Coronavirus

[Weston Super Saint]

It’s not right how MPs seem to be able to get hold of a test as soon as they get a runny nose yet NHS staff can’t.

 

Are you saying that NHS staff who are showing symptoms are not being tested?

 

Should they be tested or should they be self isolating like everyone else who has the symptoms to stop it spreading? Should we be wasting money on people (NHS or otherwise) who have the symptoms by testing them, when the prescribed course of action - self isolation - will be the same whatever the outcome of the test?

[whelk]

Are you saying that NHS staff who are showing symptoms are not being tested?

 

Should they be tested or should they be self isolating like everyone else who has the symptoms to stop it spreading? Should we be wasting money on people (NHS or otherwise) who have the symptoms by testing them, when the prescribed course of action - self isolation - will be the same whatever the outcome of the test?

 

We are wasting enough money I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist over costs of tests.

 

You realise doctors are calling for this as number of staff absent as a precaution when could be at work if we knew they did not have the virus.

[Weston Super Saint]

We are wasting enough money I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist over costs of tests.

 

You realise doctors are calling for this as number of staff absent as a precaution when could be at work if we knew they did not have the virus.

 

Doctors should know better!

 

Stay at home, protect the NHS, save lives! That goes for NHS workers too - which is why they have asked retired workers to come back to work to increase the numbers.

 

Or are you suggesting the advice is invalid if you work for the NHS? The absent staff (self isolating) are presumably doing so because they either have the symptoms or have been in close contact (presumably unprotected as you would hope precautions would be in place whilst at work) with someone who has the symptoms. In which case they would have an incubation period of up to seven days, or are you suggesting they can ignore that and carry on working as normal potentially infecting many people even after a negative test result?

[Lord Duckhunter]

It’s not even a slope, the old bill are just doing their job trying to minimise the impact. It’s people being idiots and not staying in that is the problem.

 

Not entirely it’s not.

 

As per usual, you give them a inch & they take a mile.

 

Despite your rush to stick up for plod it’s noticeable you don’t answer the question of where were they pre this virus? I’ve never seen so many round here, **** me, they were even patrolling the streets of Poole last night.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tamesaint]

Are you saying that NHS staff who are showing symptoms are not being tested?

 

Should they be tested or should they be self isolating like everyone else who has the symptoms to stop it spreading? Should we be wasting money on people (NHS or otherwise) who have the symptoms by testing them, when the prescribed course of action - self isolation - will be the same whatever the outcome of the test?

 

125,000 NHS staff are showing symptoms (source Government briefing today). 2,000 of these have been tested. We need these people at work asap so I would say that yes, NHS staff do need to be tested.

[The Cat]

Not entirely it’s not.

 

As per usual, you give them a inch & they take a mile.

 

Despite your rush to stick up for plod it’s noticeable you don’t answer the question of where were they pre this virus? I’ve never seen so many round here, **** me, they were even patrolling the streets of Poole last night.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Before this started they were busy dealing with the sort of crime that isn't now happening. For example it takes an inordinate amount of time and people to deal with the sort of cretins who go out on a weekend evening, get hammered and have a fight.

 

One fight, maybe 3 or 4 police to deal with. Drive the van to the station. Custody officers take over. Put them in a cell. Detectives then have to interview them all, plus any witnesses. Statements are taken and logged. Further enquiries happen. More statements. Now we have maybe 10 people involved trying to sort it out. All of these people have paperwork to complete, 3 months later they are warned for court.

 

One murder takes up the time of maybe 50 officers and staff, in fact probably far more. Serious Crime team, specialist units, search teams, detectives, analysts, door to door enquiries, scene guards, victim support, safeguarding. I could go on.

 

There's loads of other examples of crime that isn't happening now because most of the country are sat at home.

 

People have been moved roles from departments with current low levels of work to go out on patrol.

 

I'm not really sure why this is hard to understand? Would you prefer the teams who are currently dealing with less crime to be sat around out of sight or out on the streets?

 

One minute people moan the police don't have enough of a visible presence and then when they have it people complain there's too many of them.

[aintforever]

Are you saying that NHS staff who are showing symptoms are not being tested?

 

Should they be tested or should they be self isolating like everyone else who has the symptoms to stop it spreading? Should we be wasting money on people (NHS or otherwise) who have the symptoms by testing them, when the prescribed course of action - self isolation - will be the same whatever the outcome of the test?

