care are shocked that people should have to wait 20 months for basic dental care. Australians see that as really unfair, inequitable, unjust, a blind spot in government thinking.
Callie Westbrook's dental nightmare came to a close last year, when a private dentist heard about her story and offered her free care.
While it provided her with relief and two dental plates, giving her a picture-perfect smile, she ultimately lost 20 teeth.
She believes dental care should be covered under Medicare.
"So you can get your teeth sorted out and looked after before they get to the stage when you're 37 years old and half your mouth is full of plastic?
"When's it going to stop. When's it going to change?"
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By Zena Chamas and Tracey Shelton When Jennifer Green prepares to visit the market in Tehran, she wraps a scarf around her head, puts on a clean pair of white gloves and places an N95 air mask securely over her nose and mouth.
She has been using her bathtub as a temporary decontamination zone for whatever groceries and household items her husband brings home, spraying packages with a mixture of iodine and salt-water, which the family also gargle with as a defence against the coronavirus.
Her husband wears assigned "outside clothes" to keep his indoor attire free from contamination in a routine that's quickly become the norm for their household.
According to government figures, 853 people have died and almost 15,000 have been infected by COVID-19 in Iran, making it the third-worst affected country behind China and Italy.
And some believe the numbers are underreported and could be much higher.
Among the dead are dozens of officials, including members of Parliament and a senior adviser to the Supreme Leader.
In response to the outbreak, Iran has shut schools and universities, suspended major cultural and sporting events, cancelled Friday prayers in many regions and cut back on work hours.
"Strict preventive measures—including screening of air travellers at departure gates— are being implemented," tweeted Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.
But Ms Green said her biggest concern was not for her own family — none of whom fall into the "high-risk" category — but for the elderly, the sick and families who may not survive under the financial strain of self-isolation.

"I am also concerned about the overwhelming amount of patients in the hospitals and the impact on the doctors and nurses who are on the frontlines," she told the ABC.

"They cannot rest, and they are overstrained. How many medical staff will die and who will replace them?"

A medical system already crippled by sanctions

In May 2018, the US withdrew from a multi-nation deal that had ended Iranian sanctions in exchange for limits on Iran's nuclear program.
A series of renewed US sanctions against Iran have ensued, devasting Iran's economy and ultimately inhibiting the Islamic republic's ability to deal with the current crisis.
Ms Green said the sanctions made accessing crucial supplies difficult.
"People need access to supplies because what happens if you don't have enough? You must get selective — that's horrifying," Ms Green said.
The Iranian Health Ministry and the Iranian Embassy in Canberra did not respond to requests for comment, but Iran's Foreign Minister has been posting updates on the situation via Twitter.
Mr Zarif wrote that despite having excellent medical facilities and health workers, "we are stymied in our efforts to identify and treat our patients, in combatting the spread of the virus, and, ultimately, in defeating it".
Last week, Mr Zarif wrote to UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres asking the UN and member states to support Iran's demands for relief from "economic terrorism" and the lifting of all US sanctions to allow the country to effectively deal with the pandemic.

"Illegal US secondary sanctions make it virtually impossible for Iranians … to import medicine and medical equipment," he wrote.

Speaking to reporters in Geneva earlier this month, Michael Ryan — head of the World Health Organisation's emergencies program — said while medical supplies were rapidly depleting worldwide, Iran was particularly hard hit.
"Clearly the situation in Iran is still very serious," he said adding that there was a shortage of ventilators, oxygen and protective gear.
"Those supplies are very short, and we're struggling to find other supplies externally."
This shortage of supplies has limited Iran's ability to carry out widespread testing for the virus, and many fear the number of cases and deaths from COVID-19 could be much higher than the official numbers.

'People are dying everywhere'

Thirty-eight-year-old Fariba — who has been in self-isolation for weeks, afraid to go out in her home city of Esfahan — said many people believed the real death toll in Iran could be close to 3,000.
"According to nurses and doctors who work in hospitals, they say it's awful," she told the ABC.
"People are dying everywhere."
Fariba, who asked to be referred to by her first name only, shared photos with the ABC of her local gym which has been turned into a makeshift hospital to keep up with demand.
"We Iranians need help from other countries, SOS," she said.

"We are really afraid to be in crowded places. So many people in Esfahan have coronavirus — we feel safer at home."

