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

19 minutes ago, TerryFuchwit said:

Seems a bit TJ style over dramatic.

You're going to have to learn to live with Covid.  As scary a thought as that might be to you.

I see where you are coming from, and your continued confidence is admirable.

Yes it is scary. Have you ever been in an ITU ward? Covid is a particularly nasty turn in that respect and one that must be avoided at 'any' cost.

At the moment we can choose to live without Covid - the Isle of Man is in control. (ok, up to a point). 

It would not take much for the likes of Douglas Corporation's 'mass death' contingencies to come into force for example.

 

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

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2388

  • TheTeapot

    1358

  • Gladys

    1223

  • 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

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

Good. But not vital. Its that tool that's in my toolbox that I only use for special projects. Think its called a spirit level.:o

Yeah, I never bother with one of them either, judge it by eye!

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Barlow said:

I see where you are coming from, and your continued confidence is admirable.

Yes it is scary. Have you ever been in an ITU ward? Covid is a particularly nasty turn in that respect and one that must be avoided at 'any' cost.

At the moment we can choose to live without Covid - the Isle of Man is in control. (ok, up to a point). 

It would not take much for the likes of Douglas Corporation's 'mass death' contingencies to come into force for example.

 

Well hopefully the new borders policy will set out when we can all start traveling again as Ashie said we are part of a world economy and can't stay in permanent isolation although some would like it.

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

To be fair, the Java Express was listed as a 'Location of Interest' on Friday 19th and people who were in there between the specified times on the previous Tuesday were asked to be extra vigilant regarding the development symptoms. What else could they (IOMG) have done and how would genomics have changed anything in the subsequent timeline?

Or am I missing something?

My point was meant to be that 42 hours wasn't so bad a wait when announcements were routinely about things 5 days ago.  It wasn't a comment on the gov's performance on the Java cases.

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

This is where it gets confusing. You're completely right with the number of strains etc. But, we're looking beyond just the strains.

When you sequence the virus, you get, per Dr G's blog, you get tens of thousands of individual bits of data, describing the make-up of the virus. If you can look at all of those, you can build up a clear picture of how that sample directly relates to another.

In samples of the same strain, a number of those bits of data will match, letting you know you're looking at that strain. But, you then look at the rest as well, that gives you those mutations, or, copying errors, that give you the really detailed genomics.

 

 

My understanding is that the SARS CoV 2 virus has around 30,000 proteins in its genome and that is the information you get from the sequence. It is variations in the sequence of those proteins (copying errors as you say) that constitute mutations and lead to new strains. There are thousands of known changes, and there are databases that record those. They can be grouped together based upon how similar they are to one another genetically to form an enormous family tree

However, again as I understand it, there aren't 100 million strains, so in the vast majority of cases the viral RNA replicates perfectly and there isn't a mutation giving rise to a new strain. In that situation, the viral RNA isolated from one person will be identical to the viral RNA isolated from someone they have passed the virus to. That provides very strong evidence that one person caught it from the other, although they could also have both caught it from an unidentified 3rd person. I can see how that is helpful when looking back to fully understand a particular cluster or group of clusters, but I don't really see how it would change your approach within the first 24 hours of contact tracing. 

Again, perhaps I am missing something, but just trying to get my head round it really. The nomenclature of lineages, variants and strains doesn't help the have a go amateur virologist!

  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Newbie said:

My understanding is that the SARS CoV 2 virus has around 30,000 proteins in its genome and that is the information you get from the sequence. It is variations in the sequence of those proteins (copying errors as you say) that constitute mutations and lead to new strains. There are thousands of known changes, and there are databases that record those. They can be grouped together based upon how similar they are to one another genetically to form an enormous family tree

However, again as I understand it, there aren't 100 million strains, so in the vast majority of cases the viral RNA replicates perfectly and there isn't a mutation giving rise to a new strain. In that situation, the viral RNA isolated from one person will be identical to the viral RNA isolated from someone they have passed the virus to. That provides very strong evidence that one person caught it from the other, although they could also have both caught it from an unidentified 3rd person. I can see how that is helpful when looking back to fully understand a particular cluster or group of clusters, but I don't really see how it would change your approach within the first 24 hours of contact tracing. 

Again, perhaps I am missing something, but just trying to get my head round it really. The nomenclature of lineages, variants and strains doesn't help the have a go amateur virologist!

At least you are having a go to understand the science rather than just blindly quote articles that support your view.:flowers:

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

My understanding is that the SARS CoV 2 virus has around 30,000 proteins in its genome and that is the information you get from the sequence. It is variations in the sequence of those proteins (copying errors as you say) that constitute mutations and lead to new strains. There are thousands of known changes, and there are databases that record those. They can be grouped together based upon how similar they are to one another genetically to form an enormous family tree

However, again as I understand it, there aren't 100 million strains, so in the vast majority of cases the viral RNA replicates perfectly and there isn't a mutation giving rise to a new strain. In that situation, the viral RNA isolated from one person will be identical to the viral RNA isolated from someone they have passed the virus to. That provides very strong evidence that one person caught it from the other, although they could also have both caught it from an unidentified 3rd person. I can see how that is helpful when looking back to fully understand a particular cluster or group of clusters, but I don't really see how it would change your approach within the first 24 hours of contact tracing. 

