Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Yes, I see what you mean. I was not trying to be rude.

I didn’t take offence, and certainly didn’t attribute the interpretation put on by @Gladysalthough I’m appreciative of her efforts on my behalf.

The thing is that most of us aren’t at the extremes of total border closure or that Covid is a hoax. 

Its finding the common ground that’s reasonable and offers sufficient public health protection, based on real risk assessment and science. It’s also keeping it up to date.

What happened in March, April, May was in the dark, with little scientific basis, because it was so new. The problem is that it didn’t protect one nursing/care home. Otherwise our figures would be very good. And it’s left Howie & Co, and Jacinta boxed in. The IOM still hasn’t got a proper exit strategy. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.5k
  • 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?

...and I so wanted a long illustrious career at the DHSC   I run my own company so my involvement with the DHSC to set up and keep the COVID19 lab running wasn't exactly in the professional caree

I'll put a big disclaimer here that I'm not the person who decides who gets tested and when.  Saying that, I am a scientist who understands that if you test someone on the day they arrive and the

Posted Images

That may be no bad thing. Let everyone else make their mistakes, then we can learn from them, and cherrypick the correct way forward. It hasn't been discovered yet, by anyone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, John Wright said:

The thing is that most of us aren’t at the extremes of total border closure or that Covid is a hoax. 

Exactly but it seems that any debate (which is all it is) around possible border relaxations is met with complete hysteria from people who seem to not want the subject to even be discussed. As you say we’re now in a corner with no exit plan and along the way more and more people have been brain washed into thinking that keeping the world out is a viable long-term solution when it isn’t. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Debbie said:

What I find unsettling is that the debate among MHKs has mostly append being closed doors. They must have debated the implications of cutting off the outside world for so long. We haven't heard much of it. When we heard something, it was only regarding specific and quite minor aspects of the policy.

 

3 hours ago, Filippo said:

The issues related to current border restrictions in the Isle of Man as compared to its Covid-nemesis Jersey have already been eviscerate with such comprehensive detail in this thread that there isn’t much that comes to my mind that hasn’t been said already. Nonetheless, I wish to point out that Jersey’s border policy is sustainable in the longer term, ours isn’t.

Among the cacophony of Covid restrictions and lockdowns, revised and updated on a daily basis in the main island of our archipelago (quite ridiculously); here are two focal points of a factually-based perspective:

1) Covid fatality in the world is much less than people think and than what would be implied by our draconian policies. On the 5th of October the WHO came up with the truly alarming “best estimate” that 10% of world population has been infected with virus (1st pic below). World population is 7.8 billion people and Covid deaths so far have been 1 million. The implication is that Covid fatality is 1 / 7,800 = 0.13%, in the ball park of seasonal flu fatality. And note that flu is endemic and thus its fatality is reduced by heard immunity that has built up over a very long time; a virus like influenza would kill hundred of millions in one sweep if the world had not seen it before. Covid is this bad in an absolutely virgin population and hence bound to get much less bad with time. Its long term value is little more than cold (as with the four other cold-inducing human coronaviruses).

2) Countries in which the pandemic has been less politicised and that have adopted liberal policies, relying on individual responsibility and social distancing on a voluntary basis, have fared much better than the UK. In particular, allowing (or at the least tolerating) Covid to spread among the healthy and not too-old leads to lesser overall fatality because accumulated herd immunity cocoons the vulnerable and brings the pandemic to an end sooner. There is little evidence of a meaningful second wave in the two European countries that have had the most liberal policies: Switzerland and Sweden (2nd and 3rd pics below). The case of Switzerland is a particularly remarkable example, because it is a landlocked country surrounded by countries that had crudely repressive lockdowns and that are all now experiencing second waves. Furthermore, Switzerland is the most connected country, with greater traffic of people in or out than any other country around it. Isolation doesn’t seem to work thinking long term.

The scientific case behind the 2nd point is obvious and had to be expected from what we already knew about viruses, from the experience of managing a large catalogue of infectious diseases so far. I would suggest reading this paper published on Nature last August:
                        https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02400-7

Here are summary points of above paper: (i) there is strong immune response to a natural occurring Covid infection in most people, including high antibody levels and robust T-cell response; (ii) the waning of antibody levels does not necessarily lead to loss of immunity: memory B-cells can regenerate the needed antibodies when infection re-occurs (ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_B_cell); (iii) strong T-cell immune response can endure long after infection and in some populations is more common than antibodies seroprevalence (and thus estimates of infection fatality rates from seroprevalence of antibodies are over-estimations); (iv) immunity does not necessarily prevents re-infection but it predisposes to an asymptomatic or mild re-infection in the future; and (v) some populations have robust cross-immunity from other coronaviruses.

We were told that herd immunity from natural infection cannot work, only a vaccine can give permanent sterilising immunity. But we know that there have only been a dozen of proven Covid-19 re-infections among 40 million known cases, and only one of them has been fatal. Conversely, just a few days ago the chairman of the UK Vaccine Taskforce, Kate Bingham, has admitted that, based on what evidence is available to her now, a Covid-19 vaccine is likely to be only 50% effective and not able to confer sterilising immunity (just google it).

