Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Newbie said:

Why is A still at work if his wife tested positive a couple of days earlier?

He wasn't, he went into isolation when his wife's test came back but they wouldn't immediately get his whole workplace to isolate so B would still be working having been in contact with A the day before.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 35.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2712

  • TheTeapot

    1464

  • Gladys

    1362

  • Nom de plume

    1099

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

38 minutes ago, Newbie said:

Curious to know why (or even how) he got a test. If he was tested because he was an asymptomatic high risk contact he should have been isolating

No idea mate just seen her saying it, didn't go into specifics.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Howard the Duck MBE TBC said:

He wasn't, he went into isolation when his wife's test came back but they wouldn't immediately get his whole workplace to isolate so B would still be working having been in contact with A the day before.

 

Sorry, still not getting you. In your example (quoted below) you seem to be saying that A's wife tested positive, B was then tested for some reason the next day and tested positive, and then A, who worked with B got a call from 111 after B tested positive and was also found to be positive.

If what you actually mean is that A's wife tested positive because she had symptoms and he was tested as a high risk contact, having started to isolate, and was found to be positive as well so his work colleague was then tested that makes more sense, but even then it wouldn't really work because there is an incubation period of several days between catching the virus and becoming infectious/testing positive.

It is a genuine question because if there is some way within the existing rules that something like that could happen, then the rules need looking at.

32 minutes ago, Howard the Duck MBE TBC said:

Doesn't take a rocket scientist does it?

A and B work together.  On Tuesday As wife tests positive as an unknown case. B is tested next day and tests positive.

A who is still at work and has been working throughout gets a call from 111 goes for a test despite feeling fine and tests positive.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whatnonsence said:

Agree Boris it is poor management. If the Union are on top of it then the management usually are as well they complement each other not so with the buses and steam packet.

Of course the management have a responsibility to ensure the safety of their workforce and questions need to be asked about what's gone on here. However, that that does not absolve the employees of ensuring they take measures to ensure the safety of each other too. In fact that very point is legislated for in the Health and Safety at work act.

UNITE saying they were waiting for management to do something simply raises questions about what the employees were doing to look after each other in regards social distancing and other measures.

Attached is the relevant screen shot from Health and Safety at Work Act (1974) as adopted in the IOM.

 

Screenshot_20210323-153525_Drive.jpg

Edited by madmanxpilot
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

This cutting off of Keys and Tynwald Oral Questions[1] has been happening more and more recently. 

.

.

 

Once the voting habits have been charted, I would like to think the figures will indicate who should or should not be returned at the next election. And even those who don't stand can refer to the figures when, in their dotage, they profess to people how proud they were to be a member of the best club in the world, and a pillar of democracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Newbie said:

Sorry, still not getting you. In your example (quoted below) you seem to be saying that A's wife tested positive, B was then tested for some reason the next day and tested positive, and then A, who worked with B got a call from 111 after B tested positive and was also found to be positive.

If what you actually mean is that A's wife tested positive because she had symptoms and he was tested as a high risk contact, having started to isolate, and was found to be positive as well so his work colleague was then tested that makes more sense, but even then it wouldn't really work because there is an incubation period of several days between catching the virus and becoming infectious/testing positive.

It is a genuine question because if there is some way within the existing rules that something like that could happen, then the rules need looking at.

 

Yes sorry a's wife.

I wouldn't get to tied up on incubation periods.  People are still returning positive tests for 14 days or more after their first so A could have been asymptomatic and working with B plenty long enough to have passed it on.

As long as asymptomatic cases can last for weeks and people are still moving about we are going to get cases.

Surveillance testing or testing of waterways etc seems obvious but they don't seem to want to for some reason.

Separate issue.  A sort of local celeb hinting that he is getting no support through this.  One of many many businesses falling through the gaps, and if you have been prudent and built up savings you can't even get jobseekers until they are pretty much gone.

 

20210323_160239.jpg

Edited by Howard the Duck MBE TBC
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thommo2010 said:

How would you know you have covid? firstly you have this issue with being asympotmatic. I seen some woman saying her husband had been going into work for the past week got a test and tested positive he had no symptoms.

 

Secondly the symptoms seem so wide how do you differentiate that from normal aches and pains. I have 2 young kids that I am having to home school as well as doing work at home. I am constantly fatigued and tired am I supposed to go and get a covid test every day? 

 

It is time for the blame game to stop in my opinion.

This was about people.going into work with active signs and symptoms of Covid.  Linked back to Spanking Enigmas comment about journos not asking Howard Quayle about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

How exactly do they define recoveries?

They test them on day 13, and presumably they have to be symptom free as well.

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

"HQ - It is important to get the messaging out, we did Q&A with James Davis, millions watched it (well ok 19,000)."

19,000? I can't believe that is true!

According to YouTube it's only 538 views.  Obviously people may have viewed it via other media, but the viewing numbers are actually less that for the briefings before (19 Mar - 1768) and after (22 Mar - 1551).  It's clearly the briefings that are popular, especially the numbers at the start, rather than these pre-recorded chats.

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   1 member


×
×
  • Create New...