rachomics Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 (edited) 47 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said: I suppose, the big question everyone would ask you at the moment is: are you concerned by the current situation and how it's being handled? If it were me, the people present at the particular venues would have been offered a test 10 days post-exposure (whatever date that happens to be) and told to isolate in the mean time. That wouldn't have affected too many people's livelihoods as their test would have been at some point this coming week and a lot of people have still been on annual leave until tomorrow morning. Yes some would have been badly affected by an isolation but I can't see any employer in this situation being anything other than supportive. Instead of logically thinking it through, they've randomly tested a number of people based on a criteria of them ringing before 11am on Saturday, rather than the criteria of their potential exposure date. That tells me that they were potentially in a reactionary "headless chicken" mode rather than a rational mode where testing is used strategically and most appropriately. If people had been booked in for a post-exposure test at 10 days they would be mostly spread evenly throughout the next week, so having the added benefit of reducing testing pressure on the lab. It would have also enabled the lab to staff appropriately in advance for particular days (for example, 10 days post-1886). Same applies to the Grandstand. Based on my experiences in the last 10 months you can probably expect that post-exposure testing approach to be applied in the near future after it's read on here by an appropriate person and thought to be reasonable. Edited January 3, 2021 by rachomics 17 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 1 hour ago, Apple said: That sound you just heard was your gong flying past....😉 Already got my CDM + bar 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lagman Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatiotheturd Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 (edited) 38 minutes ago, rachomics said: If it were me, the people present at the particular venues would have been offered a test 10 days post-exposure (whatever date that happens to be) and told to isolate in the mean time. That wouldn't have affected too many people's livelihoods as their test would have been at some point this coming week and a lot of people have still been on annual leave until tomorrow morning. Yes some would have been badly affected by an isolation but I can't see any employer in this situation being anything other than supportive. Instead of logically thinking it through, they've randomly tested a number of people based on a criteria of them ringing before 11am on Saturday, rather than the criteria of their potential exposure date. That tells me that they were potentially in a reactionary "headless chicken" mode rather than a rational mode where testing is used strategically and most appropriately. If people had been booked in for a post-exposure test at 10 days they would be mostly spread evenly throughout the next week, so having the added benefit of reducing testing pressure on the lab. It would have also enabled the lab to staff appropriately in advance for particular days (for example, 10 days post-1886). Same applies to the Grandstand. Based on my experiences in the last 10 months you can probably expect that post-exposure testing approach to be applied in the near future after it's read on here by an appropriate person and thought to be reasonable. Not disagreeing, to me that makes sense from a scientific and risk point of view. However, when making these decisions they have to balance with other things. What you are suggesting there basically means 1886, robinsons at cool Road, the Majestic Chinese, the A cafe, and possibly the Best Western Palace having to close while the majority of their staff isolate. Who pays their wages? Who refunds the people booked in? Who refunds Robinsons for the lost business and wasted stock, and the possible clients who they switch permanently to whichever supplier helps them out? Its not as black and white as just going with the science. Especially when its just businesses who through no fault of their own had a particular customer through the door and any actions as a result might see them lose out to competitors long term Edited January 3, 2021 by horatiotheturd 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 "The pandemic is over" - Michael Yeardon mid 2020. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 1 minute ago, TheTeapot said: "The pandemic is over" - Michael Yeardon mid 2020. Who’s Yeardon , someone in cabinet office? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 1 minute ago, Banker said: Who’s Yeardon , someone in cabinet office? Did you just ignore Lagman? Might be for the best 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rachomics Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 1 minute ago, horatiotheturd said: Not disagreeing, to me that makes sense from a scientific and risk point of view. However, when making these decisions they have to balance with other things. What you are suggesting there basically means 1886, robinsons at cool Road, the Majestic Chinese, the A cafe, and possibly the Best Western Palace having to close while the majority of their staff isolate. Who pays their wages? Who refunds the people booked in? Who refunds Robinsons for the post business and wasted stock, and the possible clients who they switch permanently to whichever supplier helps them out? Its not as black and white as just going with the science. Especially when its just businesses who through no fault of their own had a particular customer through the door and any actions as a result might see them lose out to competitors long term Indeed. But then this is why they should have been testing everyone at day 13. This situation would have been completely avoided if they had listened to the advice I gave in October in reaction to the day 7 testing being removed. Not testing costs more money in the long run (either to business, or to government). The leadership we deserve as a nation would be the politicians having the balls to mandate a day 13 test. I believe New Zealand have mandatory testing for at least some types of arrivals. