Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I'm going to have to have a proper look at that paper, which was uploaded as a pre-print (ie not peer reviewed) back in April.  Had its thesis been accepted it would have been published by now.  My gut reaction is that it's probably rubbish.  Having said that, I don't necessarily disagree with the rest of your post, but using that paper as evidence may not be the way to go.

Fair enough. I'll defer to your medical opinion but at the end of the day my argument is essentially just an opinion and we all have different perspectives and opinions on the current situation. Some would like to hide under the bed again and others would like to regain some semblance of normality. Most are inbetween.

We now need to look forwards and use a risk based approach and the unfortunate collateral damage from attempting to deal with this so far is evident for all to see.  

Edited by Lxxx
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

Hospitals never were overflowing with Covid patients and we now have data which suggests complete lockdowns do more harm than good. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717v1

Well a non-peer-reviewed, single-author paper from an oceanographer isn't exactly the overwhelming scientific consensus among epidemiologists I was hoping for.  Especially given the criticisms on technical and other grounds made in the comments.  And even Meunier doesn't say that they did 'more harm than good', just that it made no difference. 

To be fair it's very difficult to assess such measures as 'lockdown' because the actual measures enacted and enforcement of them varies so much between countries and even within them.  One place's 'lockdown' may actually be less stringent than another's nominally non-lockdown restrictions.  The FT made an effort to do some sort of assessment, but that mainly just illustrates how complex things are.  But that's all the more reason not to announce that they don't make any difference based on very limited and misunderstood data.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

the unfortunate collateral damage from attempting to deal with this so far is evident for all to see.  

On the Isle of Man?

We're doing ok here so far. Relatively few businesses have been significantly impacted and many have too much work.

  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pongo said:

On the Isle of Man?

We're doing ok here so far. Relatively few businesses have been significantly impacted and many have too much work.

We were talking in general, but yes I agree we have been fortunate and as someone who has spent a great deal of time across in the past 6 months we don't realise how good we have had it here. The general atmosphere and interactions going about your day to day life in the UK isn't pleasant and will undoubtedly get worse. I hope we can maintain our current situation on the island. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

We were talking in general, but yes I agree we have been fortunate and as someone who has spent a great deal of time across in the past 6 months we don't realise how good we have had it here. The general atmosphere and interactions going about your day to day life in the UK isn't pleasant and will undoubtedly get worse. I hope we can maintain our current situation on the island. 

I agree with you. It's good that you are posting again :)

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

4 minutes ago, Banker said:

It's quite an interesting interview with Chris Thomas isn't it?  It makes you wonder if he was effectively sacked by the civil servants because he wanted to sort out the legislative framework for the various post-emergency measures properly.  The civil servants of course wanted to do their usual trick of leaving everything till last minutes and then rushing whatever suited them through without opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

It's quite an interesting interview with Chris Thomas isn't it?  It makes you wonder if he was effectively sacked by the civil servants because he wanted to sort out the legislative framework for the various post-emergency measures properly.  The civil servants of course wanted to do their usual trick of leaving everything till last minutes and then rushing whatever suited them through without opposition.

He was "effectively " sacked by Howard Quayle.  We know why.  Nothing to do with civil servants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2020 at 5:09 PM, Boo Gay'n said:

Explain the science of "a slow and controlled spread of Covid amongst Islanders whilst keeping it out of community spread".  That would be a mystery!

It's simple.

We all get allocated a time and place to report to (the Sefton, Stakis, Premier Inn, a B'n'B, Jurby depending on what we can afford). We then get issued with army survival packs and are infected with Covid. We then get locked in a room. Each morning we slide a saliva stick under the door - this is tested. Once we've successfully returned a positive test followed a suitable time later by a negative one we are released. 

Obviously, the vulnerable - the elderly, the sick, senior civil servants would be exempt, from this national service.

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...