IOM Covid removing restrictions

[thesultanofsheight]

7 minutes ago, BenFairfax said:

Number of years lost from a COVID infection the risks are closer across differing ages. For example the cancer data I quoted other day as recall gave ~10% mortality risk for 45 yo patient versus over 40% for 75 year old (naturally very crude on case-by-case basis, but when considering over large sets and for policy decision fine). 45 yo got life expectancy of 32 years, so COVID infection of average would have a cost is 3 years on life expectancy (10% of 30), the 75 yo got 11.7 years, so COVID infection of average would have a cost of 4.7 years. The utility function (usefulness) of remaining years will also differ between these group and from person to person.

And in contrast when you’re 30 and put on the dole because of covid lockdowns you might have a lovely 30 years to look forward to on benefits and no income. As opposed to six to twelve months before you die anyway in a care home. 

Edited November 7, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[TheTeapot]

Why would a lockdown put someone on the dole for 30 years? That's a very strange thing to say.

[thesultanofsheight]

3 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Why would a lockdown put someone on the dole for 30 years? That's a very strange thing to say.

It isn’t really. Unemployment is rising in the UK and many will have serious problems getting back to work. In the 80s the unemployment situation often became generational. There are still legacy issues 30 years or more later from the pit closures and other stuff. 

Edited November 7, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[TheTeapot]

Well you definitely have a darker view than me. 

Have to say though that I'm actually pretty concerned about our government now. Maybe I'm being a bit silly, but I can really see them losing their shit when there is some community transmission, a situation I now see as sadly inevitable. 

I feel like fucking nutting Ashford over that preposterous letter, what the fuck is he doing playing stupid games? I keep banging on about trust and truth, there just isn't any. 

[finlo]

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

The true test is what the doctors treating the patient would put on the death certificate.  

In the same way as they'll put anything but cancer on a death certificate i.e. "died from pneumonia" etc!

[thesultanofsheight]

11 hours ago, TheTeapot said:

Well you definitely have a darker view than me. 

Have to say though that I'm actually pretty concerned about our government now. Maybe I'm being a bit silly, but I can really see them losing their shit when there is some community transmission, a situation I now see as sadly inevitable. 

No you are 100% correct. It’s going to get a bit mental now in the run up to Xmas which is why announcements like this need to be managed properly. People can disagree here and go round full circle over many months - but I think most are starting to pick the real issues up right now which has been a real issue with openness and transparency right from the start in favour of passing draconian emergency laws which you can hide behind for everything. 

Edited November 8, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[BenFairfax]

8 hours ago, Escape Artist said:

The problem is that you arguments rely on assumptions and estimations, and thus, should those assumptions and estimations not be accurate, you may reach the wrong conclusion.

The mortality rates of historical COVID infections are events which happened, but going forward medics ability to treat patients will only improve. Percentage of high risks group becoming infected I do not know, I gave that example to illustrate risk to Nobles collapsing. But there again I do not know what value those who want more open borders (or even those for more restrictions) would put on protection health service. 

8 hours ago, Escape Artist said:

estimations not be accurate, you may reach the wrong conclusion

I do not have a crystal ball, with my back of envelop model I was expecting a community outbreak on island by now. When I considered such questions I see them as probabilistic, I am not trying to be deterministic and say X will happen by Y date. As I recall, when allowed potentially unlimited number of local residents to travel to and forth from Liverpool I was thinking then had 3% chance a day of an individual returning being infected, based on assumption was 250 people traveling and person traveling had same chance of becoming infected as average infection rate in North West on a per day basis. Now cases are more than 10x higher in North West, so talking over 30% now, if make same assumption. [If continued with 7 day test would know whether this was reasonable, but I am sticking to it, with anything not convincing] The fact people in airport/planes, sea terminal/boat, other household members etc not become infected leading to a community outbreak is a surprise. Getting better understanding the exact nature of how transmission can happen would greatly help, I am pretty ignorant of such matters but seems COVID it not as easily transmitted as the plague, but from situation in North West it must be lot more easily transmittable than AIDS. Where in range lies I do not know. 

9 hours ago, Escape Artist said:

The above mentioned “real-life” examples provide a more reliable indication of what would happen if we were to change our policy than models and estimations.

If adopt say policy of Jersey, Guernsey, San Marino etc then reasonable expect similar outcomes (in broad sense at least, we never will be identical since different customs etc) Would suggest you need to weigh number of likely cases against prevalence of infection from areas from which travelers are arriving. As I said before Jersey's going to get shock when wave gets to London. I say shock but maybe they as a community are happy to continue on their present trajectory.... But whatever others are doing we are IoM community and we follow policies which balance views and interests of our local community within our traditions. CM been clear in that a tradition here is to preserve life over economy.

9 hours ago, Escape Artist said:

Our policy, eradication by any mean, is not sustainable for much longer without causing a lot of damage to the island. It was initially adopted because the virus was thought to be much more dangerous than it actually is. It was adopted because politics got in the way of rational thinking.

With idea of damage to economy I just do not buy it. If like examples, please provide a state who in handling pandemic in a more sustainable way (sensible example please not Faro Islands, or Tongo). If mean situation where say young children cannot see grandparents from UK, it is difficult, they likely do not even recognize them now. Just think 2-3 years old kit now, when all this over, in UK they will need to be told that wearing masks and staying 2M away from people in not normal and real normal is not doing either of these things.   

[BenFairfax]

1 hour ago, thesultanofsheight said:

And in contrast when you’re 30 and put on the dole because of covid lockdowns you might have a lovely 30 years to look forward to on benefits and no income. As opposed to six to twelve months before you die anyway in a care home. 

