Were you replying to me, what were you saying?
On this…are different makes of LFT of different sensitivity? When I was testing couple of weeks back I had a strong +ve one day with one brand and the next day with a different brand i was only very faintly +ve.
Hmmm…so could possibly have tested -ve sooner than I did had I used one brand rather than another…that feels a bit unsatisfactory either way...ah well…maybe as we don’t have to test unless symptomatic I won’t bother fretting about it.
The World's your Oyster.
No I didn't.
Not sure what the differences are, my memory is that they were around 70% sensitive when compared with PCR but around 99.9% specific on Porton Down testing whether other brands have tested differently don't know but I imagine procurement would ensure that they are all reasonable. They are not really meant to be quantative so the result is positive or not, a slightly fainter line is still positive.
indeed how I interpret even a faint test show. Plus my understanding has always been that LFTs only really provide an indication of the prevalence of the virus in any tested population given a statistically significant sample size. A test taking by an individual gives an indication but certainly nothing like 100% certainty one way or the other - so in my understanding it has always been the case that rather too much faith has been placed on an LFT to provide a definitive individual infection status.
Absolutely, if you have not had covid the chances of false positives if tests are done properly are probably very low indeed The positive rate on PCR the ONS survey fell to 0.02% after the first wave and as this must be the sum of the false positives and true positives and there was certainly some covid, false positives are probably exceptionally low. However judging whether or not you are likely to be infectious from a single swab with a non quantative test at a single point of time in the infection is always going to involve a degree of guesswork.
There are rules and there is what is sensible, you are clearly likely to be a potential source of infection to others, personally I would take lateral flow tests and would wear a mask initially if I could not take them.
I get what you are saying. Reading the current guidelines, I could go out and about quite happily the day after a positive test which is just nuts.
Indeed, that seems nuts to me too - but perhaps not to some!
I understand but don't see the point. Is that a little easier or shall I write in crayon in nice big letters.
