Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/03/2021 in all areas

  1. 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.
    18 points
  2. 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.
    16 points
  3. But if Moulton is the only one who is getting any response and he's not a 'proper' journalist, what does that say about the rest of them? It's interesting that Manx Telecom pulled their funding from MTTV at a time when they were getting a higher profile, but beginning to annoy our ever-sensitive government. And at a time when MT were getting a lot of extra cash from the government for doing something you would think they were supposed to do anyway. I'm sure these things are unconnected.
    12 points
  4. I would give Paul Moulton an MBE REST DELETED IN DISGUST WITH THE FORUM MODERATOR JW
    11 points
  5. There isn't yet. Personally I'm sticking to my guns to protect my staff and clients by insisting anyone who attended the venues at dates and times specified do not enter until 11th Jan onwards until the picture is clearer. That's a decision made on consulting my staff on how they feel and their view hasn't changed following the briefing. I don't blame any business for taking some additional precautions.
    11 points
  6. He’s never asked a deep probing question in his career. Certainly not professionally or competently. Howie just gets ruffled by anything or anyone that isn’t fawning yes man flavoured.
    10 points
  7. He ruffles feathers and really gets the hackles up on Howie, which provides me at least with some great amusement. From HQ's perspective, he should be able to field even the difficult questions without getting stroppy about it.
    10 points
  8. I criticised them while working with them (and not even that badly - if I was tackling the same concerns now I would be shouting much louder and with more details and voracity). 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.
    9 points
  9. You're right that I'm not an epidemiologist in the traditional sense, but I'm not just a molecular biologist. The Isle of Man Government doesn't currently employ an infectious diseases epidemiologist (and why would they need to, normally?). However, half of my PhD and professional experience over the past 15 years has been in biosurveillance and genomic epidemiology (aka tracking pathogens by testing for them, sequencing their genomes and using modelling and statistics to infer the connections between them). Believe it or not myself and an ex-DEFRA colleague were the people who taught Public Health England how to do it back in the day. Ten years on genomic epidemiology has finally hit the big time.
    8 points
  10. I know. I got slightly turned on.
    7 points
  11. Government have a problem not having the capacity to admit they might be wrong, not just over this particular subject. #narcisstocracy
    6 points
  12. A number of businesses are ensuring staff who were at these venues (or whose family members or direct contacts were at the venues) work from home this week. Where possible, a sensible precaution in my view, given we will not know any true impact for at least a week. Government should be issuing the same advice IMO.
    6 points
  13. The key here is testing later this week...as the vast majority tested will have tested negative anyway as the tests were carried out too early. So only later this week at the earliest will we see any true impact of potential spread.
    6 points
  14. How else are you going to beat it? Speeches and excuses from politicians and CS? Sacrificing roosters in chalk circles? I'm sure Covid will listen, not. It hasn't so far, ask Boris. Politicians and Co. need to be listening to and led by qualified scientists on this. Not trying to rubbish their opinions and getting involved in litigation. Not diluting their advice to make a few quid for themselves and their political mates. Not doing the opposite in the name of egos and arrogance. Economies and social lives can be rebuilt in time, but not under the sword of Damocles of an ongoing pandemic, it's pissing into the wind. If you've got any doubts; Look at the title of this thread, its additional tag and the date it was started. Ask yourself "How much nearer are we to those aims with the approach so far?" The gains we have are being threatened by the current approach.
    5 points
  15. 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.
    5 points
  16. 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?
    5 points
  17. Whatever her role, I'd rather have her working with me during this crisis than criticising me.
    5 points
  18. It wasn't announced shortly after discovery to avoid any panic, according to Ashford. Had they announced it earlier perhaps some of the people intending to go out and celebrate might've reconsidered and the panic we've seen since might have been lessened...
    5 points
  19. You can’t “still” be something you never were
    5 points
  20. Not really. Hindsight is only valid after the fact. The fact is, tests and results for this potential outbreak are not likely to be accurate till later this week. Meanwhile, precautionary measures where possible are wise.
