Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 30.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2287

  • TheTeapot

    1329

  • Gladys

    1178

  • horatiotheturd

    1015

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

OK. For what it's worth I'm going to try and explain why genomics is important in a ssRNA virus epidemic. No doubt it will end up being recited badly at a briefing, but, well, whatever. You read it he

Rachel has tried every which way to re-offer her services. This last tweet wasn't the first time she's reached out. Government has made it very clear they do not want her to be involved. I want h

I think you'll find most so called anti-government rhetoric is focused on government-stupidity and government-selfishness. In recent times - under Brown, Bell and now Quayle - all too many govern

Posted Images

58 minutes ago, Declan said:

But that was always a foreseeable situation. They accepted the risk up to now, so there must be another reason for change.

Is it because someone arrived back from the UK with the virus and transmitted it to one of the household where they were isolating? As we've said many times would happen? I've never quite seen the sense in one person in a house self-isolating alongside others who don't. I guess now it's going to be a bit more watertight.

I didn't listen to the queen's broadcast this affy.  I got the news this morning from the EVF garage in Laxey that there were two community cases.  Apparently it might have been discussed on the Facebook? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kopek said:

If we take the above scenario as gospel, Husband to Wife to Sister?

The sisters transmission would be unforeseen, innocent if the 'Wfe' did not know that she was infected.

A person (husband) isolating is required to separate from the household.

If he passed it to his wife, then a breech?

But you are only required to isolate as far as practicable.  We were told it is quite a low risk of transmission but it has happened.  It doesn't necessarily mean they ignored isolation.  Let's not bay for more blood. 

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

But you are only required to isolate as far as practicable.  We were told it is quite a low risk of transmission but it has happened.  It doesn't necessarily mean they ignored isolation.  Let's not bay for more blood. 

It's like asking German bikers if they wouldn't mind awfully keeping to the left hand side of the road when they ride on our roads. Bitte.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Declan said:

But that was always a foreseeable situation. They accepted the risk up to now, so there must be another reason for change.

Uk having gone from circa 1000 new cases a day to over 33000 today, is a good enough reason. They have not declared how many dead yet, but yesterday was 595 comp area to figures sometimes in the teens a few weeks ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Is it because someone arrived back from the UK with the virus and transmitted it to one of the household where they were isolating? As we've said many times would happen? I've never quite seen the sense in one person in a house self-isolating alongside others who don't. I guess now it's going to be a bit more watertight.

I didn't listen to the queen's broadcast this affy.  I got the news this morning from the EVF garage in Laxey that there were two community cases.  Apparently it might have been discussed on the Facebook? :)

The EDF garage probably had a better delivery. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Cambon said:

Uk having gone from circa 1000 new cases a day to over 33000 today, is a good enough reason. They have not declared how many dead yet, but yesterday was 595 comp area to figures sometimes in the teens a few weeks ago. 

It's also the number of NHS beds occupied due to COVID. Up from 11,000 @ last week to a stated 14,000 this week. On top of the stated, "normal for this time of the year" 3000 flu cases and 7000 cancer cases. I can't remember how many were on ventilators but the number was given.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, wrighty said:

Like HIV for example. 

Touché Doctor....well, sort of, of the millions who have caught/had the virus not that many, in comparison, have died or had a severe reaction...I'll leave that right there.

Edited by yootalkin2me
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...