IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Nom de plume]

21 minutes ago, Gladys said:

I don't understand how reducing the isolation period alone does anything useful seeing as the Kent variant is thought to have a longer incubation period.  If you have isolation, surely it should be for as long as the likely incubation period?  Otherwise you introduce  pre-travel testing, on entry, then again after 7 days.

Our ‘experts’ will have it covered Gladys. Whoever they are & wherever they reside & whatever data they use.

[John Wright]

23 minutes ago, Gladys said:

I don't understand how reducing the isolation period alone does anything useful seeing as the Kent variant is thought to have a longer incubation period.  If you have isolation, surely it should be for as long as the likely incubation period?  Otherwise you introduce  pre-travel testing, on entry, then again after 7 days.

Considering that UK allow you out of isolation  if you’ve done a pre travel PCR and at day 5 and they’re both negative, or 10 days isolation no test, as opposed to day 1, 7, 14 testing or 21 day isolation, the disparities are large.

We've had day 1 and 13 testing for 15 weeks, and day 7 testing for slightly less. I wonder what the stats show for when positives are detected. As it’s about risk management that should be available and fed into the decision making. Perhaps it is. Why isn’t the info publicly available?

 

[trmpton]

21 minutes ago, Gladys said:

I don't understand how reducing the isolation period alone does anything useful seeing as the Kent variant is thought to have a longer incubation period.  If you have isolation, surely it should be for as long as the likely incubation period?  Otherwise you introduce  pre-travel testing, on entry, then again after 7 days.

Testing at entry, isolate until result.  If it is negative out and about with very slight restrictions.  Another test day 7, if clear back to normal.

This seems like a winner to me.

Yes there is risk, but that’s life and hopefully people will be getting regular tests anyway although we will probably go against the flow on that as well.

[Nom de plume]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

Considering that UK allow you out of isolation  if you’ve done a pre travel PCR and at day 5 and they’re both negative, or 10 days isolation no test, as opposed to day 1, 7, 14 testing or 21 day isolation, the disparities are large.

We've had day 1 and 13 testing for 15 weeks, and day 7 testing for slightly less. I wonder what the stats show for when positives are detected. As it’s about risk management that should be available and fed into the decision making. Perhaps it is. Why isn’t the info available?

 

This is what I don’t get.

Prince Harry will likely fly in today / tomorrow, pre-travel test & be out for Grandpa’s funeral after his second test on Day 5.

Sage are providing the advice & expertise.

Who are we using & where’s the data to back up the decision making.

[Banker]

3 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Considering that UK allow you out of isolation  if you’ve done a pre travel PCR and at day 5 and they’re both negative, or 10 days isolation no test, as opposed to day 1, 7, 14 testing or 21 day isolation, the disparities are large.

We've had day 1 and 13 testing for 15 weeks, and day 7 testing for slightly less. I wonder what the stats show for when positives are detected. As it’s about risk management that should be available and fed into the decision making. Perhaps it is. Why isn’t the info available?

 

Hopefully the information you mention will be included in the paper Comin are considering Thursday on moving to 3a end April.
Ashford also mentioned in PM interview that the requirement to isolate away from families was being reviewed,probably in light of many recent complaints 

[P.K.]

18 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Considering that UK allow you out of isolation  if you’ve done a pre travel PCR and at day 5 and they’re both negative, or 10 days isolation no test, as opposed to day 1, 7, 14 testing or 21 day isolation, the disparities are large.

We've had day 1 and 13 testing for 15 weeks, and day 7 testing for slightly less. I wonder what the stats show for when positives are detected. As it’s about risk management that should be available and fed into the decision making. Perhaps it is. Why isn’t the info publicly available?

I suspect the current system, with it's expensive testing, is designed to discourage people from travelling. Simple as. The alternative option of 21 days self-isolation would be difficult to maintain without food deliveries and exercise etc.

Win/win for IOMG.

Dr Glover did price out how much a test should cost and amazingly it fell well short of the round £50

[John Wright]

3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Dr Glover did price out how much a test should cost and amazingly it fell well short of the round £50

And yet David claims it costs government more and they run each one at a loss. But can’t/won’t produce the fag packet workings

[Gladys]

41 minutes ago, Nom de plume said:

Our ‘experts’ will have it covered Gladys. Whoever they are & wherever they reside & whatever data they use.

Phew!

[2112]

12 minutes ago, John Wright said:

And yet David claims it costs government more and they run each one at a loss. But can’t/won’t produce the fag packet workings

That’s because it’s probably been shredded. 

[P.K.]

 

10 minutes ago, John Wright said:

And yet David claims it costs government more and they run each one at a loss. But can’t/won’t produce the fag packet workings

Quite.

There are 130 tests booked for today.

How many are free, gratis and for nothing?

If the last ferry I was on is anything to go by that will be most of them....

[the stinking enigma]

14 hours ago, Banker said:

Ashie Q&A with Moulton, isolating & borders mentioned again 

 

Ashie said on that that there's a 1 in 100 chance of developing a "stroke event" from getting covid itself. I find that a little alarming, considering i haven't even had a letter yet and the kids are back at school tomorrow, and neither have they. 1 in 100, is that correct?0

[Gladys]

12 minutes ago, John Wright said:

And yet David claims it costs government more and they run each one at a loss. But can’t/won’t produce the fag packet workings

There is a lot of information that is not shared with us.  Sadly, the majority of people cba or are happy to let government look after them and make the right decisions for them - it is an infantile population that we have. 

DA always appears well briefed, even if he can't say efficacy, and confident which leads many to assume he knows what he is talking about.  Take him off piste and he retains a confident delivery but often the words don't make much sense.

Be that as it may, we need the information, where it has come from and to see more than the usual suspects from Comin so we can see if they really understand the decisions being made. 

 

[Gladys]

According to the IOMG website, Comin consists of HQ plus 8 ministers.  On reading the list, those named number 8 including HQ - Skelly, Cregeen, Baker, Harmer, Allinson, Ashford and Boot.

[Newbie]

34 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Dr Glover did price out how much a test should cost and amazingly it fell well short of the round £50

Dr Glover's calculation only took into account the cost of consumables and made some assumptions about the staff costs for actually taking the swabs and processing them in the lab. It didn't take account of things such as NI, Superannuation, and it didn't take into account any of the administrative costs of organising tests and informing people of results (done through 111). It didn't make any allowance for community swabs. It also didn't take any account of equipment costs (either capital costs or ongoing running costs), insurance or the pro rata cost of the buildings and infrastructure required to run the operation. I can see why it only took her 30 minutes

[Nom de plume]

I’m still trying to come to terms with the news that one of Ashy’s mates caught Covid three times (on the PM interview).

Chances of that eh?

Island Health Minister peddles a further narrative of fear to perpetuate restrictions & CoMin justification for prolonged nonsense.