Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

I need to find a gig in about 12 months' time that needs a lot of used plasterboard and 4 x 2 batten....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2574

  • TheTeapot

    1396

  • Gladys

    1293

  • Nom de plume

    1032

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

OK. For what it's worth I'm going to try and explain why genomics is important in a ssRNA virus epidemic. No doubt it will end up being recited badly at a briefing, but, well, whatever. You read it he

Rachel has tried every which way to re-offer her services. This last tweet wasn't the first time she's reached out. Government has made it very clear they do not want her to be involved. I want h

I think you'll find most so called anti-government rhetoric is focused on government-stupidity and government-selfishness. In recent times - under Brown, Bell and now Quayle - all too many govern

Posted Images

Well, without wanting to prolong the flooring debate, I would assume that the floor was in a pretty unattractive state - just look at the floor in other supermarkets, particularly where shelving and freezers are placed - it would have to be of a reasonable quality from a hygiene perspective.  So it is arguable that it would have to covered in something that can be quickly mopped down. 

The next query would be whether there was a dilapidations payment by the tenant at the end of the last tenancy, there often is as the end of a commercial full repairing tenancy including dealing with tenant's improvements.  I believe that the landlord is Douglas Corporation, so there is just the possibility that the Corpie are paying for the new flooring from the dilapidations from the last tenancy.  I could be dead wrong though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

The straight fact is that fast accurate genomics of the various cases picked up would have told the contact tracing team how many main lines of transmission there had been. This would make their job much easier. In at least one of the briefings Henrietta has said they've got a case with no clear line of transmission. Genomics would help link to other known clusters.

I'll try to explain with a hypothetical. I'm not sure of current numbers, or the finer details so I'll kind of make them up. 40 current active cases, of which 15 are known travelers in isolation, so we can ignore them. Of the other 25 say, 10 are linked in one cluster and 9 in another, through either family or location but no established link between the groups. Then there is another little group of 4 that the contact team can reliably put with each other, and then there are two individual cases with no idea how they have come about. This is where the genomics comes in. Can we put these different groups together or are they 5 different routes of infection? 

If they are all the same then you can be very comfortable that by isolating those people you will be closing that transmission down. But say that group of 4 is different to the others, or its one of the individuals, then you know that there is a good chance it is still out there and more work needs to be done.

Fast genomics is a very valuable tool for the purposes of contact tracing and closing down routes of transmission.

That's my understanding anyway, I hope it makes sense.

Genomics I understand will assist you in knowing which cluster cases belong to but not I struggle to see how it assist directly tracing transmission/contacts as the tracers want to know who you caught it off and who you may have transmitted it to,   

 In your example an individual infects a group in Ramsey, and a Group in Douglas.  Presumably testing will find all those people with the same sequencing of vaccine. A time later another individual is tested to be found positive and has the same sequencing.  Genomics can link it back to the Ramsey Group or Douglas Group but I am not sure it can differentiate as to which Group or whether it passed through an intermediary in between. I may be totally wrong in that but this why although I understand Genomics is useful I am really struggle to understand why using Mrs Glover’s facility will speed up the breakage of transmission in the Isle of Man under the present circumstances and that in practical terms it therefore makes little difference whether het facility or a different one is used.

 To me it would always be preferable to use a local service provider but in terms of stopping the current outbreak, as you can see, I still struggle to understand how getting to run Genomic testing now or over the last week or so really would have accelerated breaking the chain of transmission. We don't appear to the number of unknown cases etc that would seem to give any benefit. If on the other hand we were trying to eliminate by track and trace and only requesting those to lockdown whilst everybody else continued as normal then I totally understand why it would be very useful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I need to find a gig in about 12 months' time that needs a lot of used plasterboard and 4 x 2 batten....

Yep, crazy.

Used plasterboard is worse than useless, there has been trouble even tipping it in the past.

4 x 2 is rarely worth using again unless you have cheap labour on hand and lots of time. And there's always a risk of putting a saw through a hidden broken plasterboard screw. It just isn't worth the balls-ache recycling it.

Villa Marina Promenade Suite is designed to be partitioned off to various sizes. There are tarpaulins to cover the floor (eg Beer Festival). There may be good reasons not to use it.

But whatever,  4" x 2"  partitioning and plasterboard is wasteful, needless, time-consuming. Crazy.

Edited by Barlow
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well actually it might.  Or more likely it might stop the need to extend lockdown for longer.  I(f say a new case appears and you can link it to an existing cluster that you know about through genomics and pick up all the likely contacts, then you don't need to think about lockdown in the same way you might if it was a new unrelated case appearing from nowhere.

Of course it also helps in such circumstances if you have good track and trace and carry out a lot of testing (in New Zealand anyone with cold symptoms is encouraged to have a test).  And that you provide good support, both financial and otherwise to those who have to isolate - so people don't have to worry about testing positive and so will be more willing to come forward for a test.

But there have been several times over the last few months in New Zealand where individual cases have appeared (usually in those working in isolation facilities) and by tracing the virus back to the person who brought it in, they were able to have life go on as normal.

