IOM Covid removing restrictions

[pongo 4,390]

44 minutes ago, rachomics said:

This is why I was so pissed off at losing the day 7 tests. It was showing us the COVID19 import rate relative to the number of travellers.

Would that ultimately be practically useful data or is it just interesting?

What policy, for example, could be based on this ratio? Would it even really be a representative number given the partial and relatively tiny dataset?

[Gladys 6,901]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

Especially since none of the sentencing has been by a, or the, Deemster. All summary offences, magistrates, deputy or high bailiff.

Is there any guidance on sentencing?

[Gladys 6,901]

24 minutes ago, pongo said:

Would that ultimately be practically useful data or is it just interesting?

What policy, for example, could be based on this ratio? Would it even really be a representative number given the partial and relatively tiny dataset?

Surely information about the virus is crucial?  The more information, the better understanding. 

[Dirty Buggane 171]

Just for my own information and interest, What qualifies as compassionate grounds to be able to visit the island at this moment in time i.e. death of a parent/sibling of somebody who resides in England. You went to school with somebody who now lives on the island and you thought it would be great to go on the piss just like the good old days. And how long can you stay and what are the isolation rules you are supposed to follow. I have tried to find the information and failed, miserably I may add.

[yootalkin2me 917]

40 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Going by your benchmark with 16 now imprisoned for a variety of minor breaches suggests that they’re certainly not getting any! 

Au contraire mon ami, 4 weeks = had a shag, 8 weeks = didn't have a shag...not sure what the ratio is though.

[rachomics 875]

42 minutes ago, pongo said:

Would that ultimately be practically useful data or is it just interesting?

What policy, for example, could be based on this ratio? Would it even really be a representative number given the partial and relatively tiny dataset?

Well, knowing that, for example, 2% of returning travellers test positive at day 7 versus 20% of returning travellers testing positive at day 7 informs the isolation periods and the travel policies in place for various groups. There's a big difference. 

Manx people who travel across are far more likely to be careful while they're in the UK as they don't want to be "the person who brings it back", especially with some people being entirely asymptomatic. 

Data is only as useful as what you use it for, but if you have no data at all then you're flying blind. 

[Roger Mexico 9,406]

2 hours ago, rachomics said:

Not necessarily, there are numerous reports (even on the Island, if I may be so bold) of people testing positive at day 14+. It's all about risk mitigation. Even a 14 day isolation won't stop all community cases. The problem with no testing at all is that the first anyone will know about community spread is when a patient comes into the hospital as a severe COVID19 case and tests positive on admission. That's not when you want to find out it's in the community. 

I've not seen many cases where people have gone on to test positive after 14 days isolation, when they weren't testing positive at 13/14 days.  There are a lot of people in the New Zealand cases in isolation who don't test at 3 days but do at 12/13, though most of those would probably have tested positive earlier.

The only exceptions seem to be in certain circumstances:

Cross-contamination - either from someone they are co-isolating with or from others in a shared environment (there's been a few New Zealand cases like that)

or Developing Covid-19 and still being infectious.  There's a particular variety of this with some elderly patients where they test negative (often after testing positive before), but clearly have the disease and are found to be positive later, say on postmortem.

Edited November 1, 2020 by Roger Mexico
Clarity

[Nom de plume 1,079]

15 minutes ago, rachomics said:

Well, knowing that, for example, 2% of returning travellers test positive at day 7 versus 20% of returning travellers testing positive at day 7 informs the isolation periods and the travel policies in place for various groups. There's a big difference. 

Manx people who travel across are far more likely to be careful while they're in the UK as they don't want to be "the person who brings it back", especially with some people being entirely asymptomatic. 

Data is only as useful as what you use it for, but if you have no data at all then you're flying blind. 

Hi Rachel,

I’m interested to know what your thoughts are on the IOM mitigating risk (gradual reopening & testing regime) or trying to adopt a policy of eradication at all costs?

[WTF 5,978]

57 minutes ago, rachomics said:

 

Data is only as useful as what you use it for, but if you have no data at all then you're flying blind. 

that's how it works over here most of the time,  the rest of the time they just invent the data to justify a course of action that suits the right people.

[Gladys 6,901]

BBC2 now has a very interesting documentary on the US response.

[TheTeapot 9,839]

37 minutes ago, Gladys said:

BBC2 now has a very interesting documentary on the US response.

I've been watching it. What a mess.

[Banker 1,096]

46 minutes ago, WTF said:

that's how it works over here most of the time,  the rest of the time they just invent the data to justify a course of action that suits the right people.

And invent a letter to try & smear Rachel & the media at same time

[Gladys 6,901]

12 hours ago, John Wright said:

 

One story was it had been bought to analyse genes in dog poo, but wasn’t used. 

Please tell me that has no foundation whatsoever.

[Gladys 6,901]

1 hour ago, TheTeapot said:

I've been watching it. What a mess.

Frightening, but you can parallels with how the UK have dealt with covid. 

One if the messages was an effective test and trace system and it would seem that our (IOM)  testing regime is somewhat impaired. 

[NoTail 1,965]

I don't see how you can assess our system as impaired when there are no actual cases to track and trace.