Djokovic's PCR test was manipulated?
twitter.com
twitter.com
"You need to understand that these papers are not fakes. Both tests, database records as well as pdf certificates are 100% legit. He and his family have enough influence in state institutions to organize 100% original PCR certificate but with false positive result."[2]
"I have now checked your theory with my PCR test from October 1st. I have downloaded it now from http://e-zdravlje.gov.rs, scan QR code and timestamp from URL is 1641917096 (Tue Jan 11 2022 16:04:56 GMT). So timestamp in URL is not when test is done, but when test is downloaded"[3]
[1]https://twitter.com/CharlieWafflees/status/14809568793249955...
[2]https://twitter.com/CharlieWafflees/status/14809588647617003...
16th: 7371999-259039
22nd: 7320919-259039
Does anyone have an explanation of how that code works. Could it have been related to a manufacturing batch of tests that’s been used out of order?
Those of you here with test results how does that code relate to your testing date?
[1] https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/novak-djokovic-we...
https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1640187792DOH...
The positive test result:
https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1640524880jk8...
But our intrepid OSINT researcher discovered that the data in the QR code begins with a UNIX timestamp, such as cqcode=1640187792... and cqcode=1640524880...
From that one might infer that the positive test actually happened 4 days after the negative test.
The documents Djokovic provided to the court claim the positive test happened 7 days before the negative test.
After all the man is guilty of covid wrongthink, so who knows what depths he'd sink to.
There are scientists who state we're at the point where "we need to target the vulnerable" (rather than giving boosters to all over-12s) and that "there [is] no point in trying to stop all infections, and that at some point, society has to open up".
Professor Sir Andrew Pollard, chairman of the [UK's] Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation is one of them.
The scare quotes around "fully" are unnecessary. Two doses is enough to drive down hospitalization risk to flu levels. Boosters aren't necessary from a public health perspective because boosting the already vaccinated has a miniscule effect on total hospitalizations. (Sure, if you want them to reduce your own risk, that's fine because they have been approved. If you want them to reduce disruptions in your workplace, that is also fine. Just don't expect to materially impact health system availability.) Vaccinating the unvaccinated has a much larger effect. Alternatively, Omicron seems like it will reach them before mandates take effect or Paxlovid supply is ready, with worse outcomes on the health system.
If you look at the data, it appears that vaccinating the young and healthy has "a miniscule effect on total hospitalizations", too.
I'm not quite sure what to make of that claim. There are an awful lot of unvaccinated young people in the USA.
"13.2 million of US children and adolescents ages 12- 17 are fully vaccinated. [this] represent[s] 53% of 12-17 year-olds"[0] (as of 5 Jan 2022)
also
"Child vaccination rates vary widely across states. In 10 states, at least three-quarters of children (age 12-17) have received at least 1 dose, and in 16 states, fewer than 50% have received 1 dose."
[0] https://www.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19...
You then said "there are few young and healthy in parts of country where vaccination rates are low".
I'm still not understanding that statement. Across the globe - and across the USA - there are loads of unvaccinated young people, and (happily) most of them are healthy, and (happily) the data show that young healthy people are at very low risk from Covid19 even without vaccination.
What do mandates have to do with any of that?
Do you understand now? The entire point of this thread is that vaccine mandates will allow society to open up, which is not yet possible due to health system constraints, nor was it possible earlier. Your doctor quote is nonsensical in that it doesn't say anything about when society can open up. Today? When the pandemic first started? Obviously not — only when immunity is high enough or effective treatment is readily available.
From that same Dr. Pollard:
“When we do open, there will be a period with a bump in infections, which is why winter is probably not the best time. But that’s a decision for the policy makers, not the scientists.
“Our approach has to switch, to rely on the vaccines and the boosters. The greatest risk is still the unvaccinated.”
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/omicron-wave-pandemic-loc...
I think that claim remains to be substantiated, to put it mildly.
1. Vaccine mandates increase vaccination rates.
2. Increased vaccination rates mean the health system won't be overwhelmed, allowing society to open up.
The doctor you yourself cited agrees with step 2, as do most of the governments in the world that are managing their countries' transitions to endemicity. There are multiple examples showing that step 1 is correct.
Currently many staff shortages are being made much worse by public health policy, not Covid19 itself, in that otherwise healthy staff being forced to stay away from work to comply with quarantine requirements.
These requirements are now being relaxed[0], which is a good thing, but at some point the requirements need to go back to how the world worked before Covid which is approximately "if you're sick, please stay at home; if you're healthy, please come to work".
[0] CDC Updates and Shortens Recommended Isolation and Quarantine Period for General Population https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s1227-isolation-quar...
Croatia, for example has its official coronavirus webpage as https://koronavirus.hr
"a language is a dialect with an army and a navy"
There are definitely more differences between the lexicon and grammar of those languages apart from the alphabet they are written with.
Not very big differences, mind you. But ignoring them altogether or making them bigger than what they are enters the realm of politics.