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 a love in it would not appear that it is going to make much practical difference to most of us. That is really one of the things I was trying to understand as the impression that some have given is that the failure to use Mrs Glover's facility was going to cause the lockdown to be considerably extended. I don't get the impression from here that is likely to be the case although what it might have done is given some added reassurance which is no bad thing.

Final question and you may not have any idea but is much of this a moot point as I have no idea what after doing swabs etc the IoM retain and for how long, especially if stuff has been sent to the UK. Even if Mrs Glover & IoM Govt kissed and made up could the sequencing tests actually be run as are the samples she needs still kept. I would have thought they might have been destroyed under fairly tight protocols.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

If on the other hand we were trying to eliminate by track and trace and only requesting those to lockdown whilst everybody else continued as normal then I totally understand why it would be very useful.

Hooray!

This is why it would be very useful. And the reason to use a local lab is speed. That's obvious. 

Ignore this lockdown and think of the future. They need to do everything they can to avoid another, they've massively pissed everyone off with this one and its completely unsustainable. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

We still don't have an answer as to why COMIN decided to end testing when they did. Presumably they were advised by the 'medics' that because the virus wasn't in the community it wasn't necessary to continue. Dr. Glover said that was not a good idea. Postulating on whether genome sequencing etc brings any value to the debate now is lost, is background noise and semantics. Had testing continued with the regime that Dr Glover suggested then we probably wouldn't be in lockdown now. 

We need an answer as to why testing was withdrawn in it's entirety.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

 That is really one of the things I was trying to understand as the impression that some have given is that the failure to use Mrs Glover's facility was going to cause the lockdown to be considerably extended.

The failure to use this facility has contributed to the lockdown being brought in in the first place.

Pricks.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

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 a love in it would not appear that it is going to make much practical difference to most of us. That is really one of the things I was trying to understand as the impression that some have given is that the failure to use Mrs Glover's facility was going to cause the lockdown to be considerably extended. I don't get the impression from here that is likely to be the case although what it might have done is given some added reassurance which is no bad thing.

Final question and you may not have any idea but is much of this a moot point as I have no idea what after doing swabs etc the IoM retain and for how long, especially if stuff has been sent to the UK. Even if Mrs Glover & IoM Govt kissed and made up could the sequencing tests actually be run as are the samples she needs still kept. I would have thought they might have been destroyed under fairly tight protocols.  

Todays wasn't a travel case, so its just as likely that tomorrow or the next day will be the same

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Lost Login, as I understand it, genomics gives an audit trail.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Andy Onchan said:

We still don't have an answer as to why COMIN decided to end testing when they did. Presumably they were advised by the 'medics' that because the virus wasn't in the community it wasn't necessary to continue. Dr. Glover said that was not a good idea. Postulating on whether genome sequencing etc brings any value to the debate now is lost, is background noise and semantics. Had testing continued with the regime that Dr Glover suggested then we probably wouldn't be in lockdown now. 

We need an answer as to why testing was withdrawn in it's entirety.

We can postulate why, but what medical advice was obtained and from whom? 

There is another aspect to this and that is the accuracy of the Dr Glover test which reduced false negatives.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gladys said:

 

There is another aspect to this and that is the accuracy of the Dr Glover test which reduced false negatives.  

That's sort of debatable. Semantics maybe but what it did was ensure that the swab had been taken correctly, thus reducing the chances of false results.

Edit - at least thats how I've read it.

Edited by TheTeapot
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheTeapot said:

That's sort of debatable. Semantics maybe but what it did was ensure that the swab had been taken correctly, thus reducing the chances of false results.

It may be, but my uneducated understanding was that the source of rna for testing could be identified so they could ensure they weren't testing human rna which would give a negative result.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Gladys said:

There is another important point, and that is the whole genesis of the falling out.  Dr Glover recommended testing before leaving isolation, but that was quickly dropped and, to the lay person, it would appear that if that testing had happened, we wouldn't be locked down now as the positive case would have been picked up before going into the wild. 

I seem to remember that Rachel Glover's point was a wider one that just that.  It was that Ashford seemed to be not listening to any scientific advice - not just from her but from anyone, including people like Ewart.  Given some of the nonsense that Ashford has been spouting in recent months - not just the odd misunderstanding, but consistently - it seems likely that situation has gotten worse if anything.

It also has to be said that @rachomics wasn't a lone voice in calling for testing during isolation - though she may have been one of the most persuasive.  Many others on here and elsewhere (including some who were agreeing on nothing else) were also doing so and it culminated in that November Tynwald vote.  And the practice and experience of other countries showed it was the right policy. 

So they can't dismiss her as some 'lone voice calling in the wilderness', who just happened to to right, she was also representing the consensus of the subject everywhere except the DHSC.  So perhaps rather than worrying about the hurt feelings of their middle managers, we should be calling for them to either admit error or go.  Because the next decision they make may be fatal.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 6
Link to post
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...