Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Is the virus becoming less deadly?

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2252699-covid-19-is-becoming-less-deadly-in-europe-but-we-dont-know-why/?fbclid=IwAR2baBg-8tM57OUh60lKs6H1tUgjRHS5lw1Np_dm_HysVASy9wS7_PJnRaU

I did read somewhere at the start of all this that a virus tends to find a way not to kill its host as this is will obviously kill itself?

Probably.  This is normal viral behaviour.  You're anthropomorphising ( @VinnieK - is that a real word???) it a bit though Max.  A virus doesn't find anything, it's just that a less virulent mutation is more likely to spread, whereas the bad ones don't as their hosts end up dead or on ITU where everyone wears PPE, instead of happily going about their business mildly coughing over everyone spreading it around.  Darwinian selection in action - you could try some simple calculations starting with 2 equal groups of viruses, one bad one not so, assume that the not so bad passes on the infection to 3 others, the bad one only 1 other before its host ends up on ITU, and work forwards in time.  In a shortish period you'll have 90% of your overall viral population being in the 'not bad' category.  With cross-reactivity for immunity the bad strain dies out, and the not so bad one thrives.  I'm hopeful that covid-19, in a year or two, is considered the equivalent of getting a cold.

  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Can you guys start a separate thread titled "Jersey is ace - oh no it isn't" and leave this one to a discussion on IOM and the coronavirus?

It's a safe place right now because of the Manx people, not the Manx politicians. None of us want to be "the person who brought it back" so we isolate and make sure we don't transmit the virus by bein

Ratio of admissions to deaths is not that different, testing is obviously out due to the massive capacity increase like just about everywhere in the world.    The current UK situation is impact

Posted Images

54 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Early on in all this I remember calculating (from a published paper) that Log(t) (where t is the time from exposure to testing positive) follows a normal distribution.  These figures may well now have been refined somewhat, but the mean (of t) was 5.1 days.  Using a log normal distribution, about 78% of people if infected on day 0 will test positive by day 7.  So, the vast majority of returning travelers, if positive, will be positive on day 7 given their exposure may well be a day or 2 before their travel.

Jersey's approach is far riskier, and I fully agree with Rachel's point about the psychology of getting a negative test on day 1 and thus being less particular about distancing etc.

As for the economics, we have two schools of thought on here - either 'everything's ticking over nicely and we must avoid another lockdown, stay tight', or 'continued border restrictions are killing the economy'.  My own view is more aligned with the former.  I can't really understand how having unrestricted (or minimally restricted) borders will improve the economic situation.  I fully accept that people want to get away, and I'd like to myself, but on balance I think we've got more to lose than gain by opening up now.

No doubt I'll now be labelled as a 'covid mentalist' or 'covidiot' or something - I'm nothing of the sort, but there are plenty of people who are still scared to death of this virus, and we'll likely have to go back to social distancing, hospital shutdown, queueing for Tesco etc if we get community transmission here again.

I've asked this a number if times to different people and never get an answer.  At the start of all this it was about protecting the nhs and flattening the curve now it seems to have changed to never having a case again. What is the end game here? With more and more tests being done in the uk the 1 in 5000 infection rate seems fanciful. Scotland released their figures today just over 200 positive tests around 1% of tests done in the last 24 hours, despite high figures the hospital admissions and deaths are way down. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Banker said:

You can call our rules "Covid extremism"if you want but they're making schoolkids wear masks all day in England. And England has a 2-week quarantine from most of Europe now anyway!
 

Your quote about face masks is just not true and an example of scare tactics being used.

the rules state that in secondary schools it’s at the heads discretion for face masks in communal areas indoors only in social distancing can’t be maintained. In areas where they are in lockdown it’s mandatory in communal areas but not classrooms 

 

It's mandatory on the bus to school, it's mandatory in the corridors, it's mandatory in the dining hall, it's mandatory on the way home. Some things might theoretically be "discretionary" but not really. The list of locally restricted areas expands by the day.

Pubs and restaurants are, largely, insisting on masks when you're not sat at a table. They're mandatory in shops, on buses.

Call it "scare tactics" if you want, but I like being able to see my friends and I like not having to wear a mask.

Across have all these rules and yet, for travel from most of Europe, they have a 2-week quarantine as well.

Edited by tetchtyke
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rachomics said:

So let's say that we test everyone on arrival. We end up giving out a large number of negative results to people who are going to be going into isolation for at least 7 days anyway. Here's where the psychology comes in, and you'll have to ask yourselves how you would behave if someone said you tested negative for COVID19 the day you arrived. Would you stick to strict isolation even though you have a negative test result from your arrival test? I'd bet that there's a good number in the population who would be a little less strict with themselves because they've been told they're negative.

Nice to see that you agree, and in fact state, that the government set policy is actually to psychologically control people through fear by not allowing them to seek out any form of test to see if they actually have it. Thats been clear from the very start to me. But the fact is the tests are being done after 7 days here so nobody has the opportunity to be slack with anything when they are at the highest risk of transmitting and some people have paid no attention to self isolation rules anyway whether tested or not. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

I've asked this a number if times to different people and never get an answer.  At the start of all this it was about protecting the nhs and flattening the curve now it seems to have changed to never having a case again. What is the end game here? With more and more tests being done in the uk the 1 in 5000 infection rate seems fanciful. Scotland released their figures today just over 200 positive tests around 1% of tests done in the last 24 hours, despite high figures the hospital admissions and deaths are way down. 

