IOM Covid removing restrictions

[thesultanofsheight]

10 minutes ago, Scotty said:

I think the little lamb is thinking I am another poster who was being groomed by him

Nobody is biting. With the greatest respect you really need to get your head together. If another poster adding the odd emoji in response to your confusing posts is responsible for such a spiral of paranoia I’d suggest you either stop posting or just block other posters from reading your posts. That must be 5 posters at least now suffering from emoji aversion too. It certainly does seem to be more contagious than COVID-19. 

Edited October 12, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[Neil Down]

11 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Nobody is biting. With the greatest respect you really need to get your head together. If another poster adding the odd emoji in response to your confusing posts is responsible for such a spiral of paranoia I’d suggest you either stop posting or just block other posters from reading your posts. That must be 5 posters at least now suffering from emoji aversion too. It certainly does seem to be more contagious than COVID-19. 

The edit king strikes again

[thesultanofsheight]

9 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

The edit king strikes again

It’s nice that you are so obsessed with my posts (I’d prefer if you just blocked me to be honest) but as I have already explained. I’ve bought a new devise and the predictive text is all over the place for some reason. Probably as I went down market from my usual Apple products. Yet again it’s nothing to obsess or be concerned about. There is no conspiracy. It’s just that the random word replacements are sometimes .. random and I only spot them after I have posted. Can I use a confused emoji in response to your confusing post? Or would that offend? 

Edited October 12, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[Neil Down]

6 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

It’s nice that you are so obsessed with my posts (I’d prefer if you just blocked me to be honest) but as I have already explained. I’ve bought a new devise and the predictive text is all over the place for some reason. Probably as I went down market from my usual Apple products. Yet again it’s nothing to obsess or be concerned about. There is no conspiracy. It’s just that the random word replacements are sometimes .. random and I only spot them after I have posted. Can I use a confused emoji in response to your confusing post? Or would that offend? 

It would be expected...🥴

[Scotty]

8 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

It would be expected...🥴

Not like he is swapping devices for different log ins then ?

Come on , give it up.😂

[HeliX]

This forum is becoming a caricature of itself.

[P.K.]

11 minutes ago, HeliX said:

This forum is becoming a caricature of itself.

MF can't become a caricature of itself.

Only the posters can...

Like you have in the "Teacher's Greed" thread.

From the sublime to the ridiculous....

[P.K.]

Back on thread in view of the new UK "strategy" to "control" the virus Mr Quayle has made what in reality is the ONLY change he can make. Removing the Day 7 test was essentially his only option.

However he should feel quite smug to see that the CI's flawed strategy is becoming apparent with an increase in cases. But folks going down with the virus is not exactly good news for anyone.

Anyway, I suspect the current status quo is here to stay for a while.

Which only leaves the thorny question of "Key Worker" ingress to keep this thread alive...

[thesultanofsheight]

23 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Back on thread in view of the new UK "strategy" to "control" the virus Mr Quayle has made what in reality is the ONLY change he can make. Removing the Day 7 test was essentially his only option.

However he should feel quite smug to see that the CI's flawed strategy is becoming apparent with an increase in cases. But folks going down with the virus is not exactly good news for anyone.

Anyway, I suspect the current status quo is here to stay for a while.

Which only leaves the thorny question of "Key Worker" ingress to keep this thread alive...

The only flaw in the Channel Islands (Jersey) strategy is that they’re still testing people which is throwing up positive results which are being logged and reported on, as opposed to us now testing next to nobody and therefore not throwing up any positive cases to be logged. If you think that is the right thing to do you’re clearly mad. You really think that basically lying to people and potentially covering up the true extent of the on island infection rate by not allowing people to be tested and potentially throw up positives is protecting the public and is, in fact, good practice? If that’s your view it just shows how many people in this island have completely lost the plot. 

Edited October 12, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[P.K.]

1 minute ago, thesultanofsheight said:

The only flaw in the Channel Islands (Jersey) strategy is that they’re still testing people which is throwing up positive results which are being logged and reported on, as opposed to us now testing next to nobody and therefore not throwing up any positive cases to be logged. If you think that is the right thing to do you’re clearly mad. You really think that lying to people and covering up the true extent of the on island infection rate by not allowing people to be tested is protecting the public and good practice? 

How do you know that the folks on Jersey are not simply developing symptoms and reporting them like they should?

Oh dear, you have absolutely no idea, have you?

Not exactly covered yourself in glory tonight have you...?

[NoTail]

2 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

The only flaw in the Channel Islands (Jersey) strategy is that they’re still testing people which is throwing up positive results which are being logged and reported on, as opposed to us now testing next to nobody and therefore not throwing up any positive cases to be logged. If you think that is the right thing to do you’re clearly mad. You really think that basically lying to people and potentially covering up the true extent of the on island infection rate by not allowing people to be tested and potentially throw up positives is protecting the public and is, in fact, good practice? If that’s your view it just shows how many people in this island have completely lost the plot. 

I genuinely don't understand your post here. Right now there is no virus in the community so random testing would be pointless.  Those returning who have symptoms are reporting it and getting tested. The system is working well.

[Black Mirror]

14 hours ago, TheTeapot said:

Don't suppose you'd be able to copy and paste that article could you, its behind a paywall.

 

14 hours ago, pongo said:

Could you share your login details please @Utah 01

 

14 hours ago, Beelzebub3 said:

I never suggested a single entity handpicked him, however he has got into a position which imo he is not fit for purpose and will bring the UK to it's knee's before he has finished he needs to be removed from his role pronto.  If you think I am wrong, look across the Atlantic and see what that other lunatic Trump is up to and they are both as bad as each other.

