IOM Covid removing restrictions

[madmanxpilot]

Total test and concluded test numbers today are lower than yesterday...somethings not quite right!

[TheTeapot]

32 minutes ago, Barlow said:

Your previous post wasn't clear.

I take it you are annoyed at the lockdown because if there had been a stricter regime  operating there wouldn't have been a need for a second lockdown.

 

Yes.

It was predictable and preventable.

[Andy Onchan]

54 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Why?  What possible justification is there for keeping people from their loved ones if they are prepared to isolate and test?

Thousand of people have travelled since this kicked off (possibly tens of thousands) and the only issue has been a result of insufficient testing which has now been rectified.

Where exactly is the risk?

But has the testing issue been rectified? Until Ms Glover and her company are back onboard then I have my doubts that the testing regime is anything more than just adequate.

[pongo]

58 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Why?  What possible justification is there for keeping people from their loved ones if they are prepared to isolate and test?

All unnecessary travel is unnecessary and a drain on valuable resources. Nor is isolation and testing a panacea.

I really don't understand why people cannot just live with the measures until everyone is vaccinated. 

[Andy Onchan]

11 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

Total test and concluded test numbers today are lower than yesterday...somethings not quite right!

This is not the first time the numbers have been screwed up. I think Roger M picked up on that last time around.

[jaymann]

Not too long ago, I called- quite publicly in the press - for a more effective border regime with a view to ultimately unlocking the borders in a more controlled manner. Now, this was before the UK went backwards again and the 'new strain' was discovered. But the principles remain.

We were told many times that a Day 1 test would only detect 7% of possible cases, because that is what Public Health England reckoned was the figure, with no actual basis other than a scientific guess.

The scientists called for Day 13 tests but even @rachomics didn't believe in a Day 1 or on-arrival test, deeming it a wasted exercise. The figures we have had over recent days flagging up multiple Day 1 positive results must highlight a substantial percentage of returning residents testing positive on Day 1.

https://www.oxera.com/on-arrival-passenger-testing

This study by Oxera (who our Government trust for Gas consultancy but apparently not COVID), clearly paints the picture of how Day 1 or on-arrival testing is actually a better defence than 14 Days of isolation on its own.

https://www.oxera.com/test-and-release-scheme

This further report and study - based on real facts and experiences of other jurisdictions - shows that a day 5 test can clearly pick up 90% of potential positive cases as a result of travel.

It is clear that the 'experts' in Public Health are in at the deep end and struggling to breathe.

There is ample data going as far back as September/October to support border testing strategies to aid in controlling the movement of people far better than a standalone 14 day isolation. But nobody paid attention to it because nobody had slipped through the net before.

These new testing measures came too late. That much is clear. They should have been in place several months ago and this lockdown is not only an over-reaction, but entirely avoidable.

[pongo]

1 minute ago, jaymann said:

Not too long ago, I called- quite publicly in the press - for a more effective border regime with a view to ultimately unlocking the borders in a more controlled manner.

Have you got a link to your press piece?

[Major Rushen]

4 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

This is not the first time the numbers have been screwed up. I think Roger M picked up on that last time around.

This is where the guys at top look like idiots as the people posting the data do not sense check it.

[jaymann]

13 minutes ago, pongo said:

Have you got a link to your press piece?

Admittedly my thinking back then was on a pre-arrival negative certificate, on-arrival test and a final test on day 5. With full household isolation.

2 or 3 tests over even a slightly longer period coupled with a pre-arrival negative PCR certificate would be effective.

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/manx-businesses-back-border-testing/

The situation is different again now. New strains which Dr Ewart says isn't useful to know in helping strategy to fight the virus, but I'm a non-scientist that disagrees. Knowing the strain and how it performs is highly useful in establishing how to react to positive cases.

Edited January 8, 2021 by jaymann

[Roger Mexico]

48 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Three weeks is insane if it turns out (as it is looking) that there isn't actually an issue

But the problem is that that it won't be till the end of three weeks until we know there is no issue.  We won't have the information that will tell us we are clear until then - and even then it depends on there being sufficient testing and (especially) retesting to be safe. 

