Jump to content

Lost Login

Regulars
  • Content Count

    6,199
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Lost Login last won the day on May 2 2018

Lost Login had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,710 Excellent

About Lost Login

  • Rank
    So long and Thanks for All The Fish

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. But calling the director of Public Health Hetty or similar rather than Dr Henrietta Ewart in posts is fine. I look forward to all future reference to HQ or DA as being The Hon....... I refer to virtually all as Mr, Mrs, Miss, Mr or by their names except when dealing with them professionally. You may not like it but I try not to pick and choose who I think deserve to be given their full title and who don't.
  2. I don't think I am. I want to stop the outbreak as soon as possible. The best way to do that is the test trace and isolate. I may have missed it, and for that I apologise, but it appears that the rapid genome testing is not going to make the slightest bit of difference to that, so giving it such a high profile to make it seem vitally important I think is misleading. I appreciate that not all do
  3. I don't think they are. Certainly in the media briefings some of the journalists appear to struggle to understand. It is fine, I came on here to try and understand if I was missing something as to why some where giving the impression that the failure to have rapid local genome testing would seriously compromise stopping the current outbreak. It appears fairly clear from recent posts it does not. I am happy with that so will cease posting for another long period as I have, to my satisfaction, answered my own curiosity. I had really hoped that somebody could have posted in way that I unders
  4. No downside and I have said repeatedly it would be good to have. What I wanted to understand was there a serious downside in stopping the current outbreak from not presently having. From the recent posts it appears there is no serious downside from not presently having but that appears not to be the impression Ms Glover wishes to give the general public. I appreciate that may be totally unintentional but I do not see that as good. If there was a serious downside then yes, scream it from the rooftops.
  5. And there is the issue. Ms Glover's tweets are, I believe, giving many a misleading impression and because of her position people will take far more notice of what she says. A local nutter screaming the world is about it end is different to Brian Cox stating it.
  6. But Covid testing and genome sequencing are different issues. I don't thinks many would disagree with the points made with regard to testing for Covid. As others have said that, in respect of testing, was a matter of logic. As I have said before it should be remembered that the 7 day test though was not compulsory, you only took if you wanted to be able to have a days exercise. I think you also had to pay for it unless you were a medical transfer so it was never introduced as a means of picking up cases. By banging on about that she could do same day genome sequencing, in my view, Ms Glo
  7. Sorry I will refer to Ms Glover in future. I appreciate she is qualified but I do have an aversion to referring to individuals by their qualification or occupation in general conversation. We don't a general rule refer to John Wright as advocate John Wright or refer to people's qualifications in their names so I always wonder why we do as for a certain qualification or profession. You have retired armed forces personnel who still want to be called by their rank when enlisted. That is just an aside. With regard to "Dr Glover is trying to save us from further incompetent action that could
  8. Genuine offer or self publicity.? Taken at face value it is a great offer although the issue seems to have been elevated so that it appears rapid genome sequences is of vital importance when that does not appear to be the case. A cynic might question whether after this length of time and stuff being sent across the stuff is still available to be tested. If not then it is a bit of a hollow offer. I have no idea. I would like to see a bit of a compromise. In future, if we can, the stuff is split in two and genome sequenced both in the UK and IoM. The IoM has the rapid results and
  9. I could see them announcing what they intend to do in the future if there are no new cases that are not people already in self isolation but I would expect and hope that they are not introduced for a week or so. Another few days to be certain is better than risking returning to the current lockdown
  10. Mrs Glover did a great job in setting up the testing facility in the IoM for which we should all be extremely grateful. I would not argue that the IoM should have done more testing and had stricter isolation and testing rules and that the rules for those coming over as key workers etc were not strict enough. We seem to have had an influx of people around Christmas time who you would wonder under which of the criteria they qualified. I think one of the current MHK's had several pictures of their parents visiting them over Christmas on their facebook page. I would not disagree with you abou
  11. As I understand it most cases show up with 5 to 10 days with very few after after day 14. We are now into, I think day 11, of the lockdown, so the chances of new cases not linked to known cases is diminishing everyday. We have had only something like 30 cases which are not day 1, 7 or 13 cases and a good percentage of those are family members or people who were self isolating as they were a close contact case and therefore only infectious after they started self isolating. Of the four cases you refer to for part of the period they were infectious the current restrictions were in place and any
  12. I don't think so. I believe Vets can treat humans but Doctors can not treat animals. That used to be on the basis that humans could give the Vet permission but the animal could not give a doctor permission. I think it is the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 that states who can treat animals and it is stricter than rules covering doctors and human. A doctor can carry out surgery on an animal if specifically asked to by a Vet.
  13. I agree. Mrs Glover's background and position give her views more weight than the like of most of us on this website but simple logic was all that was required to understand that if you wanted to be pretty sure a new arrival could not infect others in the community then you needed to test on 1, 7 and 13 or something close to if they lived with others. If you self isolate on your own day 7 testing is probably pretty irrelevant. If you share accommodation then testing on day 1 & 13 is no guarantee. The initial carrier at day 13 may have ceased to be positive and if they have passed on anoth
  14. Yes, but is that audit trail one which tells you who has read a specific copy of a book or does it tell you who passed to who after reading. I get the impression it is the first with the odd occasion it is the latter as the sequence changes slightly, but that is only an impression
  15. Thanks. Any new cases now should be travel cases, caught pre lockdown and they are already in isolation or caught from a party you are isolating with. If an individual tests positive for Covid 19 outside that they are going to extend lockdown or whatever. I am not disregarding the use of Genomics but in the present case the IoM appears pretty sure how it got out again and where. There is little evidence of infection from other sources ad even if there was the IoM would do nothing different to break transmission so on this specific instance whether Mrs Glover and IoM Govt are having a fight or
×
×
  • Create New...