Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

How seriously are you taking that?

In the time you've taken to reply you cannot possibly have read that article - and if you are happy to dismiss, and I quote form the article :

'Dr Mike Yeadon has a degree in biochemistry and toxicology and a research-based PhD in respiratory pharmacology. He has spent over 30 years leading new medicines research in some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, leaving Pfizer in 2011 as Vice President & Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory. That was the most senior research position in this field in Pfizer. Since leaving Pfizer, Dr Yeadon has founded his own biotech company, Ziarco, which was sold to the worlds biggest drug company, Novartis, in 2017.'

...who has probably got more brain-cells in his little finger than you can muster in the void between you ears then you should seek some help.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.8k
  • 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

3 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

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.

Even if it was for the wrong reason, getting rid of the seven day test was still the right thing to do in the current circumstances.  That test certainly isn't enough to let people out 'unfettered' even at the lower UK levels of infection we saw over the Summer - too high a percentage of people only test positive after 6 or so days for that to work. 

I recently post the figures from the ONS Infection Study and the figures for the most recent fortnight came out yesterday.  They're quite scary:

image.png.7cef4ee54cae0aae962e3772df00c0eb.png

These are not skewed by the number of tests done more generally. And those are end dates so there's another nine days of infection plus since

We certainly need more testing for a variety of reasons and I think WHO need to change their statistics so that the number testing positive in isolation after arrival is shown separately from cases actually in the community.

Except for the compassionate stuff which is already in place with appropriate restrictions (one hopes) it's difficult to see the purpose of family visits unless the visitors are able to self isolate for 14 days as part of an extended time spent here.  That might be justified in some circumstance, but effectively it's going to mean more elderly people moving over here - at least temporarily.

Edited by Roger Mexico
Add link
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

You started it to be fair:thumbsup:

Where? 

Edit - OK, I suppose my question could be taken the wrong way, I should maybe have worded it better. 

Edited by TheTeapot
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Even if it was for the wrong reason, getting rid of the seven day test was still the right thing to do in the current circumstances.  That test certainly isn't enough to let people out 'unfettered' even at the lower UK levels of infection we saw over the Summer - too high a percentage of people only test positive after 6 or so days for that to work. 

I recently post the figures from the ONS Infection Study and the figures for the most recent fortnight came out yesterday.  They're quite scary:

image.png.7cef4ee54cae0aae962e3772df00c0eb.png

These are not skewed by the number of tests done more generally. And those are end dates so there's another nine days of infection plus since

We certainly need more testing for a variety of reasons and I think WHO need to change their statistics so that the number testing positive in isolation after arrival is shown separately from cases actually in the community.

Except for the compassionate stuff which is already in place with appropriate restrictions (one hopes) it's difficult to see the purpose of family visits unless the visitors are able to self isolate for 14 days as part of an extended time spent here.  That might be justified in some circumstance, but effectively it's going to mean more elderly people moving over here - at least temporarily.

I'm not suggesting anyone should be moving over.

But a large number of people on island have children living away from the island.  Or parents.  Yes, they would need to isolate but at least that's an option.

I know a lot pf deluded "I'm alright Jack" types will say " well there is nothing stopping someone going across to see those relatives" but actually, for those not living in an ivory tower, real life tends to be a touch more complicated  .

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank god you are not in charge, an expert on everything and critic of all, the best you can do is quote a load of garbage from people who are just using Covid to make a name for themselves with no credibility at all.  I thought we had a superlative of experts on the promenade but these guys are just making it up as they go along and as for all the figures quoted I do not believe any of them from any source.   It all depends on who is doing the counting and the point they are trying to make.  For instance, a member went down when the illegal march was on and counted 737 people and a couple of dogs, marching, mostly students, Manx Radio reported 1000 and a couple of weeks ago the subject was mentioned and it was reported 1500 people marched, that shows the nonsense figures are. :spam:

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

For instance, a member went down when the illegal march was on and counted 737 people and a couple of dogs, marching, mostly students, Manx Radio reported 1000 and a couple of weeks ago the subject was mentioned and it was reported 1500 people marched, that shows the nonsense figures are. :spam:

The March wasn’t illegal. 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

The march was held when there was restrictions on numbers congregating the Chief Constable chose to ignore that and let it happen.

With support of Howie & pals as couldn’t be seen to be opposing BLM

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

The march was held when there was restrictions on numbers congregating the Chief Constable chose to ignore that and let it happen.

We were covid-free at that stage. You really are some bitter miserable moaning old git. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

The Chief Minister left the decision to the Chief Constable.   If I am a bitter, miserable, moaning old git I certainly am not alone on this forum.

Yes, there was a definite two steps back on that one.  The CC not only allowed the march to go ahead, but positively supported and encouraged it.

  • 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...

×
×
  • Create New...