 

Of course it’s vital NHS staff get tested. We don’t want nurses with it infecting half the hospital and you don’t want nurses without it sat at home for two weeks because they have a bit of a cold. MPs can work from home so why we are wasting resources on them I do not know.

[egg]

125,000 NHS staff are showing symptoms (source Government briefing today). 2,000 of these have been tested. We need these people at work asap so I would say that yes, NHS staff do need to be tested.

That is frightening. Our testing across the board is atrocious. Is it as simple as the likes of the USA buying up the available test kits and we're getting scraps?

[Weston Super Saint]

125,000 NHS staff are showing symptoms (source Government briefing today). 2,000 of these have been tested. We need these people at work asap so I would say that yes, NHS staff do need to be tested.

 

I'm struggling to understand how testing 125,000 NHS staff who are 'showing symptoms' is going to get them back to work any quicker.

 

If they are 'showing symptoms' then the advice - from the NHS - is to self isolate for 7 days. Testing them is not going to get them back to work any sooner than 7 days. Frankly, testing 125,000 who are showing symptoms is likely to do more harm than good as they will have to leave their self isolation to go for the test - unless you're suggesting home visits which would put thousands more people at risk!

[aintforever]

I'm struggling to understand how testing 125,000 NHS staff who are 'showing symptoms' is going to get them back to work any quicker.

 

If they are 'showing symptoms' then the advice - from the NHS - is to self isolate for 7 days. Testing them is not going to get them back to work any sooner than 7 days. Frankly, testing 125,000 who are showing symptoms is likely to do more harm than good as they will have to leave their self isolation to go for the test - unless you're suggesting home visits which would put thousands more people at risk!

 

If they test negative they go back to work, it’s not rocket science.

[Weston Super Saint]

If they test negative they go back to work, it’s not rocket science.

 

Clearly it's a struggle for you, so let me spell it out....

 

125,000 are SHOWING SYMPTOMS.

 

Can you see they key words there? If you are SHOWING SYMPTOMS you HAVE TO SELF ISOLATE FOR SEVEN DAYS. What's more, your family members / house mates (who may also work for the NHS) have to self isolate for 14 days....

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/self-isolation-advice/

[Lighthouse]

Clearly it's a struggle for you, so let me spell it out....

 

125,000 are SHOWING SYMPTOMS.

 

Can you see they key words there? If you are SHOWING SYMPTOMS you HAVE TO SELF ISOLATE FOR SEVEN DAYS. What's more, your family members / house mates (who may also work for the NHS) have to self isolate for 14 days....

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/self-isolation-advice/

 

Because they could be showing symptoms, without actually having the virus. You could have symptoms, test negative and go back to work without self isolating. That's the point.

[Weston Super Saint]

Because they could be showing symptoms, without actually having the virus. You could have symptoms, test negative and go back to work without self isolating. That's the point.

 

How do they get tested?

 

If you are showing symptoms, you have to self isolate, which means do not leave the house, do not receive visitors. How do you get tested if you can't go anywhere and no-one can visit you - magic testing pixies?

[aintforever]

How do they get tested?

 

If you are showing symptoms, you have to self isolate, which means do not leave the house, do not receive visitors. How do you get tested if you can't go anywhere and no-one can visit you - magic testing pixies?

 

Most countries have drive through a with people in full protective gear.

[Lighthouse]

How do they get tested?

 

If you are showing symptoms, you have to self isolate, which means do not leave the house, do not receive visitors. How do you get tested if you can't go anywhere and no-one can visit you - magic testing pixies?

 

That's a fairly simple logistical issue. If they can test Boris, Charlie and a few others they can test a nurses and doctors.

[Batman]

Because they could be showing symptoms, without actually having the virus. You could have symptoms, test negative and go back to work without self isolating. That's the point.

 

Not necessarily the case in many health care fields.

If you show the symptoms but don't have COVID19, good chance you will need to stay away from severely sick patients anyway. Obviously, not necessarily for the 7-14 days.

[aintforever]

Clearly it's a struggle for you, so let me spell it out....

 

125,000 are SHOWING SYMPTOMS.

