Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

I always thought that the false negative was because the person taking the swab had not proddled deep or hard enough to actually collect the nasty viruses from said persons orifices. The test itself (with a correct and representative sample) is shirley near to 100% reliable

You're right that the person conducting the test makes a big difference - this applies to all tests of course.  That's why Rachel's test had an extra check for human DNA to check proper contact was made.  And self-swabbing is always going to be the least efficient option for obvious reasons. 

But even with expert swabbers the Innova test only has about 58% accuracy (I mean it says people have Covid when a PCR test says they do).  Even more surprisingly only 82% of positive results were confirmed, despite them claiming this was 99.9%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ramseyboi said:

Some good posts from weighty this morning.

Any of the doom mongers going to pipe up and disagree with him?  We all know if the same posts had been made by various other posters non de plume for example they would have been torn apart by now.

Mr Wright talks sense.  I really think the government need to clearly get this info out to people.

 I respect his opinion but that doesn’t mean I always agree with it, the difference being Wrighty engages in debate, he doesn’t just dismiss people as doom mongers, I’m sure some of his patients share their concerns, he doesn’t ridicule them and call them stupid.

The reason I disagree, well his work has been cancelled today because of everything other than Covid, ok that might be the case this week, but what happens when Covid patients do actually start taking up bed space? What happens when even more of his patients start testing positive for Covid due to pre admission test?  Well even more ops will be cancelled and people’s quality of life will ultimately suffer. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HeliX said:

35 new cases today, which is 268 fewer than yesterday's 103 new cases. The active case number has gone up by 237.

People keep saying stop looking at the numbers, but they're quite entertaining

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HeliX said:

35 new cases today, which is 268 fewer than yesterday's 103 new cases. The active case number has gone up by 237.

 

Fucking. Farce.

If they could sort this nonsense out I wouldn’t even have a reason to debate it, I just don’t like the way cases continue to be reported in low numbers, if people only read headlines  they’d think we’d have about 700 cases, the reality is double that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Annoymouse said:

If they could sort this nonsense out I wouldn’t even have a reason to debate it, I just don’t like the way cases continue to be reported in low numbers, if people only read headlines  they’d think we’d have about 700 cases, the reality is double that.

The media should do their fucking job regarding this, instead of just repeating the government’s figures. 
 

Sorry, but this shit annoys me. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, HeliX said:

kqesjSq.png

 

35 new cases today, which is 268 fewer than yesterday's 103 new cases. The active case number has gone up by 237.

 

Fucking. Farce.

Absolutely mind boggling bad.

They also no longer publish the raw spreadsheet data that drives this.

It's just bizarre.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, swoopy2110 said:

Now changed to 233 cases added!

210 positive, 233 added, and only a total of 123 in the "new case breakdown." Is Alf doing this sparkling mathematics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

but what happens when Covid patients do actually start taking up bed space?

Firstly, that is pure conjecture and based upon precisely what data - or do you have access to the same crystal ball as Fergusson and the rest of SAGE?

Secondly, if your powers of future prediction are correct, then as I and several others have suggested, the medical authorities have know for at least a year that CV is going to be, long-term, another reason for hospital admission along with the multiplicity of other conditions - and should have been planning and making the necessary provisions for the load accordingly.  In some circles, and clearly is absent in the parish council, it is termed 'future planning'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   I'm a simple person really . I have no F***ing clue as to what the hell their doing with the Covid figures. How the hell cant they do a simple task adding and subtracting daily and manage to produce to all in a acceptable manner . Mind blowing . Lots of clever people on this site . Apart from the obvious answer that the people responsible are completely incompetent can anyone help !!! 
Edited by Numbnuts
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON

HRH Tim Baker MHK is doing the COVID figures as the usual geezer is on annual leave!

Just like his budgets and overspending, the COVID figures are also all over the f*cking place!

Spot on Tim keep up the good work! 👌

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...