Yes, that different utility. Personally, I put little value on my years over 80, but if I get to 80 I may think differently. I feel terrible for outlook for young in UK, because of crisis would support increased taxes on UK assets with that money used to help young with additional UK training and job support programs over inevitable economic downturn. I assume you mean UK, in IoM bar quaranteen on return from travel we free to do whatever we want and still have very little unemployment. Think education system here got lot to answer for, but that another matter.

At start when we got herd immunity presentation, we were told up to 20% at any one time would be off work sick with COVID. Never know what would have happened if continued with this no intervention policy. But I cannot imagine economy continuing anything close to normal. With 1918 pandemic UK had no social distancing measures, quaranteen on travelers, or limits on movement. In 1918 looked at data for reference and got:

[naturally curious to compare with outcome in 2020 pandemic in UK, so far have UK Feb-Aug 2020 GDP growth -9.2% and now shut down parts of economy again. Last IoM data have is here, and as far as I can tell all parts of economy can function with present restrictions bar Tourist Accomodation but that only accounts for 0.4% of GDP.  As side note, for me curious to compare effect 1918 pandemic on GDP with 1929 stock market crash and its subsequent  depression!]

Not robust in any way to say this happened before so will happen again. But want to point out Austalia in 1918 did have quaranteen on people entering and had stronger economy over same period, find this article with various details, and post two most relevant charts.

[monasqueen]

12 hours ago, BenFairfax said:

If adopt say policy of Jersey, Guernsey, San Marino etc then reasonable expect similar outcomes (in broad sense at least, we never will be identical since different customs etc) Would suggest you need to weigh number of likely cases against prevalence of infection from areas from which travelers are arriving. As I said before Jersey's going to get shock when wave gets to London. I say shock but maybe they as a community are happy to continue on their present trajectory.... But whatever others are doing we are IoM community and we follow policies which balance views and interests of our local community within our traditions. CM been clear in that a tradition here is to preserve life over economy.

Following from that, Jersey appears to be going through a bad spell at the moment, with over 100 active cases, and they are getting close to having their own lockdown.

https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/11/07/islanders-warned-that-jersey-could-be-heading-for-another-lockdown-as-active-cases-top-100/

They have also shown that they are prepared to be tough on anyone who willfully flaunts the regulations.

https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/11/03/visitor-fined-59k-for-going-on-a-pub-crawl-instead-of-self-isolating/

[wrighty]

12 minutes ago, monasqueen said:

Following from that, Jersey appears to be going through a bad spell at the moment, with over 100 active cases, and they are getting close to having their own lockdown.

https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/11/07/islanders-warned-that-jersey-could-be-heading-for-another-lockdown-as-active-cases-top-100/

They have also shown that they are prepared to be tough on anyone who willfully flaunts the regulations.

https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/11/03/visitor-fined-59k-for-going-on-a-pub-crawl-instead-of-self-isolating/

But as people keep pointing out, at least Jersey has a strategy. Unfortunately right now that seems to be to copy the UK into lockdown, and copy IOM by sending folk to prison. 
 

Jersey is ace though - can’t say otherwise in this thread. 

[thesultanofsheight]

36 minutes ago, monasqueen said:

They have also shown that they are prepared to be tough on anyone who willfully flaunts the regulations.

https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/11/03/visitor-fined-59k-for-going-on-a-pub-crawl-instead-of-self-isolating/

Yes but reading that story that guy took the absolute piss and goaded the environmental people, he told them directly he had no intention of self isolating, then he diverted his taxi and told them he was going on a bender. He still only got fined. That is not being like the IOM. Here putting some petrol in your car on an empty forecourt because it was empty gets you four weeks in prison. There is no actual comparison. Jersey is nowhere near as totally fucked up in its covid overreaction as we are. 

Edited November 8, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[John Wright]

12 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Yes but reading that story that guy took the absolute piss and goaded the environmental people, he told them directly he had no intention of self isolating, then he diverted his taxi and told them he was going on a bender. He still only got fined. That is not being like the IOM. Here putting some petrol in your car on an empty forecourt because it was empty gets you four weeks in prison. There is no actual comparison. Jersey is nowhere near as totally fucked up in its covid overreaction as we are. 

Not only that, but he did go to prison, for 15 weeks. He wasn’t able to pay the fine.

Guernsey, Jersey and the UK, have all had lots of £10,000 fines. Most can’t afford them. So they end up serving the default prison sentence, which is often much longer than the 4 weeks immediate prison here.

Our system is fairer in some ways. The high fine option discriminates against the less well off and allows the rich to buy their way out of prison. Is that right?

[Boris Johnson]

7 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Not only that, but he did go to prison, for 15 weeks. He wasn’t able to pay the fine.

Guernsey, Jersey and the UK, have all had lots of £10,000 fines. Most can’t afford them. So they end up serving the default prison sentence, which is often much longer than the 4 weeks immediate prison here.

Our system is fairer in some ways. The high fine option discriminates against the less well off and allows the rich to buy their way out of prison. Is that right?

Yes, it is right.

What is the point of working hard and getting a bit of money if you cant make use of it?

 

 

 

 

😁

[Barlow]

Rich buying themselves out of jail is another subject especially on IoM(eg rich boy gets a fine after driving on wrong side of road and ploughing into a woman on a motorbike and killing her, chief minister's wife gets a fine for fraud etc) but the best place for people who do not comply with these virus emergency measures is properly locked up out the way. They can spend a bit of time in their cells sticking two fingers up to society. 

Edited November 8, 2020 by Barlow

[thesultanofsheight]

5 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Not only that, but he did go to prison, for 15 weeks. He wasn’t able to pay the fine.

But as I said he was massively taking the piss. A prison sentence isn’t unreasonable in this sort of instance where there was a clear and deliberate attempt made to not comply and to goad the authorities into tracking him down. It’s not fleeing a domestic situation or putting fuel in your car or buying a sandwich.