Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Barlow said:

 

Perhaps staged release from isolation is needed. I know people who have met up at 14 days plus 1 minute from their isolation.

so:

After isolation:

1. Allowed outside for exercise

2. Go shopping (keep receipts to track movements)

3. Go to the 1886 discotheque etc.

 

Love no.3 not only for the joke but the use of the word discotheque

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rachomics said:

As I understand it, the elephant in the room is that public health and CoMIN are of the understanding that Livepool will only be delivering a lineage (i.e. B.1.1.7). That's not the case, it's just that they don't understand the data nor where to look for the genome sequences themselves. 

Once someone like me has their sticky mitts on the actual genome sequences all kind of possibilities become apparent. Like who gave it to who. It's literally that sensitive a technique. 

I don't understand how they don't understand that.  If nothing else they must know from the work described in your blog that Liverpool are sequencing to that degree of accuracy.  Perhaps they may only pass on the lineage initially, but the full sequence will be recorded in a database somewhere. 

Maybe Ashford thinks they put the information in a shredder afterwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheTeapot said:

Here's a question based on this info from that link...

"The other seven cases are close contacts of someone who tested positive for the virus having travelled to the Island."

What on earth is going on where someone who has traveled here can be in contact with at least 7 people to`infect them? 

Think the 7 cases of "someone" are not necessarily the same "someone". 

So there are 7  new people who tested pos, but they weren't in contact with the same original contact, they all had different original contacts

Could be wrong, just saying they might not be the same infector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

A lockdown is simply the last resort to try and get things under control, ideally whilst you ramp up track & trace.

A lockdown was the only real way to contain it because all the other options required them to take some responsibility or eat a fat slice of humble pie.

The police still can’t trace that guy that’s skipped bail, reason why? because he wasn’t at his registered address, so he could quite literally be anywhere on island and no doubt staying with likeminded folk who I very much doubt care about the virus.

Track, trace, tag people and test people it shouldn’t be that difficult, lockdown should be a last resort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

I don't understand how they don't understand that.  If nothing else they must know from the work described in your blog that Liverpool are sequencing to that degree of accuracy.  Perhaps they may only pass on the lineage initially, but the full sequence will be recorded in a database somewhere. 

Maybe Ashford thinks they put the information in a shredder afterwards.

They do not want to understand or the lot of them are incapable of understanding it

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Raffles said:

Think the 7 cases of "someone" are not necessarily the same "someone". 

So there are 7  new people who tested pos, but they weren't in contact with the same original contact, they all had different original contacts

Could be wrong, just saying they might not be the same infector.

I believe the seven were isolating together with someone who travelled to the island with them or in the same cohort. Nothing sinister or underhand, they are extending their isolation along with other members who were not infected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Raffles said:

Think the 7 cases of "someone" are not necessarily the same "someone". 

So there are 7  new people who tested pos, but they weren't in contact with the same original contact, they all had different original contacts

Could be wrong, just saying they might not be the same infector.

Could be I suppose, its not unlikely for the government to issue unclear or indeed purposefully misleading information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Raffles said:

Think the 7 cases of "someone" are not necessarily the same "someone". 

So there are 7  new people who tested pos, but they weren't in contact with the same original contact, they all had different original contacts

Could be wrong, just saying they might not be the same infector.

That makes it worse though.  The alternative scenarios here are:

(a) Someone travelled, broke quarantine and then went out and infected a close contact.

(b) Someone travelled, spent 14 days in isolation, passed Day 1 and Day 13 (and maybe day 6/7) tests - which have been there for people finishing isolation on 4 Jan or after, left quarantine and then infected a close contact.

It's bad enough if there's one of these.  If there's up to seven ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a news agency I'm sure Paul Moulton could hire in someone for a day to ask questions at the next briefing:

HQ: I now pass over to Paul Moulton from IOM TV, Paul.

IOM TV: I'm afraid Paul couldn't make it today. Hello I'm the intern Dr Rachel Glover, my first question to David Ashford

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

That makes it worse though.  The alternative scenarios here are:

(a) Someone travelled, broke quarantine and then went out and infected a close contact.

(b) Someone travelled, spent 14 days in isolation, passed Day 1 and Day 13 (and maybe day 6/7) tests - which have been there for people finishing isolation on 4 Jan or after, left quarantine and then infected a close contact.

It's bad enough if there's one of these.  If there's up to seven ...

There really shouldn't be any need for this kind of speculation if the government weren't so up themselves with their ridiculous messaging and just told the bloody truth.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, slinkydevil said:

As a news agency I'm sure Paul Moulton could hire in someone for a day to ask questions at the next briefing:

HQ: I now pass over to Paul Moulton from IOM TV, Paul.

IOM TV: I'm afraid Paul couldn't make it today. Hello I'm the intern Dr Rachel Glover, my first question to David Ashford

 

Well Julie Edge MHK is asking a pertinent question  to the CM:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gladys said:

To be honest, with a question phrased like that, I can easily see the reply. "No."

Yep. Yes/no questions are the last type you ask if you actually want any useful information. You need to ask who/what/why/when/where. This is Information Gathering 101 ffs!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zarley said:

Yep. Yes/no questions are the last type you ask if you actually want any useful information. You need to ask who/what/why/when/where. This is Information Gathering 101 ffs!

Or tell/explain/describe....

MHKs are seemingly as bad as journalists on this island for their investigative prowess...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...