Anyway, the english wikipedia article does a decent job capturing a few key differences in the dialect continuum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_standard_Bosnian...
I am well aware of them: Croatian is not my native language. But, I learned it and I am conversational in the Shtokavian (Štokavian) dialect. I am Štokavski. This is the standard dialect of Croatian, in Croatia.
My family however were Čakavski. They spoke the Chakavian (Čakavian) dialect. They are from the islands of Croatia. Unfortunately, it is a dying dialect of Croatian that is Venetian in origin. It is not mutually intelligible with Štokavian, but everyone in Croatia seems fond of it.
I can share my own (positive) test, which confirms timestamp and id theory. My test was taken on the 7th January, it was a rapid test, not a PCR. But it's in the same government database:
https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1641591150Q!A...
Timestamp: 1641591150, which translates to GMT: Friday, 7. January 2022. 21:32:30. That seems to be right, it was taken earlier on the 7th and probably entered later to the central database.
Also, ID of my test is: 7601263. Djokovic IDs are 7371999 (16/12 test) and 7320919 (22/12 test).
It really looks like IDs are incremental, and that his test that was supposedly taken on the 16th was taken on the later date.
One consolation fact is that he wasn't positive when he took photos with kids on 17th.
EDIT: I messed up and copied Novak's QR url! fixed now!
- it's automatically sent to email (if they have it)
- you can download it from ezdravlje.rs portal
The test I shared above is the one I got on email. However, I went to portal, downloaded pdf, and now I have two copies. They're different! IDs and all the data are the same, but QR codes are different.
This is the new one: https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1641923234g3D...
Timestamp on new pdf is: 1641923234, which is GMT: Tuesday, 11. January 2022. 17:47:14
So it appears that timestamp is related to when pdf is generated, and when you download it from the portal it's generated at that point of time, i.e. there are no pdf documents sitting on government server!
So this timestamp is definitely no proof of forgery. But test ID might be - that one is still suspicious.
And one more thing, when I switch tabs with my two QR codes - page content is the same but shifted a bit. I didn't look into html/css to see what's different.
I've done these kinds of systems many times in the past and there could be any amount of reasons why a timestamp is included like this. Especially with weird government regulations, policies and rules that mandate all sorts of info to be included inside government documents. Like adding a year or date to when a company was registered to a company's company registration no.
It sounds like you just don’t like or use Twitter. Is that accurate?
We’re not talking about random tweets, we’re talking about on-topic tweets from posters like foone which consistently post relevant content. You’re throwing the good out with the bad and claiming that folks submitting off topic links are bad apples that ruin the whole barrel. I just don’t find your logical argument internally consistent or rational.
I’ll admit I do use Twitter (and HN!) a lot, though.
Here’s one with 600+ points. You’re telling me we should block Twitter on HN. I’m saying that’s a bad idea for HN. Seems like the users of HN agree with me. HN is for all of us, not just any one user’s preferences.
Rapid test:
https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=16415703349MJ...
Timestamp: 1641570334, time: GMT: Friday, 7. January 2022. 15:45:34
PCR:
https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1641924832NyL...
Timestamp: 1641924832, time: GMT: Tuesday, 11. January 2022. 18:13:52
I downloaded PCR from portal today, that's why it has today's timestamp.
What's interesting is that her test IDs are 7601574 and 7631146 while they were taken within 15 minutes from each other. There's some 30k difference, and I think Serbia runs around 40k tests a day. PCR samples are sent to central lab and processed later, that would explain why PCR's ID is much higher.
However I don't think we have definite proof of how these test IDs are generated. Different labs could be assigned batches of IDs, PCR tests itself could have preassigned IDs (you can see they have same ID when you're tested, but I'm not sure it's the same ID as presented in results). If test ID is generated when results are inserted into database, then they should always be incremental and Novak's test IDs point to forgery. But there could be other explanations.
My conclusions:
- timestamps are not proof of forgery
- test IDs are suspicious, but we can't be sure.
All invalid reports ("Report IS NOT VALID!") are in red color (Bootstrap 3 class .alert-danger). You can see it when open https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs without any subdir/script/query string.
This green for positive test mean just that QR code and associated test are valid, not that it’s good or bad. Positive test is bad in the first 14 days but after that it’s good - it gives you same rights as if you were vaccinated. But it’s the same test in both cases and green just tells us it’s a valid document.
Digital certificate is different kind of document. That’s the one you need to enter restaurans, bars, etc. after 20h - it will be red if you don’t fulfill conditions, e.g. vaccination or positive test within last 6 months (but not within 14 days), etc.
In programer’s lingo, test result is const, while digital certificate is a function of multiple conditions in context of current date/time.
This is exactly the same as here: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/serbia
So I'm assuming that this dataset can be trusted.
The point:
From the dataset: Date: 2021-12-16, new tests: 13690.0, total tests: 7032035.0 Date: 2021-12-22, new tests: 14808.0, total tests: 7107851.0 Date: 2021-12-26, new tests: 9265.0, total tests: 7158932.0
As We can see Djoko's "ID" (7371999) is much larger than total number of tests for 26th of December 2021 (by 213067) and for me this furthers your point that We don't know how this number is generated. (It seems to be sequential, but is it?)
