Infectious diseases expert Associate Professor Siouxsie Wiles tagged the national carrier in a Twitter thread today, also criticising the participation of Air NZ's chief medical officer in research arguing for a loosening of border restrictions.
Dr Wiles said she had contacted Air NZ a few times questioning the policy to serve snacks and drink on domestic flights, but never got a response.
The current approach meant people were removing masks.
"They are only serving a cookie or some chips. It's not like we can't survive the hour or two without them," Wiles, an Associate Professor at the University of Auckland, and who has become one of the faces of the science community's response to Covid-19, said in the thread.
"This makes me really angry, as they got a massive bail out from the government to keep them viable and so surely in return they should be doing their bit for our team of 5 million."
Air NZ has been contacted for comment.
Wiles also took issue with an Air NZ employee's link to a new research paper "by the Plan B boys", which advocates for a loosening of border restrictions.
"It's only because we followed Plan A and not Plan B that we are even able to safely fly internally right now," she wrote.
The report referenced by Wiles, "Estimating the effect of selective border relaxation on Covid-19 in New Zealand", calls for a "traffic light" system to be put in place at the border, where international travellers are rated according to the Covid-19 situation in their origin country.
It's co-authors include Dr Simon Thornley, an epidemiologist at the University of Auckland and part of the "Plan B" group who argued lockdowns were an overreaction to Covid-19, and Air NZ's chief medical officer Dr Ben Johnston.
The research was paid for by Auckland International Airports. Wiles followed up her initial social media post by tweeting an apology to Air NZ, for mistakenly stating the airline partly funded the research.
Under the proposed traffic light system, travel would be unrestricted from Covid-19-free locations.
The report was released yesterday but written in August 2020.
The research predicts more than 60,000 travellers a month would come into the country under the model, up from the 11,271 who entered in August 2020.
Reacting to the research, Professor Michael Plank of Te Pūnaha Matatini and the University of Canterbury, said such a system would mean breaches like that seen recently at the Pullman Hotel would happen 20-50 percent more frequently.
"The authors of the study claim that the recent requirement for a pre-departure test will mitigate this risk. However, this is far from clear because pre-departure tests are not perfect and many travellers were already required to take pre-departure tests by their airline or country of transit."
Related Stories
Comments
And just exactly what is that cheap ill-fitting surgical mask doing to protect you from the covid? Seriously. We have to breathe, wearing a useless 'face nappy' or not.
Surgical masks are made to stop a surgeon contaminating an open wound if the surgeon coughs, but are utterly useless against a flu virus--common sense should tell everyone that.
I will start my comment on your opinion by observing that "common sense" is neither common nor is it usually sensible. It's a phrase like "political correctness gone mad" which is used by those bereft of anything useful to say in defence of their foolish opinions.
Surgical masks are worn by surgeons, and other medical staff, routinely for the avoidance of passing on infection both to and from the patient. It works both ways. And it works. The evidence is plain.
The other factor that tends to prove masks work, combined with careful hygiene, is that the incidence of ordinary influenza has been the lowest level ever recorded over the last year. Why? Because of social distancing, increased awareness of hand washing and masks.
The public would do well to continue following the advice of science and disregard self appointed experts who know better because of their common sense.
Self appointed expert's like....you? And why exactly are you promoting mask wearing when you still are more than likely to catch COVID through the membranes in your eyes? Most people don't know how to handle the mask and end up touching the most infectious part thus spreading the disease when they rub or touch their eyes. You have no idea what your talking about.
The masks that AirNZ provide and that the ministry of health push for are totally useless.
How am I so sure of this?
Last week I had to paint some steel, so as a test I used a spare mask that had been provided from an AirNZ flight, instead of my usual mask, that I use for spray painting. I fitted the mask as per instructions and after the small amount of spraying in the open air, I removed the mask. I found paint residue on my face below the mask, coming up each side of my mouth, down either side of my nose and below my nostrils. The paint droplets were much larger and traveling at a lower velocity, than what would be produced from the average sneeze.
