Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Indeed.  But have there been any public health warnings about this?  A campaign to remind older and other vulnerable people about what they should be doing in warmer weather would seem to be sensible and so is starting it before things do really get hot.  I haven't seen anything.

Me neither.... said the same to the missus earlier in the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Utah 01 said:

Indeed.....but consider that since the mid 60s tens (maybe even hundreds) of millions of all ages, including the frail, vulnerable OAPs) have made annual , and for likes of the Canary commuters, multiple visits to the Mediterranean from all over northwest Europe to 'experience' (and happily survive to go back for more and more and more) days-upon (weeks-upon) end of 30C plus temperatures.

I don't recall being handed a 'public health warning sheet' either upon departure from UK or arrival in Med country.  Do you want Nanny State to spoon feed and do everything for you? This past 16 months has deprived far too many on this Island of the capability to even think for themselves, let alone act and take responsibility for their own well-being.

I'm not talking about the club 18-30 holidaymakers, nor even the retirees who spend half the year in Tenerife (although we see a fair few of those each year coming back after falling down the stairs of the apartment).  I mean people for whom it's a genuine effort, or maybe even need help, to get themselves to the toilet, or are perhaps incontinent and get a carer coming in a couple of times a day to help them out.  I don't personally need a leaflet to be given to me prior to my next holiday - whenever that may be - but some quite possibly do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Numbnuts said:

Expected , by me anyway... hopefully its a policy driven briefing and not a bad news one .

Either way we’ll find out about twenty minutes in. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Utah 01 said:

Indeed.....but consider that since the mid 60s tens (maybe even hundreds) of millions of all ages, including the frail, vulnerable OAPs) have made annual , and for likes of the Canary commuters, multiple visits to the Mediterranean from all over northwest Europe to 'experience' (and happily survive to go back for more and more and more) days-upon (weeks-upon) end of 30C plus temperatures.

I don't recall being handed a 'public health warning sheet' either upon departure from UK or arrival in Med country.  Do you want Nanny State to spoon feed and do everything for you? This past 16 months has deprived far too many on this Island of the capability to even think for themselves, let alone act and take responsibility for their own well-being.

But, you can’t make direct comparisons between the temperature here and temperature in somewhere built for it. 

Much like how Texas froze over in the way that it did, none of our architecture or infrastructure is really built for sustained heat. Our houses are typically designed to trap every ounce of heat. In most of the Med, public taps and drinking fountains are common place, the tall buildings in many streets in Florence for example, shade you from the sun. The buildings themselves made to keep the heat out or promote airflow.

You can ask plenty of people from hot countries who will concur that temperatures in the UK feel disproportionately hot compared to say India, Australia, the Med etc. 

But, no. Utah has decreed they are silly. 

Edited by AcousticallyChallenged
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BenFairfax - I've been looking at the model you've put out and have a couple of points I think it's worth making.  I don't really do Twitter, so I'll put them here.

You use a hospitalisation rate of 1.23%.  The slider on the website is quite granular, at least on my computer, and the neighbouring options would be 0.43% or 2.04%, with nothing in between.  How have you chosen 1.23%? It seems rather high to me.  The overall test-positive admission rate in the UK second wave was about 7%, with (my) estimated case ascertainment rate of 30%.  This was in an unvaccinated population.  Your susceptible population of 14765 (chosen, again, by the granularity of the slider) will have a much younger demographic structure and hence a much reduced requirement for hospital admission.  Need for admission varies in proportion to exp(0.044*age), i.e. halving every 15 years younger.

Same goes for length of stay.  You've used 9.42 days.  I think for youngsters it's a bit shorter.

Finally, R.  3.35 may be about right as an R0, but your initial susceptible population of 14765 will be 'diluted' by 70000 who are vaccinated.  This should reduce the effective R to something rather less.  It might be difficult to do, but what's the R if 'admitted to hospital because of covid' is the case definition, rather than a positive PCR?

My conclusion is that this model is too unreliable to be used as a predictive tool - I looked at it last year and thought the sensitivity of the input variables was too high then.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wrighty said:

@BenFairfax - I've been looking at the model you've put out and have a couple of points I think it's worth making.  I don't really do Twitter, so I'll put them here.

You use a hospitalisation rate of 1.23%.  The slider on the website is quite granular, at least on my computer, and the neighbouring options would be 0.43% or 2.04%, with nothing in between.  How have you chosen 1.23%? It seems rather high to me.  The overall test-positive admission rate in the UK second wave was about 7%, with (my) estimated case ascertainment rate of 30%.  This was in an unvaccinated population.  Your susceptible population of 14765 (chosen, again, by the granularity of the slider) will have a much younger demographic structure and hence a much reduced requirement for hospital admission.  Need for admission varies in proportion to exp(0.044*age), i.e. halving every 15 years younger.

