Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I think there is herd immunity for colds.  They're endemic, they circulate round, but as far as I'm aware nobody is dying from them.  There is a level of community immunity to them.  My guess is that in time, covid will become another such infection.  We'll live with it.  It's not going to be eradicated so what's the alternative?

Hmmm "community immunity" - very catchy.

There is no vaccine for colds in the same way flu is always evolving. But there could be for Covid one day hopefully soon.

From a standpoint of knowing fuckall about the logistics I would say it's impossible to vaccinate 7.8 billion people.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.4k
  • 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

6 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Don't be daft.

Even the truly excellent Grauniad gets it wrong sometimes.

I'll let you in on a little secret that actually refers to the entire planet.

The Guardian is put together by people.

And like people everywhere they sometimes fuck up...

WTF are you on!!

When Howie ignores advice not to stop 7 days testing we don’t see you blathering on about how bad that it is.

Get a grip

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Banker said:

WTF are you on!!

When Howie ignores advice not to stop 7 days testing we don’t see you blathering on about how bad that it is.

Get a grip

I didn't go on about it because, as I have posted before, it's a positive step.

Data mining is lost of course. But hey...

You need to get a grip.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I didn't go on about it because, as I have posted before, it's a positive step.

Data mining is lost of course. But hey...

You need to get a grip.

WTF is no testing a positive step ?

Why is not locking down economy to say millions of jobs a negative step?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, P.K. said:

You keep blathering on about these two alleged "issues" when a recently infected person was self isolating in their household and developed symptoms. The rest of the household were tested and all were negative. So it can be successfully done and has been.

The Day 7 test was not scrapped for some totally ridiculous propaganda reason but simply it was the ONLY response they had left to make. Reducing the risk of infection from 6% to 1%.

Unfortunately as this post shows very clearly you don't do probability and risk.

 

How does removing the 7 day test reduce the risk from 6% to 1%?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

How does removing the 7 day test reduce the risk from 6% to 1%?

Rachomics explained it back in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, P.K. said:

 

The Day 7 test was not scrapped for some totally ridiculous propaganda reason but simply it was the ONLY response they had left to make. Reducing the risk of infection from 6% to 1%.

Unfortunately as this post shows very clearly you don't do probability and risk.

 

I'm not sure you do either PK.

Scrapping the day 7 test does not reduce the risk of infection from 6% to 1%.  It simply means that if a returning traveller is covid positive, there is a 94% hit rate for testing at day 7 (compared with 99% at day 14).  The 6% (of the about to be positives, of which there may be 1 in 400ish returnees) would be able to go to the shops for essential items and out for a walk.  The risk of that very small number spreading their covid would be tiny.

It's a marginal gain, not the 6-fold reduction you make it out to be.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Rachomics explained it back in this thread.

Well i CBA scolling back through so many pages of trolling by you.

I assume the reduction in risk comes from (a) the belief 5% of people could test negative on day 7 but develop symptoms after it and before 14 days and/or (b) 5% of tests producing a negative result could actually be wrong.

As I said earlier, if Howard had given some numbers out on 7 day testing there might have been some context to the decision.  But he didn't.  For good reason.  If he did then it would have been clear that the numbers were fairly immaterial and that the 7 day test was not suddenly creating a surge of visitors.

Instead, we lose data. Get less tests and therefore less positive results.

Instead, what we will have is those same people that would have been tested mixing with their household oblivious to whether they are or are no covid free whilst their household then goes out and about doing whatever they want.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wrighty said:

I'm not sure you do either PK.

Scrapping the day 7 test does not reduce the risk of infection from 6% to 1%.  It simply means that if a returning traveller is covid positive, there is a 94% hit rate for testing at day 7 (compared with 99% at day 14).  The 6% (of the about to be positives, of which there may be 1 in 400ish returnees) would be able to go to the shops for essential items and out for a walk.  The risk of that very small number spreading their covid would be tiny.

It's a marginal gain, not the 6-fold reduction you make it out to be.

This.  PK has no clue and is largely trolling.

I'm conscious you may not be able to answer this Wrighty - but do you believe the decision to stop 7 day testing has any real merit or foundation other than "less tests equals less positives"?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I think there is herd immunity for colds.  They're endemic, they circulate round, but as far as I'm aware nobody is dying from them.  There is a level of community immunity to them.  My guess is that in time, covid will become another such infection.  We'll live with it.  It's not going to be eradicated so what's the alternative?

With colds having been around for so long, has there not been some selective pressure for milder colds too? You're out and about much less when you've got a bad case of flu.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

This.  PK has no clue and is largely trolling.

I'm conscious you may not be able to answer this Wrighty - but do you believe the decision to stop 7 day testing has any real merit or foundation other than "less tests equals less positives"?

The possible benefits I can see are

  1. The marginal reduction in risk of onward transmission as described above
  2. A reduction in the possibility of a false negative test at 7 days giving the cohabitees of the returnee a false sense of security
  3. Perhaps a reduction in the number of people travelling about as they'd be willing to chance it on 7 days but not the full 14, although as I think you pointed out we've not seen any stats in terms of travel numbers to suggest that introducing the 7 day protocol increased the numbers.

I don't believe it was stopped as some sort of 'head in the sand, nothing to see here' measure.  There are marginal benefits, but perhaps outweighted by as Rachel pointed out a reduction in viral surveillance.

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

I'm not sure you do either PK.

Scrapping the day 7 test does not reduce the risk of infection from 6% to 1%.  It simply means that if a returning traveller is covid positive, there is a 94% hit rate for testing at day 7 (compared with 99% at day 14).  The 6% (of the about to be positives, of which there may be 1 in 400ish returnees) would be able to go to the shops for essential items and out for a walk.  The risk of that very small number spreading their covid would be tiny.

It's a marginal gain, not the 6-fold reduction you make it out to be.

It's based on everyone coming to the island having the virus of course.

Add the probability factor and it's as you say, miniscule.

But people like TheDogsDanglyBits just don't get probability and risk and maybe never will. But Mr Quayle binned it off anyway. Hmmm.....

Probability and risk make for interesting scenarios. Here's one:

The current infection rate in Donney is 167 per 100,000.

So you would expect to get one infected person in every 598 Flatlanders.

Out of 5 welders and a team leader one of them had the virus.

So the island hit rate for Flatlanders with the virus appears to be one in six.

How is this?

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic seems to be the new "flat earth" thread. Same people day in day out shouting at the mirror...

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

It's based on everyone coming to the island having the virus of course.

Add the probability factor and it's as you say, miniscule.

But people like TheDogsDanglyBits just don't get probability and risk and maybe never will. But Mr Quayle binned it off anyway. Hmmm.....

Probability and risk make for interesting scenarios. Here's one:

The current infection rate in Donney is 167 per 100,000.

So you would expect to get one infected person in every 598 Flatlanders.

Out of 5 welders and a team leader one of them had the virus.

So the island hit rate for Flatlanders with the virus appears to be one in six.

How is this?

Definitely on something, arguing with the experienced medics now!!

Perhaps you should be Howies advisor as you love him so much!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Banker said:

Definitely on something, arguing with the experienced medics now!!

Perhaps you should be Howies advisor as you love him so much!

Experienced medics has nothing to do with it.

It's just numbers.

  • Like 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...