IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Banker]

4 minutes ago, Lagman said:

I prefer ours and Guernsey's.

Guernsey is different in that they are allowing non residents in and still have less cases than us. Also Guernsey have a plan to move to testing on arrival in next few months.

I would be happy with Guernsey plans, the main issue is we have no plans.

[Lagman]

5 minutes ago, Banker said:

Guernsey is different in that they are allowing non residents in and still have less cases than us. Also Guernsey have a plan to move to testing on arrival in next few months.

I would be happy with Guernsey plans, the main issue is we have no plans.

I think all 3 islands are doing ok at the moment actually.

[wrighty]

Testing asymptomatic people has a very low yield.  Even Bolton, which appears to be the corona capital of the UK, has (from memory) only 160 cases per 100,000 people. So that's 1 for every 600 people at random you test.  Testing everyone on arrival would not find many cases.  We're testing everyone admitted to hospital, with no cases found since April.  I think that's reasonable evidence that there is no meaningful covid in the community.

There may well have been cases who have done the right thing, isolating for 14 days on their arrival, that we don't know about.  If they're asymptomatic, and don't pass it on to anyone else because they follow the rules, who cares?  It's obvious that if we offer testing at 7 days we will find the odd case.  It confirms that the PCR testing locally is still working - @rachomics and the team must have been wondering if the reagents had gone off

Current strategy is working.  Jersey are doing OK too, but they're taking more risks than we are.  They might be right.  But I am still waiting for someone to explain to me in words of one syllable why copying them will result in any economic benefits here.

[wrighty]

2 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

 By your logic you can never catch AiDS if you don't have an AIDS test! 

Poor analogy - HIV infection, which is what you test for (AIDS is a syndromic diagnosis, part of which is a positive HIV test), is irreversible.  If you don't know you have it you can still pass it on.  Whereas with covid, if you don't know you have it, but keep away from everyone for a couple of weeks after potential exposure (being in the UK) it's fine.

[rachomics]

4 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Testing asymptomatic people has a very low yield.  Even Bolton, which appears to be the corona capital of the UK, has (from memory) only 160 cases per 100,000 people. So that's 1 for every 600 people at random you test.  Testing everyone on arrival would not find many cases.  We're testing everyone admitted to hospital, with no cases found since April.  I think that's reasonable evidence that there is no meaningful covid in the community.

There may well have been cases who have done the right thing, isolating for 14 days on their arrival, that we don't know about.  If they're asymptomatic, and don't pass it on to anyone else because they follow the rules, who cares?  It's obvious that if we offer testing at 7 days we will find the odd case.  It confirms that the PCR testing locally is still working - @rachomics and the team must have been wondering if the reagents had gone off

Current strategy is working.  Jersey are doing OK too, but they're taking more risks than we are.  They might be right.  But I am still waiting for someone to explain to me in words of one syllable why copying them will result in any economic benefits here.

@wrighty we definitely need to go for a cuppa at some point to put the world to rights. You should be able to find my DHSC email. 

Part of diagnostic testing with PCR is that we run controls with every batch of tests. There's always a "positive control" so known positive material that will come up positive with that batch of tests. There's also two negative controls: an extraction negative (to make sure the viral isolation reagents aren't contaminated) and a PCR negative (to make sure the PCR reagents aren't contaminated). These tell us that the test is working fine, even if all the patient samples test negative.

[wrighty]

2 minutes ago, rachomics said:

@wrighty we definitely need to go for a cuppa at some point to put the world to rights. You should be able to find my DHSC email. 

Part of diagnostic testing with PCR is that we run controls with every batch of tests. There's always a "positive control" so known positive material that will come up positive with that batch of tests. There's also two negative controls: an extraction negative (to make sure the viral isolation reagents aren't contaminated) and a PCR negative (to make sure the PCR reagents aren't contaminated). These tell us that the test is working fine, even if all the patient samples test negative.

Tongue in cheek comment Rachel, I have every confidence in the testing protocols.  Will call you about coffee.

[Uhtred]

When, as has been stated in respect of the two new cases reported today, they are described as ‘not being in the community’ what exactly does this mean?

[HeliX]

Just now, Uhtred said:

When, as has been stated in respect of the two new cases reported today, they are described as ‘not being in the community’ what exactly does this mean?

