• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

hovis said:
So at some point the risk has to be accepted. Mass testing stops and no isolation? I wonder what the criteria is for that. Number of daily deaths? Number of hospitalised people?
Click to expand...

This happened with Spanish flu. Killed lots of people, and later waves were bad, but survivors developed an immunity and within a relatively short time, it really only affected the sick and elderly, and nowadays most people don't get flu symptoms, but may have antibodies for exposure.

Personally, I think the LFTs are a waste of time. We should maintain a degree of social distancing, masks etc, PCR anybody with symptoms but most of the rest is either unnecessary or false reassurance. Likewise isolate for PCR-positive or while awaiting results.

The case numbers are now even more unreliable because of limited testing capacity, so the test-positive rate is a better measure of the trend of cases. Hospitalisation Dan deaths are clearly critical but tell you about cases last week or the week before, so are too outdated to really keep policy ahead of the game.
 
Ethan said:
Personally, I think the LFTs are a waste of time. We should maintain a degree of social distancing, masks etc, PCR anybody with symptoms but most of the rest is either unnecessary or false reassurance. Likewise isolate for PCR-positive or while awaiting results.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure if this is what you meant however I agree with you about LFT’s. Stop testing healthy/symptomless people. If you feel unwell and it’s a Covid-esque symptom then isolate and get a PCR.
 
Ethan said:
This happened with Spanish flu. Killed lots of people, and later waves were bad, but survivors developed an immunity and within a relatively short time, it really only affected the sick and elderly, and nowadays most people don't get flu symptoms, but may have antibodies for exposure.

Personally, I think the LFTs are a waste of time. We should maintain a degree of social distancing, masks etc, PCR anybody with symptoms but most of the rest is either unnecessary or false reassurance. Likewise isolate for PCR-positive or while awaiting results.

The case numbers are now even more unreliable because of limited testing capacity, so the test-positive rate is a better measure of the trend of cases. Hospitalisation Dan deaths are clearly critical but tell you about cases last week or the week before, so are too outdated to really keep policy ahead of the game.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that
I can't say latteral flows are a waste of time though. I done one just as I was setting off for work (as per policy) and I noticed the faintest line. This stopped me going to work sitting shoulder to shoulder with 7 blokes and probably knocking a fire engine off the run. Pcr was possitve next day and the lateral flow now is a propa dark line ?
 
road2ruin said:
I’m not sure if this is what you meant however I agree with you about LFT’s. Stop testing healthy/symptomless people. If you feel unwell and it’s a Covid-esque symptom then isolate and get a PCR.
Click to expand...
I was a 100% fine and got a possitve. The latteral flow saved my employer and family from a right ball ache
 
hovis said:
Thanks for that
I can't say latteral flows are a waste of time though. I done one just as I was setting off for work (as per policy) and I noticed the faintest line. This stopped me going to work sitting shoulder to shoulder with 7 blokes and probably knocking a fire engine off the run. Pcr was possitve next day and the lateral flow now is a propa dark line ?
Click to expand...

It may be a zero sum game, though. I know doctors who have had patients who did an LFT instead of getting a PCR - Negative, go to work, whatever, get symptoms, PCR positive, but had a period of false reassurance during which they transmitted it to half the office.
 
Ethan said:
...
Personally, I think the LFTs are a waste of time. We should maintain a degree of social distancing, masks etc, PCR anybody with symptoms but most of the rest is either unnecessary or false reassurance. Likewise isolate for PCR-positive or while awaiting results.
..
Click to expand...
Good, quick and relatively cheap way to encourage potential 'victims' to start the 'test' process. Availability is far better than PCR test!
Trying to think of equivalence....Triage philosophy? Provisional ball?

Used in hospitals - for those arriving with other issues? I doubt it.
 
Ethan said:
It may be a zero sum game, though. I know doctors who have had patients who did an LFT instead of getting a PCR - Negative, go to work, whatever, get symptoms, PCR positive, but had a period of false reassurance during which they transmitted it to half the office.
Click to expand...
Yeh I didn't think off that in all fairness. Even today I did a nasal one and I'm negative. I've done 3 a day of the throat ones (for work experiment) and all possitve. Then you've got the people that don't do them correctly either
 
hovis said:
Yeh I didn't think off that in all fairness. Even today I did a nasal one and I'm negative. I've done 3 a day of the throat ones (for work experiment) and all possitve. Then you've got the people that don't do them correctly either
Click to expand...

I’ve seen threads on Twitter suggesting that the new LFT’s that are nose only don’t actually pick up the new variant or at least not nearly as accurately and when retested with the throat swab positives were being picked up far more regularly. This would make sense to me as I have friends who had numerous negative LFT’s before getting a positive PCR.
 
road2ruin said:
I’m not sure if this is what you meant however I agree with you about LFT’s. Stop testing healthy/symptomless people. If you feel unwell and it’s a Covid-esque symptom then isolate and get a PCR.
Click to expand...
As per my reply to Ethan.
I believe they do have value.
Early identification - as per Hovis.
Cheap way to encourage testing of 'potential' cases.
 
Foxholer said:
As per my reply to Ethan.
I believe they do have value.
Early identification - as per Hovis.
Cheap way to encourage testing of 'potential' cases.
Click to expand...
I agree but I suppose for one person that it works for you get one idot that gets a false negative and goes round tesco sneezing on tesco shopping trolly handles
 
Foxholer said:
Good, quick and relatively cheap way to encourage potential 'victims' to start the 'test' process. Availability is far better than PCR test!
Trying to think of equivalence....Triage philosophy? Provisional ball?

Used in hospitals - for those arriving with other issues? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

LFTs are good at identifying people who are true negative, but not as good at identifying people who are true positive. They are also often used badly, so someone who is true positive has a decent chance of testing negative and going about their business confident they are "clean". if you wanted complete capture of all true cases, the detection level would be set lower, so more people test LFT-positive, including some who then have a PCR negative and can be told to relax, but you don't miss any cases.
 
hovis said:
I agree but I suppose for one person that it works for you get one idot that gets a false negative and goes round tesco sneezing on tesco shopping trolly handles
Click to expand...
But that was/is likely to happen anyway, as they almost certainly wouldn't consider finding/having a PCR test in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top