 

Can you see they key words there? If you are SHOWING SYMPTOMS you HAVE TO SELF ISOLATE FOR SEVEN DAYS. What's more, your family members / house mates (who may also work for the NHS) have to self isolate for 14 days....

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/self-isolation-advice/

 

I’ve been on full lock down for 14 days because my other half had a bit of a cough last week. Neither of us have a clue wether one or both of us had it but if I was a Doctor that would be a big loss to the NHS if it was for nothing.

 

The problem with this virus is that th3 symptoms can be mild or nonexistent, testing would make a huge difference.

[Weston Super Saint]

Most countries have drive through a with people in full protective gear.

 

And if you live in a city and don't drive / take public transport, how do you get tested?

 

That's a fairly simple logistical issue. If they can test Boris, Charlie and a few others they can test a nurses and doctors.

 

I'd hazard a guess that the logistics of testing Boris, Charlie and a few others is way more manageable than the logistics of testing ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND people scattered across the entire UK....

[Saint in Paradise]

Here is a video which might be of interest about how to deal with grocery deliveries to your door.

What might be common sense for you might still be worth passing on as not everyone will perhaps

have thought of some of his ideas? He takes his time explaining how and why but try and keep going

 

 

[Weston Super Saint]

I’ve been on full lock down for 14 days because my other half had a bit of a cough last week. Neither of us have a clue wether one or both of us had it but if I was a Doctor that would be a big loss to the NHS if it was for nothing.

 

The problem with this virus is that th3 symptoms can be mild or nonexistent, testing would make a huge difference.

 

Which brings us full circle to my original point, you can be tested - because you have a cough - and return a negative result, walk out the door, touch something and pick up the virus, happily spreading it around everyone you meet safe in the knowledge that you tested negative!

[Batman]

Which brings us full circle to my original point, you can be tested - because you have a cough - and return a negative result, walk out the door, touch something and pick up the virus, happily spreading it around everyone you meet safe in the knowledge that you tested negative!

 

if you have a cough and do not need any assistance/show mild symptoms, and have been practising social distancing. why do you need a test?

NHS staff, working from ICU backwards, yes but even then, they could test negative/not having it and pick it up an hour later after getting the result and go on a killing spree!!

[Weston Super Saint]

if you have a cough and do not need any assistance/show mild symptoms, and have been practising social distancing. why do you need a test?

NHS staff, working from ICU backwards, yes but even then, they could test negative/not having it and pick it up an hour later after getting the result and go on a killing spree!!

 

if you have a cough and do not need any assistance/show mild symptoms, and have been practising social distancing. why do you need a test? - it's my argument that you don't, so not sure what your point is. I would, however, argue that someone working in the NHS cannot practice social distancing at work as the NHS is not set up for people to keep 2 metres of seperation at all times. Hence, self isolation is the only answer for someone with symptoms.

 

With regards to your second point, as I mentioned earlier, the only effective test - at this time - would be one that identifies antibodies to confirm that someone truly is 'safe' to continue working.

[Lighthouse]

I'd hazard a guess that the logistics of testing Boris, Charlie and a few others is way more manageable than the logistics of testing ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND people scattered across the entire UK....

 

No doubt but even if we can put 10% of them back into hospitals it'll save a few lives. Your argument is like saying it's pointless having field medics at the Battle of the Somme because it's impossible to save all the half a million British casualties.

 

Which brings us full circle to my original point, you can be tested - because you have a cough - and return a negative result, walk out the door, touch something and pick up the virus, happily spreading it around everyone you meet safe in the knowledge that you tested negative!

 

No...

 

You would still have to follow the same social distancing and hygiene rules as every other NHS worker. The point is you could work and wouldn't have to self isolate for 14 days because you were coughing a bit.

[Batman]

if you have a cough and do not need any assistance/show mild symptoms, and have been practising social distancing. why do you need a test? - it's my argument that you don't, so not sure what your point is. I would, however, argue that someone working in the NHS cannot practice social distancing at work as the NHS is not set up for people to keep 2 metres of seperation at all times. Hence, self isolation is the only answer for someone with symptoms.

 

With regards to your second point, as I mentioned earlier, the only effective test - at this time - would be one that identifies antibodies to confirm that someone truly is 'safe' to continue working.

 

sorry, i was kind of agreeing with you...poorly

[Weston Super Saint]

No doubt but even if we can put 10% of them back into hospitals it'll save a few lives. Your argument is like saying it's pointless having field medics at the Battle of the Somme because it's impossible to save all the half a million British casualties.

