IOM Covid removing restrictions

[The Old Git]

20 minutes ago, Banker said:

There’s also a shortage of flu jabs here as the GP said ring in a few weeks to my mum.

I was offered one the next day. 

[P.K.]

13 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Is he even in the IOM to be so concerned? It’s amazing so many people object so vehemently to discussions around bringing in a proper risk based approach rather than just shutting the place down and chucking people in prison. No wonder we had the birch for so long. The only deterrents we ever seem to come up with seem to be more focussed on delivering maximum cruelty and oppression than actually addressing and fixing the problem at hand.  

The thing I object to is folks going on about how wonderful the CI's processes are when they're flawed.

Have to say coming back gave some concerns. Stopped at the gate and handed over passports and paperwork to the two ladies there. Better half got ticked off the list straight away. Then confusion as they couldn't find my name. So they decided they would just add me to the list! It was only when one of them actually read out the name they were looking for so the other could write it down that I realised they were looking for someone with my first and middle (baptismal?) name but not my surname!

So if your name is not on the list apparently they'll just add it....

[HeliX]

3 hours ago, trmpton said:

Agreed.  I said up three that this is a PR nightmare but was dismissed by the usual suspects.

As an island we are getting absolutely torn apart on a number of forums etc.

People who have never heard of the place saying they will never visit and suggesting the human rights card is pulled by the UK.  Reference to backwaters, Royston Vasey, The Wicker Man etc people going on about how we lock up gay people and had the birch until relatively recently.

I think it has the potential to cause some real issues. Hope I am wrong

People who've never heard of the island weren't likely to be potential visitors either way.

You can find people whinging about literally anything/anywhere on the internet. Wouldn't put much stock in it, mind.

[P.K.]

10 minutes ago, John Wright said:

There will have been two negatives 9 or 10 days apart. What is the risk of someone having contracted and not showing by second test? Is it a justifiable risk when assessed because it’s so low. Is it worth it to allow people back to work a week earlier?

As I pointed out it's only worth doing if IOMG drop the lesser restrictions after Day 8.

[Banker]

1 minute ago, P.K. said:

As I pointed out it's only worth doing if IOMG drop the lesser restrictions after Day 8.

May as well just scrap the lesser restrictions anyway as they don’t really make sense. I can go to Tesco, Boots, M& S, butchers etc but can’t sit outside a cafe!

I can gather in a group of 10 inside or out but can’t sit in a restaurant.

Incidentally I had no contact during seven days isolation to check if I was and could have gone out evening of day 7 as had email at 6.50pm saying I am now on the lesser restrictions.

[Beelzebub3]

35 minutes ago, Banker said:

There’s also a shortage of flu jabs here as the GP said ring in a few weeks to my mum.

My wife and I visited the drop in at Peel on Saturday morning at 9.45, Surgery empty only the staff and we got both the flu and pneumonia jabs at the same time.

[Banker]

4 minutes ago, Beelzebub3 said:

My wife and I visited the drop in at Peel on Saturday morning at 9.45, Surgery empty only the staff and we got both the flu and pneumonia jabs at the same time.

Must be different in each area, this was southern start last week 

[John Wright]

40 minutes ago, P.K. said:

As I pointed out it's only worth doing if IOMG drop the lesser restrictions after Day 8.

You’re really obtuse sometimes.

You’re becoming hard to communicate with. You seize a point and won’t let go, even if you have got hold of the wrong end of the ( sometimes wrong or a different ) stick, then had it explained to you. You’re dogged at holding on to your misconceptions and preconceptions, however wrong you are.

Getting rid of day 8 to 14 restrictions  is what I’m suggesting. I repeat that. You miss it every time.
 

The restrictions aren’t really lesser, are they? No public facing work, no work without agreement of employer. No pubs, restaurants, theatres, cinemas, meetings with friends and extended family. All you can do is go for a solitary walk or shop for essentials.

[P.K.]

2 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Which is what I’m suggesting. The restrictions aren’t really lesser, are they. No public facing work, no work without agreement of employer. No pubs, restaurants, theatres, cinemas, meetings with friends and extended family. All you can do is go for a solitary walk or shop for essentials.

Quite.

Which is why we didn't bother with the test. Also there were some doubts over whether wine/beer counted as "essentials" which if not they should be.

I personally think IOMG will be very resistant to change but they're aware of the pressure building re families etc and 2021 is after all an election year.

Should concentrate the mind somewhat.

[Banker]

15 minutes ago, John Wright said:

You’re really obtuse sometimes.

You’re becoming hard to communicate with. You seize a point and won’t let go, even if you have got hold of the wrong end of the stick, then had it explained to you. You’re dogged at holding on to your misconceptions and preconceptions.

Getting rid of day 8 to 14 restrictions  is what I’m suggesting. I repeat that. You miss it every time.
 