- Datum uzorkovanja (Date of sampling): 22.12.2021 14:12:10
- Datum izdavanja rezultata (Date of issuance of results): 22.12.2021 16:15:49
=> I will ignore the time needed to get the actual swabs to the laboratory and do the necessary paperwork etc and round this to ~2 hours of time available for testing.
- Vrsta analize i proizvodjac testa (Type of analysis and test manufacturer): Real Time PCR test-SARS-CoV-2, , Sansure Biotech INC; Hunan Province
See, unless my fellow countrymen have developed a way to do PCR tests 5 times faster than the fastest tests available in the (rest) of the world, this test in itself is a joke. This is the reason PCR testing: costs, is usually indicated by symptoms already present/positive antigen test.
You're welcome.
Take care
While I have no clue how they work in detail they offer 60 min express PCRs in Germany at least at my airport.
Seems to be FDA approved.
Unfortunately, no data points from me, even though I have been tested MANY times due to my profession. They've got my email, so they obviously get generated immediately.
However, I do have a data point for screenshots when QR code of the positive test stated that the result was negative. This is something that happened to me as well (back in 2020, once, and never since then). It was a bug, obviously. The second part of the ID is person-specific (all my test results have that second part identical, regardless of when they were taken) - it seems that if a positive test is followed by a negative test, that happens sometimes.
When I donate blood the nurse pulls out a sheet of around 20 pre-generated identical barcode stickers, and attaches one to each piece of paper and bag of blood. This uniquely identifies my donation end-to-end.
Djokovic's PCR tests were done at two separate labs. It is quite possible that each lab is bulk-allocated a unique range of IDs every day or week from the central authority. You'd see big "time jumps" from one lab to the other if you assumed the ID was always in time order.
Depending on how they handle their range (e.g. if they are handing physical stacks of barcode stickers around) the code may not even always be in time order in the same lab.
BTW, apparently my IP address has now been blocked accessing to that website :) I get this message now: "Ваша адреса је блокирана 24 сата! Vaša adresa je blokirana 24 sata! Your address is blocked for 24 hours!"
While I guess in these cases governments don't really worry about enumeration aka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem - it's still often a security risk that means you usually try to avoid it.
Even when internally you have auto-incremental ID - you can provide a non-sequential public ID (e.g. at least use SkipJack/Skip32 of that incremental value).
We have the deepest respect for the German language, but HN is an English language site and posts here need to be in English. It's hard enough to get people to read the articles even when they are.
There are a ton of things like that. If we added them all to the guidelines, no one would read the guidelines. I fear they're already too long.
In Israel, which swabs every person who lands at the airport. There is a suspiciously steady stream of people flying in from the U.S who were negative before take off and positive 10 minutes after landing
That does not mean it is easy to verify test results, but it should be possible.
The corresponding QR codes in the documents still point to a negative and a positive test result in the Serbian database. The charge is that the Date of Sampling/Sample ID/Date of Results was swapped in what appears a Word document [1]
[1] https://twitter.com/zerforschung/status/1480924213309550594/...
The Netherlands could make up 5000 ghost identities and issue them passports. How would passport control at JFK airport know?
and still not understand the messy nature of centralized dbs with no civilian oversight?
Of course intelligence agencies can issue new, edit, etc when convenient!
Not when the test was made.
Normally that's the same.
But it's not enforced, as for example a test center which lost it's internet connection temporary is still allowed to add tests once the connection is back up.
So we don't know for sure that the test is manipulated.
We only know for sure that it was placed later in the system, not that it was made later.
Which is still very suspicious.
No never wrote anything like that.
I just wrote that the date in the system is from when the information was put in the system, and that there are reasons why it is allowed to put information into a system about an older test.
I didn't say that I think it's likely that it had been the case in this case.
The internet connection is just an random example(1). Someone more involved with the process could probably list many other reasons such a thing can happen.
It just means that it's just an hint that something unusual happened but not at all a prove that the test was made later.
It even less means that anyone from the operators of the system recording the tests was involved, it's enough for a single laboratory which can evaluate tests to enter a fake result, there are probably tens or even hundreds of such laboratories in most EU countries.
There are even chances that the manipulation was quite different then what it seems to be, like the positive test has been made at that point in time, but it was intentionally hold back from being put into the system, because the person wanted to be able to lie about not having had covid. Now hat is clearly a unlikely thing. But possible.
Anyway the point is that "datum of recording" != "datum of test" is on itself not _that_ unusual in general. But if it happens in this specific context with another test being made shortly after before the first tests result was put into the system etc. it is _very_ suspicious.
Google suggests that it takes 10-12 hr to fly from NYC to Israel. That's a long time with a fast virus. (Even with a week's incubation period, you'd still expect to see it, just less.). Furthermore, many of those negative tests will have been 24-48 hr prior to takeoff, depending upon legal requirements that day.