 

 

 

No...

 

You would still have to follow the same social distancing and hygiene rules as every other NHS worker. The point is you could work and wouldn't have to self isolate for 14 days because you were coughing a bit.

 

Wait a week and you could have about 95% of them back to work and you wouldn't have risked infecting anyone else...

[Weston Super Saint]

No doubt but even if we can put 10% of them back into hospitals it'll save a few lives.

 

Unless, which is hugley unlikely, all NHS workers started showing symptoms on the very same day by doing absolutely nothing at all, you would get more than 10% back to work every day due to them only having to self isolate for 7 days....

[Lighthouse]

Unless, which is hugley unlikely, all NHS workers started showing symptoms on the very same day by doing absolutely nothing at all, you would get more than 10% back to work every day due to them only having to self isolate for 7 days....

 

I’m not sure why this is difficult to understand.

 

If you have symptoms and there is no test, you have to self isolate.

If you have symptoms and test positive, you have to self isolate.

If you have symptoms and test negative, you can go back to work in 10 minutes. Not a week. That’s the advantage. You get a week of productivity from a worker who would otherwise have been sat at home.

[Batman]

I’m not sure why this is difficult to understand.

 

If you have symptoms and there is no test, you have to self isolate.

If you have symptoms and test positive, you have to self isolate.

If you have symptoms and test negative, you can go back to work in 10 minutes. Not a week. That’s the advantage. You get a week of productivity from a worker who would otherwise have been sat at home.

not if you are caring for very sick people.....

[shurlock]

if you have a cough and do not need any assistance/show mild symptoms, and have been practising social distancing. why do you need a test?

NHS staff, working from ICU backwards, yes but even then, they could test negative/not having it and pick it up an hour later after getting the result and go on a killing spree!!

 

In which case, they would develop symptoms and simply be retested. The opportunity costs of not having medical professionals at work are far greater than the costs of conducting a pretty standard test multiple times, if necessary.

 

And at the very least, they would know they were negative - preferable to someone who’s self-isolated for 14 days and believes they had the virus (when testing would have shown they didn’t) and returning to work and possibly thinking they’re invincible and not a risk to others.

Edited 1 April, 2020 by shurlock

[Lighthouse]

not if you are caring for very sick people.....

 

Depends what your roles is and what you’re actually sick from, if at all. If it’s hayfever or you’ve spent the weekend up to your tits in sawdust, putting new floorboards in, you’re no risk to anyone,

[shurlock]

I’m not sure why this is difficult to understand.

 

If you have symptoms and there is no test, you have to self isolate.

If you have symptoms and test positive, you have to self isolate.

If you have symptoms and test negative, you can go back to work in 10 minutes. Not a week. That’s the advantage. You get a week of productivity from a worker who would otherwise have been sat at home.

 

Precisely- it’s very easy to understand.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Those of you sticking up for plod need to watch this. Bloke films a jobsworth traffic warden on his phone & 5 plod turn up to invite him for an “interview”, including one with his hand constantly on his taser. None of them 2 meters apart, yet people claim it’s the public that are the idiots. If anyone believes these new powers aren’t going to their head, they’re deluded.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrJamesKent3/status/1245249108148879362

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[whelk]

Precisely- it’s very easy to understand.

 

He is pretty damn stupid.

[aintforever]

Which brings us full circle to my original point, you can be tested - because you have a cough - and return a negative result, walk out the door, touch something and pick up the virus, happily spreading it around everyone you meet safe in the knowledge that you tested negative!

 

But I don’t have a cough, my other half had a weird cough about 10 days ago so we have all been on lock down over what was probably nothing. Neither of us have any symptoms now but I have to isolate until Saturday. I can work from home so it’s not an issue but if I was a doctor I probably would have wasted the last two weeks.

 

On the flip side I expect nurses are under huge pressure to go to work. If they felt a bit iffy 10 days ago but put it down to something else they might have spent the last 10 days spreading it around. There are probably thousands of people round the country who felt a bit rough but just assumed it was probably a cold then caught the tube to work because there are no tests available.

[Lord Duckhunter]

If you have symptoms and test negative, you can go back to work in 10 minutes. Not a week. That’s the advantage. You get a week of productivity from a worker who would otherwise have been sat at home.