Again, perhaps I am missing something, but just trying to get my head round it really. The nomenclature of lineages, variants and strains doesn't help the have a go amateur virologist!

So my understanding is we have 2 things:

The strain - a strain is a set of mutations that give the virus a particular behaviour, for example, making it more infectious. Any sample of that strain has those mutations, so will likely behave in a similar way. For example, the UK strain had a number of functional mutations to change how it attaches to cells. A viral sample with non-functional or minor mutations won't count as a new strain, as the key parts are all the same.

Whilst SARS CoV 2 has a proof reading mechanism, to stop mistakes being made when copying itself, the error rate in that replication is still very high.

Lineage - This is the family tree style linking of cases, and what people talk about when they say that a virus is from the same lineage e.g B.1.1.7 (snazzy names scientists come up with). In the case of B.1.1.7, that lineage became defined as the UK strain, as it came with a set of spike mutations changing how infectious it is.

 Lineage is what we're talking about with the tracing genomics. The proteins make a certain number of mistakes when they're replicated, which is what the sequencer looks for, and where those 30,000 data points come from. Instead of just looking for the sequences that match a known strain, you compare all of those points to your known data, to identify how the cases are linked.

Lineages are also used to work out how many times the virus has been imported, for example.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Banker said:

Looks like the borders easing policy document will be released shortly after all MHKs have had input , god knows what Moorehouse & Cregeen will add in!!!

New Castle Rushen High School

New Castle Rushen High School

New Castle Rushen High School

Err...that's it.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting in the briefing that Ashford clearly dumped responsibility from any individual SP employee breaching the rules to Corporate SP responsibility for breaches of the rules. Basically a 'get out of jail' card for the employees of that 'Monopoly'.

So as owners of the SP, the government could effectively fine the SP £10m for any breach, knock £10m off the cost of the pandemic and claim a victory...and be home in time for cornflakes.

Though £5 says it will be 'lessons have been learned' ...yet again - and no one gets held to account ...yet again.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Probably true. But you would have isolated them both wouldn't you. What next? Test everyone on the Island and then do the sequencing or wait for the next positive test.

I am not sure what you don't get.  The rest of the world are using genomics the IOM is using genomics. - if it was a waste of time nobody would bother .. Do you want to ping a quick note to Jacinda Ardern and tell her she's wasting her time?  To have data quickly puts us ahead of the game. Do you want to tell HQ and Dr Ewart they needn't send samples to LPL. Dr Ewart stated that we should get results back from LPL 'this week' in the press conference/update today. So clearly they are of importance to them.  However they are less useful if they take a week to 'deliver'.  There is no harm in Dr Glover running tests in tandem, for free, and getting the results to us quicker. I want what is best for the IOM and waiting an indeterminate length of time for results which are clearly 'of interest' to Dr Ewart when we could have them within hours is a disservice to the Manx public.  If you don't get it that's fine just stop going round in circles.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Whilst SARS CoV 2 has a proof reading mechanism, to stop mistakes being made when copying itself, the error rate in that replication is still very high.

I suppose that is the key to it. Does a very high error rate mean an error occurs in 50% of transmissions, 1% of transmissions or 1 in 10,000. Hopefully @rachomics will be along at some point!

As I said, I can see the benefit in confirming (or otherwise) what the contact tracers believe has happened, but before getting the information the person has to have been identified already in order to get the sample.

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

Interesting in the briefing that Ashford clearly dumped responsibility from any individual SP employee breaching the rules to Corporate SP responsibility for breaches of the rules. Basically a 'get out of jail' card for the employees of that 'Monopoly'.

So as owners of the SP, the government could effectively fine the SP £10m for any breach, knock £10m off the cost of the pandemic and claim a victory...and be home in time for cornflakes.

Though £5 says it will be 'lessons have been learned' ...yet again - and no one gets held to account ...yet again.

 

 

 

From what HQ said in Tynwald today the only person likely to be held to account will be the guy who had the virus. It stinks but we all know no one will be fired above foot solider level.

 

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

I am not sure what you don't get.  The rest of the world are using genomics the IOM is using genomics. - if it was a waste of time nobody would bother .. Do you want to ping a quick note to Jacinda Ardern and tell her she's wasting her time?  To have data quickly puts us ahead of the game. Do you want to tell HQ and Dr Ewart they needn't send samples to LPL. Dr Ewart stated that we should get results back from LPL 'this week' in the press conference/update today. So clearly they are of importance to them.  However they are less useful if they take a week to 'deliver'.  There is no harm in Dr Glover running tests in tandem, for free, and getting the results to us quicker. I want what is best for the IOM and waiting an indeterminate length of time for results which are clearly 'of interest' to Dr Ewart when we could have them within hours is a disservice to the Manx public.  If you don't get it that's fine just stop going round in circles.

What are you talking about ? I have never said don't use genomics. Have you read my posts. I just said that there was little benefit in having an on island lab. Everyone else seems to manage with LPL. 

I never said we shouldn't let Dr G do tests for free either. Why wouldn't you. 

I'm not Howard Quayle and I have no axe to grind.

No wonder it's going round in circles. Perhaps you should do your research by reading the posts. 

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...