Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Banker said:

How many fucking times do you need to be told he has no science!!!

here is a copy of Rachel tweet again, read it this time & stop going on about Howie must have science to help decisions!!!

Honestly, it would have been nice if COMIN/

had given us the heads up. Or asked us about the statistics and risks associated with day 7 testing. It's not like we don't do this professionally for a living. Reading "papers" are not a substitute for professional advice

We vote them in to make decisions for us. Should they knock at your door for your opinion everytime they have to make a decision ?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Do you have the numbers that demonstrate the new relaxed regulations were responsible for an increase in travel?

ETA - Thinking about it mummy and daddy packing kids off to uni would probably have pushed the numbers up...

Nope, just anecdotal evidence and basic intuition. As soon as the 7 day rule was put in place, it was short enough to encourage several visits to UK family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gladys said:

You know I have read the thread and every link.

So, how does not testing prevent new cases?  If someone one arrives and goes into quarantine for 14 days  but are not tested because they are not able to take the 7 day test, it does not actually stop them having covid, it just stops it being recorded.  And as Dr Glover points out, the 7 day test was useful information.

As I hope I pointed out what I thought was clearly enough the caveats around being released into the wild after a negative test on Day 7 indicated to me that there was still an element of risk involved with doing so.

Or do you think they did it just for a laugh...?

Of course, testing on Day 7 or waiting until symptoms develop up to Day 14 makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to the number of folks coming to the island with the virus.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scotty said:

We vote them in to make decisions for us. Should they knock at your door for your opinion everytime they have to make a decision ?

Correct we are a representative democracy, however when decisions are made that impact on your basic freedoms (however well intentioned or necessary), they should consult with the appointed experts in the appropriate field, and then make public the decision making process. The public should not have to blindly speculate, or blindly follow our democratic representatives on such matters without complete transparency.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, pongo said:

Fewer people choosing to go away because they don't want to have to quarantine for 14 days rather than 7.

It's a maybe. On the plus side it simplifies the protocols. There definitely seemed to be a certain amount of confusion about what was allowed after 7 days.

There isn't a single piece of information to back that up.  If they published before and after traffic on that 7 day test rule change there might be some legs to it.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, P.K. said:

As I hope I pointed out what I thought was clearly enough the caveats around being released into the wild after a negative test on Day 7 indicated to me that there was still an element of risk involved with doing so.

Or do you think they did it just for a laugh...?

Of course, testing on Day 7 or waiting until symptoms develop up to Day 14 makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to the number of folks coming to the island with the virus.

So you concede that removal of the 7 day test makes no difference to the number of people coming to the island with the virus?  The natural concomitant of that is that we will not know how many asymptomatic people are coming in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another aspect to consider is the psychology of the masses.  The more measures introduced by government, the more the general populace look to government to do something.  It is infantilism, people abrogating responsibility for themselves  and handing over that responsibility to government.  So government has to respond, introducing more measures, and more and more becoming the parent. 

Some may call it a duty of care, but in reality that is quite a restricted concept to take reasonable care of those who may be affected by your actions or inactions.  It does not mean that government, particularly,  has to take over the responsibility of individuals as a quasi parent.

But that is what is happening now, and with each added measure, the greater the expectation of parental protection.  

In the dark ages, people looked to God for protection.  However  just as God wasn't particularly good at protecting people, neither are elected politicians.  

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Only a matter of time till a couple of idiots get us locked down for 2 weeks end of November.

Need to tie these people down.

And that will entirely be as a result of measures taken by government against covid rather than the virus itself. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...