Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Fair enough

.

.

Thanks

I've found HTT's posts sometimes an enlightening and well written view.

Like good ol' notwell from days of yore, who was always at hand to put forward a contrary (and often bollocks but certainly not always) view. Which presented the opportunity to reinforce one's argument even further.

I miss notty.

 

eta:

and now HTT, but only temporary I hope.

Edited by Barlow
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gladys said:

Would it be correct to say day 1 after infection has a very low accuracy rate?  Testing on day 1 of arrival could be any number of days after infection, so is that where the confusion lies?

That is an important confusion and one they clearly are failing to understand they are falling into.  But the specific problem is that Ashford has been quoting the 7% since the start of November despite it being implausible to start with and debunked at the time.  I wrote this then:

I couldn't work out where the 7% that everyone keeps repeating comes from.  Luckily the Manx Radio piece discloses the source - a PHE modelling paper from August.  I think this is being misread as the 7% isn't based on any clinical evidence, but from modelling assumptions from which they calculate (I think) that 7% of people who were undetectable at the start of a 'medium haul' flight (by which they mean 7-9 hours) would test positive on arrival. 

It's not really relevant or based on reality.  It also wasn't really the point of the paper which was to point out how much more efficient a double testing regime was than just testing on arrival.  In practice a test on arrival will pick up a much higher percentage than 7%, but even 50% still means you are letting a lot of infected people in and need additional measures for the whole population - which still may not work as we see in Jersey at the moment.

It's not just about him get a fact wrong - we all make mistakes - it's the repeating of it and the not even trying to understand the context.  Together with the DHSC management they seem to have got into a ritual approach to the problem doing the same actions over and over again without understanding the underlying mechanisms.  That interview was full of such confusions and nonsense - very little he said was right and when it was (such as Day 1 tests being nothing like good enough) it was usually for the wrong reasons.

 

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

Just now, Banker said:

Went for a walk today & to Boots to pick up prescriptions, thought we would through Villa gardens as more space etc but found gates locked & bolted so not sure if they are closed completely 

Yep, that happened last lockdown, during all that sunny weather. I suppose the place would have become crowded like we saw pictures of people mobbing parks in UK during their situation.

So fair enough, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Apple said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayflick_limit

 

We were taught that cells are programmed only to be reproduced so many times. After that, they fade and die.

Not sure I believe that any more.

Yep, hence there has been quite a bit of research into stopping or slowing of the degradation of telomeres. 

Ever heard of Henrietta Lacks - you could potentially consider her immortal! 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

It's not just about him get a fact wrong - we all make mistakes - it's the repeating of it and the not even trying to understand the context.  Together with the DHSC management they seem to have got into a ritual approach to the problem doing the same actions over and over again without understanding the underlying mechanisms.

Then why hasn't Henrietta put him right - or is that why she seems to smirk a lot in the press conferences?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Banker said:

Went for a walk today & to Boots to pick up prescriptions, thought we would through Villa gardens as more space etc but found gates locked & bolted so not sure if they are closed completely 

Villa complex is closed as all staff have been redeployed to the Covid team, they were amongst the first to be redeployed last time too.

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

29 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Largely pointless trying to debate on here anyway.  People are so entrenched in their own "i am alright jack" mentality that they can't grasp others opinions.

No more posts from me, but maybe someone could actually quantify the risk of level 3 WITH the current protocols for returnees in place, because so far noone has even attempted other than to say "its too risky"

Thanks

I enjoy differing opinions, it leads to interesting debate but it’s a complete waste of time trying to force your opinion on others, because much like you’ve said, people don’t listen, they do what they want, hence why the UK is in such a mess.

I don’t think you should leave or stop talking, but perhaps pop in now and again with MF in the background, rather than spending your day smashing the refresh button.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Apple said:

Then why hasn't Henrietta put him right - or is that why she seems to smirk a lot in the press conferences?

I suspect she isn't being listened to - she certainly wasn't during the Autumn as we know from remarks in Tynwald.  She may be seen as an 'outsider' by the DHSC nomenklatura as she was (rightly) very critical of how public health and statistics had been done (or not done) before her arrival. 

The fact that Public Health was moved into the Cabinet Office in April[1] suggests clashes within DHSC.  Possibly a culture clash as well caused by the more scientific approach to public health.  But you'd hope that a Department of Health would have a scientific mindset. 

 

[1]  This was a planned move, not triggered by Covid.

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

3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The fact that Public Health was moved into the Cabinet Office in April[1] suggests clashes within DHSC.  Possibly a culture clash as well caused by the more scientific approach to public health. 

Agreed. HE doesn't hold back in her views, and certainly not with those she considers not as well qualified and as experienced as her, which is good in my book.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/covid-19-variant-spreading-south-africa/story?id=75062211

Some details of the new variants here with an endorsement of having a good system of genome testing to hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

I think an extension is inevitable as soon as we have even a small number of community cases.

Unless they can map every transmission, there's no way it can be 3 weeks.

Especially when it is taking 5 to 7 days to get the genomics through meaning they can't see if cases are related quick enough. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

She may be seen as an 'outsider' by the DHSC nomenklatura as she was (rightly) very critical of how public health and statistics had been done (or not done) before her arrival.

This speaks volumes.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 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...