 

Can you still become infected at the same time you have a cold/cough.

 

Under your “simple to understand” explanation. Could someone test negative one day & catch it the next?

 

Does the test stop you being infected? No, therefore surely you need to test everyday. Otherwise a nurse on a Covid ward could test negative one day, catch it 3 days later but continue to work because her negative test makes her think she’s only got her original “cold”.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[buctootim]

Can you still become infected at the same time you have a cold/cough.

 

Under your “simple to understand” explanation. Could someone test negative one day & catch it the next?

 

Does the test stop you being infected? No, therefore surely you need to test everyday. Otherwise a nurse on a Covid ward could test negative one day, catch it 3 days later but continue to work because her negative test makes her think she’s only got her original “cold”.

 

The tests the Gov have ordered supposedly will test for both antibodies to COVID-19 and live virus - ie both those currently infected and those previously exposed and now likely immune. To your point the alternative is what? only allow those NHS staff who have previously been infected and now have antibodies to work? Not sure you cab cope with a pandemic with only say 10% of staff present

[aintforever]

Can you still become infected at the same time you have a cold/cough.

 

Under your “simple to understand” explanation. Could someone test negative one day & catch it the next?

 

Does the test stop you being infected? No, therefore surely you need to test everyday. Otherwise a nurse on a Covid ward could test negative one day, catch it 3 days later but continue to work because her negative test makes her think she’s only got her original “cold”.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

If you had a cold then go it I expect you would have a change in symptoms so just get re-tested. If you are one of the people who don’t have any symptoms then obviously you would risk spreading it regardless.

[The Cat]

Those of you sticking up for plod need to watch this. Bloke films a jobsworth traffic warden on his phone & 5 plod turn up to invite him for an “interview”, including one with his hand constantly on his taser. None of them 2 meters apart, yet people claim it’s the public that are the idiots. If anyone believes these new powers aren’t going to their head, they’re deluded.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrJamesKent3/status/1245249108148879362

 

Because one incident is obviously representative of the whole of the police force? You know it's likely that at the same time one of his colleagues in another department is putting the final touches to a case file which convicts a paedo?

 

The copper who is talking could have done without leaning on the wall but nothing he said was technically incorrect. Someone has complained about a public order offence so he is going to find out more details and ask the guy if he would volunteer for an interview. He definitely should have offered to take more details regarding the theft and had a look into it though.

 

I'd suggest that the couple outside could well be new student officers who have been taken along to observe.

 

But yeah, you carry on bashing the police.

[shurlock]

Can you still become infected at the same time you have a cold/cough.

 

Under your “simple to understand” explanation. Could someone test negative one day & catch it the next?

 

Does the test stop you being infected? No, therefore surely you need to test everyday. Otherwise a nurse on a Covid ward could test negative one day, catch it 3 days later but continue to work because her negative test makes her think she’s only got her original “cold”.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

It’s easy to conjure up ever more silly situations.

 

But let’s play your little game pal: said nurse could wait till the cold has cleared, likely to be a few days tops and then return to work. If she caught the virus and developed symptoms, she’d know it was no longer her cold (the symptoms of coronavirus may be quite different from a common cold at any rate, so easy to distinguish). In this worst case situation, the NHS has lost her for a few days (time required for cold to clear) as opposed to two weeks under the no testing, self-isolation protocol which is obviously preferable to it.

Edited 1 April, 2020 by shurlock

[Lord Duckhunter]

The tests the Gov have ordered supposedly will test for both antibodies to COVID-19 and live virus - ie both those currently infected and those previously exposed and now likely immune. To your point the alternative is what? only allow those NHS staff who have previously been infected and now have antibodies to work? Not sure you cab cope with a pandemic with only say 10% of staff present

 

 

My point is that it’s much more complicated than people are making out. Too easy to just say that a negative test means you can go back to work safe in the knowledge you’re clear. That status my change the very next day. Surely people displaying symptoms but testing negative need a daily test if they’re working normally, is that really feasible? If it is, great. Anyone with no symptoms, or symptoms but pass a daily test can work. I’m not sure I’d want my snap dragon working on the front line alongside someone coughing & sneezing all day, even if they did pass a test 2 days earlier.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RedArmy]

Here is a video which might be of interest about how to deal with grocery deliveries to your door.

