No mention of the fear doesn't mean the risk is gone away

The risk and the reason for it is badly stated  

If the fear has been around awhile,  you can be sure the people will put pressure on to stop EVERYBODY talking about it . When PC is the ruling philosophy,  nobody is safe. The truth will set us free,  but the price for those who sit too comfortably away from it , is . in their opinion.  too high 

No leader can stop this imperfect process of making ,gaining and then losing fear and trust . The leaders who play up to it should leave . ( take Vic and NSW  playing up to overlast seasons bushfires)   
It will be hastened in Andrews case by the child and then the public  realisation that his chasing of substance through his own stats collection  is misplaced concreteness.
Not even a good epidemiologist should trust the leader to know what it is doing ( when it presumes to on risk questions) A wise lieutenant  would insist in help to avoid a corrupting and cloned consensus that the dilittants in charge can often seek from the real experts and ones who know stuff .  .   

So what will precipitate the loss of panic .who knows?  It may not be all good 
 One good reason for reducing the panic will be  the realization .that much advice was not taken in the first place about the risk and how to deal  with it ( that includes PM Morrison) 
The inevitability of push back ( when the risk is badly stated - shortstated ) must come when those in charge don't know what they are doing and have explained nothing to date ( except driven home the same old fear tactics -- see the list of stats listed elsewhere )

People smell a rat when  leaders in crisis are NOT  prepared to admit they don't know what they are doing . 
Attention seeking is not just what children do ( the person in the story ) its what some leaders are actually good at .Such a leadership style may gain momentum , but has no sustainability . 

As the Spanish flu epidemic showed , once people stop  talking about a fear, Fear doesn't go awa, y it just becomes PC not to mention it  , 

 So,  just as the fear words were used to effect to START the panic , the absence of fear words will be used to end the fear.  Its all to do with using a meredescription.
blogspot.com PC name   , 

TODAYS DEVELOPMENTS 
August 30th 2020   Quote 

Why does every one think case numbers mean something? 

Presumably when COVID is no longer news ,, it won't be the subject of worry,   

Does this preoccupation with simple stats stuff  mean it's gone away when numbers go down  ?  

Do polys think we are stupid--- that they explain nothing and keep using their own versions 

or the fear of death facts as their primary message ? 

Andrews doesn't tell us "deaths with" and "death by COVID: , test/case ratios ( until last week ) or ' immune response triggered " facts such as localities under heavy testing. It could be expected that the current agglutination testing is inadequate to show "exposure" because a lot of resistance is needed to build up antigens ?'

Unless more info on the above and the perceived herd immunity level is known, Morrison is mad to accept the attention seeking Premiers equally non compos mentis unproven significance of shallow catchprases like "hotspots " and " waves" .

Does anyone know what the new catch phrase "active " means ? (infectious , adapting , overcoming or what?) Forget chasing a vaccine dillitantants - At what point do they hope to identify the evil bug,,,,,, not its aftermarth , Spring street are trying to lock the door after the horse has bolted.

Why is the CMO not speculating on the level of herd immunity,,,, now present?

Maybe all the testing, tracing and "no talk" about the above means our leaders are no wiser from all their brilliant investigation techniques ?