    5 points
  21. Moultons going to get thrown out here
    5 points
  22. Retired medical expert. Albeit not in infectious diseases. But then, neither is Dr Ewart.
    5 points
  23. they don't grit swamps.
    5 points
  24. Sweepstake on Howardism's for the 11am presser Odds for: Foot-teen days - 1/4 Gold standard - 1/4 Would you like to take this, David? 1/2 For fuck's sake Paul, stop asking about Rachel Glover, destroyed letters and testing capabilities. 10/1
    5 points
  25. I don’t know. I’ve never listed my academic qualifications after my name on letter head. Most advocates don’t. It says nothing about how good, or bad you are in court. In my case it refers to how well I did in exams 40+ years ago. Yes, some clients want to employ a QC, but that’s no different to England, and nowadays they’d be hard pushed to be given the opportunity. I sit as tribunal chair. I’ve had all sorts appear and address me, including Attorneys General, QC’s, advocates, solicitors, Steve England, lay parties. The quality of address and credence given is directly related to quality of research and effort in preparation and presentation, and nothing to do with post nominal letters. In my time the self proclaimed best court barrack room lawyer was the self proclaimed Barrie Steven’s BS. Where BS not only stood for his name, but bull shit.
    4 points
  26. 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.
    4 points
  27. I listened to the briefing - all seemed pretty reasonable to me. I agree with others that a short briefing at, say, midday on 1st might have helped government communications rather than leaving it to today, but apart from that all ok. I think I agree with Howard that PM’s a tit, but he should try not to get so obviously irritated by him.
    4 points
  28. But it's okay, their logic is that because it has been 6 days, at least someone must end up symptomatic, so they'll surely flag up if there's an issue. Playing devil's advocate, they have to be seen to be testing ASAP, otherwise people would ask what on earth they were doing. Now, what would make perfect sense would be inviting people for another 'viral surveillance test' towards the end of the week. Not cheap, but it'd be giving a lot more clarity on the situation.
    4 points
  29. Really? In that case, there's another forum in the morning
    4 points
  30. Come on, you've got to include "Great Manx Public" 😄
    4 points
  31. You’re right. The woman complaining could have read the TandC’s before she took to social media. A place was reserved for them. Equipment was reserved for them. She cancelled despite the official word being carry on as usual. No case. Move on.
    4 points
  32. Personal opinion? These conditions have existed annually since the year dot. Say, fifty years ago and more, people used to be able to respect them, drive in them and still reach their destinations, by and large. And thought nothing of it, bar a bit of inconvenience and extra time. It was simply accepted and wasn't a bar to daily commuting over the Mountain Rd for instance. Only the road utterly blocked with snow would instigate a closure. Now they can't be trusted to do that and have to be protected from themselves and other road users, although there's undoubtedly the litigation culture that has to be kowtowed to as well.
    4 points
  33. You need to learn to read. You are a nasty miserable excuse for a human being. That article refers specifically to Palestinians living inside Israel, in the occupied territories, unrecognised internationally as Israel, but under their de facto control. That’s different to the areas occupied by the Palestinian Authority. And even if that were not enough, and the Israeli Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed their military occupied status, under international law the Israelis are obliged to look after the civilians in the militarily occupied areas which, under international law includes, still, the whole West Bank and Gaza. The International Court of Justice, the UN General Assembly and the United Nations Security Council regards Israel as the "Occupying Power".UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk called Israel's occupation "an affront to international law." The Supreme Court of Israel has ruled that Israel holds the West Bank under "belligerent occupation". According to Talia Sasson, the High Court of Justice in Israel, with a variety of different justices sitting, has repeatedly stated for more than four decades that international law applies to Israel's presence in the West Bank. Israeli governments have preferred the term "disputed territories" in the case of the West Bank.Officially Israel maintains that the West Bank is disputed territory. Israel asserts that since the disengagement of Israel from Gaza in 2005, Israel no longer occupies the Gaza Strip. However, as it retains control of Gaza's airspace and coastline, it continues to be designated as an occupying power in the Gaza Strip by the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly and some countries and various human rights organizations. The significance of the designation of these territories as occupied territoryis that certain legal obligations fall on the occupying power under international law. Under international law there are certain laws of war governing military occupation, including the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention. One of those obligations is to maintain the status quo until the signing of a peace treaty, the resolution of specific conditions outlined in a peace treaty, or the formation of a new civilian government.
