Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, horatiotheturd said:

Seems the only ones who couldn't see it were the ones making the decisions.

Surely with such clear (and obvious, to anyone who isn't stupid) advice there is an element of liability for ignoring it (with no good or justifiable reason) and the situation we now end up in.

Every previous job I have had if my team recommended something and I ignored it and it turned I to bite us on the arse I would have beenhauled over the coals - unless I could show good reason for having looked at the evidence making a judgement call based on the apparent risk vs something like expenditure or if it was something where the negative impact on a process or procedure would have outweighed the potential benefit.

This just screams cock up.

Some serious questions need to be asked, but the problem is: who will ask them? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Thie Veg said:

no science to support the efficacy of face masks"..... You should write to the hospital and explain that to them.

So you're saying some cheap plastic disposable shite from Dealz is the same as medical grade PPE? Maybe you had better tell Nobles, they'll save a fortune. Tell them they don't need hazmat suits either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Also, going based on some of the recent trials, Danmask, which wasn't finished when your article was written, was reported as saying masks didn't work. Henegan was lauding this data about saying masks clearly didn't work.

What actually happened is that a study with significant limitations showed inconclusive results. This isn't therefore a great shock. https://rebelem.com/the-danmask-19-trial-masks-not-effective-to-prevent-covid-19-not-so-fast/

Researchers at MIT did a study too which lauded masks as reducing hospitalizations in the US. They then had to withdraw it because hospitalizations shot up despite mask wearing. Oops.

Masks are expensive and uncomfortable but don't do much harm (or any harm to most people). So I get the attitude that we may as well mandate them as the risk is low and therefore the risk/benefit swings in their favour even if the benefits are low too. But there isn't the concrete evidence to support them, the literature is reviews of reviews, and I'm sick of them being mandated instead of easier, simpler, and cheaper solutions like keeping your distance and washing your bloody hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

I am sure someone will correct me but a big risk with covid is obesity etc etc, there should be a big push on getting people to exercise use gyms eat healthy, be a bit proactive (not just the Island but everywhere) rather than be reactive waiting for vaccines etc

Diet is by far the bigger determinant of someone's weight than exercise.  So you're right, obesity is a risk factor for doing badly with covid, but it'd make more sense to introduce rationing than promoting gyms.  Might solve the Tesco battles too.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

It was my understanding as all construction work is to stop. There could be a u-turn of course

Howie did say unless critical infrastructure!

he also said house moves were off but Ewart corrected him and said they were allowed last time.

Link to comment
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...