Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

yet on the andrew marr show yesterday there was a scientist on saying restrictions in Britain could last for years. 

 

If we only listen to scientists we will be in a perpetual ‘safe’’ state, I dearly hope not. Risks are part of life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Out of the blue said:

If we only listen to scientists we will be in a perpetual ‘safe’’ state, I dearly hope not. Risks are part of life.

All I know is that forbidding anyone from leaving their homes would stop 100% of people from being ran over by a bus.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Out of the blue said:

Quite right, buses are bloody dangerous, stay safe 

Er, given the money Ian Longworth has expended, we should have the safest bus fleet in the world 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Newbie said:

I think their position was that mass testing of asymptomatic individuals was not helpful, particularly when the prevalence of disease in the community is low (such as last summer/autumn on the island). There is evidence from places like Liverpool, where mass testing was undertaken, that supports that view.

That is different to surge testing, where increased testing of asymptomatic individuals in specific areas and at specific times (i.e. during an outbreak or cluster) can be helpful. Here, they tended to refer to that as surveillance testing.

Mass testing can also be helpful, to an extent, in specific settings such as healthcare or Universities.

As with many things, the answer isn't black and white, but requires a nuanced approach. Unfortunately, with many issues relating to the pandemic, people often adopt extreme positions such as 'Mass testing is a good thing and we should do it all the time' or 'Mass testing is a waste of resources and doesn't work'.

In that sense, flip-flopping can be a good thing provided that there are sound principles underlying the decisions taken at any particular time. One person's flip-flopping is another person's nuanced approach.

 

Mass testing in the guise that Universities use is a pragmatic approach to try and reduce risk. It’s about minimising how students pass it between eachother after travelling from quite a diverse range of areas in the UK. Lateral flow tests used to support that aren’t particularly good either, they’re just convenient. Not particularly applicable here when we have a good PCR lab, HQ’s gold standard  

The surge or surveillance testing, however they’d like to refer to it, came across as very much an accident in the first case they acknowledged it. In the New Year’s Day scenario, where you’d get told to get a test if you called before X o’clock just in case. Not a broader net. 

In Australia for example, waste water is sampled as an early warning sign of virus spread. 

Or, in the case of the coffee and noodle place, they were only all called to be tested after someone happened to develop symptoms after being in there at the same time as a case. In other words, when you already knew that cat was halfway out of the bag.

Flip-flopping or changes of strategy can be a good thing, but you’d hope it was in an organised, proactive and meaningful way. Not accidents and luck. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TerryFuchwit said:

You've got to be next level stupid to get arrested.  

What is it about these people that makes them do such stupid things?

Do they not realise that it is their stupidity that helps to ensure that the controls against us all keep getting extended?

We all want to get out of lockdown, and I'd rather do it sooner, without their "help".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Mass testing in the guise that Universities use is a pragmatic approach to try and reduce risk. It’s about minimising how students pass it between eachother after travelling from quite a diverse range of areas in the UK. Lateral flow tests used to support that aren’t particularly good either, they’re just convenient. Not particularly applicable here when we have a good PCR lab, HQ’s gold standard  

The surge or surveillance testing, however they’d like to refer to it, came across as very much an accident in the first case they acknowledged it. In the New Year’s Day scenario, where you’d get told to get a test if you called before X o’clock just in case. Not a broader net. 

In Australia for example, waste water is sampled as an early warning sign of virus spread. 

Or, in the case of the coffee and noodle place, they were only all called to be tested after someone happened to develop symptoms after being in there at the same time as a case. In other words, when you already knew that cat was halfway out of the bag.

Flip-flopping or changes of strategy can be a good thing, but you’d hope it was in an organised, proactive and meaningful way. Not accidents and luck. 

I agree that making different decisions to suit different circumstances (aka 'flip-flopping'!) is a good thing, but that the government/public health don't really seem to have thought through how they will respond in any particular set of conditions. It does appear that the decisions can be a bit random and often behind the curve.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, monasqueen said:

What is it about these people that makes them do such stupid things?

Do they not realise that it is their stupidity that helps to ensure that the controls against us all keep getting extended?

We all want to get out of lockdown, and I'd rather do it sooner, without their "help".

It's a combination of being stupid and also woolly, ambiguous signals from Govt in respect of lockdown restrictions, open to all sorts of personal interpretations and applications.

These couple of examples are a bit too late which is why we're now averaging 20+ new cases a day. If they'd enforced a clear message somewhat earlier we'd have alleviated the current situation somewhat IMHO.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GD4ELI said:

Have a word with Brazil. My former neighbour in Switzerland married a Brazilian lady, moved to a coastal area outside of Santos. I'm in daily contact with both - the situation is very grim there, so no matter had bad it is on the rock it could be one hell of a lot worse.

I believe the man in charge doesn't believe in covid. I wonder how many more people have to die before he changes his mind. It does seem a little weird that Texas has made the decision to open up and the number of infected has fallen whereas in the rest of the world with the same decision they have become overrun with cases. Are we sure Texas is telling the truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

I believe the man in charge doesn't believe in covid. I wonder how many more people have to die before he changes his mind. It does seem a little weird that Texas has made the decision to open up and the number of infected has fallen whereas in the rest of the world with the same decision they have become overrun with cases. Are we sure Texas is telling the truth?

Like I've posted texas arent doing as much testing they are focusing on the vaccine,  same as Israel. They are pretty much back to normal as well. Vaccine has been smashed over there.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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...