The restrictions aren’t really lesser, are they? No public facing work, no work without agreement of employer. No pubs, restaurants, theatres, cinemas, meetings with friends and extended family. All you can do is go for a solitary walk or shop for essentials.

John, according to the lesser guidelines you can meet family & friends in a gathering of no more than 10 . I did clarify that with the 111 line and they said yes including outside sports upto 10 which does limit it a bit.

this is extract from notice 

you must not attend a gathering of more than ten people;

Edited October 5, 2020 by Banker

[John Wright]

1 minute ago, P.K. said:

Quite.

Which is why we didn't bother with the test. Also there were some doubts over whether wine/beer counted as "essentials" which if not they should be.

I personally think IOMG will be very resistant to change but they're aware of the pressure building re families etc and 2021 is after all an election year.

Should concentrate the mind somewhat.

And it’s why I shan’t be testing on 16/10. I’m going to ride it out. I’ve Tesco booked on 10/10, 18/10 and 25/10. Ive got a lot of catch up from 8 weeks away. Luckily I work from my home office.

I've got appointments pencilled in starting 26/10 and a couple hearings and an ombudsman adjudication.

Plus I’ve been having work done whilst I’ve been travelling. Lounge, diner, stairs and landing re carpeted and redecorated, stair lift installed. There’s a couple of days making sure everything is back in place and hours of fun zooming up and downstairs.

As for essential alcohol, I’m visiting the biggest wholesaler in Penedes wine region tomorrow. Last chance before 31/12 to bring back unlimited quantity for personal use. Not sure how I’ll cope if I’m limited to 2 bottles. 

[Declan]

 

19 minutes ago, John Wright said:

You’re really obtuse sometimes.

You’re becoming hard to communicate with. You seize a point and won’t let go, even if you have got hold of the wrong end of the stick, then had it explained to you. You’re dogged at holding on to your misconceptions and preconceptions.

Ignore him John, he's always trying to turn a discussion into a contest. One where he's the referee, governing body, and changes the rules on a whim. Where even though he's the only one playing, and he declares himself the overall champion, somehow he still always loses.

[Gladys]

30 minutes ago, P.K. said:

 

I personally think IOMG will be very resistant to change but they're aware of the pressure building re families etc and 2021 is after all an election year.

Should concentrate the mind somewhat.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call a volte face!

Edited October 5, 2020 by Gladys

[wrighty]

3 hours ago, John Wright said:

Perhaps @wrightyand @rachomicscould comment on the suggestion of pre entry testing, admission only if negative, followed by 7 days strictly enforced isolation, then a second test and if negative then no further restriction.

Lots of countries are requiring testing within the 72 hours before arrival. As @rachomicssays it seems odd and can give a false sense of security absent further measures and follow up. Lots of countries are using 10, rather than 14 day quarantine.

Im trying to see if there’s a next step along the road to the new normal.

What we can't escape is that there is a time lag between exposure to the virus and development of symptoms (or even not!) during which time there is potential for transmission.  The likelihood of getting a true negative test is higher the longer the interval between exposure and testing.  I use the phrase 'true negative' carefully - test too early and that negative test could be false.  Test very late, and even if the patient has had covid but has been diligently isolating, the test may be negative but who cares about that - it indicates safety to get on with normal business.  There is a 'sweet spot' when testing is most likely to be accurate and relevant.  If people are symptomatic and test negative, it's likely it's a true negative.  If people are asymptomatic and test negative, the likelihood is maximum that it's a true negative at about 7-10 days post potential exposure.

For those travelling to the island from the UK potential for exposure is to the point they've left, unless there is some system of proper quarantine before departure.  We could test 3 days before departure (although the result doesn't mean much if negative), isolate, and then test at day 4 or 5 here.  But is that any better than the current day 7 testing scheme - we can't guarantee isolation here, how is it going to be possible in the UK or elsewhere when there aren't even neighbours or petrol station workers to report breaches?

I don't see a better way of doing it than we are now with perhaps a couple of tweaks.  I'm uncertain of the logic that requires a full 14 days isolation from the point of positive test at day 7 - presumably exposure was 7 days previously so I'd think a further 7 days should be acceptable.  And I don't see there's a much higher risk by allowing UK relatives and friends to visit, with the same rules for 7 day isolation and testing as we have for returning locals.  I hope this is brought in soon, as ministers seem to have indicated.

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

You’re really obtuse sometimes.

You’re becoming hard to communicate with. You seize a point and won’t let go, even if you have got hold of the wrong end of the ( sometimes wrong or a different ) stick, then had it explained to you. You’re dogged at holding on to your misconceptions and preconceptions, however wrong you are.

My mind works in mysterious ways....

It must be something to do with being manx.

I fully understood where you were coming from John but I doubt if IOMG will go for it.

If only because the first test is out of their jurisdiction and control.