Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 33.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2545

  • TheTeapot

    1384

  • Gladys

    1280

  • 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

3 minutes ago, TerryFuchwit said:

When you look at our position now once we are out of lockdown you would have to question the value in keeping the borders shut.

What is the point of having them shut now?

Makes no sense.  Would make more sense for them to be closed in the other direction.

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

What is the point of having them shut now?

Makes no sense.  Would make more sense for them to be closed in the other direction.

we were on a red list a couple of days ago

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

16 what in hospital? People? We have loads of people in hospital.

We also have loads of people with COVID, way more than the figures say. So be default some of the people in hospital will produce a positive COVID test.

This may or may not be relevant to why they are in hospital.

There is no reason why they can't make this information public.

When we move to mitigation, clear information is going to be absolutely critical to management by IOMG and for each of us individually.  What are the chances?

While elimination is the policy you can get away with less information, just do as you are told.  But mitigation really means less state intervention and more individual responsibility and to be effective we have all got to have the information to risk assess our own position. 

Was that aspect covered in the plan? 

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

You ever been in an ICU boy.

I know someone who was in ICU because he fell off his motorbike.

We should probably dig all the roads up (please resist the temptation to make obvious jokes about manx roads)

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

As you say, over the last 12 months, not throughout the administration (although I accept that Thomas was hamstrung whilst a Minister). The only member who has, from day 1, been prepared to face up to Quayle and challenge his manifest bullshit, and not simply on Covid, has been Daphne Caine. No wonder Quayle is so bloody rude to her - she engages his existing misogyny.  She also comes in for plenty of flak on these pages but if I was a Garff voter, which I’m not, she’d get an X in the box from me for that alone.

Yes she stuck it to the Quayle Administration with the Goat question.

Really held them to account, nearly brought comin down.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It will need to be explalained to the masses exactly what the move to mitigation is going to entail. Case numbers are going to be an increasingly less important metric moving forward - that is going to a difficult adjustment for many.

Edited by madmanxpilot
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Nellie said:

Just to clarify '1000 awaiting results' is actually '1014 awaiting result notification' (see page 7 of the Dashboard).

This means a lot of people waiting to be told the outcome of their test, not that test is still being processed. So, those 1014 results are already in the headline figures. It isn't going to influence tomorrow's figures.

The number of tests completed shows that the positive test rate is now 9%, down from a steady 13-14% for the last week, which looks like a move in the right direction. 

Not certain this is correct, when you compare the figures.  It would be worthy of clarification from Ashford or whoever.  There was 666 'awaiting result notification' yesterday, there has been 482 tests since yesterday and now 1014 'awaiting result notification'.  I know 111 is under pressure but I would have thought more than 150 odd have been informed of their respective results in the last 24 hours. It can not be the other way round as there haven't been enough cases in the last 24 hours - 482 to have 1014 waiting results.  Very odd, sure all will be explained.

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

It will to be explalained to the masses exactly what the move to mitigation is going to entail. Case numbers are going to be an increasingly less important metric moving forward - that is going to a difficult adjustment for many.

They should stop publishing case numbers.  

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

You ever been in an ICU boy.

It seems the recent unfortunate death was not a patient in ITU then as the figures for that area stayed the same. Is that correct or have I misheard.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TerryFuchwit said:

They should stop publishing case numbers.  

I think its still important to have them whilst we are trying to achieve elimination, but yes, as we move forward, there will be less use in seeing them on a daily basis.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CowMan said:

Most of the 12 people in hospital won’t even end up in ICU. Very few people end up in ICU. 

because the ICU has it's own patients, there will be a nearby Coronavirus ward. and there is the possibility they will be on an invasive respirator and all that goes with that as with ICU.


The current admissions will at least have doubled the workload on this side of the hospital. 

But Ashy said last week they could handle it. At what point can't they? 

Edited by Barlow
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hmmmm said:

Not certain this is correct, when you compare the figures.  It would be worthy of clarification from Ashford or whoever.  There was 666 'awaiting result notification' yesterday, there has been 518 tests since yesterday and now 1014 'awaiting result notification'.  I know 111 is under pressure but I would have thought more than 170 have been informed of their respective results in the last 24 hours. 

I agree, that the 'awaiting' figure is building, and not contacting more people must be a capacity thing. But, the definition is clear, and it does not appear to be a cause for alarm. Perhaps the priority is only to contact positives results and manage the fallout from those. 

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...