Coronavirus

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.

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...

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.

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 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.

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.

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?

Might as well called it a stab. I remember saying it wasn’t a target as that sounded like it might not be achieved. Full of it but lap it up

Might as well called it a stab. I remember saying it wasn’t a target as that sounded like it might not be achieved. Full of it but lap it up

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

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.

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.

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

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.

Only 14,000 people were tested yesterday.

Only 14,000 people were tested yesterday.

Supposedly many many people can’t be arsed

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

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

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

What about your Kenny Dalglish case who showed no symptoms. By chance got tested. Could easily be a nurse in same position

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?

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

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

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/key-workers-denied-coronavirus-tests-as-hancock-scheme-falters-on-first-day

Too much demand now?

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.

Nice one. Will come back later

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

There clearly is demand. Too much for them today

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/key-workers-denied-coronavirus-tests-as-hancock-scheme-falters-on-first-day

 

Too much demand now?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

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.

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.

Is it wrong to have a thing for Dr Jenny Harries?

Is it wrong to have a thing for Dr Jenny Harries?

Exodus 20:17

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

Exodus 20:17

I almost detected some humour there. Get back to your thread where you belong

Is it wrong to have a thing for Dr Jenny Harries?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-52409765

Twins is Southampton die days apart, very very sad.

Is it wrong to have a thing for Dr Jenny Harries?

Only if you’re a necrophiliac.

Only if you’re a necrophiliac.

More a sapiophile. Mind she is far more your age old boy

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-52409765

 

Twins is Southampton die days apart, very very sad.

Awful.

Sad news

More a sapiophile. Mind she is far more your age old boy

She’s a bit young for me

I’m nearly ten years older.

Today’s announced deaths are from as far back as 11th March. It’s almost as if they save a few to add on to the daily total when they feel people need scaring back indoors.

There are 3 static caravan holiday parks along our road, over the last few days they have got much busier.

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?

Massive drop off in A & E visits and now telling us to not hold off on visits. Surely means many are from drunks, time wasters and those who use to bypass their GP?