Jump to content

Coronavirus


whelk
 Share

Recommended Posts

What are you on about? The scope of those eligible to access testing is still incredibly narrow. Plus having drive in test centres in places obviously not accessible to all. You can have all the testing capacity in the world but it means little if the pitiful number of people actually tested remains as is. There are big problems with testing, and it isn't because people can't be arsed to get tested.

 

Precisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you on about? The scope of those eligible to access testing is still incredibly narrow. Plus having drive in test centres in places obviously not accessible to all. You can have all the testing capacity in the world but it means little if the pitiful number of people actually tested remains as is. There are big problems with testing, and it isn't because people can't be arsed to get tested.

 

it is a fact that the take up where testing is freely available is much lower than expected/anticipated

 

many many more people than expected are just not bothering and whilst more capacity is being opened up elsewhere, 'others' are being encouraged to go and get tested where possible.

 

just passing on some facts...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is a fact that the take up where testing is freely available is much lower than expected/anticipated

 

many many more people than expected are just not bothering and whilst more capacity is being opened up elsewhere, 'others' are being encouraged to go and get tested where possible.

 

just passing on some facts...

 

Testing for front line staff should be mandatory - NHS, nursing home staff and carers. About 1.5 million people? Once they've been tested move onto police, fire service and teachers. Once they've been done in about 1 month it will time for the NHS staff to be tested again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They thought they could get away with pretending they promised capacity but now they've been reminded of the original pledge, it'll be difficult.

If Cummings does deliver 100,000 tests out of the blue I'd be curious to see the detail.

It was just another promise made to satisfy the easily-led.

Ditto the PPE debacle and all the financial support for small businesses that doesn't stack up.

It's easy to stand behind a lectern and read out cliches and promises, but delivering on the detail requires talent.

And integrity.

And organisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was made clear that antibody testing was going to be a big part of the 100,000 tests per day, the government had an order in place to buy enough to test 45,000 per day for the next year. It’s not completely their fault they turned out to be unreliable, I don’t know why they don’t come out and say that it was never in the plan to test 100,000 a day to see if they HAVE the virus, and revise their target instead of letting the media hammer them over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They thought they could get away with pretending they promised capacity but now they've been reminded of the original pledge, it'll be difficult.

If Cummings does deliver 100,000 tests out of the blue I'd be curious to see the detail.

It was just another promise made to satisfy the easily-led.

Ditto the PPE debacle and all the financial support for small businesses that doesn't stack up.

It's easy to stand behind a lectern and read out cliches and promises, but delivering on the detail requires talent.

And integrity.

And organisation.

It was a goal not a promise, wasn't it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had an email today saying tests have been opened up to Police officers or staff who are self-isolating because they suspect they have symptoms. You can't just go and get a random test.

 

I got a text from my Doctors yesterday advising they were a “Surveillance research centre” & a link to book a test. The only criteria they had was a cough for less than 7 days, “feel” you have a temperature or “feel” you have a chest infection. It’s a home testing kit which the researchers drop round your house, no questions asked. With the number of ****ing idiots we’ve got round here, they’ll put the Government well on the way towards 100,000. I bet they’ll be loads of time wasters. Thing is my Mrs could respond to that text and get a test before she gets one as an NHS worker. Seems a bit haphazard if you ask me, which is the problem with putting a targets on these sort of things. I’d rather have 50k clearly targeted tests given to people who need them, than 100k which includes people who “feel” ill.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a text from my Doctors yesterday advising they were a “Surveillance research centre” & a link to book a test. The only criteria they had was a cough for less than 7 days, “feel” you have a temperature or “feel” you have a chest infection. It’s a home testing kit which the researchers drop round your house, no questions asked. With the number of ****ing idiots we’ve got round here, they’ll put the Government well on the way towards 100,000. I bet they’ll be loads of time wasters. Thing is my Mrs could respond to that text and get a test before she gets one as an NHS worker. Seems a bit haphazard if you ask me, which is the problem with putting a targets on these sort of things. I’d rather have 50k clearly targeted tests given to people who need them, than 100k which includes people who “feel” ill.

 

Tbf that sounds like an attempt to estimate the number of infections in the general population, which is a good thing.

 

Edit Hancock announced it was available to all health workers and their families.

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbf that sounds like an attempt to estimate the number of infections in the general population, which is a good thing.

 

Edit Hancock announced it was available to all health workers and their families.

 

If the idea was to estimate the number of infections in the population, surely its not very scientific to base your results on tests given to people who feel like they’ve got a chest infection. I’d have thought more accurate results would be achieved by testing similar %’s to the general population. For example If there’s 12% BAME in the general population, then 12% of your sample should be BAME. Same amongst age groups, sex etc. You know exactly what will happen here, a load of time wasters will want testing.

 

I don’t care what Hancock says, my snap dragon has not been offered a test via her work, let alone any of us. We all could get one via our doctors, but won’t without symptoms.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the idea was to estimate the number of infections in the population, surely its not very scientific to base your results on tests given to people who feel like they’ve got a chest infection. I’d have thought more accurate results would be achieved by testing similar %’s to the general population. For example If there’s 12% BAME in the general population, then 12% of your sample should be BAME. Same amongst age groups, sex etc. You know exactly what will happen here, a load of time wasters will want testing.

