Jump to content

Vaccine- who will have it?


Banker

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Major Rushen said:

The Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine needs to be stored at minus 70 Celsius. Health care providers will need to store it either in dry ice for shorter stints or in specialized freezers.

-20c relates to the newly approved Moderna Vaccine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Banker said:

Don’t panic, the 3 day vaccinations program is restarted, Oxford one waiting for paperwork!!

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/vaccination-programme-continues-today/

Paperwork duly strapped to pigeons leg and ready to fly once the indemnity for the pigeon is sorted and also his landing papers. A few days should see us near to starting 

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

1 hour ago, Banker said:

Don’t panic, the 3 day vaccinations program is restarted, Oxford one waiting for paperwork!!

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/vaccination-programme-continues-today/

3 days a week is not enough. 

If one person with the 'old' coronavirus passes it onto three people, and those three people pass onto three more people for ten cycles, there will be 59,000 infections. That's almost 70% of the Island's population. The 'new' variant will rip through our community at an alarming rate.

What is it that COMIN and their advisers don't understand? As I have said in the other blog, I have now lost all confidence in the Public Health advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

3 days a week is not enough. 

If one person with the 'old' coronavirus passes it onto three people, and those three people pass onto three more people for ten cycles, there will be 59,000 infections. That's almost 70% of the Island's population. The 'new' variant will rip through our community at an alarming rate.

What is it that COMIN and their advisers don't understand? As I have said in the other blog, I have now lost all confidence in the Public Health advice.

That’s just scaremongering. It shows either panic or total lack of understanding of R. 

Has anywhere had an R rate of 3?  No!

Plus you ignore the effect of lockdown. That has a huge dampening effect.

This is all about risk management. No precaution can be 100% effective. So 14 day gold standard isolation had a 0.5% risk. We’ve now extended to 21 days or 14 and tests on days 1, 6/7 and 13.

Youre brighter than this Andy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

That’s just scaremongering. It shows either panic or total lack of understanding of R. 

Has anywhere had an R rate of 3?  No!

Plus you ignore the effect of lockdown. That has a huge dampening effect.

This is all about risk management. No precaution can be 100% effective. So 14 day gold standard isolation had a 0.5% risk. We’ve now extended to 21 days or 14 and tests on days 1, 6/7 and 13.

Youre brighter than this Andy.

It's not scaremongering. It's highlighting the potential of what it is capable of if it's not dealt with properly. The risk management is only as good as the 'treatment'. The treatment (testing) was removed because someone in their almighty wisdom couldn't see that a positive test on arrival and subsequent tests was a good move. It was more about this stupid idea that somehow using percentages would wish it away. A positive test is as good as a negative. Simply because you know it's there and can do something about it and stop it in it's tracks.

Just wait and see what happens JW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Paperwork duly strapped to pigeons leg and ready to fly once the indemnity for the pigeon is sorted and also his landing papers. A few days should see us near to starting 

This wind is getting up. Its gonna blow the pigeon off course. Paperwork will be lost and a new set will have to be handwritten. Then there's the search for another pigeon. Of course everything has to be in order.

I hope and prey that one of our journos asks so proper questions today

1) What deliveries of vaccine have we had (by type and number) and when they arrived

2) Day to day figure for number administered (Type/Group)

3) Rolling number with 1 shot

4) Rolling number with both shots

Time to stop all this weasel worded deflection and treat us like we are actually stakeholders in this process.

 

  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andy Onchan said:

It's not scaremongering. It's highlighting the potential of what it is capable of if it's not dealt with properly. The risk management is only as good as the 'treatment'. The treatment (testing) was removed because someone in their almighty wisdom couldn't see that a positive test on arrival and subsequent tests was a good move. It was more about this stupid idea that somehow using percentages would wish it away. A positive test is as good as a negative. Simply because you know it's there and can do something about it and stop it in it's tracks.

Just wait and see what happens JW.

Totally agree with you, Andy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dreamon said:

Totally agree with you, Andy.

Using percentages with a small data set is next to useless. And I'm really surprised that this bullshit is still being rolled out by the MBE and his Public Health cohorts. We're talking people here in a community of no more than 85K. They are people that we know, not someone across the other side of the planet. I do wish they'd stop this percentages crap and start talking about real numbers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Using percentages with a small data set is next to useless. And I'm really surprised that this bullshit is still being rolled out by the MBE and his Public Health cohorts. We're talking people here in a community of no more than 85K. They are people that we know, not someone across the other side of the planet. I do wish they'd stop this percentages crap and start talking about real numbers.

Politicians (and their cs) don't like real numbers. Real numbers come with accountability and can require explanation to the unwashed.

Best to hide behind "percentages", pretending that they're looking at the bigger picture.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to maybe be a bit behind the curve on this but what 'indemnity' are / were we actually waiting for.

Is it to absolve the UK NHS from any negative or destructive effects of the vaccines or is it from the manufacturers for the same reason ?

Or have I missed something? (probably - not been well)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Apple said:

Sorry to maybe be a bit behind the curve on this but what 'indemnity' are / were we actually waiting for.

Is it to absolve the UK NHS from any negative or destructive effects of the vaccines or is it from the manufacturers for the same reason ?

Or have I missed something? (probably - not been well)

I understand it’s an indemnity from uk to crown dependencies which Ashie insist is checked by AGs office, other crown dependencies take indemnity as being acceptable and crack on whether they have paperwork or not which is probably why they started mid December 

  • Like 2
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...