Protecting the NHS was the most immediate goal to begin with because the virus has been circulating in the populace and becoming established for a while, so there was a danger it could get completely out of control within a relatively short amount of time. 

I imagine that now there are other considerations that are more immediate, such as the economic and social damage another lockdown could cause and the need to keep the virus at bay/under control. The easiest way to address these is to stop the virus getting a foothold from which it can transmitting through the community. My guess is that the focus on the infection rate in the UK is aimed at limiting the risk of getting a whole bunch of infections on the Island, which in turn limits the probability that a few will slip through the net and create multiple points from which the virus can start spreading again.

Basically, there seems to be two options: 

  • allow more freedom at the border, but keep some social distancing measures in place indefinitely and/or impose temporary local lockdowns; and
  • have more restrictions at the border, but benefit from limited to no social distancing measures or internal restrictions.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, tetchtyke said:

It's mandatory on the bus to school, it's mandatory in the corridors, it's mandatory in the dining hall, it's mandatory on the way home. Some things might theoretically be "discretionary" but not really. The list of locally restricted areas expands by the day.

Pubs and restaurants are, largely, insisting on masks when you're not sat at a table. They're mandatory in shops, on buses.

Call it "scare tactics" if you want, but I like being able to see my friends and I like not having to wear a mask.

Things do still seem to be pretty grim in a lot of England. Even aside from the restrictions and measures that still affect people's lives, the anxiety and worry a lot of people are suffering from is noticeable everywhere, not to mention the fear that their area is going to be subjected to a local lockdown. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Probably.  This is normal viral behaviour.  You're anthropomorphising ( @VinnieK - is that a real word???) it a bit though Max.  A virus doesn't find anything, it's just that a less virulent mutation is more likely to spread, whereas the bad ones don't as their hosts end up dead or on ITU where everyone wears PPE, instead of happily going about their business mildly coughing over everyone spreading it around.  Darwinian selection in action - you could try some simple calculations starting with 2 equal groups of viruses, one bad one not so, assume that the not so bad passes on the infection to 3 others, the bad one only 1 other before its host ends up on ITU, and work forwards in time.  In a shortish period you'll have 90% of your overall viral population being in the 'not bad' category.  With cross-reactivity for immunity the bad strain dies out, and the not so bad one thrives.  I'm hopeful that covid-19, in a year or two, is considered the equivalent of getting a cold.

Yes, keeping the host alive does improve the chances of reproduction and spread for a respiratory virus, but some others eg ebola, can still be passed on after the death of the host. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nom de plume said:

The Government(s), UK & Manx lied.

Protect the NHS & flatten the mortality curve was the essence of lockdown restrictions.

It is now a control issue. Be scared & obey.

To what end? 

Do the fiendish lizard people own shares in companies producing masks and hand sanitizer or something?  

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, VinnieK said:

To what end? 

To the end that people don't start kicking off about their lives turning to shit by the economic fallout as they’re still paralyzed by fear. It’s different in America most of the population have just turned round and gone “fuck that” I can’t afford not to work and cracked on or demonstrated heavily when threatened with restrictions of any kind and their President largely seems to agree with them. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, thesultanofsheight said:

To the end that people don't start kicking off about their lives turning to shit by the economic fallout as they’re still paralyzed by fear. It’s different in America most of the population have just turned round and gone “fuck that” I can’t afford not to work and cracked on or demonstrated heavily when threatened with restrictions of any kind and their President largely seems to agree with them. 

Once the furlough ends in the uk in october it would not surprise me to see the same in the uk.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

To the end that people don't start kicking off about their lives turning to shit by the economic fallout as they’re still paralyzed by fear. It’s different in America most of the population have just turned round and gone “fuck that” I can’t afford not to work and cracked on or demonstrated heavily when threatened with restrictions of any kind and their President largely seems to agree with them. 

OK, but in that case the supposed 'lie' looks like it both causes the problem and then excuses the governments from blame.  Wouldn't it be much, much easier for them just to say "hello scum! Everything's fine now, so start working again and get back to your horrible little lives"?

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, kevster said:

Yes, keeping the host alive does improve the chances of reproduction and spread for a respiratory virus, but some others eg ebola, can still be passed on after the death of the host. 

Only spread it to a very limited area/ persons in very close contact.

You don't see many corpses walking around infecting people outside of films....

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, VinnieK said:

OK, but in that case the supposed 'lie' looks like it both causes the problem and then excuses the governments from blame.  Wouldn't it be much, much easier for them just to say "hello scum! Everything's fine now, so start working again and get back to your horrible little lives"?

 

 

 

 

Politicians dont liketo admit they were wrong, just look at the bus lane on glencrutchery road. I dont think theres any great conspiracy theory in my opinion in the beginning governments were seeing pictures from wuhan of people dropping dead in the streets didnt know what we were dealing with and done such a good job of scaring people to keep them in (i agree with the early restrictions by the way) that now they are having a tough time trying to get out of it. They cant just turn around after decimating businesses airline industry etc and say sorry we over reacted. 

I could be well out and this winter sees millions of us drop dead but at the moment a lot of people are ignoring the restrictions in the uk cases are up death and hospital admissions are low which suggests the virus has ran its course. 

As I say all the above is my opinion and I may be well wrong.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
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   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...