Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, rachomics said:

I love your optimism. 

Unfortunately, people do, and have, lied to contact tracers in the last year. Their consciences tended to become clearer when their own health status becomes more precarious, but by then it could be too late to trace anyone they came into contact with. 

For example (purely hypothetically), someone who swears blind that they didn't break isolation might be a little more honest if presented with some data that shows that 10 people who state they were in a particular location on a specific date have exactly the same 30,000 letters of viral RNA as theirs (i.e. they caught it from that person). It tends to sharpen the memory. 

Unfortunately the punitive measures in place by the government for breaking isolation have an unintended consequence: people lie through their teeth to contact tracers when they test positive for fear of punitive measures like a holiday in Jurby. 

I take your point there, but the response that I was commenting upon was answering the question whether any of today's positive results were people who were already in isolation as a result of high risk contacts through either St Mary's or Truth Wine bar. I was just pointing out that the contact tracers would know whether todays positives were already self isolating and if they were they would know why they were self isolating without the need for genome sequencing. I can absolutely see the role for that, but suggesting that it was needed to answer this particular query seemed to be pushing it a bit

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 20.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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

5 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

Last week Dr Ewart said that all of the positive swabs are sent to Liverpool for genomic analysis. If this is the case, would there still be anything on island for Dr Glover to analyse even if the ice was broken in her relationship with IOMG? I'm genuinely not sure how it works hence the question.

As I understand it, the elephant in the room is that public health and CoMIN are of the understanding that Livepool will only be delivering a lineage (i.e. B.1.1.7). That's not the case, it's just that they don't understand the data nor where to look for the genome sequences themselves. 

Once someone like me has their sticky mitts on the actual genome sequences all kind of possibilities become apparent. Like who gave it to who. It's literally that sensitive a technique. 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rachomics said:

As I understand it, the elephant in the room is that public health and CoMIN are of the understanding that Livepool will only be delivering a lineage (i.e. B.1.1.7). That's not the case, it's just that they don't understand the data nor where to look for the genome sequences themselves. 

Once someone like me has their sticky mitts on the actual genome sequences all kind of possibilities become apparent. Like who gave it to who. It's literally that sensitive a technique. 

Plus...Liverpool are taking up to a week to turn around even these results?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rachomics said:

Witnesses and recollection can't always be relied upon. 

Something of a long-time trait in our government and civil service.

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

As I understand it, the elephant in the room is that public health and CoMIN are of the understanding that Livepool will only be delivering a lineage (i.e. B.1.1.7). That's not the case, it's just that they don't understand the data nor where to look for the genome sequences themselves. 

Once someone like me has their sticky mitts on the actual genome sequences all kind of possibilities become apparent. Like who gave it to who. It's literally that sensitive a technique. 

Thanks - I appreciate that. In layman terms you are saying that once Liverpool have sent the data back, you would be able to work with it to follow the paper trail of infection. My previous question may be mute if that data is going to be on Island soon anyway, but I was interested to know if the whole positive swab is sent across and once thats happened, the chance to get it done quickly in your lab is lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Here's a question based on this info from that link...

"The other seven cases are close contacts of someone who tested positive for the virus having travelled to the Island."

What on earth is going on where someone who has traveled here can be in contact with at least 7 people to`infect them? 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Here's a question based on this info from that link...

"The other seven cases are close contacts of someone who tested positive for the virus having travelled to the Island."

What on earth is going on where someone who has traveled here can be in contact with at least 7 people to`infect them? 

I read that as meaning one of two things...a very big family isolating together, or that they were the isolating close contacts of the person who tested positive after they had exited their post travel quarantine - ie the Ramsey NYE case. If the latter is the case, lets hope all the close contacts were identified!

Edited by madmanxpilot
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, madmanxpilot said:

I read that as meaning one of two things...a very big family isolating together, or that they were the isolating close contacts of the person who tested positive after they had exited their post travel quarantine - ie the Ramsey NYE case. If the latter is the case, lets hope all the close contacts identified!

I thought that returning travellers were no longer allowed to isolate with their family unless the family had travelled with them, in which case they would have been described as returning travellers themselves rather than close contacts of a returning traveller

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Here's a question based on this info from that link...

"The other seven cases are close contacts of someone who tested positive for the virus having travelled to the Island."

What on earth is going on where someone who has traveled here can be in contact with at least 7 people to`infect them? 

Looks like the self-isolation policy could be a bit leaky...? Quelle surprise.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Newbie said:

I thought that returning travellers were no longer allowed to isolate with their family unless the family had travelled with them, in which case they would have been described as returning travellers themselves rather than close contacts of a returning traveller

Good point well made. So its the likely the latter then.

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

Here's a question based on this info from that link...

"The other seven cases are close contacts of someone who tested positive for the virus having travelled to the Island."

What on earth is going on where someone who has traveled here can be in contact with at least 7 people to`infect them? 

It’s nothing more than a spin on words so they aren’t deemed community cases. It’s a returning traveller who went out after 14 days isolation, went on to infect at least 7 others and when they went on to develop symptoms they tested positive, few days later anyone in the high risk location is deemed a ‘close contact’ and also told to self isolate, it’s taken about 2 weeks now for them to also develop symptoms as it’s the new strain they don’t want to talk about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Banker said:

As long as the new cases were in isolation I’m not bothered!

Well technically speaking the new cases would have been in the community for around 3-4 days before being told to self isolate, it’s unlikely they would have been shedding though at such an early stage, fingers crossed if they did self isolate correctly that it should be nipped in the bud and they would have been unlikely to infect anyone else.

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...