Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

I think that's exactly it, it's a clear signal that you are being cautious, or at least, risk-aware. If you've got the vast majority doing it, people will be inclined to just be that bit more prudent about risks.

What we do need is to get people out of the habit of fiddling with them though. Makes me twitch in Tesco when you've got someone scratching their nose through their mask, then rooting through the fresh fruit.

That's not that bad.

What about the people that have a dig for a brown nugget itch through their 20 year old Puma trackie bottoms, proceed to give the fingers a sniff, and then go about their business fruit shopping.

Never thought of that did you? I'd say nose scratching is the lesser of two evils. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also can I just make one more point. 

Tim Baker is a better politician than Howard Quayle.

Hear...me...out.

Manx Radio make one heavy handed comment towards Howard and he spits the fucking dummy and throws all the toys out the pram,

meanwhile...

Baker has been getting a hammering from Manx Radio and the Island's press/Social Media for YEARS and he's still a smirky little tw*t and doesn't cry about it.

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

2 hours ago, wrighty said:

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.

As general point the cases (in real world not what PCR reports) is what the SEIR model focuses on. When borders was moved to '1d & release' I knew from Jersey data only going to catch 80% on COVID+. The SEIR equations spoke to me regarding the resultant impending storm of COVID+ cases, and I want to get a coherent, (reasonably) robust, narrative of the likely scenario out in the public domain. I spend my days now just communicating the messages contained within the SEIR model with regard to IoM situation we face. Number 1, message being:

2+2s in High Risk group (I suggest top 6 vax groups), should do whatever following to avoid becoming infected by the ongoing Natural Wave. Additional infections of 2+2s do absolutely nothing with regard to move us towards levels of 2+2 equivalent to obtain Herd Immunity.

In my view (as non-medic), we should all be shouting this message loud and clear. Nobles should be 'ring fenced' (we do not have a Nobles backup hospital like UK), I have lot respect for Manx Care and its recent policies with regard to PPE in clinical settings. Anyway, regarding hospitalization rates it naturally depends on which demographics becomes COVID+. The figures on 

The hospitalizations rate naturally depends on various data sets which I am not privy too. The figures of 1.23%, I came from the use of Scotland's real world, fact expected only 1-in-4 in Scotland to get a test, and estimate on level 0 jab adults in population in ~15K susceptible group I considered. (note, the 20 I mentioned I should had put 17.5)

 

In short the calibrated SEIR model purpose was to warn of the impeding storms and people is particular risk from it, to take action. The model did not deal with issue of deaths. Been asked to produce such a model however having myself produce models telling DHSC how many body bags to order in, based on behavior/personal mitigation, human contact network topology, IoM health risk factor demographics of unvaccinated & vaccinated (need data), variants in circulation & effectiveness for population being consider of vaccines deployed at protecting against acute disease (need data), is not going to reduce mortality risk.

But telling 2+2 High risk to shield next 4 wks will!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hugh G Rection said:

Also can I just make one more point. 

Tim Baker is a better politician than Howard Quayle.

Hear...me...out.

Manx Radio make one heavy handed comment towards Howard and he spits the fucking dummy and throws all the toys out the pram,

meanwhile...

Baker has been getting a hammering from Manx Radio and the Island's press/Social Media for YEARS and he's still a smirky little tw*t and doesn't cry about it.

Baker hasn't been given a proper media going over. There's been countless open goals.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AlanShimmin said:

Baker hasn't been given a proper media going over. There's been countless open goals.

The Douglas Prom and Liverpool Terminal budgets to start with, plus now the Meat Plant finances and management structuring. A decent media would have had him tenderised, grilled and served by now. Unlikely to happen before the election now too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

The Douglas Prom and Liverpool Terminal budgets to start with, plus now the Meat Plant finances and management structuring. A decent media would have had him tenderised, grilled and served by now. Unlikely to happen before the election now too.

TBF any self respecting human being would have just resigned by now. 

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

2 minutes ago, AlanShimmin said:

TBF any self respecting human being would have just resigned by now. 

Must be the small man syndrome ego complex preventing that from happening. 

At least he doesn't have an infuriating little smirk............

 

.... oh wait. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BenFairfax said:

As general point the cases (in real world not what PCR reports) is what the SEIR model focuses on. When borders was moved to '1d & release' I knew from Jersey data only going to catch 80% on COVID+. The SEIR equations spoke to me regarding the resultant impending storm of COVID+ cases, and I want to get a coherent, (reasonably) robust, narrative of the likely scenario out in the public domain. I spend my days now just communicating the messages contained within the SEIR model with regard to IoM situation we face. Number 1, message being:

2+2s in High Risk group (I suggest top 6 vax groups), should do whatever following to avoid becoming infected by the ongoing Natural Wave. Additional infections of 2+2s do absolutely nothing with regard to move us towards levels of 2+2 equivalent to obtain Herd Immunity.

In my view (as non-medic), we should all be shouting this message loud and clear. Nobles should be 'ring fenced' (we do not have a Nobles backup hospital like UK), I have lot respect for Manx Care and its recent policies with regard to PPE in clinical settings. Anyway, regarding hospitalization rates it naturally depends on which demographics becomes COVID+. The figures on 

The hospitalizations rate naturally depends on various data sets which I am not privy too. The figures of 1.23%, I came from the use of Scotland's real world, fact expected only 1-in-4 in Scotland to get a test, and estimate on level 0 jab adults in population in ~15K susceptible group I considered. (note, the 20 I mentioned I should had put 17.5)

 

In short the calibrated SEIR model purpose was to warn of the impeding storms and people is particular risk from it, to take action. The model did not deal with issue of deaths. Been asked to produce such a model however having myself produce models telling DHSC how many body bags to order in, based on behavior/personal mitigation, human contact network topology, IoM health risk factor demographics of unvaccinated & vaccinated (need data), variants in circulation & effectiveness for population being consider of vaccines deployed at protecting against acute disease (need data), is not going to reduce mortality risk.

But telling 2+2 High risk to shield next 4 wks will!

Scotland did of course publicly attribute at least part of the increase in children in hospital with COVID meaning more kids being out of the house as restrictions eased and hurting themselves doing things kids do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BenFairfax thanks for your reply, however I don’t think it answers my questions.

1) Did your Scottish 1.23% figure come from a general population, or did you calculate it according to our ‘at risk’ demographic consisting of mainly those under 30?

2) Any comments on length of stay or R?

 

I think your talk of impending storms and ordering body bags are simply scaremongering. Right now we have about 1800 active cases that we know about - probably many more that we don’t - and only 5 (none double vaxxed) in hospital.  Of those 5, not all are there purely as a result of a covid infection. 
 

I hope you’re wrong in your modelling, I think you are.  Your conclusion however, that vulnerable 2+2 should be careful (not shield - too strong) is reasonable.  Covid is highly prevalent right here right now, but fortunately the vaccine seems to be doing its job very effectively in preventing deaths and serious illness. You can still get covid if vaccinated, and if you’re vulnerable you should be careful, like you should be all year round for all other infections.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

The COVID dashboard appears to have fallen over, which is never ideal.

The dashboard is currently unavailable.  We are investigating the issue and hope to have this rectified shortly.  We apologise for any inconvenience.

What a pity there won't be any information on the latest Covid situation in time for the media conference.  I'm sure Quayle and Ashford will be heartbroken.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ramseyboi said:

Scotland did of course publicly attribute at least part of the increase in children in hospital with COVID meaning more kids being out of the house as restrictions eased and hurting themselves doing things kids do.

The BBC said that not the Parliament / Govt.

  • Confused 1
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...