Same goes for length of stay.  You've used 9.42 days.  I think for youngsters it's a bit shorter.

Finally, R.  3.35 may be about right as an R0, but your initial susceptible population of 14765 will be 'diluted' by 70000 who are vaccinated.  This should reduce the effective R to something rather less.  It might be difficult to do, but what's the R if 'admitted to hospital because of covid' is the case definition, rather than a positive PCR?

My conclusion is that this model is too unreliable to be used as a predictive tool - I looked at it last year and thought the sensitivity of the input variables was too high then.

That sounds a very polite way of saying ….

Well, you know. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Probably just to assure us that they've got this all under control.... even though they haven't.

Good afternoon everyone fastyr mie. I’ve always said that our Island would be following Manx solutions for Manx problems. Throughout the pandemic, we’ve needed fast, decisive and clear action to tackle outbreaks of COVID-19 on our shores. 

With the Council of Ministers, we have decided the time is right to go back to our roots. With this, we are moving into the Traa Dy Liooar phase of our pandemic response. A true Manx solution, where we can take our time, and still beam my face onto thousands of screens.

We won’t be taking questions from the media today, we don’t like Manx Radio, they were mean to me, and I don’t want to give the rest of them a chance. 

Thank you, stay safe and good evening. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Good afternoon everyone fastyr mie. I’ve always said that our Island would be following Manx solutions for Manx problems. Throughout the pandemic, we’ve needed fast, decisive and clear action to tackle outbreaks of COVID-19 on our shores. 

With the Council of Ministers, we have decided the time is right to go back to our roots. With this, we are moving into the Traa Dy Liooar phase of our pandemic response. A true Manx solution, where we can take our time, and still beam my face onto thousands of screens.

We won’t be taking questions from the media today, we don’t like Manx Radio, they were mean to me, and I don’t want to give the rest of them a chance. 

Thank you, stay safe and good evening. 

Serious question:

What measures / restrictions would you empower over your people from 5.15pm today if you were Chief Minister?

Edited by Nom de plume
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Good afternoon everyone fastyr mie. I’ve always said that our Island would be following Manx solutions for Manx problems. Throughout the pandemic, we’ve needed fast, decisive and clear action to tackle outbreaks of COVID-19 on our shores. 

With the Council of Ministers, we have decided the time is right to go back to our roots. With this, we are moving into the Traa Dy Liooar phase of our pandemic response. A true Manx solution, where we can take our time, and still beam my face onto thousands of screens.

We won’t be taking questions from the media today, we don’t like Manx Radio, they were mean to me, and I don’t want to give the rest of them a chance. 

Thank you, stay safe and good evening. 

English solutions for Manx problems.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wrighty said:

Perhaps you missed my explanation.  The arbitrary definition of what constitutes 'hot' or 'warm' is irrelevant. Just because the temperature hasn't reached the heights of 31 doesn't mean the relative heat doesn't have an effect.

If your normal, best physiological state is 'on the edge', due to age, frailty, chronic medical conditions, polypharmacy etc, and there are plenty of people like that around, then the slightest thing - higher than average temperature combined with a bit of dehydration for example - is enough to tip you over that edge.  Once in hospital, many people such as this become difficult to discharge since the criteria required to discharge someone safely are more stringent than many people live with day to day.  We see this all the time with people admitted with relatively minor problems who can't be discharged afterwards because their mobility is poor, or they struggle with stairs, or have been existing on a sub-standard diet, or fall over all the time because they drink too much etc. etc. 

Thank you for your explanation. I have indeed missed your previous post on this subject, sorry.

I certainly understand that very vulnerable people can be negatively impacted by even small changes from their usual environment. This is one of the reasons why I believe that climate change/global warming is a real threat to human existence, and that it is already hitting weakest and vulnerable people.

My issue is that both articles (MR and IOM Today) have stated that there is a rise in people attending A&E without giving an explanation as to why this is occurring. If the warmer weather is the main reason, then presumably the even hotter weather will increase the number of people presenting at A&E, only to be subsequently hospitalised. It is all very well for Manx Care to put something out on Tweeter, but these articles should have made specific reference to people experiencing health issues because the recent warmer weather, hence alerting the general public to take precautions. Just to say that more people are attending A&E and not saying why is a bit irresponsible on the part of our media organisations, IMHO. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...