IOM Covid removing restrictions

[P.K.]

26 minutes ago, Gladys said:

So, keep it for posterity, whatever that means. 

Saved for future generations.

So they can learn from our mistakes.

Like reducing border controls before treatments like Paxlovid and Molnupiravir were developed which would have saved lives.

[Gladys]

19 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Saved for future generations.

So they can learn from our mistakes.

Like reducing border controls before treatments like Paxlovid and Molnupiravir were developed which would have saved lives.

Well, I hope my post on a small local internet forum does prove instructive to future generations faced with whatever new virus comes along.

Don't think that is very likely tbh.

BTW, I know what posterity means, just wondered why you thought my post worthy of consignment to that invaluable archive.

[Danoo]

8 hours ago, Ramseyboi said:

OMG!! 😂😂😂

The psychology is pretty easy to understand.

Some people who post under their real names, like Wrighty and John Wright, are well balanced posters who offer decent contributions.

Others come across as mad as a box of frogs and a little unhinged, so they get treated as such. 

It doesn’t take a psychologist to conclude what the issue is here.

 

[747-400]

4 minutes ago, Danoo said:

The psychology is pretty easy to understand.

Some people who post under their real names, like Wrighty and John Wright, are well balanced posters who offer decent contributions.

Others come across as mad as a box of frogs and a little unhinged, so they get treated as such. 

It doesn’t take a psychologist to conclude what the issue is here.

 

 t think parts of the GMP are to blame. Normally Manx crabs would be at play, but here they have put Dr G on a pedastal, asked her opinion and taken everything she has said as gospel. We know SAGE is comprised of scientists from many different backgorunds and Vallance had to make a best judgement based on often opposing views. The scientific understanding was rapidly evolving and each country took a different approach to dealing with the virus. Parts of the GMP could not use their objectivity and see there was no text book solution. 

[CallMeCurious]

6 minutes ago, 747-400 said:

 t think parts of the GMP are to blame. Normally Manx crabs would be at play, but here they have put Dr G on a pedastal, asked her opinion and taken everything she has said as gospel. We know SAGE is comprised of scientists from many different backgorunds and Vallance had to make a best judgement based on often opposing views. The scientific understanding was rapidly evolving and each country took a different approach to dealing with the virus. Parts of the GMP could not use their objectivity and see there was no text book solution. 

It all comes down risks and probability but when it comes to humans there are so many divergent reactions and interactions that any logic in the modelling gets swamped out by the flux of human nature. The choice somehwere between self-preservation and the greater good. Sometimes they align and sometimes they don't.

At the beginnng, when data was slim, risks were high and people mostly understood and even sympathised with the decison makers. Later on, proabably around the 2nd or 3rd lockdown, a year into it and after 6 months (mostly) normality on the island, it felt like those in charge were caught with their pants down.

We had the vaccines coming into Christmas but nowhere to administer them. Another mistake was using the same 111 line to book vaccinations and book a test. It apperared to be woefully underresourced. How many times did they have problems with it? As was said at the beginning vacciantion was the way out and yet it felt like we were caught napping.

Personally, I think the lack of preperation and urgency in getting the vaccine rolled out was one of the big mistakes. At less than 0.075% of our population dying from/with Covid, we were very, very lucky. 

This is why we need a Covid enquiry (at whatever level) so the lessons learned are not lost to future generations. Every country had a unique solution and although here border restrictions were tragic for some, for the majorty they were far better protection than masks, social distancing and hand washing.  

The steam packet incident, if nothing else, highlighted a chink in the defence and lead to a rapid surge which highlighted how fast it could spread leading to our (hopefully) last lockdown.

 

[CallMeCurious]

[cissolt]

44 minutes ago, 747-400 said:

 Parts of the GMP could not use their objectivity and see there was no text book solution. 

This last statement seems to be repeated by politicians quite often.  If you read through the PAC minutes you will find that we had numerous text books, or pandemic preparedness plans, and they were not adhered to.  This was one of the biggest failures of the govt handling of the whole thing.