It's okay to suspect malice, but it may not be necessary here :).
https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-eu/coronavirus-re...
So if I got a negative test in July and a positive one yesterday, and I want to fly somewhere, it seems I can just copy the QR code from the test in July and paste it into a Word document that says "The test was performed on January 10, 2022, and the result is available through this link: [QR code with the link to the results from July 2021]". And it seems this document doctoring (with a document with a result that allows unvaxed entry) is what Team Djokovic has done.
Serbia's one of 33 non-EU countries whose centralised system is up to EU standard, and as such you can get both the Serbian QR code and the EU QR code.
As such, assuming no shenanigans (even though things point otherwise), he should have no problem converting it to the EU QR code and presenting that.
But for the international version you can’t just decide to give less information because then it won’t accepted.
(I'm in the EU): I can get a free "gargle" PCR test - either via walk-up test centre or via collect/test-at-home/drop-sample-in-collection box any time I want here, and in both cases there is zero verification that the sample I provide for the test actually came from my mouth.
If you have a friend who is Covid19 positive, it would be trivial to get yourself a positive result.
The problem is at the state level, you have a lot of weird political stuff that influences what and how each state performs certain processes.
There’s also a huge flow of travel from US to Israel, and lots of weird corner cases and loopholes. (Just like Canada and Mexico)
Those states have no rapid tests? Nobody in those states can buy a test at CVS and take it at home?
Israel doesn’t accept some random traveler and his assertion of being COVID negative.
Canada has a fairly annoying requirement to have a negative PCR test taken within 72h of takeoff (or arrival by car), which can be dicey/expensive in many parts of the world to get, but if you have a positive PCR result from 14-180 days, this requirement drops and travel gets a lot easier than those that never got a positive covid test. Regardless of vaccination status.
Perverse incentives showing up, as usual.
Unfortunately, Germany bought too many vaccines, and they need to use them all to be able to buy even more.
In German. It was heavily discussed back in the time, can’t find it now since I’m on mobile.
The quote that you probably refer to, is this one, from 3 Sep 2021 (translation by deepl):
"My goal as a virologist Drosten how I would like to become immune now is: I want to have a vaccine immunity and then saddling on top of that I definitely want to have my first general infection and the second and the third at some point. I have resigned myself to that for a long time. And then I know, I'm immune for a really long time and I'll only see this virus every few years, just like I see the other coronaviruses every now and then. As a relatively healthy adult, I can take responsibility for that. There are other populations that can't. But I can only answer for myself, for my own health, because I am now twice vaccinated. And I have to admit, I would also like to be vaccinated a third time."
On 9 Nov 2021, he's on the record with this (translation by deepl):
"One can debate whether one has grasped this correctly at the beginning. I think that the plan to work with two doses at the beginning was correct. Because what changed here was the virus. But now we just have to acknowledge, the vaccine is not specifically targeted to the delta virus, but to a virus that is not even circulating today. The virus has changed."
So definitely a preference for more than 2 shots and not suggesting that anyone do this, other than he himself, personally, given his specific risk profile. Is his stance on delta equally valid in light of the new omicron variant? Maybe, maybe not?
--- source: https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/coronaskript174.pdf
But if it was more durable (long-lasting), they wouldn’t have the 180d limit. They put that limit in because of the (lowwwww) risk of continuing to test positive after recovery, but the worst case report I’ve seen is in the 6 week after recovery range.
It’s mostly Canada trying to be punitive when it comes to travelling by requiring PCR, when a within-24h antigen test would be cheap, easy, catch as many asymptomatic cases as a less-fresh PCR, and near zero-risk of false positives immediately after recovery.
The reason you can test positive for so long is that it takes time for remnant RNA from the virus to totally leave your system, and even though it's not replicating (you aren't infected or infectious), the PCR test is just detecting the RNA.
The other difficulty (impossibility?) is in segmenting the chronically infected vs those that are just working out the remnant junk of their recovered infection.
(I’m not ruling out any value of antibody testing, just saying I did mean antigen)
The choices become
1. Follow the majority guidance, wear masks, avoid large gatherings, get vaccinated, get tested often.
In which case you will have to continue paying for testing to travel (and risk not being able to travel at the last minute)
OR...
2. Intentionally go get covid (usually by neglecting all the above guidance). Get a positive result. Avoid expensive testing, have easier travel, get easier access to gatherings.
Choice 2 is valid, yes, but unless Omicron is much, much more mild for most people I wouldn't make that choice for myself.
Luckily I got an official PCR test confirming positivity at the very end of my COVID journey so I can take advantage of that horrible month.
Edit: Also, the cost is much higher. In Mexico I paid $25 for an antigen test. The PCR test cost $100.
And that was at a $$$ private clinic.
It still makes sense to protect the airline employees, but I no longer view a pre-flight test as a reliable measure to stop COVID from arriving in the US.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/10/29/fact-sheet-guidance-trav...
Source: That's how I re-entered the country recently.
