Jump to content
Spam messages. Please stop reporting messages from Orange 15, Ivsa and Pupyh. They’ve been banned. ×

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Peter Layman said:

Good to see that the Java staff tested negative and are now back at work. I am slightly confused at this though. My colleague at work is currently self isolating at home after his young daughter was caught up in the school isolation bit. Daughter had the test which came back negative. However, the family still have to stay in isolation until they have a second test. Why does that not apply to Java staff?

Because we don't know the exact timings, level of contact etc.  I would suggest however, that young daughter to parent contact/transmission is far more likely than customer to kitchen staff transmission, which may explain the apparent discrepancy.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 32.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2390

  • TheTeapot

    1358

  • Gladys

    1224

  • horatiotheturd

    1015

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

16 hours ago, Banker said:

Several relatives have had similar experience which is not great if you’re elderly and easily confused ,one was promised call back as vaccinations line kept ringing out but it never happened 

Just wait until they get an email....

After I registered I got an email asking me to fill in consent forms. In the email the words "Consent Form" were highlighted as though is was a URL link. Clicking on it does nothing - because no URL link has been included.

Further down there are what appears to be two URLs concatenated on the same line. Clicking somewhere does go to a link, but not to consent forms. But, somewhat to my surprise, I found that the final few characters of the second URL are actually a link to a third, hidden, URL - which is where the consent form is.

How many oldies are willing to wade through the source text of an email to find this stuff out? - apart from me, of course.

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Peter Layman said:

Good to see that the Java staff tested negative and are now back at work. I am slightly confused at this though. My colleague at work is currently self isolating at home after his young daughter was caught up in the school isolation bit. Daughter had the test which came back negative. However, the family still have to stay in isolation until they have a second test. Why does that not apply to Java staff?

Not all of the staff were high risk contacts...so can work after a single test....which is what Ashford said on MR this morning.

Edited by Albert Tatlock
Link to post
Share on other sites

What level are we on, in the Borders Framework?

Level 4 is highlighted in green. Is that the current level that's in operation? 

I thought we were in Level 5A. I don't recall seeing a press release about a change.

ETA: Indeed it does say we're in Level 4.

Edited by Andy Onchan
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Old Git said:

Dr Glover is an ex barmaid. She says it’s where she learned not to take shit. 

That is very true. But she then went on and became a doctor. A real one, and an expert it genomic testing  

We have a health Minister who says all the words but is still coming from the experience of a barman. And paper clips.

If this was a level playing field, who would you like to hear calling the shots. David or Rachel? 
 

Daddy or chips, daddy or chips. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

That is very true. But she then went on and became a doctor. A real one, and an expert it genomic testing  

We have a health Minister who says all the words but is still coming from the experience of a barman. And paper clips.

If this was a level playing field, who would you like to hear calling the shots. David or Rachel? 
 

Daddy or chips, daddy or chips. 

Yes  but DA is being advised by people with real qualifications too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

Ashford is guided by the Director of Public Health and the CEO of the Department of Health and social security and would be very unlikely to make decisions that contradict that advice. Unless you made Dr G minister the same would apply.

This is why government doesn’t work then. Dr G knows more than the DoPH and the CEO of the DHSS put together, as witnessed many times with DA coming out with statements previously made by Dr G on Twitter  

it would be hilarious if we weren’t talking about a global pandemic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

That is very true. But she then went on and became a doctor. A real one, and an expert it genomic testing  

We have a health Minister who says all the words but is still coming from the experience of a barman. And paper clips.

If this was a level playing field, who would you like to hear calling the shots. David or Rachel? 
 

Daddy or chips, daddy or chips. 

I wasn’t knocking her, just thinking that previous bar work isn’t necessarily a deterrent to progressing. I’m a big fan of Dr Glover, but think she maybe needs to reign it in a little on social media re the government. 
 

I think they’ve lost control of this current “cluster”. Have four restaurant bookings before the weekend and expect half to be cancelled. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

I certainly don't suggest we bumble along but unfortunately there are two choices

1) Accept occasional small outbreaks and try to manage them or

2) Be locked down all the time.

Neither are good.

Which is your preferred?

I choose neither.  I choose being led by someone who knows what they are doing and who has staff to project manage the whole scenario plugging loopholes before they become a danger. Preferably around March 2020.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manx Yeller said:

Out of interest, how can they be certain which is the index case? Does this mean we have the genomics back from Liverpool to tell us this?

Steady on, it’s only been a week. Give it a few days and Hetty will drop them a reminder email. 

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...

×
×
  • Create New...