And as the public we don't even know that that is taking place.   We're told there are so many tests being done, but not how many of those relate to the various testing regimes that have been imposed (but not retrospectively) on arrivals over the last few weeks.

It can't be emphasised enough just how much the failure to test is responsible for the current situation.  In a way it's surprising that it hasn't happened before.  The sort of magical thinking from DHSC where they seem to believe that a positive test is some sort of failure (even if it happens in isolation) and therefore it's best not to know, has meant that not getting testing has been encouraged.  Insisting on an automatic extra 14 days isolation if someone tests positive (rather than say two negative tests) meant that people would be less likely to report symptoms.

Some of us have been banging on for months about the danger of transmission between those co-isolating, but there was no understanding of even this simplest of points from the DHSC.  None of their procedures seem to be based on any understanding of the science - just a belief that is you followed the right rituals then nothing bad would happen - or at least they couldn't be blamed if it did.

And because we are refusing to use genetic sequencing to assist in tracing clusters it means we have to suffer lockdown as a blunt instrument because we can't rely on using more exact tools.  New Zealand for example can use it to reassure themselves that cases are linked and there are not separate outbreaks in the community (something we don't know about the current Douglas and Ramsey cases).

Both these refusals over testing are linked to the refusal to engage with Rachel Glover and the £10 million lockdown will cost us is basically what we are paying because DHSC middle managers believe that their own vanity is more important than the health and economy of the Island.  And our politicians lack the will and determination and intelligence to do anything except meekly go along with it.

 

[pongo]

6 minutes ago, jaymann said:

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/manx-businesses-back-border-testing/

There was no case for relaxing restrictions. There was certainly a case for increasing testing - but no case for relaxing quarantine. And there is no evidence that the rules had put businesses off from moving here. That was a red herring.

1 minute ago, Roger Mexico said:

But the problem is that that it won't be till the end of three weeks until we know there is no issue.

3 weeks plus 3 weeks surely.

[jaymann]

Just to add on to @Roger Mexico....

The Government are going to have a problem if there transpires to be zero community spread identified in the coming weeks.

To me, this is exactly why we should have followed the pathway laid down by Government, below.

Very simple steps:

1) We think we have a small cluster and we don't know how big it could be, we are up to 6 positives.

2) We therefore move to Amber alert and introduce new social distancing measures with compulsory mask wearing in public places. But groups of up to X households can socialise together and can eat or drink out together.

3) IF and only when we detect any element of community transmission, then we consider a lockdown.

There's only so many times we can go for this 'hard and fast' approach. It will become tiresome and grind down the economy each time it happens.

[jaymann]

Just now, pongo said:

There was no case for relaxing restrictions. There was certainly a case for increasing testing - but no case for relaxing quarantine. And there is no evidence that the rules had put businesses off from moving here. That was a red herring.

3 weeks plus 3 weeks surely.

There was a case to increase testing as part of an effective border control strategy, with a view to easing restrictions on the borders to certain countries based on their infection, rather than relying solely on the UK infection rate.

I can tell you first hand that even this 3 week lockdown has deferred some businesses moving over, let alone our last one and subsequent border controls.

[pongo]

2 minutes ago, jaymann said:

The Government are going to have a problem if there transpires to be zero community spread identified in the coming weeks.

No. They have to assume a worst case scenario. That's the only responsible thing to do.

Great if it turns out they have done too much. That's much better than doing too little.

Just now, jaymann said:

I can tell you first hand that even this 3 week lockdown has deferred some businesses moving over

No serious business so quickly takes such short term decisions.

[Barlow]

3 minutes ago, jaymann said:

There's only so many times we can go for this 'hard and fast' approach. It will become tiresome and grind down the economy each time it happens.

Yep, for sure, although just now a glimpse at the rest of world, especially UK, has made the Island embrace this lockdown with some fervour.

We've tasted the fruit of freedom and we want it back. Maybe this is the lockdown to end all (local) lockdowns.