Roger Mexico Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Banker said: Simple majority now but would need Alf & Chris Thomas support Not yet I'm afraid. The Council of Ministers (Amendment) Bill 2020 is only at second reading stage in the Keys: They'd still need 16 votes in the Keys. Note that it isn't a vote of confidence in the Chief Minister (it's not possible to do that for any Minister), but in all of CoMin. So at least one CoMin member would need to no-confidence himself. The current situation is that silly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Roxanne said: I'm still not wearing those horns... Jamiroqui is on his way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: So at least one CoMin member would need to no-confidence himself. The current situation is that silly. Cregeen might 😂 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 One of them might press the wrong button. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Declan said: One of them might press the wrong button. What does that button do though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Declan said: One of them might press the wrong button. Let’s hope Trump doesn’t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepyJoe Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 31 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said: The Speaker is very worried that the populist contagion in the USA will spread to other democracies like the IOM. He's ahead of us all on this one. Put that pitchfork away Geoffrey... Maybe that's why he has militarised the national broadcaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 hours ago, Banker said: So you think it’s acceptable doing 1100 per week, holding 6 Pfizer &1 Oxford vaccine in reserve is good enough when the Island Howie keeps referring to as comparison are planning 3000 per day? Yes. Because in two weeks time, that figure has to double when people start to get their second jab. If they suddenly did 2000 this week, they would have to stop inoculating new people for a couple of weeks while second jabs were given to the first lot. Building up is just common sense. With regard to the Oxford jab, until the second try arrives, they will not administer the first. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatiotheturd Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Cambon said: Yes. Because in two weeks time, that figure has to double when people start to get their second jab. If they suddenly did 2000 this week, they would have to stop inoculating new people for a couple of weeks while second jabs were given to the first lot. Building up is just common sense. With regard to the Oxford jab, until the second try arrives, they will not administer the first. OK, genuine question to you or one of the people who like your post. Why not just utilise the extra resources available who they aren't currently using and open for longer hours to do more people. Its in everyone's interests to get as many done as possible, so why build in a deliberate bottleneck? Getting the vaccines here is a bottleneck that can't be avoided. Once they are on island any delay in administering them is just down to a lack of appetite to just get stuck in and do what it takes. If a private company had exactly the same resources and were paid based on time from vaccine landing to being administered it would be done quicker and still within all the required protocols. I would love to see anyone argue that not to be the case. Edited January 10, 2021 by horatiotheturd 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Declan said: One of them might press the wrong button. One can only hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 hours ago, jaymann said: I see the Health Minister is still fumbling. Best viewed from 4th minute onwards. - Still claiming border/day 1 testing at only 7% detection. - Still claiming 14 days isolation as the gold standard. - Still saying that Day 1 and 13 testing wouldn't have stopped two recent cluster outbreaks as there's always a 1% chance of cases slipping through. Actually it's complete nonsense from the start, and as I've said before quite scary because he seems to be listening to nonsense advice and endlessly repeating it no matter how often everyone else points out the flaws and inaccuracies. This would be a very long comment if I tried to explain every error, so I'll just pick on the 14 day one in relation to the Douglas cluster and the 1%. I actually suspect it's even less than this, but if the chance of one person not testing positive is 1% then the combined chance of two is 0.01% not 1%. The reality of course if the problem here is intra-household transmission during isolation and testing should pick this up from at least one of the people involved. The 14 day gold standard only applies to those isolating individually. 7 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Roxanne said: In my experience, the gentlemen never could press the right one. If they could find it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 Do they know yet where the transmission occured with the wee one from St. Mary's school? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatiotheturd Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 8 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Actually it's complete nonsense from the start, and as I've said before quite scary because he seems to be listening to nonsense advice and endlessly repeating it no matter how often everyone else points out the flaws and inaccuracies. This would be a very long comment if I tried to explain every error, so I'll just pick on the 14 day one in relation to the Douglas cluster and the 1%. I actually suspect it's even less than this, but if the chance of one person not testing positive is 1% then the combined chance of two is 0.01% not 1%. The reality of course if the problem here is intra-household transmission during isolation and testing should pick this up from at least one of the people involved. The 14 day gold standard only applies to those isolating individually. What? I thought they said it was two people who travelled back together and isolated together. One potentially positive on return or prior to return infected the other whilst in isolation? No intrahousehold transmission? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmanxpilot Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 I am shocked at Mr Ashford's interpretation of the day 13 test purpose. He seems to be confused. The 1% figure he uses are people who remain infectious after day 14 and therefore have the potential to transmit the virus after release from self isolation. Surely the day 13 test would identify the vast majority these people remain who infected >day 14..... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.