    3 points
  34. French government are more useless than ours?
    3 points
  35. I don't know anyone who worked there, and my nurse friends were far too busy at the hospital and don't have anything more than unofficial gossip that they themselves are unsure of. It just seems pretty odd to be handing out awards when there is still an investigation. Then again they gave Ashford one prematurely too.
    3 points
  36. Suppose I'll just wait for the official and entirely honest report then, in 2028
    3 points
  37. 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
    3 points
  38. Humble pie is neither in the Governmental nature nor vernacular. Anywhere, ever.
    3 points
  39. Scientifically speaking, and spoken too by your purveyors of facts. We simply don't know yet if it is an issue, and your purveyors are operating under the assumption that it is low risk. Based on it being the old strain, we're reasonably likely to have symptomatic cases around now. Based on the new strain? It's anyone's guess. Swimming pools etc. are closing because they had staff who are worried about it, and are being closed at their own expense. Keeping a pool running isn't cheap. There isn't a money tree they're shaking. They just know that patience can be a virtue. Businesses that can work from home are as a measure of staff welfare and being prudent. If it makes those staff feel better, and potentially avoids a problem for the sake of a few days, fair play to them. For staff who might be vulnerable, the mental benefits of doing so probably outweigh any disadvantage.
    3 points
  40. Knowing how this works, I’d imagine the AGs office issued advised that would mean the Government made themselves liable financially if they made such instructions if e.g. a business had to close due to staff shortages.
    3 points
  41. I’m not calling for a lockdown. Just acceptance or facts rather than skirting around them.
    3 points
  42. Ashford saying they didn’t put info out earlier to avoid mass panic and scaring people. errr....
    3 points
  43. Bwanker. Always in the know and always knows more than anyone else.
    3 points
  44. So the lab run had finished by 4 pm. Doesn’t mean the e-mails had been sent out. Doesn’t indicate what you suggest. The listing of those waiting for second tests is inconsistent. I’m not sure how much reliance can be placed. Or they’ve changed. I booked our first, and second, tests on 23rd. We were first passengers off the boat at 05.45 on 23rd, first passengers to whom the new regs applied. We did our first tests. 2nd tests are tomorrow. So at 16.00 on 24/12 there were at least 2 awaiting 2nd tests - plus people who had arrived on the same sailing as us, the sailings and flights on 23 and 24 December. The press announcement table issued 16.00 on 24th said zero waiting for tests. There may have been a couple of hundred. Although it was probably many fewer as I’m assuming people returning for family Xmas would arrive before 10/12. We were only here for Xmas accidentally. I’d also assume that there was an increase in arrival numbers after Xmas day. As UK moved more areas/people into Tier 3, meaning you couldn’t stay with family or in hotels. I've no idea how many of the 1463 are waiting for 1st tests or second tests, or 1886, or suspected Covid, or being admitted to hospital, or travellers. The worrying thing is that I suspect Government doesn’t either.
    3 points
  45. Come on, folks. Stop all this whinging and whining, or move to a different forum or thread. I'm only looking on here for comments about Manx Radio.
    3 points
  46. It's coming to something when you can't even drive home pissed anymore, for fear of crashing into some drunken idiot coming the other way. Something needs to be done about this.
    3 points
  47. Appalling I grant you. But then again, Billown is at the heart of the constituency that elected Cregeen and Moorhouse.
    3 points
  48. We'd have known before NYE if it was the new strain or not. We may also have a clearer plan of who to test, when and why.
    3 points
This leaderboard is set to Isle of Man/GMT+01:00
×
×
  • Create New...