Not caught from another person on the Island. Or words to that effect. Imported.

[Uhtred]

Just now, HeliX said:

Not caught from another person on the Island. Or words to that effect. Imported.

Cheers!

[rachomics]

32 minutes ago, wrighty said:

It confirms that the PCR testing locally is still working - @rachomics and the team must have been wondering if the reagents had gone off

This is the level of anxiety that's going to put me in an early grave. There's nothing like the testing expectations of 86,000 people to put the stress levels up. We check this with with controls for every run of testing to make sure so I can sleep at night. 

[rachomics]

2 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

When, as has been stated in respect of the two new cases reported today, they are described as ‘not being in the community’ what exactly does this mean?

It means that they're known cases where they had been tested after spending time in the UK (either £50 day 7 testing or key worker pathways). Community cases would be where people had no travel history in the UK (or beyond) and tested positive. 

[Uhtred]

Just now, rachomics said:

It means that they're known cases where they had been tested after spending time in the UK (either £50 day 7 testing or key worker pathways). Community cases would be where people had no travel history in the UK (or beyond) and tested positive. 

Thank you very much. 

[thesultanofsheight]

2 hours ago, Cambon said:

So, basically you cannot. Because although allowing a few thousand tourists in would definitely benefit a few hotels, allowing 85,000 people to leave the island and spend would be far worse economically. Sultan may call it entrapment. It is not. It is keeping islanders safe.

For what must now be the hundredth time. Not one poster in this thread who seems to be supporting more border flexibility has mentioned it’s to support tourism. It’s only you who continually does that when backed into a corner you can’t get out of. It is also bordering on entrapment. If it was on health grounds we’d be policing self isolators very rigidly and testing more returnees which we aren’t. It’s just creating a hassle factor to keep people trapped here spending. I disagree with Banker in blaming HQ for this as I doubt it’s a strategy he devised or massively supports from some of the public statements he’s made. But the faceless masses in government have clearly decided on this as being the cheapest easiest solution rather than being arsed doing anything more robust. After all we couldn’t have any open and discernible data disrupting the carefully placed thought in peoples heads that we are covid free and that all we have to do is close down for another 5 years to keep it up. Reported cases are going to continue to rise purely because of more testing (even if people have to pay £50). Exactly like reported cases are spiking in the UK - because more people are being tested. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[P.K.]

51 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

For what must now be the hundredth time. Not one poster in this thread who seems to be supporting more border flexibility has mentioned it’s to support tourism. It’s only you who continually does that when backed into a corner you can’t get out of. It is also bordering on entrapment. If it was on health grounds we’d be policing self isolators very rigidly and testing more returnees which we aren’t. It’s just creating a hassle factor to keep people trapped here spending. I disagree with Banker in blaming HQ for this as I doubt it’s a strategy he devised or massively supports from some of the public statements he’s made. But the faceless masses in government have clearly decided on this as being the cheapest easiest solution rather than being arsed doing anything more robust. After all we couldn’t have any open and discernible data disrupting the carefully placed thought in peoples heads that we are covid free and that all we have to do is close down for another 5 years to keep it up. Reported cases are going to continue to rise purely because of more testing (even if people have to pay £50). Exactly like reported cases are spiking in the UK - because more people are being tested. 

I'm sure even Mr Quayle realises that with infections rising in the UK and winter on the way now is not the time to make changes.

If it ain't broke...

[trmpton]

6 hours ago, P.K. said:

I'm sure even Mr Quayle realises that with infections rising in the UK and winter on the way now is not the time to make changes.

If it ain't broke...

“Infections rising” and “identified infections rising due to increased testing” are two very different things!

With only the details reported to go on it sounds very much like we have three examples of the latter recently.  People who, without the additional testing in place, would have returned to the island, isolated for 14 days and then gone about their business without ever showing as an infection or case and almost certainly after 14 days not passed it to anyone else.

The same is happening in the UK.  Extra testing is identifying people who didn’t even know they had it.  They are then being contact traced and surprise surprise more people are found who didn’t know they had it.

There are no useful statistics that can show a rise or drop in cases as the testing isn’t consistent.  The only useful figures are hospital admissions and deaths and even they aren’t a true reflection of how prevalent the virus is due to the way they are recorded and advances in treatment.