From the whole timeline, it would look to me as someone created a later test result that they backdated for him to be able to apply for a Visa. This would explain why Djokovic was out in public at the time he was apparently positive (I doubt he would have public appearances after a day after a positive test) and it would explain the test result ID discrepancy.
It could also explain why the positive test result was generated on 26th and the negative one on 22nd.
Only outlier is Djokovic's positive test. It perfectly fits to 26. December, the same date timestamp was created.
When scanning a QR code, is the date visible anywhere on the page? I am trying to guess whether someone just edited a PDF with a different date (might explain why they chose 16.12 - you need to change a single number). Alternative would require someone back dating a test in the system.
In any case, not a good look for Djokovic.
Apparently the qr code (and related timestamps) are generated when the result document is downloaded, not when the test is performed. Der Spiegel should have confirmed their theory with other serbians who have access to test results.
Suggest changing the link to that.
You just need to corrupt one to give you whatever pass you need.
That's how the "Adolf Hitler" pass was generated a few months ago.
If he didn't have any symptoms, and was doing PCR test regularly just to be sure, he had to reason not to go to the gathering.
And given they were ready at 8pm it’s quite possible that the guy that makes Djokovics mail account was long gone. It may even have landed in the Spam folder if he is using Gmail (happened to me once).
It’s up to the court to decide what happened. I guess that Serbian courts can get the details about the results delivery. All it has to do is ask email providers to check logs, both on the sending and receiving side.
As always, it’s the one making accusation that needs to provide a proof.
On the other side, he can claim before Serbian court that all is five and the test was fake, but he can’t be processed about that in Serbia, since he neither faked nor used it there. And in Australia he can claim test is valid, and Australia would need to prove it’s fake if the want to cancel his visa. Which they cannot prove that easily, since Serbian authorities are not obliged to jump on immediately on the Australian request.
Yes, it would be a loophole and playing two legal systems, but that’s what companies do all the time when it comes to taxes.
But as he is a private citizen seeking glory in AU, it's inappropriate to make an exception in this case.
I thought 'open' meant 'open to people from outside the host region' not 'open to amateurs and professionals alike'?
Eventually tournaments became Open as they also allowed pros in.
The US Open in chess is open to anyone who is a USCF member, which is anyone who wants to buy a membership ($45/year, $40 for seniors, $27 for young adults, $20 for youth, $85 family plan covers parent and children under 19 and college age students up to 24, $55 family plan that covers all children under 19 in the same household). Obtain a USCF membership, pay the US Open entry fee, and you are in.
When you play in the open, regardless of whether you are an experience pro grandmaster or some newbie who barely knows the rules that entered on a whim, everyone is in the same group. It uses the Swiss system rather than a knockout system, so every plays the same number of games.
There's really not much difference as far as the tournament goes between that top grandmaster and that newbie, except that the press and spectators will be a lot more interested in watching the grandmaster play, so the top boards will usually be set off in some place making it easier for observers, and they might be fancy wood boards and set instead of the paper or vinyl boards and plastic pieces most players will be using, and maybe nicer chairs.
If that newbie wins enough to be a leader, that newbie will be playing on those top boards.
If that grandmaster has some bad games and ends up in the middle of the pack, they will be down playing with the hoi polloi.
BTW, if you win the US Open you are automatically invited to the US Championship, an invitation only round robin tournament.
Every other year the US Championship also serves as the "zonal" tournament for the US in the World Championship cycle. Doing well in your zone's zonal earns you a spot in the FIDE World Cup. Doing well in the World Cup earns you a spot in the Candidates Tournament. Win that and you are the next challenger for the World Chess Championship.
In chess then if you sell your soul to the Devil in exchange for winning the next 50 games of chess you play you should be able to become World Champion!
9 to sweep the US Open, 11 to sweep the US Championship, 8 for the World Cup, 14 for the Candidates Tournament, and 8 for your match with Carlsen for the Championship.
Is there any other individual sport or game where selling your soul gets you such a short path from complete unknown to World Champion?
Should all of the people who got exceptions be turned away now?
Was the Australian Open tournament wrong for providing this process? Was Novak wrong for taking advantage of a process provided by the tournament?
Some (or maybe all) already were.
Sorry, I don't really follow those sports news, so maybe I missed something; but how did he try to cheat? He applied to Australian Open for an exemption, and was granted an exemption [0]. How is this cheating?
[0] - https://twitter.com/BenRothenberg/status/1478329044156309505
It's not like he tried to cheat the tournament or Australia with this. He was following a provided process.
Note, this is separate from any notion of him cheating or not with the process. Just saying it doesn't appear he tried to sneak in by bypassing the processes.
The reason he's being looked at instead of the others who went through this process is likely that he posted about it on social media.
They're not the Australian federal government though, so it's moot.
Djokovic may have a claim against the Australian Open for wasting time and causing inconvenience.
That doesn't mean Canberra must grant him a visa. And it is in no way an excuse for submitting falsified documents (if he did that, which is far from proven) to Canberra and her courts.
The dynamics here are interesting, too.