 

14 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I don't think it's a "plan".  But that is what is happening. 

The main problem appears to be the government simply can't be seen to take a more sensible tack because it would be a glaring admission they have been wrong.

The government simply seem to stumble from one shambolic approach to the next.

 

As requested

Though, to be honest, there are even more persuasive and factual arguments against crude forms of lockdowns and mandatory rules that are ridiculous. I won't elaborate here but, in my opinion, as concerns specifically the UK, the government response has not reduced overall Covid deaths in respect to what what would have been achievable with voluntary forms of social distancing and more liberal and consistent policies. What is the point of having a set of rules that are not really enforceable and changes by the minute? Boris Johnson only understands classics and politics unfortunately.

 

Not all ‘cases’ of Covid are created equal
Ministers are starting from highly questionable assumptions

Dr John Lee - 12 October 2020 • 7:00am

It is a commonplace of science, medicine and everyday life that in order to solve a problem you must first of all frame it correctly. If you ask the right questions, finding solutions can be straightforward. But if you ask the wrong ones you can grope in the dark forever. So having the right perspective really matters.

Unfortunately, the Government’s Covid approach has all the hallmarks of groping in the dark. In the name of “keeping everyone safe” we have endured local and national lockdowns, social distancing, masks, curfews, shutting cafés and pubs. Now we face further restrictions, based on naive modelling and virtually no evidence.

Our societal response doesn’t seem to have advanced much since 1665, the year of the Great Plague. Getting the framing wrong then cost many lives. If you believe (as people did) that plague is caused by corrupted air, not by a bacterium, you will take the wrong actions and make things worse. The authorities locked ill people in their homes with all who lived there, increasing overall mortality several-fold. Believing, paradoxically, that dogs and cats spread the plague, they arranged widespread culls, facilitating spread through a burgeoning rat population and their attendant fleas.

Funnily enough, Covid is actually carried on the air, so at least we have understood that bit correctly. But there has been a dangerous mission-creep since March. Then we were told a three-week lockdown was needed to stop the NHS being overwhelmed. But this has metamorphosed from the ugly caterpillar of protecting the NHS into the even uglier maggot of controlling case numbers. The wrong framing is that “case numbers” are being equated with “positive” tests.

What is a “case” of Covid? Let’s say you developed a viral cold last winter. Were you a “case” of a viral respiratory infection? On a theoretical level the answer must be yes. But on a practical, real-world level, the answer is no: you went to work and carried on with life. You were invisible to the authorities. Let’s say it got a bit worse and you saw your GP. Still no. You decided to take a couple of days off. Still no – you might show up in sick leave statistics, but not as a case of respiratory infection. If you got so far as being admitted to hospital with serious illness, you would show up as a “case” – a tiny proportion of those who actually had the illness.

The contrast with today is clear. Covid was made a notifiable disease in February, obliging all “cases” to be reported to the authorities. Since the only way to identify Covid is with a lab test, positive tests have been equated with positive “cases”. Back then, it was claimed there were no asymptomatic cases, but we now know that 90 per cent or more of people have Covid asymptomatically. A positive test is clearly not a positive “case”.

We also know that Covid affects different groups of people very differently: there is a thousand-fold difference in the severity of the disease between young and old. So the meaning of a positive test cannot be equated with its meaning in March, because the incidence of the disease at present has a completely different demographic.

Then there’s the issue of the tests themselves. Plausible false positive rates make up a substantial proportion of “positives” as unverified mass testing is rapidly rolled out. There is profound uncertainty around what low viral titres – found in a high proportion of young asymptomatic people – mean. Most probably very low infectivity. T-cell (as opposed to antibody) testing indicates that many people already have resistance to the virus. The more we know about this virus, the more it is like viruses we are already familiar with.

And yet, the Government is looking for an easy way out of the complex mass of restrictions they have devised; “control” the “cases” and wait for a vaccine to save the day. Unfortunately the former is a classic example of rubbish in, rubbish out, and the latter is unlikely to happen effectively, given previous attempts.

It’s time for the Government to start asking the right questions; framing things in the light of accumulating evidence, not unexamined preconceptions. On that basis, the course we should be taking is clear: asymptomatic spread is good. Advise and help the very elderly and those with serious illnesses to shield if they wish – but do not compel them, it’s their life, after all. And let everyone else get completely back to normal.

 

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

Interesting article.  Hard to disagree with.

[TheTeapot]

"Asymptomatic spread is good".

This is bollocks.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

4 hours ago, NoTail said:

I genuinely don't understand your post here. Right now there is no virus in the community so random testing would be pointless.  Those returning who have symptoms are reporting it and getting tested. The system is working well.

Setting aside his nutty ranting - his post isn't difficult to understand at all.

The point being made is that we, by removal of the 7 day test, are simply doing so to reduce testing thereby reducing positive test results.  How does that increase safety? Surely all that means is more people milling about in a house with others whilst being positive for covid 19 but not knowing? (Virtually no one REALLY isolates away from people in the same house).

If the main concern had been safety and people mingling with the general population (on a limited basis) post day 7, then they could have kept the 7 day test, made it mandatory and left it so as you had to remain isolated for 14 days.

Instead, they simply stopped testing.  Government couldn't offer a logical reason for it either.  It was hardly like they published the number of people coming in pre and post the introduction of the 7 day test and said "look, by doing this we anticipate halving the traffic into the island ".