Access to the outside world for Fariba and her family has been limited. Paranoid about infection, she washes everything her husband buys immediately after it enters the house.
While she waits in the safety of the family home, her husband goes out and buys basic household needs and groceries for Fariba to cook.
But she said they were in desperate need of more sanitary products.
Fariba said criticism over the Government's response to the virus was mounting, and many believed the Iranian Government was lying about the death toll.
While some activists claim the number of deaths and infections are being deliberately under-reported, it is unclear if any discrepancy could be due to a lack of resources to confirm COVID-19 cases.
In the city of Qom — the epicentre of Iran's COVID-19 outbreak — satellite images provided by US space technology company Maxar appeared to show mass graves being dug as an extension of the city's largest cemetery.
Kianoush, a systems analyst from Tehran, said the new graves could be preparations for what was to come.
"According to the leaders of the modern world, the infection rate of coronavirus will be 40-70 per cent," he said.
"In Qom, the population is 1.2 million; if you say 50 per cent will be infected, you have 600,000 infected people. With a death rate of 3 per cent minimum, that will be around 18,000 deaths."
He said preparing a place to bury the bodies would be a smart move.
"They have to be ahead of this so that no bodies are held longer and increase the infection rate," he said.

"Is this wrong to be ready in advance? Is Australia ready for the burials about to happen?"

'We do not trust the official statistics'

Kaveh Taheri, Turkey-based Iran researcher and chairman at the Institute of Capacity Building for Human Rights, said there were no "reliable" statistics on the number of cases or deaths in Iran, claiming Iranian officials hid the first suspected cases for political reasons.
"The situation in Iran is in high-security alert, and the security agents arrest those medical staff who leak the information or details about the issue," Mr Taheri said.
A report published on health sciences website medRxiv — titled Estimation of COVID-2019 Burden and Potential for International Dissemination of Infection from Iran — made an estimate based on the three internationally exported cases that had occurred by February 23 — within days of the government reporting the country's first few coronavirus cases.
The authors estimated 18,300 COVID-19 cases would have had to have occurred in Iran at that time "in order to observe these three internationally exported cases reported at the time of writing".
By March 4, 97 cases had been exported from Iran to 11 countries according to the WHO.

"Based on grassroots reports received from the country, I am convinced that the estimates would be very close to reality and we do not trust the official statistics," Mr Taheri said.

"Iranians inside the country are extremely frightened, and they don't know how to get rid of the fatal virus … You cannot imagine how desperate the people are."
Mr Taheri said he was very worried for family members inside Iran, two of which had already contracted the virus.
"My mum also suspects she has coronavirus, but she was told to stay at home unless her condition gets worse because the hospitals have been left overloaded," he said.
Mr Taheri said he believed the current situation would further anger citizens who had taken to the streets in recent times to protest inflation, unemployment and widening inequality in the wake of increasing US sanctions.
"Iran's oil export has reached its lowest level in the past four decades, and the regime does not have enough resources for small businesses inside Iran to move through the crisis," Mr Taheri said.

"Iranians will take into streets again after the eradication of coronavirus in the country, even wider and wider than what we saw during the 2019 Iran protests."

The most recent wave of protests followed Iran's shooting down of a passenger plane that was misidentified as a US cruise missile, which left 176 people dead.
Iran initially denied responsibility, until US and Canadian intelligence agencies uncovered evidence.
Protesters condemned authorities for not initially telling the truth.

'I'm not afraid'

While life amid coronavirus has caused fear, panic buying and isolation across the globe, Ms Green, who is a US citizen temporarily living in Iran, says it is important to focus on the positive ways Iranians are helping each other.

"This is a hard place to survive right now, yet they are still taking time to help others," she said.

"People with much less than others are still taking time to be human and decent, even though many are going to die."
As a teen, Ms Green lived in China during the SARS outbreak and still remembers it well.
She said getting through that outbreak perhaps prepared her for what was to come in Iran.
"I'm not afraid because there's no-one in our home who fits the criteria for the more at risk," she said.
Ms Green said she had witnessed several acts of kindness while living in Iran. She has seen random people giving out hand-made face masks and gloves, and heard stories of volunteers sanitising ATM machines, as well as doctors and nurses dancing to liven up spirits.
"There is an underlying belief here that if you want to be safe from the coronavirus, you must protect those near you too. How can you be safe if your neighbours get infected?"
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By business reporter David Taylor Something extraordinary happened this week.
The securities market regulator, ASIC, stepped in and imposed controls on the share market to ensure it remains "fair and orderly".
Why? Well, because last Friday saw the highest number of stocks ever traded on the Australian Securities Exchange.