Just because the public outcry might have prompted politicians to intervene doesn't mean they were wrong to do so
If the evidence presented here holds, Djokovic submitted falsified documents to the Australian government and courts. That's potentially visa fraud, perjury and a bunch of things that would put an ordinary person behind bars for years.
> Djokovic submitted falsified documents
If the dates are real from the records everyone has found then he would, in theory, still qualify. So, why change the dates?
Djokovic has people who do all this stuff for him. I wonder if something happened in translation or somewhere else.
The motive seems to be missing.
Djokovic pursued an exemption on the basis of recovery. That requires a positive test followed by a negative one. If the allegations here hold, he tested negative and then positive. That wouldn't be proof of recovery, but of infection.
For example, was he getting regular rests due to being tennis? Did the wrong ID for the recovery test result get submitted by accident? This is plausible and accidents do happen.
I'll be curious to see more details that come out on this.
"people are welcome in Australia. But if you're not double vaccinated and you're not an Australian resident or citizen, well, you can't come." - Australian PM Scott Morrison - 6th Jan https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-canberra-act-35
According to the ATAGI guidelines (which are not the border rules), previous covid infection is not a contraindication for vaccination, and as a temporary exemption vaccination can only be deferred by up to 6 months in the case of "acute major medical illness".
Apparently Tennis Australia was specifically told this by border patrol but they didn't pass that information on to the players. Probably everyone was too chicken to tell Novak.
On that note, I have no idea on what basis he was granted an exemption when he applied for his visa in November, given that he had not even been covid positive in the last 6 months (at that time, lol).
I have a bit of sympathy for Novak with the lack of concise communication but at the end of the day he wouldn't be the first person who has been irritated by bad government communication, or the first person to be turned away from a country because of confusing border rules.
- lied about travel activity beforr entering Australia (he declared not having traveled within 14 days prior to entering the country but he flew from spain and had an interview in serbia during this time)
- if what zerforschung found here he did not have a negative PCR after getting a positive PCR test first (which would mean he cannot infect others and has bery likely immunity), but a negative PCR and *then* a positive PCR after, which could in the worst case mean he was infected and still travel.
Real question is why are the Australians running an international tennis competition in the first place?
Although in this case at least they've been doing it for 117 years... so they do have precedent on their side.
That's not what they're doing, which is the whole point of this story and controversy.
But anyway a tennis competition should be the very bottom of the list of anyone's priorities.
Windsor Ontario has something like 1000+ health care workers commuting to the Detroit area that have been exempt from most entry test/vaccination/quarantine requirements. Same for truckers and flight crews and ~30 other groups.
I think this is only changing next week with an actual vaccination requirement.
If you want to go for covid-zero, go for it, but if you half-ass it, you get all the disadvantages without any of the advantages.
Probably not even worth attempting given our border has so many illegal crossings.
Covid-zero is impossible in any open society. China is still pursuing a covid-zero policy, but even with locking down entire cities and imposing travel bans they're far from zero.
I think this dichotomy (prevents vs doesn't prevent) is false. Vaccination reduces the likelihood of getting infected and it reduces the likelihood of severe illness. Perhaps not to the same degree, but my point here is that it's not black & white as the quoted wording implies.
It may increase it by selecting the un-protected strains.
> it doesn't prevent infection or transmission
Source? We’ve (largely) vaccinated our way out of other diseases. I haven’t heard of any outbreaks of mild measles or mild rubella and I suspect it’s because vaccination gets the R lower.
https://www.businessinsider.com/delta-variant-made-herd-immu...
If we end up with measles2 and rubella2, I wouldn’t be surprised if my measles1 and rubella1 vaccines weren’t effective.
On top of they are 66% less infectious when being infected since they clear the virus twice as fast and 40% of their virus particles are dead.
This gives them an overall reduced risk of infecting someone else by 93%.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.24.21266831v...
https://news.arizona.edu/story/covid-19-vaccine-reduces-seve...
Q: How long does that reduced risk persist for?
Then read this story:
We can’t vaccinate the planet every six months, says JCVI chief https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/03/fourth-covid-jab...
"Prof Sir Andrew Pollard said there was no point in trying to stop all infections, and that 'at some point, society has to open up'"
Are there many previously young and healthy people ending up in hospital with Covid?
Yes, of course, more than a thousand of children and young adults in their prime died just in US.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wrecked-lives-families-young-adult...
https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-Focus-...
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/05/study-number-of-kids...
In these events he is not standing up against anything. He appears to be quietly proving false statements about his test results and/or his recent travel history in order to manipulate the system to his advantage (i.e. gain the ability to take part in a tournament in a country he is likely not eligible to enter).
Authoritians are the ones who want censorship, no dissent and emergency powers that override human rights and informed consent.
I believe in personal freedom, but the limits of that are when it impacts on others personal freedom.
If someone dies of covid in hospital, they occupy a bed for about a month before dying.
A hospital has limited capacity. In my country, Australia, we have public health so everyone pays for that hospital capacity.
