IOM Covid removing restrictions

[TerryFuchwit]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Really?

Really. Wtf is wrong with people.

I see World War Z is on TV at the moment.  You would think this is the situation we are in.

[Annoymouse]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

Here we go...

Letter from advocate

@Roger Mexico

 

Interestingly there was no mention of the fact we aren’t allowed to actually choose which vaccine we were given, yet this weekend people are being told to do their own research? Well the research suggests Pfizer gives a high protection than AstraZeneca?

[Roger Mexico]

It's a wonderful compendium of bonkers ideas about Covid plus stuff that is readily available with a bit of genuine research.  Though to be fair he's missing a few such as the belief that everyone in hospital with Covid is really suffering from something else or the belief that everyone on the Island has really had it anyway.  He ought to spend more time on Manx Forums.

But there are actually a few topics in there where there are valid questions hidden away.  For example point 5 babbles on about the number of cycles of replication used in testing.  Normally this is irrelevant - if there's nothing there there will still be nothing there no matter how many times you multiply it - that's why false positives are almost impossible, barring contamination. 

However I wonder if, when people are retested after having been shown to be positive, there may be a danger of tiny amounts of inactive viral material being picked up and this may explain why the number of recoveries has been lower than expected, it could also explain the odd pattern of them I referred to yesterday.  I don't know if @rachomics might have any ideas on this.

But on the whole it's just a list of nutty ideas, wild rumours and misunderstanding.  As such it might have some use as list of nonsense that should be countered.

[Polly Quirk]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

It may be tosh, it may not, but I welcome a questioning.  There has been very little questioning of the scientific justification for the steps taken by IOMG, much less a fully advised process. 

Today, we were told GPs were being inundated with awkward questions about the vaccine, after a week of hearing about joy riding bus passengers putting the drivers at risk and how we really weren't behaving ourselves.  The upshot is "our people" are actually imbeciles. 

Quite frankly, the more scrutiny the better because I suspect the wheels are coming off the bus.

See? And I never mentioned the SP,  Dr Glover, the complete cock up in early March, the appalling public relations and my lovely smile. 

Questioning is good, scrutiny is good. But time given over to answering how many chimps were hurt, how recovering alcoholics might be damaged by the vaccine and aborted foetuses might be better spent on doing real work. Surely the question should have been sent to the World health Organisation?

[Roger Mexico]

8 minutes ago, Polly Quirk said:

But time given over to answering how many chimps were hurt, how recovering alcoholics might be damaged by the vaccine and aborted foetuses might be better spent on doing real work. Surely the question should have been sent to the World health Organisation?

Those are my favourites!  I particularly like the idea that recovering alcoholics might be triggered back on the booze by having minuscule amounts of alcohol injected into their muscles.  But not by drinking it.

[Polly Quirk]

12 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

 

However I wonder if, when people are retested after having been shown to be positive, there may be a danger of tiny amounts of inactive viral material being picked up and this may explain why the number of recoveries has been lower than expected, it could also explain the odd pattern of them I referred to yesterday.  I don't know if @rachomics might have any ideas on this.

 

Its a good point, but the lab results will only say whether SARS-CoV-2 RNA has been detected / not detected. It cannot say whether a person is infective or not.

[Polly Quirk]

4 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Those are my favourites!  I particularly like the idea that recovering alcoholics might be triggered back on the booze by having minuscule amounts of alcohol injected into their muscles.  But not by drinking it.

 

Reminds me of a Simpsons episode where Barney Gumble drank some non-alcohol fizzy after passing astronaut training. 

[Annoymouse]

6 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Those are my favourites!  I particularly like the idea that recovering alcoholics might be triggered back on the booze by having minuscule amounts of alcohol injected into their muscles.  But not by drinking it.

I was surprised by that one, if that was the case, wouldn’t certain religious groups be refusing to have it?

[piebaps]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

and my lovely smile. 

 

[Roger Mexico]

6 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

I was surprised by that one, if that was the case, wouldn’t certain religious groups be refusing to have it?

Not really.  As the letter itself points out a lot of foodstuffs such as bread contain similarly tiny traces of alcohol and that does stop religious or other teetotallers from eating them.  That's what makes it so comic, it's explained what bullshit it is.

What that middle section is of course is the long list of dishonest and emotional anti-vaxxer  scare stories that they trot out, despite having had it explained to them what complete nonsense they are.  It's not scientific argument but rhetorical gestures trying to scare the uninformed emotionally rather than give them facts.

[Kipper99]

7 hours ago, Max Power said:

Here we go...

Letter from advocate

@Roger Mexico

 

There’s an invitation for the Law Society to intervene in a practice. The entire anti Vaxer conspiracy theories in one place.

Content smells of Mr Heading, 

[Albert Tatlock]

45 minutes ago, Kipper99 said:

There’s an invitation for the Law Society to intervene in a practice. The entire anti Vaxer conspiracy theories in one place.

Content smells of Mr Heading, 

[Newbie]

7 hours ago, hampsterkahn said:

EU stance on OxAZ vacc.  recently seemed  strange - demanding more but denigrating it and reluctant to to use it.

A case of wanting their cake - and  not eat it.

The EU's current vaccine problems are largely of their own making. The UK (and other countries) signed contracts worth billions with pharmaceutical companies at a time when the success of vaccines in development was far from certain. The EU held off at that time, in order that they could more easily 'pick a winner', as well as holding out for more favourable pricing.

Whilst that might have seemed clever to them at the time, it meant that when the EU signed their contracts, the pharmaceutical companies already had contractual obligations in place with many other countries. The pharmaceutical companies knew what their existing obligations were, and anticipating that there might be capacity issues in vaccine production, included phrases such as 'best efforts' in the EU contracts

The EU's actions have come back to bite them. The speed of vaccine development caught them out, and they are now scrabbling to catch up. The tactic they have chosen to employ is to paint themselves as victims of Big Pharma and non-EU governments. That explains their illogical stance on the AZ vaccine (wanting more of it, but being reluctant to use it). In reality it is a cynical attempt to mitigate the problems caused by their earlier short-sightedness.

[Banker]

Concert for 5000 after rapid testing, suppose that maybe way forward for unvaccinated to attend events if vaccine passports introduced 

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-5-000-music-fans-attend-barcelona-rock-gig-after-passing-same-day-coronavirus-screening-12258771

[John Wright]

13 minutes ago, Banker said:

Concert for 5000 after rapid testing, suppose that maybe way forward for unvaccinated to attend events if vaccine passports introduced 

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-5-000-music-fans-attend-barcelona-rock-gig-after-passing-same-day-coronavirus-screening-12258771

They ran a similar one in Holland last weekend.