Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Roger Mexico said:

To be fair to Ewart, if you listen to the main clip she's mainly reckoning it's the Kent variant because that's now the most common one in the UK. So it's just a matter of probabilities.

I'm less convinced by the idea that the Kent variety is quicker to induce symptoms, not least because in this case the periods we know about seem to have been around the standard 5-6 days.  But proper genomics would telling us not just the variant but reassure us that it was all from the same source and that this linked back to the UK-based SP employee who passed it on to his colleague (rather than say from an infected passenger).

You would expect these things to be the case, but a lot of science is the boring slog of checking that likely things are true.  Because the odd time they are not, you have to completely change your plans.

Some good points but what do you mean by 'proper' genomics. Genuine question. Do you mean more timely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, The Old Git said:

When I was working cost was cost. Didn’t include any element of profit or loss. Quite easy to work out the cost of any job done and see what profit was made. 

I think that is the point though. What is meant by cost. If someone says the cost of painting my house is £1,000, that is what I would expect to pay. I wouldn't expect the painter to say that I had to pay £1,500 because the cost hadn't included any labour and was just the cost of the paint. Cost price of a service should include labour costs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Newbie said:

I think that is the point though. What is meant by cost. If someone says the cost of painting my house is £1,000, that is what I would expect to pay. I wouldn't expect the painter to say that I had to pay £1,500 because the cost hadn't included any labour and was just the cost of the paint. Cost price of a service should include labour costs.

True but I think this is a moot point now as Dr G has confirmed it was for free. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Old Git said:

I can’t see how there’s any confusion. If I was letting a mate have something at cost, it would be the purchase invoice price to me. Literally what it cost me. 

That is fine for goods, but if you are providing a service at cost, which involves labour, then the labour is a part of what it has cost you.

Anyway, as has been said, it is a moot point in this situation as Dr Glover has said she would provide the service for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

To be an expert in this field you need qualifications combined with experience. One you work for a time in that field the experience becomes more valuable than the qualifications. Both ladies have this so we should back off on the my Doc knows more than yours competition.

Maybe they should meet up for a coffee.

Given that it's impossible to meet someone for coffee without it appearing on Manx Forums within about 3 nanoseconds, I'm sure we'll be the first to hear.

Actually Rachel has always spoken respectfully of Ewart, but you have to remember that Ewart is constrained politically as to what she can say.  She can advise all she wants, but in the end decisions are made by the politicians (not always for the best scientific reasons) and she has to go along with it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Given that it's impossible to meet someone for coffee without it appearing on Manx Forums within about 3 nanoseconds, I'm sure we'll be the first to hear.

Actually Rachel has always spoken respectfully of Ewart, but you have to remember that Ewart is constrained politically as to what she can say.  She can advise all she wants, but in the end decisions are made by the politicians (not always for the best scientific reasons) and she has to go along with it. 

Rightly or wrongly, Dr Ewart has become the figurehead of DHSC policy, and catcher of Ashford's hot potatoes in briefings. I don't like how the IOMG go for the trying to blind us with sciencey words when there is a question that's a controversial topic, or something a Minister isn't clear on.

Whether she has any real capability to effect change that is against the tide of the dynamic duo is something I'm not sure on. You see what happens if you don't nod, agree and say "Yes Minister".

I don't agree with disparaging her for a PhD in history, a PhD is about the transferable skills you pick up as a researcher. She can apply those to the background in medicine she already has.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

If that were true how do you explain the disparaging references to qualifications

You would argue the colour of orange juice! 

Barlow was under the misunderstanding that Dr Ewart got her Dr title from a PhD in history not from medicine.  If that was the case he would be right to raise it as a concern.  

I don't think anyone has said Rachel is better qualified than Henrietta, or vice versa. Just that they have different expertise, all of which is very useful in the current circumstances and that it is a pity that Rachel's particular and highly relevant expertise is being ignored.

  • Like 7
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...