It's easy enough to buy and sell shares. Now that trading is online, buying or selling shares literally involves a couple of clicks of the mouse — assuming you already have an account with a licensed stockbroker.
The problem is every single transaction needs to be processed and settled. That involves both human and computerised intervention.
The problem last Friday was that the settlement system was reaching the limits of what it could process.
Staff at the ASX literally had to work over the weekend to make sure trading could resume at 10:00am on Monday.
To avoid the entire market being forced onto the sidelines, ASIC told the financial firms using high-frequency robotic trading machines to dial down those machines, by 25 per cent.
This example gives you a sense of the strain the share market is under, as investors try to get a handle on how the economy is tracking.

Fear and panic

The sheer volume of trading is also indicative of the level of fear in the market.
The chart below shows the movements of Wall Street's VIX Index or "fear gauge".
Earlier this week it rose to 78 — a level not seen since the global financial crisis.
It's a tradeable index on the Chicago Board Options Exchange that represents market participants' expectations of 30-day forward-looking volatility (think huge market swings up and down).
That's a fancy way of saying it's a financial markets weather forecast — predicting storm clouds as well as lightning and thunder ahead. Scary stuff.
Its current level shows the stock markets are anticipating a global recession and a US recession.
That's bad enough, but it is not currently forecasting the economic climate will get worse than that — as it did after the 1929 stock market crash.

What the market is saying about the Australian economy

So, if the stock market is "pricing in" a global recession, what are movements on the ASX saying about our economy?
Essentially the same thing.
From peak to trough, the All Ordinaries Index and the ASX200 have fallen roughly 25-30 per cent.
That's the same kind of market damage consistent with an economic recession.
But the market doesn't move down all in one hit — it has up days and down days.
The volatility we've seen on the market last week and this week, say stockbrokers, is set to continue.
Each day, it's entirely possible we will see market moves anywhere between 3 and 10 per cent — depending on the news flow.

Share market is pointing the way

And that's the crucial point.
This is a health crisis, which has produced the beginnings of an economic and financial crisis.
We're not there yet — a financial crisis, that is — but investors are trying to work out when that might happen.
Tuesday's market resurgence is a classic example of market participants taking heart from news of a possible "cure" for coronavirus and then hunting around for stocks or securities that look "cheap" (have been heavily sold in recent weeks) now.
Given the extraordinary amount of government and central banks stimulus that has been pumped into the world economy in recent weeks, if there's even a whiff that the pandemic can be contained soon, the financial foundation has been set for an almighty rally in stock prices.
That said, the central problem still facing financial markets — that the coronavirus pandemic has the potential to cause both a financial crisis and a serious global recession — remains.

What to look for

AMP Capital's head of investment strategy, Shane Oliver, has the responsibility of looking after billions of dollars worth of client funds.
This is his central focus right now.
"The increasing number of COVID-19 cases globally and spreading lockdowns will continue to dominate in the week ahead as investors attempt to assess how long it will take to be contained and how bad the hit to economic activity will be," he said.
The new metric for global financial markets is looking at the increase in the number of COVID-19 cases.
Each day that goes by without evidence that containment is on the way, is another day the economic outlook deteriorates.
However, big financial institutions, with billions of dollars on the line, are studying the numbers carefully and looking deeply into both government and central bank responses.
Their market activity (buying and selling of shares), on a daily basis, is a window into how they see this health crisis ultimately affecting the economy, our job security and hip pockets.
It's one gauge you can follow to understand the extent of this health crisis.
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

3-4 minutes The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has issued advice recommending Australians abroad who wish to return home do so as soon as possible via commercial flights.
The recommendation comes after the Federal Government last week urged Australians to consider whether overseas travel was necessary regardless of the destination.
DFAT is warning Australian travellers that they may not be able to return home at a later stage with more countries closing their borders due to the rapid spread of coronavirus.
Additionally, the statement warned that consular assistance could be limited due to movement restrictions during the pandemic.
On Sunday, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced that anyone coming into Australia would be subject to a 14-day self-isolation period.
"As more countries close their borders or introduce travel restrictions, overseas travel is becoming more complex and difficult," the DFAT advice read.
"You may not be able to return to Australia when you had planned to.
"Consider whether you have access to health care and support systems if you get sick while overseas. If you decide to return to Australia, do so as soon as possible."
DFAT said the advice has been issued primarily due to what could be a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 overseas and that health systems overseas may not be as well-equipped as Australia's.
"Health care systems in some countries may come under strain and may not be as well-equipped as Australia's or have the capacity to support foreigners," DFAT said.
"Many countries are introducing entry or movement restrictions.
"These are changing often and quickly. Your travel plans may be disrupted. You may be placed in quarantine or denied entry to some countries."
The advice comes on a day when Qantas and Jetstar slashed their international capacity by about 90 per cent.
In a statement, the airlines said the changes were due to a drop in travel demand due to coronavirus, and meant grounding about 150 aircraft.
"Despite the deep cuts, the national carrier's critical role in transporting people and goods on key international, domestic, routes will be maintained," the statement read.
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By Julian Savulescu and Dominic Wilkinson OpinionImagine there are two patients with respiratory failure.
Joan is 40, normally employed with two children and no other health conditions or disabilities. Mary is 80, with severe dementia, in a nursing home.
In the Western world, doctors are gearing up for an explosion of cases of COVID-19 and with a massive shortage of medical resources, including life-saving ventilators, they are likely to be presented with dilemmas of exactly this kind.
It is undeniable that people should have an equal chance when there are sufficient resources.

