Rooter
Money List Winner
The system works?
Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?
- Thread starter drdel
- Start date
The system works?
theoneandonly
Blackballed
We have 2 cases in the house, neither is isolating and as yet wife and I haven't caught it. I can only assume the booster is doing its job.
Got my test results back this morning, positive, least I now only have to isolate for 7 days from my LF as I understand it. Worst oart is my throat is so sore, swallowing is agony
Robster59
Tour Rookie
Still, it gives you lots of free time to moderate.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
Eh?
How about test on Sunday, meet a positive on Monday and become infected
..........for the rest of the week ?
larmen
Head Pro
Obviously the positive guy would have also tested on Sunday and wouldn't be out. And of course on symptoms you could do additional tests, and on test and trace, ...
My point is, if we all have a test a week by default then we minimise a lot of risk. The unsymptomatics that currently just pass by have a chance to be identified.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
What is being "forgotten"(conveniently?) is that LFT tests giving negative results are not reliable. Unlike those which give positive results.
That has been said many times , but it seems to me to be convenient to regard the neg tests as conclusive.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Er...'reduce some'...
Ethan
Money List Winner
It hasn't been forgotten. A positive LFT is very likely to be a true positive, and a true negative is very likely to get a negative test. That leaves a group in between, the true positives that get a negative test (false negatives). There are very few false positives.
All tests have to balance the false negatives and positives, you can't have both at a very high level. so LFTs are really designed to confirm negativity where the great majority are expected to be negative (i.e. low population prevalence) because the actual number of false negatives will then be pretty low.
It doesn't work so well when LFTs are used in different risk populations, such as symptomatic patients in whom the risk of being positive is much higher because the number of false negatives is also higher.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Which is why I’ve decided to cancel the Burns Supper and Ceilidh I have organised for the 22nd. Venue and some who would attend have indicated they would be happy for it to go ahead, suggesting allprovide a -ve LFT beforehand, But I am not convinced by accuracy of LFTs on an individual basis, and have other family risks to consider.
Unfortunately as I am not only the organiser but the host, chairman, and main provider of all things Burns on the evening, my deciding to not attend mean I essentially have a veto over any decision my fundraising committee might make, or have made, to go ahead with it.
A great pity…but I am doing what I am being encouraged to do the Prime Minister. I am using my common sense to not take any non-essential risks, including attending indoor gatherings in quite enclosed and compact venues. There will be a good number of disappointed people who may give me a bit of angst, so be it, but there will be others who will be relieved.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Common sense decision imo.
GB72
Money List Winner
Feel free to use my NYE story as a cautionary tale. I was shocked that a big room with not that many people in, all of whom were fully vaxed and sensible people with no symptoms, ended up with over half of them with covid a few days later.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Your story was very helpful for me to read. I had already this morning emailed the chair of our fundraising comm with my decision, but I was still feeling a little bit worried about reactions of some. Your story convinced me that I have absolutely made the right decision, -LFTs or not, and will use it as required. So thankyou indeed.?
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
What is scary about your story is how many times it was replicated over Xmas and New Year and, probably, with less caution......
D
Deleted member 3432
Guest
As long as people were able to go out and get pissed, thats all that matters.....
Last edited by a moderator:
DanFST
Head Pro
What's great about the story.
No one has any remotely serious effects.
No one has any remotely serious effects.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
I think that's what I said, though not so comprehensively.
When I wrote it I was recollecting the number of times said on this thread that someone doing a LFT test who got a positive result was almost certain to be positive in reality. Whereas if the LFT gave a negative result, it could be that it was "reporting" falsely and the tester could actually be positive.
So, I think we are on the same hymn sheet.
When I said "forgotten" I was inferring some criticism of what seems to me to be an increasing reliance of LFTs to be an absolute proof of infection or no infection.
Ethan
Money List Winner
Yes, I wasn't disagreeing, just waffling on a bit more in the same direction.
My daughter went into college yesterday for a test prior to returning to school today. Whilst she was negative the college have emailed parents to say a “significant” proportion of students returned positive tests, few, if any, displaying any symptoms. That sort of situation seems to be replicated wherever you turn, including in examples posted here. So it seems omicron is absolutely spreading like wildfire, and then some.
Given the very gradual increase in ICU patients in comparison, as depicted in official data, is anyone here ever going to concede that omicron is nothing like the threat most European governments perceived it to be and that, in fact, the advice of the South African experts appears to have been right all along?
I accept many NHS Trusts appear to have declared critical incidents, but it seems to be that staffing is the primary issue, with huge numbers self isolating, rather than pressure being brought to bear by admissions. I saw a graph this morning which confirmed that the proportion of hospital beds occupied by Covid patients is very small. The proportion occupied by people in those beds directly because of Covid, rather than those who have been admitted for other reasons, must be even smaller.
Maybe the decision makers in England have actually followed the science after all, rather than following the knee jerk decisions of their counterparts in Wales and Scotland? I’m not expecting to be killed in the stampede of replies accepting that full lockdown was not necessary this time round after all.
Given the very gradual increase in ICU patients in comparison, as depicted in official data, is anyone here ever going to concede that omicron is nothing like the threat most European governments perceived it to be and that, in fact, the advice of the South African experts appears to have been right all along?
I accept many NHS Trusts appear to have declared critical incidents, but it seems to be that staffing is the primary issue, with huge numbers self isolating, rather than pressure being brought to bear by admissions. I saw a graph this morning which confirmed that the proportion of hospital beds occupied by Covid patients is very small. The proportion occupied by people in those beds directly because of Covid, rather than those who have been admitted for other reasons, must be even smaller.
Maybe the decision makers in England have actually followed the science after all, rather than following the knee jerk decisions of their counterparts in Wales and Scotland? I’m not expecting to be killed in the stampede of replies accepting that full lockdown was not necessary this time round after all.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
I wasn't shocked, I must say. It has been "an inconvenient truth " ever since the start of this thing, that people indoors in ordinary ventilated rooms, as in most places- bars , restaurants, etc, breathing each other's expelled air, is what is readily spreading this virus. To be in such a place without a mask is quite risky. If it isn't necessary to do it....then ...???