By all means wear a mask if you want to. But be honest with yourself, all you are doing, is making a fashion statement.
Be honest with 'youself'? Then I would suggest the appropriate use and correct fitment of the mask. The wearing of any mask has been shown and proven to reduce the risk of infection. Please, exercise some responsibilty. Anything we can do, as a team of 5m to prevent our hospital beds being inundated by Covid patients is worth doing. Have a thought for front line staff, have a thought for those who cannot be treated for other illnesses if all the beds are full and have a thought for those who are prone to misinformation. The evidence from the experiencies overseas should be enough to sit up, take notice, and do the right thing. We have, nationwide wide, barely 400 critical care hospital beds.
Put ya bloody masks on where and when required and stop being childish armchair scientists. It's more than about just you :) We are in a unique, almost utopic position in comparison to other nations in the handling and outcomes to date. Why do you think that is? Enjoy your blissfull long weekend of summer and freedom from lockdowns.......
Masks or other face coverings stop the spread of viruses mainly by preventing people spraying each other or surfaces with secretions and by stopping us touching our faces with contaminated hands. (Which we all do many times a minute without knowing it.).
The touching and removal of face coverings to eat should involve decontaminating our hands prior to eating and then a clean face covering applied after.
A better idea on a plane would be to just leave the mask on until you get there then put it in a sealed bag for washing if reusable or in a bin if not, then wash your hands thoroughly before eating or touching your face.
Air New Zealand probably is in denial that someone with COVID travelling on one of their domestic flights right now is a real possibility, and therefore would rather keep customers happy with a cookie time and cup of tea than park the refreshments until it is 100% safe to reinstate them.
Response to red_pill comment on 6 Feb above.
I certainly make no claim to being an expert, I merely precis what is common knowledge and easily available facts presented by scientists.
Your observation about infection through the eyes is a good one, however the scientific evidence shows that improved hand hygiene effectively combats that risk. The reduction in notified flu cases also supports this.
Following the advice of scientists is going to save more people from this disease that the poorly thought out observations of fools.
How many people do you see washing their hands on an airplane between sips of coffee or tea? Stop lecturing people, it's a petty argument that in the grand scheme of things makes no difference! There is no evidence to support your claim! Yes your observations are foolish, glad to see you acknowledge that.
@IRD - I'm glad that you admit you aren't an expert. However, I am a virologist and can unequivocally state that you are 100% wrong. Passengers on an aircraft do not have the opportunity to properly wash their hands. The mask will block some of the virus particles a person releases into the air around them. It will also reduce how much virus you breathe in. And it will prevent big drops of spit and saliva from hitting your nose and mouth but it doesn't stop all of them. Make sure the mask fits well, and keep in mind, the mask doesn't protect your eyes. So you might want to consider wearing a face shield or goggles or some other kind of eye protection. All this is worthless unless you disinfect surfaces around your seat, such as the armrests, tray tables and seat backs. You can use hand sanitizer or bleach wipes, and try to do it regularly throughout the flight. Avoid touching your face as much as possible. Lastly, keep chatter to a minimum. When you talk, you can emit 10 times the droplets and aerosols that you do when you're quiet. The reduction in flu cases does not support any of the theories you espouse; Flu cases were minimized because more people were vacinated.
Wow! Two opinions to respond too. Red_pill: your comments speak for themselves.
Hull: So, I'm 100% wrong yet you go on to confirm most of what I say. You may be a virologist but you certainly ain't no mathematician. As to disinfecting surfaces in the plane, I, like most fliers, rely on Air NZ to do this between flights. They may or may not do this thoroughly but they claim to do it. When I fly, which is rarely, I take and use hand sanitizer, especially if I touch surfaces, and I certainly discourage chatting with seat mates. As for eyes, i take my chances.
The point is, we should actively try and encourage each other to do what we can to eliminate the spread of disease. Nay sayers who go public with their questionable opinions over the value of masks are, IMHO, letting the team down. I'm pleased at least that you, like your colleague Ms Wiles, are making it clear that wearing a mask is better than not wearing one at all.