Someone should not be denied medical treatment that is available because of their sex, race, age, disability or any other factor. That would be unfair discrimination.

But when there are limited resources, doctors do take various factors into account.

How should Australia ration the supply?

In Italy, such factors are already being considered and doctors are apparently making decisions about who should live and who should die.
One document from Northern Italy argues: "The criteria for access to intensive therapy in cases of emergency must include age of less than 80 or a score on the Charlson comorbidity Index [which indicates how many other medical conditions the patient has] of less than five".
Indeed, doctors in Niguarda have been reported to be declining life-prolonging treatment to any patients over the age of 60.

So how should countries like Australia ration a limited supply of ventilators?

Here are five ways.

1. Egalitarianism: the 'first come, first served' approach

One popular approach is of equality of access: everyone should have an equal chance of treatment.
Egalitarianism argues equal treatment for equal need and that no factors should be used to discriminate.
This is the stated principle of national health services. In practice, this equates to first come, first served when there are equally pressing needs.
Equality of access implies that doctors should toss a coin if there is only one ventilator, or adopt some other random procedure (like first come, first served).

2. Utilitarianism: the 'best use of resources' approach

The alternative to equality of access is to consider the likely or expected outcome of one's actions. According to the most famous version of this approach, known as utilitarianism, doctors should select the action which brings about the most good.
Utilitarianism requires taking a number of factors into account.
One obvious factor is numbers. Most people believe that resources should be used to save the greatest number.

According to utilitarianism, resources should be distributed to bring about the greatest good for the greatest number. If you can save five people, or one, you should save the five.

In practice, duration of time on a ventilator equates to numbers. The longer one person will be on a ventilator, the more people who die because that ventilator is being used.
If one person needs a ventilator for four weeks, and four others need it for one week, your choice is to save one or four. So doctors should take duration of use into account.
Another factor is probability of survival. If one person, Jim, has a 90 per cent chance and another, Jock, has a 10 per cent chance, you should use your ventilator for Jim.
Indeed, if you treat people like Jim rather than people like Jock, you will save nine people instead of one for every 10 treated. That is why probability is a relevant consideration.
Italian doctors claim that age is relevant because it reduces the chance of survival. However, age itself is relevant to utilitarians. Older people have less expected life left.
Consider again in the case of Joan and Mary.
If Joan is saved, she can be expected to live for 45 years. At best, Mary will live a few more years.

According to utilitarians, we should save the young because they are expected to live longer.

(Another factor which we will return to is that the older have already had more life.)
But utilitarianism also includes a more controversial factor than age. It also considers quality of life. The fact that Mary has severe dementia counts itself against treating her.
Consider an extreme example. The endpoint of dementia is unconsciousness.
Imagine Paul has respiratory failure. He is 60, still working, in possession of all of his faculties. Frank is 70 and unconscious with end-stage dementia.
Clearly we should treat Paul. Frank will derive zero benefit from being kept alive in an unconscious state. Indeed, this would apply even if Frank (with dementia) were younger than Paul.
What about lesser degrees of cognitive impairment or other disabilities? According to utilitarians, these should be considered in making allocation decisions if they affect the person's wellbeing.

Probably the most profound question in ethics is the question of wellbeing, what makes a person's life good?

Philosophers have debated this question for thousands of years. Answers include happiness, desire fulfilment or flourishing as human animals (which includes having deep relationships with others and being autonomous, amongst other things).
So utilitarians will consider probability (chance) of survival, length of life after successful treatment and the quality of life.
These judgements are highly controversial. Should we adopt an egalitarian or utilitarian approach to the ventilator?

3. Contractualism: the 'veil of ignorance' approach

A third approach comes from a different tradition called contractualism.
It asks people to make choices behind a "veil of ignorance". If you had an equal chance of being Joan or Mary, Paul or Frank, who would you want to be saved?

In these cases, most people would want what would give them the best chance or the longest, best quality life.