[P.K.]

3 minutes ago, cissolt said:

This last statement seems to be repeated by politicians quite often.  If you read through the PAC minutes you will find that we had numerous text books, or pandemic preparedness plans, and they were not adhered to.  This was one of the biggest failures of the govt handling of the whole thing.

It was clearly underestimated.

At the start of the pandemic I can still recall Matt Hancock emerging from one of the five Cobra meetings that Bozo didn't bother attending and announcing to all and sundry that there was no danger to the general public.

Go figure...

[the stinking enigma]

34 minutes ago, CallMeCurious said:

Where is that graph from? I don't remember 11 deaths in a day

[Ham_N_Eggs]

39 minutes ago, P.K. said:

It was clearly underestimated.

At the start of the pandemic I can still recall Matt Hancock emerging from one of the five Cobra meetings that Bozo didn't bother attending and announcing to all and sundry that there was no danger to the general public.

Go figure...

Which was exactly what both Quayle and Ashford said to us.

[CallMeCurious]

35 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

Where is that graph from? I don't remember 11 deaths in a day

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/isle-of-man/

September 10th apparently, possibly these figures are from what is reported officially to WHO and not what IOMG diegns to pass onto GMP. Or could have been adjustment when cases reviewed. I've noticed the reporting of deaths is now out synch with the number of cases reported.

Looking at the deaths graph it seems they might be chunking the reporting of deaths to a few more every few days to avoid the impression of daily deaths.  

Might correlate to the 2474 active cases peak on 26th Juty this year.

 

[Happier diner]

2 hours ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Which was exactly what both Quayle and Ashford said to us.

It was the date that the deaths were reported. Not necessarily the date of the deaths as far as I know.

[Gladys]

3 hours ago, cissolt said:

This last statement seems to be repeated by politicians quite often.  If you read through the PAC minutes you will find that we had numerous text books, or pandemic preparedness plans, and they were not adhered to.  This was one of the biggest failures of the govt handling of the whole thing.

Indeed, and that has been one of the questions that I think any inquiry should focus on.  Was there an emergency response/disaster recovery plan?  If so was it followed and, if not, why not?  If there was no such plan, why not? 

Of course any plan would not deal with the specific circumstances, but it would have given a framework and identified what committees or advisory groups were needed, who should be on them, including from outside of government, and would also have identified if a 1936 Emergency Powers Act was fit for purpose almost 90 years later. 

The fact that that legislation had not been updated does make you wonder if there was a plan, or if there was if it was nothing more than something to tick a box and not given a second thought thereafter. 

[momo65]

4 hours ago, cissolt said:

This last statement seems to be repeated by politicians quite often.  If you read through the PAC minutes you will find that we had numerous text books, or pandemic preparedness plans, and they were not adhered to.  This was one of the biggest failures of the govt handling of the whole thing.

The problem with that is the plans were based on a different disease (influenza) which is considerably less infectious and killed a lower proportion of cases. There could be no plan for this. The problem was sticking to the wrong plan for too long and not adapting it rapidly based on what was clearly happening in Italy. You can almost hear our DPH saying "but there's no evidence." They closed the border once she went on holiday and just played it by ear. If they had rapidly amended the plan it would have provided a more measured response more rapidly. 

[Gladys]

13 minutes ago, momo65 said:

The problem with that is the plans were based on a different disease (influenza) which is considerably less infectious and killed a lower proportion of cases. There could be no plan for this. The problem was sticking to the wrong plan for too long and not adapting it rapidly based on what was clearly happening in Italy. You can almost hear our DPH saying "but there's no evidence." They closed the border once she went on holiday and just played it by ear. If they had rapidly amended the plan it would have provided a more measured response more rapidly. 

But there needed to be a government wide plan, not just a health plan. 

Regulated business has to have a plan, why not government?