Science books had to be rewritten to make the science agreeable to the politically correct narrative of Covid. Here is an example of the science prior to Covid:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6841076/2006-11-Disease-Mitigation-Measures-in-the.pdf
a paper concluding that lockdowns do far more harm than good and that there is no historical evidence that lockdowns can reduce the death toll from a respiratory illness in the longer term.

More recently the Lancet published a report on the Covid policies of some 50 countries:
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2589-5370(20)30208-X
and it concludes that lockdowns have not been associated with decreased mortality from the virus.

We are seeing acceptance of reality among many US states. Florida, a state regarded by some as vulnerable to Covid because of its large senior population, has determined that it will no longer attempt to control the spread of Covid-19 and has removed nearly all remaining Covid-19 restrictions:
Florida Governor Removes COVID-19 Restrictions on Restaurants, Bars
https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2020-09-25/florida-restaurants-can-now-operate-with-no-restrictions-governor-says
With the exception of some coastal states with left-wing administrations (New York, California etc) the US is doing a Sweden by stealth.

The left has concocted an alternative reality version of Covid, Covid immunity and Covid vaccines (Covid vaccines don’t exist yet so it is easy to fancy them as convenient); to justify the lockdown and consequent policies of heavy government intervention in the economy; which, it hopes, will be difficult to reverse when the pandemic subsides (it is actually hoped that the pandemic will last indefinitely).

As concerns the strange case of the Isle of Man, I would not accuse Tynwald of malefic intent, nor intent ideological motivated in a meaningful extent, nor intent calculated as an equilibrium of conflicting forces as observed in Westminster. There has hardly been any public debate among MHKs about trade-offs and underlying assumptions of the whole policy; they have debated it nearly all of it behind closed doors; the public debate we have seen (in those Manx Radio interviews for instance) has been at the most simplistic level and focusing on specific aspects of the overall policy, such as the repatriation of residents excluded by the border closure or the consistency (or lack thereof) of IOM courts sentencing; rather than questioning the sanity of the main policy aim of virus eradication by mean of isolation.

The alternative reality underpinning IOM Covid response has two pillars: the first pillar is that it is so great that we are a separate jurisdiction (a nation actually...) so that we have the option of controlling our border and shunning the dangers of the outside world, the horrible virus threatening our community; and the second pillar is, quite obviously, islander’s basic instinct: a civilised version of, as an extreme example, the Sentinelese throwing spears and arrows at any outsider approaching their beloved island, to express rejection of any alien contact (4th pic below). Guess what, just to stay on topic, the Sentinelese tribe is regarded by the WHO as extremely vulnerable for having no resistance to such common diseases as flu or measles, which would immediately decimate their population if contact with outsiders were made. If our border policy strongly discourages travel and outsiders indefinitely, we are heading precisely in that direction, of sickening inbreeding and vulnerability to pretty much anything alien, thus begetting even more isolation.

And the crassest expression of the above described alternative reality: that thickheaded constable (which I won’t mention by name) declaring on Manx Radio his “surprise” at the level of enforcement needed to discourage violations of Covid regulations in the isle; with his other pathetic subconscious elaborations to justify the enforcement of policies that have thrown personal values and individual consent into the sewers: “We didn’t really want to do it...”

Those are the dunces who are leading and controlling us. I have one proposal: let’s exile Howard Quayle and David Ashford to our alter ego island North Sentinel Island among the uncorrupted Sentinelese: the duo would find its most “natural” constituency; and we would be free to crack on with our lives.
 

2091079273_1.WHOsays10ofglobalpopulationmayhavebeeninfectedwithvirus.jpg.a6fefe718e670215cf610b143e5d1293.jpg

 

297283073_2.DailynewdeathsinSwitzerland.jpg.26fbf0bbba2655b2443ddf83b3da93d6.jpg

1926262569_3.DailynewdeathsinSweden.jpg.cabc6162919bc2281a0eafeff57baaac.jpg

 

379763750_4.TheSentineleseattackanyonewhoenterstheirterritory.jpg.a63cdb78135d57a9e1ba9cc1abb3b160.jpg

 

End October or early November, we will have the first reliable data about Covid vaccine efficacy in the real world, from the more advanced double blind studies currently under way.

I think IOM government plan is to wait for that information to come through and then start charting an exit strategy on the basis of that expectation. Unfortunately, if the trials were to point out to an effective vaccine solution, their policy will be to stick to current restrictions or even make them stricter.

My concern is that this will prove a miscalculation. Any vaccine roll out on the general population is at the least six months away and it will be an adjuvant than the all encompassing solution that people expect. I remember last July Howard Quayle declaring on Max Radio that some were seeing a vaccine being available from September. They miscalculated already.

