Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Filippo

IOM Covid removing restrictions

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Banker said:

No one can answer that , certainly not Cambon or is he ashy!

Everyone who wants borders closed slags Jersey off but they are showing it works and their unemployment is falling.And it’s not just tourists it’s business travel.

lets see what Iom unemployment Is in 2 months and see if Cambon, Pongo & teapot comments that economy is doing well reflects in unemployment.

Well let’s see what happens in the UK first. Don’t forget the UK can buy there way out of this but at a huge cost in terms of massive tax hikes. The IOM can’t as they have no control over their economy. That means they fund this by spending the funds they have but those funds will run out eventually. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 so which policy is better?

I prefer ours and Guernsey's.

Share this post


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

That’s not true. We’ve gone over 100 days of not testing people who have returned from the UK who don’t have symptoms. So we haven’t found any cases as we haven’t tested most of the people who have come back. You’re assuming there have been no cases when likely there have been several cases exactly like this but nobody has been tested. So what’s the panic now that we have tested some people and surprise, surprise we’ve found some who are positive? By your logic you can never catch AiDS if you don't have an AIDS test! 

During that 100 day timeframe if there had been spread it would be noticed in the hospital admissions.

No by my logic you stand a much better chance of keeping infection rates low by not having people travelling back and forth to places where it's rife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lagman said:

I prefer ours and Guernsey's.

Guernsey is different in that they are allowing non residents in and still have less cases than us. Also Guernsey have a plan to move to testing on arrival in next few months.

I would be happy with Guernsey plans, the main issue is we have no plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Banker said:

Guernsey is different in that they are allowing non residents in and still have less cases than us. Also Guernsey have a plan to move to testing on arrival in next few months.

I would be happy with Guernsey plans, the main issue is we have no plans.

I think all 3 islands are doing ok at the moment actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Testing asymptomatic people has a very low yield.  Even Bolton, which appears to be the corona capital of the UK, has (from memory) only 160 cases per 100,000 people. So that's 1 for every 600 people at random you test.  Testing everyone on arrival would not find many cases.  We're testing everyone admitted to hospital, with no cases found since April.  I think that's reasonable evidence that there is no meaningful covid in the community.

There may well have been cases who have done the right thing, isolating for 14 days on their arrival, that we don't know about.  If they're asymptomatic, and don't pass it on to anyone else because they follow the rules, who cares?  It's obvious that if we offer testing at 7 days we will find the odd case.  It confirms that the PCR testing locally is still working - @rachomics and the team must have been wondering if the reagents had gone off :D

Current strategy is working.  Jersey are doing OK too, but they're taking more risks than we are.  They might be right.  But I am still waiting for someone to explain to me in words of one syllable why copying them will result in any economic benefits here.

  • Like 8

Share this post


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

 By your logic you can never catch AiDS if you don't have an AIDS test! 

Poor analogy - HIV infection, which is what you test for (AIDS is a syndromic diagnosis, part of which is a positive HIV test), is irreversible.  If you don't know you have it you can still pass it on.  Whereas with covid, if you don't know you have it, but keep away from everyone for a couple of weeks after potential exposure (being in the UK) it's fine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Testing asymptomatic people has a very low yield.  Even Bolton, which appears to be the corona capital of the UK, has (from memory) only 160 cases per 100,000 people. So that's 1 for every 600 people at random you test.  Testing everyone on arrival would not find many cases.  We're testing everyone admitted to hospital, with no cases found since April.  I think that's reasonable evidence that there is no meaningful covid in the community.

There may well have been cases who have done the right thing, isolating for 14 days on their arrival, that we don't know about.  If they're asymptomatic, and don't pass it on to anyone else because they follow the rules, who cares?  It's obvious that if we offer testing at 7 days we will find the odd case.  It confirms that the PCR testing locally is still working - @rachomics and the team must have been wondering if the reagents had gone off :D

Current strategy is working.  Jersey are doing OK too, but they're taking more risks than we are.  They might be right.  But I am still waiting for someone to explain to me in words of one syllable why copying them will result in any economic benefits here.

@wrighty we definitely need to go for a cuppa at some point to put the world to rights. You should be able to find my DHSC email. 

Part of diagnostic testing with PCR is that we run controls with every batch of tests. There's always a "positive control" so known positive material that will come up positive with that batch of tests. There's also two negative controls: an extraction negative (to make sure the viral isolation reagents aren't contaminated) and a PCR negative (to make sure the PCR reagents aren't contaminated). These tell us that the test is working fine, even if all the patient samples test negative.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rachomics said:

@wrighty we definitely need to go for a cuppa at some point to put the world to rights. You should be able to find my DHSC email. 

Part of diagnostic testing with PCR is that we run controls with every batch of tests. There's always a "positive control" so known positive material that will come up positive with that batch of tests. There's also two negative controls: an extraction negative (to make sure the viral isolation reagents aren't contaminated) and a PCR negative (to make sure the PCR reagents aren't contaminated). These tell us that the test is working fine, even if all the patient samples test negative.

Tongue in cheek comment Rachel, I have every confidence in the testing protocols.  Will call you about coffee.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When, as has been stated in respect of the two new cases reported today, they are described as ‘not being in the community’ what exactly does this mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Uhtred said:

When, as has been stated in respect of the two new cases reported today, they are described as ‘not being in the community’ what exactly does this mean?

Not caught from another person on the Island. Or words to that effect. Imported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HeliX said:

Not caught from another person on the Island. Or words to that effect. Imported.

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, wrighty said:

It confirms that the PCR testing locally is still working - @rachomics and the team must have been wondering if the reagents had gone off :D

This is the level of anxiety that's going to put me in an early grave. There's nothing like the testing expectations of 86,000 people to put the stress levels up. We check this with with controls for every run of testing to make sure so I can sleep at night. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

When, as has been stated in respect of the two new cases reported today, they are described as ‘not being in the community’ what exactly does this mean?

It means that they're known cases where they had been tested after spending time in the UK (either £50 day 7 testing or key worker pathways). Community cases would be where people had no travel history in the UK (or beyond) and tested positive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rachomics said:

It means that they're known cases where they had been tested after spending time in the UK (either £50 day 7 testing or key worker pathways). Community cases would be where people had no travel history in the UK (or beyond) and tested positive. 

Thank you very much. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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...