Contractualism roughly converges with utilitarianism.
Doctors in fact make utilitarian decisions. That is easily defensible. But it is also important to recognise other ethical approaches are also able to be defended.

4. Flatten the curve: the 'too little, too late' approach

There are two wishful-thinking approaches that try to make the problem go away.
The first is that we need more liberty to impose restrictions on the movement of citizens in an effort to "flatten the curve", reduce the number of coronavirus cases and pressure on hospitals, and allow everyone who needs a ventilator to get one.
That may have been possible early on (Singapore and Taiwan adopted severe liberty restriction and seemed to have controlled the epidemic).
However, that horse has bolted and it is now inevitable that there will be a shortage of life-saving medical supplies, as there is in Italy.
This approach is a case of too little, too late.

5. Paternalism: the 'greater harm' myth

The second wishful-thinking approach is that some people try to argue that it is harmful to ventilate older patients, or patients with a poorer prognosis.
One intensive care consultant wrote an open letter to older patients claiming that he and his colleagues would not discriminate against them:
"But we won't use the things that won't work. We won't use machines that can cause harm."
But all medical treatments can cause harm. It is simply incorrect that intensive care "would not work" in a patient with COVID-19 who is older than 60, or who has comorbidities.

The question is: do the expected benefits outweigh the expected harms?

Is a 1/1,000 chance of survival worth the discomfort of a month on a ventilator? That is a complex value judgement and people may reasonably differ. I would take the chance.
The claim that intensive care doctors will only withhold treatment that is harmful is either paternalistic or it is confused.
If the doctor claims that they will withhold ventilation when it is harmful, this is a paternalistic value judgement. Where a ventilator has some chance of saving a person's life, it is largely up to that person to decide whether it is a harm or a benefit to take that chance.
Instead, this statement is obscuring the necessary resource allocation decision. It is sanitising rationing by pretending that intensive care doctors are only doing what is best for every patient. That is simply false.

Justice should guide our decisions

Doctors should make decisions about what risks are worth taking — but not in the name of the patient. Rather, in the name of all patients.
It is justice which should guide these decisions.
We simply don't have enough ventilators and now we have to make ethical decisions about how they are allocated.
Unavoidably, there will be winners and losers. We have to take responsibility for making those decisions as ethically as possible.
Julian Savulescu is Uehiro chair in practical ethics at University of Oxford, and visiting professorial fellow, Murdoch Children's Research Institute and Melbourne Law School. Professor Dominic Wilkinson is a consultant neonatologist at John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford and Professor of Medical Ethics at University of Oxford.
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>

By David Mark and James Coventry
The AFL Players Association held a teleconference on Monday night to brief its members, hours after the league announced plans for a shortened 17-round men's season.
The players were surveyed about what they thought should happen.
"As it stands, the players feel like they're prepared and ready to play this weekend," Richmond captain Trent Cotchin told Channel Nine.
"Having said that, there is a lot of depth to the conversation."
Cotchin's Tigers are due to face Carlton in Thursday night's season opener at the MCG.
The AFL is expected to announce late on Tuesday whether that match will go ahead, but the teams are preparing to play.
"If it's deemed safe enough to play this weekend, we're all for it — and that's some of the conversations we had as a playing group," Cotchin said.
"Can that change, will that change? It may. There's a bit of the unknown and I think that's why it's been such a challenging thing for everyone involved."
Clubs have been advised that quarters will be reduced to 16 minutes plus time on — a measure designed to mitigate for shorter turnarounds between matches being needed at some point during the season.
AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan has conceded the league will come to a standstill "at the first instance" if a player tests positive for COVID-19.
"If a player was found to have coronavirus this weekend, ultimately that would mean a stand-down for the club and for the integrity of the competition that would mean it would put a stop to that round of football," McLachlan said.
The AFL's position is in stark contrast to that held by the National Rugby League.
NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg said if a player, coach or team official contracted COVID-19, their club would be isolated, but it would not stop other teams playing.

"We've worked through a number of scenarios if we lose a club or a game and how we might pick that up over the course of a year," Greenberg said on Monday.
It is a nonsensical position, according to Federal Liberal MP Andrew Laming.
"You're not tackling your own team," Mr Laming told the ABC.
"You're swapping secretions with the opponents — what about them? They're the bigger concern."
Mr Laming said he had requested through the Federal Health Minister's office that the nation's chief medical officer recommends banning all contact sport.
"Clearly you're seeing here these leagues are hedging at a way of continuing a competition that must be stopped and must be stopped this week," Mr Laming said.

"We simply can't treat players like they're a form of entertainment that keeps us busy while we're all trying to self-isolate."

Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>