They are also miscalculating the true feelings in the island about Covid restrictions. Though, their calculation could be that among the non-Manx professionals many won’t bother to vote. This might actually be correct, many will be reassessing their long term residence in the island, let alone bothering to vote in the local election.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheTeapot said:

It's because the idea of allowing less restrictive travel for the trade off of social distancing and mask wearing in the run up to winter is not one I would personally advocate for. John has previously posted that he is lucky enough to actually get a delivery spot for his shopping. Tesco obviously is just an example, but it applies everywhere. To return to social distancing so that some people can go away is a backwards step in my opinion. Some people may prefer it.

The main takeaway there is dont shop at Tesco.  I never queued really much at all at Shoprite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, John Wright said:

I didn’t take offence, and certainly didn’t attribute the interpretation put on by @Gladysalthough I’m appreciative of her efforts on my behalf.

The thing is that most of us aren’t at the extremes of total border closure or that Covid is a hoax. 

Its finding the common ground that’s reasonable and offers sufficient public health protection, based on real risk assessment and science. It’s also keeping it up to date.

What happened in March, April, May was in the dark, with little scientific basis, because it was so new. The problem is that it didn’t protect one nursing/care home. Otherwise our figures would be very good. And it’s left Howie & Co, and Jacinta boxed in. The IOM still hasn’t got a proper exit strategy. 

it actually has no exit strategy at all outside of a 20 in 100000 infection rate across the UK.

My preference as a next step would have been to retain 7 day testing.  Allow immediate family in.    Bring in arrival testing.  I would prefer to see a day 7 negative test allow unfettered movemeny but I can understand how the paranoid risk averse compliance types would shit themselves over that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John Wright said:

Sweden has larger land area ( almost double ) and much smaller population than UK ( 1/8th or 12% ).

It’s much less urbanised.

 

In Sweden people live in cities. Once you exclude the parts that are nearly completely uninhabited, population density is actually greater than the UK. There is little population that we would regard here as "rural".

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

The main takeaway there is dont shop at Tesco.  I never queued really much at all at Shoprite.

You didn't experience the wondrous snaking queue round and round the back car park of Shopshite, then.

Tesco was usually bad, and M&S was too.

All wonderful when it was cold and wet. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, spoiledbratoframsey said:

 

In Sweden people live in cities. Once you exclude the parts that are nearly completely uninhabited, population density is actually greater than the UK. There is little population that we would regard here as "rural".

Have you visited Sweden. Less than half the population is urban. A lower percentage than the UK. The rural population is large and widely dispersed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a lot more to Sweden than Stockholm. The countryside is lovely, with lots of little communities.

Sweden is divided into 21 county councils and 290 municipalities. Municipalities are also divided into a total of 2,512 parishes. (From Wikipedia)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nom de plume said:

It’s not difficult John, really it isn’t.

The challenge lies with care home & hospital staff.

They are the people who have to be extra careful & tested almost daily.

Couple these provisions with border testing +1 & +7 and I believe we can all start living again.

So it's really easy except for the people for whom it will be really hard.  Most of whom are poorly paid and under a lot of stress anyway.  But you don't care because you're not one of them.

What I find amazing about this sort of attitude isn't its selfishness but its stupidity. Because this sort of thing was tried in the Spring and it didn't really work, anywhere.  So you're quite happy to have lots of vulnerable people die and the health service collapse so that you will feel slightly less inconvenienced.  But it doesn't matter because you have found someone you can blame for it.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

So it's really easy except for the people for whom it will be really hard.  Most of whom are poorly paid and under a lot of stress anyway.  But you don't care because you're not one of them.

What I find amazing about this sort of attitude isn't its selfishness but its stupidity. Because this sort of thing was tried in the Spring and it didn't really work, anywhere.  So you're quite happy to have lots of vulnerable people die and the health service collapse so that you will feel slightly less inconvenienced.  But it doesn't matter because you have found someone you can blame for it.

I’m not happy to see a single person die but you seemingly are by ignoring the facts that untold damage is being done as a direct consequence of lockdowns.

Just because we don’t have a running daily Sky News death count on cancer, heart attacks, suicides, strokes, flu etc etc (not to mention the economy).

You are not prepared to accept the bigger picture in regards the long term Armageddon that is unfolding before you.

Its idiotic, really it is. 

Edited by Nom de plume
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheTeapot said:

Yes, I see what you mean. I was not trying to be rude.

No problem, although we don't always absolutely agree, your posts normally come across as someone who has thought about it and come to a reasoned conclusion. :flowers:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gladys said:

No problem, although we don't always absolutely agree, your posts normally come across as someone who has thought about it and come to a reasoned conclusion. :flowers:

You’ve obviously succumbed to CLDS

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Nom de plume said:

I’m not happy to see a single person die but you seemingly are by ignoring the facts that untold damage is being done as a direct consequence of lockdowns.

Just because we don’t have a running daily Sky News death count on cancer deaths, suicides, strokes, flu etc etc (not to mention the economy).

But none of those things are the direct consequences of lockdowns.  They are the consequences of either the stresses that Covid put the health services under or because of underfunding or poor management (including poor messaging) by the health service.  Nowhere do people explain how lockdown itself caused any of those effects directly.  This is just gullibly repeating what the media say because they think lockdown affects the economic interests of their owners.

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...