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatiotheturd Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 Just now, rachomics said: Indeed. But then this is why they should have been testing everyone at day 13. This situation would have been completely avoided if they had listened to the advice I gave in October in reaction to the day 7 testing being removed. Not testing costs more money in the long run (either to business, or to government). The leadership we deserve as a nation would be the politicians having the balls to mandate a day 13 test. I believe New Zealand have mandatory testing for at least some types of arrivals. Agreed. I have been saying they should test everyone on arrival and before leaving isolation since about June and I know nothing about this stuff. Just a bloke with common sense and the ability to do a little bit of research. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenFairfax Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 10 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said: Not disagreeing, to me that makes sense from a scientific and risk point of view. However, when making these decisions they have to balance with other things. What you are suggesting there basically means 1886, robinsons at cool Road, the Majestic Chinese, the A cafe, and possibly the Best Western Palace having to close while the majority of their staff isolate. Who pays their wages? Who refunds the people booked in? Who refunds Robinsons for the lost business and wasted stock, and the possible clients who they switch permanently to whichever supplier helps them out? Its not as black and white as just going with the science. Especially when its just businesses who through no fault of their own had a particular customer through the door and any actions as a result might see them lose out to competitors long term Reminds me of old business saying: 'if you think safety is expensive, try an accident'. At least debate moved on from lets be like Jersey, to should we suggest people in 1886 on 26th Dec visit granny this week. As ever it not a balance of health versus economy, the only way to enable functioning economy (particular night time economy) is to control virus. All my family bar 1 is in the UK and it a s**tstorm, regarding ordinary working families just being able to perform their usual commercial activity efficiently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 Viruses and illnesses will only ever be combatted with science and the knowledge, protocols and procedures arising from it. Not politics and economics. 'Twas ever thus. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenFairfax Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: I'm sorry, but Quayle doesn't get to decide if the advice was clear. The only thing that tells you if advice was clear is how the public at large understands it. If they (or even a reasonably large percentage of them) are confused, then the advice wasn't clear. That's what 'clear' means. It's typical of the arrogance and stupidity of those who are in charge of running the Island, both politicians and civil servants, that they think all they need to do is issue a single statement at 13 to midnight on New Year's Eve and then everyone on the Island will telepathically know exactly what the meaning of it is and what to do. And if they don't it's the public's fault. The whole technique of public information is that you have to keep on repeating the message you want to get across and monitor how it is received and what queries people have and alter your message accordingly. You don't just put out a long, confusing Facebook post at the last possible minute and sit on your arse for days in the belief that everyone must understand you because you are a Terribly Important Person. Exactly, and also CM Howard Quayle does not decide what is a suitable question or line of enquiry. Free press in liberal democracy is essential in holding the government to account. I think in case is CM trying to influence press as was case today and previously is outrageous. Manx people as is the case in UK should be protected by clear principles in expectations of behaviour in public office. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatiotheturd Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 25 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Viruses and illnesses will only ever be combatted with science and the knowledge, protocols and procedures arising from it. Not politics and economics. 'Twas ever thus. Not "just" a virus though is it? No point keeping everyone alive if we are all suicidal and skint with no economy left or social lives. Its a balancing act 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 1 hour ago, rachomics said: That's why they've dug their heels in over the genomics and are sending them to Liverpool (who arguably have less experience in viral genomics than my company does). Hell will freeze over before they call me; as many have already said, it would involve them admitting they might have handled the whole relationship between me and the DHSC less than well. Presumably this is the same team at Liverpool who are sequencing the samples to trace the spread of the outbreak in the Spring, as described in your latest blog? Which explains why they weren't working over the Christmas holidays - they're doing non-urgent research on historic data. But it makes the decision to rely on them for this pretty inexcusable. Even if they couldn't bear to ask you, there will be other labs who can do the tests. One thing that has struck me looking at the New Zealand experience is how useful 'current' genetic sequencing has been is tracing sources of infection and reassuring the public that such outbreak clusters had been contained. (By 'current' I mean identifying the lineage that the latest infections have so they can be linked together). In this particular case there's the additional need to check if these cases are of the new variant strain and having to wait a week isn't very helpful. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatiotheturd Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said: Not "just" a virus though is it? No point keeping everyone alive if we are all suicidal and skint with no economy left or social lives. Its a balancing act @dilligaf Whats the joke? The whole world could have fixed this months ago by making everyone stay at home for a month and drink water and eat whatever was in the cupboards or the garden, like killing mice and stuff, eating worms. Some people would have died, but the virus would likely be gone or under control. So what part of this isn't a balancing act? Edited January 3, 2021 by horatiotheturd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.