 

I don’t care what Hancock says, my snap dragon has not been offered a test via her work, let alone any of us. We all could get one via our doctors, but won’t without symptoms.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

It’s easy to apply weights after the survey to adjust for sampling and nonresponse errors and ensure particular groups i.e. BAME aren’t over- or under-represented relative to their distribution in the population as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly annoying that the BBC and others are still parrotting the line that it is a "demand" issue. When there are only a handful of sites for the entire country to go and get a test I would call that supply issue. It's not just the testing kits that one needs to supply, it's the facility to administer them.

 

So an availability issue, a logistics issue, in summary issues on the supply side. Sorry just ranting at the sloppy journalism on TV this morning.

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly annoying that the BBC and others are still parrotting the line that it is a "demand" issue. When there are only a handful of sites for the entire country to go and get a test I would call that supply issue. It's not just the testing kits that one needs to supply, it's the facility to administer them.

 

So an availability issue, a logistics issue, in summary issues on the supply side. Sorry just ranting at the sloppy journalism on TV this morning.

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Isn't part of it also that it's now for people who are currently showing symptoms. So that excludes anyone who may have had symptoms and anyone not showing symptoms which maybe doesn't leave multiple thousands every single day. Maybe they should make the testing compulsory instead rather like how south Korea have done it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long does it stay in the body?

 

I don’t know if I had it a few weeks back but if I did would a test now show me as positive cos still kicking around?

 

I don't believe it would.

 

I have no idea but every test and every disease is different. I had a bacterial infection a few years ago and six months after treatment I got a weak positive from traces of dna from dead bacteria still in my system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea but every test and every disease is different. I had a bacterial infection a few years ago and six months after treatment I got a weak positive from traces of dna from dead bacteria still in my system.
The point is there isn't currently much motivation for people who may have had it a few weeks ago to get a test now because it may not even show anything other than negative the antibody test is a different thing and that's very much worth the effort.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is there isn't currently much motivation for people who may have had it a few weeks ago to get a test now because it may not even show anything other than negative the antibody test is a different thing and that's very much worth the effort.

 

I know. I was simply making the point that sometimes it is possible to find traces of the infective agent months after. You can obviously also test for antibodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. I was simply making the point that sometimes it is possible to find traces of the infective agent months after. You can obviously also test for antibodies.
Fair enough. I was just questioning the people who were laughing at the idea of there not being too much demand. Is there demand at the rate of 100k a day for people currently displaying symptoms who haven't had a test?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I was just questioning the people who were laughing at the idea of there not being too much demand. Is there demand at the rate of 100k a day for people currently displaying symptoms who haven't had a test?
Think you're correct, and maybe this roll out of testing is politically motivated more than actually being massively useful at this point in the journey.

 

Really we should be testing everyone that works in every care home regardless of symptoms as part of a track, isolate and trace plan. Might actually save lives in a very immediate way. Not self selecting those with symptoms.

 

Either way, the actually useful test is the "have you had it/are you immune" which allows people to get back to work with confidence.

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think you're correct, and maybe this roll out of testing is politically motivated more than actually being massively useful at this point in the journey.

 

Really we should be testing everyone that works in every care home regardless of symptoms as part of a track, isolate and trace plan. Might actually save lives in a very immediate way. Not self selecting those with symptoms.

 

Either way, the actually useful test is the "have you had it/are you immune" which allows people to get back to work with confidence.

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Completely agree. Test everyone in the care sector and NHS on a regular basis and that's easily 100k a day. Then once the antibody test is available (if it ever is), certain people can get back to things with a level of certainty.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact at this point why not just open the online portal up to anyone who has symptoms but hasn't had a test with priority for key workers and NHS? Seems like the logical thing to do if there really isn't the demand there.

 

There clearly is demand. Too much for them today

Link to comment
Share on other sites

World at One Radio 4, Chris Mason's interview with Chen Wen of the Chinese embassy is very interesting; the Chinese contantly demand respect from the rest of the world. They are desperate to be seen as a progressive world stage player but this insecure need for approval and their constant management of the version of events just shows them up to be a backward authoritarian state. If they admit to any mistakes, they blame the local government (as previously explained on here by Shurlock), any other blame is fended off as racism. All you have to do is mention Hong Kong and democracy and they can't help but reveal their true colours. If you weren't listening to it at lunch time give it a go, it's worth a listen.

 

What with this lot on one side, Trump on the other and all their little wannabes dotted around the world we are not in a very good place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

World at One Radio 4, Chris Mason's interview with Chen Wen of the Chinese embassy is very interesting; the Chinese contantly demand respect from the rest of the world. They are desperate to be seen as a progressive world stage player but this insecure need for approval and their constant management of the version of events just shows them up to be a backward authoritarian state. If they admit to any mistakes, they blame the local government (as previously explained on here by Shurlock), any other blame is fended off as racism. All you have to do is mention Hong Kong and democracy and they can't help but reveal their true colours. If you weren't listening to it at lunch time give it a go, it's worth a listen.

 

What with this lot on one side, Trump on the other and all their little wannabes dotted around the world we are not in a very good place.

 

Indeed. Like them or not, they will become the dominant global force if America carries on rejecting multilateralism. Hopefully they get a President who isn’t a malignant fool soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to know what to believe. Have they ditched all the experts wheeled out to tell us masks were a waste of time? Turns out now should be worn everywhere.

Not that they didn’t want a run in masks by any chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lighthouse changed the title to Coronavirus

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...