Vaccination reduces a persons risk of severe disease by 90%.
I got vaccinated to prevent myself and my family getting sick, and a nice side effect of that is that it also helps hospitals from running out of capacity, because I'm very unlikely to go to hospital should I be infected with covid.
It's insanely selfish and stupid to not get vaccinated.
I also think Assange should have been freed long ago, and I want journalistic freedom because the truth is the most important thing we have.
Your hospital bed propaganda is just that. Part of the push to blame sectors of the population who don't comply with the lockdowns, masks, vaccine mandates, you name it. An honest strategy was never assessed.
Your country, Australia, just banned Novak for his thoughts. Not for any rule breaking. Not for any health reason. Australia and much of its population are being absolutely discriminatory and ready to commit crimes against the humanity of others under the pretense of "the greater good".
You overplay the dangers of covid, lie about transmission and beds, prevent early treatment, deny human rights, prevent discussion of science, ignore or censor side effects.
And then you call people stupid and selfish for not making the same decision you did?
You're a horrible person. A truly disgusting one, like so many. I'm not surprised considering the country you live in, but it's your fault if you fall for hateful propaganda.
You're not for truth. You're for harming people who don't follow your politics.
All files are here: https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/migration-law/online-file/djokovic
- Datum uzorkovanja (Date of sampling): 22.12.2021 14:12:10
- Datum izdavanja rezultata (Date of issuance of results): 22.12.2021 16:15:49
=> I will ignore the time needed to get the actual swabs to the laboratory and do the necessary paperwork etc and round this to ~2 hours of time available for testing.
- Vrsta analize i proizvodjac testa (Type of analysis and test manufacturer): Real Time PCR test-SARS-CoV-2, , Sansure Biotech INC; Hunan Province
See, unless my fellow countrymen have developed a way to do PCR tests 5 times faster than the fastest tests available in the (rest) of the world, this test in itself is a joke. This is the reason PCR testing: costs, is usually indicated by symptoms already present/positive antigen test.
And before you ask: but what about the positive test, it was done under your suggested 10h too? The positive test results actually have the exact test kit specified (https://www.cepheid.com/en/tests/Critical-Infectious-Disease...) and it's definitely not PCR. Furthermore, that company doesn't even manufacture PCR tests/systems. Their focus is on rapid pathogen detection systems.
The negative test on the other hand, doesn't specify the test kit used at all, only the manufacturer. That manufacturer though, not only produces PCR tests/systems, but most of the covid-related products are PCR-oriented, along with a few rapid/antigen solutions. (https://www.sansureglobal.com/products-and-solutions/covid-1...)
Note: on their product details pages you will see mentions of 60 minute amplification time. That might indeed be true, but amplification is, albeit long, just one step of a multi-step process (extraction, preparation, amplification, evaluation).
You're welcome.
Take care
In effect, if his team + Serbian gov't manipulated the tests, I'm not sure what the recourse is, except for the Australian gov't to sue the Serbian gov't?
Australia's recourse would be to deny him entry.
P.S. But either way, of course it's he who is ultimately responsible, in the same way I'm responsible for the contents of my tax return, regardless of who prepares or files it on my behalf.
He just had root access at the gov't COVID testing system level.
Here's a separate thought experiment too:
We've all heard stories of people faking COVID tests. E.g. people don't want to pay the price to get tested, or they can't be bothered to go get tested, so they grab an old covid test, change the date and then go to the airport. The airline representative can only do a visual inspection of the document, and most of the time they have bigger issues than making sure each covid test is valid. For example, they're not going to call the doctor's office for each test.
This seems to be what Djokovic did, fake the COVID test. Hundreds / thousands of people break the rules with fake covid tests and they don't get caught, but he fakes it once and he gets caught.
With this framing, you could in fact say that he is under even more scrutiny than the rest of us. So, not only does he have to follow the rules, he has to follow them even more than we do.
doesn't make that much sense, does it?
It's up to ever single individual to interpret what is just and what is unjust, with all its consequences.
I, personally, find that the restriction is stupid, doesn't bring any benefit, and would have no problem to completely disregard it on a moral basis, if I had no fear of consequences.
The date an image is generated (which is what they are looking at) on some website is not the date's the test were taken.
This was never about the law and rules, it is just politicians wanted to make a show. I think it is embarrassment for whole Australia how the whole thing played out.
The way it played out was poor, and few are impressed. We're still yet to find out fully what happened behind the scenes. A lot of misinformation is circulating.
https://www.health.gov.au/health-alerts/covid-19/internation...
In fact from your link:
> It is important to note that previous infection with COVID-19 is not considered a medical contraindication for COVID-19 vaccination.
One of the main issues here is that ATAGI told TA that previous infection does not constitute containdication, and that Novak was not told this by TA.
Draw your own conclusions from that however you like.
That leads to a page that anyone can see
Also positive test information for infectious diseases can always be expected to be disseminated.
I have a vaccine cert that works like this. How do I know that none of the countless people who had access to that by now did not leak the data into some ad tech database or are using it for other nefarious purposes?