What might be common sense for you might still be worth passing on as not everyone will perhaps

have thought of some of his ideas? He takes his time explaining how and why but try and keep going

 

 

All well and good in principle but after he originally picks up a “contaminated” item his hand is now potentially contaminated too, but he cleans it and then moves it to the clean side with that dirty hand and has potentially contaminated it again. You need a clean hand and a dirty hand too.

[Lighthouse]

My point is that it’s much more complicated than people are making out. Too easy to just say that a negative test means you can go back to work safe in the knowledge you’re clear. That status my change the very next day. Surely people displaying symptoms but testing negative need a daily test if they’re working normally, is that really feasible? If it is, great. Anyone with no symptoms, or symptoms but pass a daily test can work. I’m not sure I’d want my snap dragon working on the front line alongside someone coughing & sneezing all day, even if they did pass a test 2 days earlier.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Literally anyone could have the disease and not be showing symptoms for a few days. If we send home anyone who might have it, we’d send home literally everyone. It’s about risk management. Anyone could catch it at any moment, regardless of whether they’ve just had a test.

 

To put it simply, if they haven’t tested positive, we want them in work.

[RedArmy]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8176909/Health-chiefs-warn-public-stay-home-concerning-INCREASE-road-traffic.html

 

Obviously Public Health England have never heard of a thing called the weekend ffs. Shocking news that road traffic decreased the two days the majority of people didn’t have to go to work and went back to normal on Monday.

Thesr are the geniuses that are meant to be helping to keep us safe from the virus?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Literally anyone could have the disease and not be showing symptoms for a few days. If we send home anyone who might have it, we’d send home literally everyone.

 

To put it simply, if they haven’t tested positive, we want them in work.

 

 

Have you been asleep the past 10 days.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[buctootim]

My point is that it’s much more complicated than people are making out. Too easy to just say that a negative test means you can go back to work safe in the knowledge you’re clear. That status my change the very next day. Surely people displaying symptoms but testing negative need a daily test if they’re working normally, is that really feasible? If it is, great. Anyone with no symptoms, or symptoms but pass a daily test can work. I’m not sure I’d want my snap dragon working on the front line alongside someone coughing & sneezing all day, even if they did pass a test 2 days earlier.

 

If someone passed a test and then got infected five minutes later they are unlikely to be an infective danger to others for several days afterwards because it takes time for the virus to replicate. As a general rule of thumb you are infectious when you have symptoms and a couple of days before. With this corona virus symptoms seem to emerge 5-11 days after infection. So potentially you could safely test only, say, every three days.

Edited 1 April, 2020 by buctootim

[Weston Super Saint]

It’s easy to conjure up ever more silly situations.

 

But let’s play your little game pal: said nurse could wait till the cold has cleared, likely to be a few days tops and then return to work. If she caught the virus and developed symptoms, she’d know it was no longer her cold (the symptoms of coronavirus may be quite different from a common cold at any rate, so easy to distinguish). In this worst case situation, the NHS has lost her for a few days (time required for cold to clear) as opposed to two weeks under the no testing, self-isolation protocol which is obviously preferable to it.

 

She would isolate for SEVEN days if she had symptoms, NOT FOURTEEN.

 

It's really not difficult to understand.

[Batman]

[video=youtube_share;xcQaQIB1fSk]

[Weston Super Saint]

Literally anyone could have the disease and not be showing symptoms for a few days. If we send home anyone who might have it, we’d send home literally everyone. It’s about risk management. Anyone could catch it at any moment, regardless of whether they’ve just had a test.

 

To put it simply, if they haven’t tested positive, we want them in work.

 

Then the only way to ensure that is to test all key / NHS workers every day (or at least every other day, depending on the incubation rate of the virus) - that's assuming the results come back instantly, rather than having to wait for cultures to be grown.

[whelk]

Lack of testing lead story on all news channels and all newspapers (including all the Tory supporting ones).

Haven’t seen one pundit espousing Weston Saint and LD views. Funny that.

[Weston Super Saint]

Lack of testing lead story on all news channels and all newspapers (including all the Tory supporting ones).

Haven’t seen one pundit espousing Weston Saint and LD views. Funny that.

 

Do you mean, apart from the ones calling for an antibody test - which was exactly the point I was making?