Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Nom de plume said:

0F719941-B83C-4B4F-B99A-52F02230E266.jpeg

I get the sentiment, but a poster with that many errors in the text is just not a credible source. Do the UN really think ‘hundereds’ of thousands of children will die, and what is a ‘circuitarly’ disease?

  • Like 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

1 hour ago, Utah 01 said:

Herein lies/lay the problem.

...................................and of course it didn't happen or come even close.  Yes, there are caveats in the document but this is the kind of information SAGE has been feeding to the Classics and PPE graduates who run the nation, who see nothing but catastrophic numbers. 

Well I think even Classics and PPE graduates might be able to understand the words "reasonable worst case scenario" which is actually in the headline.  It's the very worst that would happen under the given circumstances.  It doesn't mean that it will happen and they specifically say that the model isn't predictive.

In this case it's what would happen if there were enough restrictions lifted to make the R value climb to the range R = 1.5 to 1.7.  Which didn't happen because not enough restrictions were lifted.  So those people didn't die.  Are you disappointed?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, the stinking enigma said:

Theres only one Barrington as far as I'm concerned. And that's the right honourable sir Barrington Stevens esquire. Where is he anyway? I know he made a bit of a faux pas with the Jews in the ashtray joke but surely it's about time to welcome him back into the fold? And rog too.

Rog was suspended for a short while. Expired in September. He must have decided not to return.

Barrington Stevens was given a permanent ban. It wasn’t just one anti Semitic holocaust comment, but a series of ashtray and gas bill comments.

Id probably have removed the ban, but he started pestering me with e-mails at home.

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

To be honest, that one does look mad. I’m sure Roger will along to dismiss it point by point, but I’ll just say that it’s wrong - the other one (Barrington whatnot) is more credible. 

I think the point is, more and more medical professionals are voicing their concerns over lockdowns & the long term economic, social & health damage being done.

It is becoming critical now. Things must change in the New Year.

Edited by Nom de plume
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Nom de plume said:

I think the point is, more and more medical professionals are voicing their concerns over lockdowns & the long term economic, social & health damage being done.

It is becoming critical now. Things must change in the New Year.

We all know it, the responses we're seeing around the UK and Europe are bound to have a serious negative effect for the future, and it's why our current travel restrictions remain broadly the right thing to do. Yes they're shit for people who may wish to travel, or for companies  who like face to face meetings and that, but they're definitely better than the risks. SD, the rule of 6, masks etc are all worse options for where we are. I still think the 7 day test removal was a backwards step, and there could be a bit more movement for family members who wish to come over, but at least it was only a tiny backwards step. Bigger ones would be much more damaging, This weeks false positive was a timely reminder, and on the face of it you could say there was some reassurance there regarding contract tracing and all that. It seems like people got busy quick, bunch of tests carried out etc. Hopefully it'll be looked at as a fire drill exercise, and they've learnt from it. They've not really had all that much to do for the last few months.

Edit - I get the impression you've moderated your views on the borders a little? Is that a fair thing to say?

Edited by TheTeapot
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

We all know it, the responses we're seeing around the UK and Europe are bound to have a serious negative effect for the future, and it's why our current travel restrictions remain broadly the right thing to do. Yes they're shit for people who may wish to travel, or for companies  who like face to face meetings and that, but they're definitely better than the risks. SD, the rule of 6, masks etc are all worse options for where we are. I still think the 7 day test removal was a backwards step, and there could be a bit more movement for family members who wish to come over, but at least it was only a tiny backwards step. Bigger ones would be much more damaging, This weeks false positive was a timely reminder, and on the face of it you could say there was some reassurance there regarding contract tracing and all that. It seems like people got busy quick, bunch of tests carried out etc. Hopefully it'll be looked at as a fire drill exercise, and they've learnt from it. They've not really had all that much to do for the last few months.

Edit - I get the impression you've moderated your views on the borders a little? Is that a fair thing to say?

Fair to say, however ...

I still believe we are setting ourselves up for a huge fall by not drip feeding the virus in.

I have been away very recently & seen first hand the measures in the larger cities. I’m not sure overall what more people can do - I observed excellent SD practices in pubs, restaurants, trains & around about.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

We all know it, the responses we're seeing around the UK and Europe are bound to have a serious negative effect for the future, and it's why our current travel restrictions remain broadly the right thing to do. Yes they're shit for people who may wish to travel, or for companies  who like face to face meetings and that, but they're definitely better than the risks. SD, the rule of 6, masks etc are all worse options for where we are. I still think the 7 day test removal was a backwards step, and there could be a bit more movement for family members who wish to come over, but at least it was only a tiny backwards step. Bigger ones would be much more damaging, This weeks false positive was a timely reminder, and on the face of it you could say there was some reassurance there regarding contract tracing and all that. It seems like people got busy quick, bunch of tests carried out etc. Hopefully it'll be looked at as a fire drill exercise, and they've learnt from it. They've not really had all that much to do for the last few months.

Edit - I get the impression you've moderated your views on the borders a little? Is that a fair thing to say?

I dont have a massive issue with the borders at this point.

However, the 7 day test removal is a sham designed to hide results.  I also think 7 days and a negstive test is enough to let people out and about unfettered.

I would also like to see a slight moderation to allow immediate family to visit.  Things like parents, children perhaps.

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

To be honest, that one does look mad. I’m sure Roger will along to dismiss it point by point, but I’ll just say that it’s wrong - the other one (Barrington whatnot) is more credible. 

I got as far as the second paragraph

It is clear that at no point was the National Health Service (NHS) in any danger of being overwhelmed, and since May 2020 covid wards have been largely empty; and crucially the death toll from covid has remained extremely low.

I'm sure many of your colleagues across will be relieved to know that it was literally all a bad dream.  And of course, as was sadly predictable, the deaths have been rising again with the daily 7-day moving average now over 100 for the first time since mid-June, even on the UK government's restricted definition. 

It's also a bit odd that a group of people so keen to call themselves a world body seem unaware that the pandemic over the Summer in other parts of the globe might have been rather more virulent.

It's all a demonstration of what I have seen described as the Some Arsehole Principle.  No matter how widely agreed and obvious something is, the media can always find some arsehole to oppose it out of self-promotion or delusion or because there's some sort of scam.  And because the media have come to believe that their job is promoting conflict rather than assessing and providing information, such people will get attention - which means more of them will be encouraged.

And of course it's always been true that you can always find some sort of medical professional somewhere who will say they believe in anything, no matter how wacky.  The Daily Mail has been filling its pages for the last 50 years at least on that principle. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nom de plume said:

I still believe we are setting ourselves up for a huge fall by not drip feeding the virus in.

I suggested this last week and received nothing but 'confused' emojis from the usual COVID tin-foil brigade. 

I likened our situation to that of an Amzonian tribe never before exposed to western diseases - the first missionary turns up laden with (virally) whatever and the tribe is wiped out.

We can either live in splendid isolation and ultimately perish or we can begin exposure to something that is not and will not go away - ever!

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

It doesn't mean that it will happen and they specifically say that the model isn't predictive.

Correct - but this is the garbage that Johnson et al (and I shall stick with my opinion of Classics and PPE graduates - and lump in with them career politicians who swell from those ranks) that has shaped ill-founded and erroneous policy.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...