Most countries didn't even try, while some countries have at least systems in place that try to reduce the privacy impact. Will all these countries ever delete all this fine-grained contact tracing, testing and vaccine status data? Of course not.
In Germany it just made the news that police was unlawfully accessing contact tracing data.
You have the right to know if you have been in contact with someone that has tested positive, and you have the right to tell other people.
Germany. My vaccine cert is from a non-EU country. I cannot enter businesses without the digital EU cert. It's real.
https://www.sante.fr/how-to-obtain-a-french-health-pass
I know there's a similar scheme in Switzerland, so this sort of thing is definitely not unique to France.
> Ja. Die momentan auf dem Markt erhältlichen Impfzertfikate in Scheckkartenformat werden im monochromen Thermotransfer-Druck erstellt und enthalten neben dem Namen der oder des Geimpften auch den QR-Code der zweiten oder dritten Impfung. Für den Kartendruck ist lediglich der QR-Code des Impfzertifikats der letzten COVID-19-Impfung erforderlich. Die Kosten für die Herstellung eines solchen Ausweises trägt dabei die oder der Geimpfte selbst.
> Die Überprüfung des Zertifikats erfolgt im gewerblichen Bereich über entsprechende Prüf-Apps (CovPassCheck), mit der der QR-Code der Karte gescannt und damit der Impfstatus nachgewiesen wird. Wie beim Nachweis über die CovPass-App oder die Corona-Warn-App oder den gelben Impfausweis muss die Nutzerin oder der Nutzer sich außerdem mit ihrem beziehungsweise seinem Personalausweis identifizieren. Wenn der Impfnachweis im Scheckkartenformat verloren geht, ist dies im Vergleich zum Verlust des gelben Impfbuchs nicht problematisch, da eine neue Karte jederzeit bestellt werden kann.
The vaccination card *IS* the digital certificate in physical form. You may want to look deeper, before you accuse people of lying.
> there is still the WHO vaccination passport
The WHO passport is not useful either, if it does not contain any proof of vaccination, because it is on another continent during vaccination and you are in lockdown. Also, have you seen someone using them for entering businesses during the last couple of weeks? People are clearly pushed towards an app for displaying a QR code that could as well have been a simple image. Let's not normalize installing state-made apps. I am not consenting.
Actually there is a fourth undocumented option, the one that I am using right now: scan the code, create a new qr code with the data and store it on my phone or print it. It is just an image. Works better than the one from the pharmacy, because my QR code is sharper. The app is as useless as the vaccine mandates.
However, let's also not act like officials all around the world did not dismiss data privacy without hesitating during the pandemic. Just like before, only more. Did you read about the police in Mainz accessing LucaApp data for investigations?
Since it looks like the (always thin) scientific basis for vaccine mandates and G2 is crumbling by the day, I suspect that their proponents will soon look pretty foolish anyway and the rest of us can finally move on to dealing with the pandemic in a sensible way.
> You have three ways to enter German businesses either a digital certificate or a vaccination card from the pharmacy or your who vaccine passport
The vaccination card from the pharmacy *IS* the print out of the digital EU certificate, including the QR code. That's all I got at the pharmacy. Businesses will not accept my foreign certificate. I have no other certificates. This is my reality.
Pathetic.
The date a doc is downloaded has no bearing on when a test was taken.
It could of course be explained by an administrative error where it had been re-issued.
Australian Border Force should be requesting proof from Serbia if the authenticity of the results are in doubt.
But I doubt Serbia is keen to cooperate with the deportation of their golden child.
Just to protect my ego when this is downvoted and flagged to death: watch this comment get downvoted, because even HN has too many such numbnuts.
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
Edit: actually, you've been breaking the site guidelines so frequently that I've banned this account until we get some indication that you actually want to use HN as intended. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
You'd wish the tournament could have been clearer here and just said that all athletes should be fully vaccinated, regardless of what any authorities say.
It's PR after all, and the PR of an antivaxer playing is much much worse than the PR of Novak missing the tournament.
And obviously an athlete would need to fulfill the requirement of both entry to to country and to the tournament.
Previous infection is only a 6-month temporary deferral in the case of major acute medical illness.
https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021...
https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/who-is-actually-el...
These are the ATAGI guidelines though, the border can do what they want and they do not recognize previous infection as an exemption, apparently except in very special cases where the person is a millionaire with a world-class backhand.
It'd be really interesting to know why he was given an exemption even while he hadn't tested positive in the past 6 months.
That said, international travel is one of the places that should be strict, and high profile international competition could and should make an example. Taking part isn’t a right. Organizers have an opportunity to set an example here.
No, I don't give a shit about any tennis players and am tired of celebrity and sports activities being "news". Very few people actually do care, let those people read/watch niche media sources if they want to do so but don't make it part of the mainstream news. I would be perfectly fine if I never heard another tennis (or golf, or hockey, or football) story in my life. If a story affects nobody or very few people and has no advisory or actionable element then it doesn't deserve to be part of international "news".