Testing woes

[vapesmarter]

I’m back in tomorrow night

go in get tested no problem ...open wide

really

yes we are tested all the time

but I read all the media and the testing situation in complete shock what a fuck up

In the world of fuck ups this is most likely the best one so far

the covid test lottery Jesus

 

[TheLiqidator]

If you have symptoms you must get a test.

Nobody can get a test because when we told people to get a test if they have symptoms to get a test, they seem to have listened.

It's not our fault, we told people to get a test but didnt think they would listen, as they don't listen any other time.

But, you must get a test. Even if we don't have a test for you, you must get a test. But not if you don't need a test.

 

[zouzounaki]

 

[Enoch]

Thats another funny thing.

too many people are getting uncesserary tests. Yet if they test postive it isnt unnecessery....

So the only positive tests are the ones that test positive, which defeats the purpose of having a test. Or for testing the population for that matter becasue if you only want to find positive tests, then you are manipulating the numbers for your own gain.

After all, if they found 2 thousand positive tests one day and reported 100000 negative tests at the same time, kinda doesn't make you think we have to lock down the country again......

 

[zouzounaki]

Thats another funny thing.

too many people are getting uncesserary tests. Yet if they test postive it isnt unnecessery....

So the only positive tests are the ones that test positive, which defeats the purpose of having a test. Or for testing the population for that matter becasue if you only want to find positive tests, then you are manipulating the numbers for your own gain.

After all, if they found 2 thousand positive tests one day and reported 100000 negative tests at the same time, kinda doesn't make you think we have to lock down the country again......

i’m not sure i follow your logic.

 

[Enoch]

i’m not sure i follow your logic.

Matt Hancock blamed uncessesery tests on the strain for testing.

Yet if people test positive then they arent unesessery, and there is no way of knowning that you aren't positive until you take the test, making every test necessery. Given it is a pandemic, we should be testing as many people as possible to find the negative tests so you understand how many people actually do have it rather than just going off the basis of positive only.

So if the positive tests are all you are wanting then you are actively managing in a crisis scenario all the time. Because you only want to see the negative situation. Whereas is you manage using the negative tests each day, then you get a good idea of how widespread it actually is, 2000 in the country isnt that many of a population of 64 million, even over a week thats only 14000, not much , especially when people aren't going into hospital with said cases.

A competient running of this would isolate cases in the coutnry rather than blanket lock down entire regions for what could be a small area being at fault. If you got 100 positive tests in a factory for example, is the problem the city or the one location?

 

[zouzounaki]

Matt Hancock blamed uncessesery tests on the strain for testing.

Yet if people test positive then they arent unesessery, and there is no way of knowning that you aren't positive until you take the test, making every test necessery. Given it is a pandemic, we should be testing as many people as possible to find the negative tests so you understand how many people actually do have it rather than just going off the basis of positive only.

So if the positive tests are all you are wanting then you are actively managing in a crisis scenario all the time. Because you only want to see the negative situation. Whereas is you manage using the negative tests each day, then you get a good idea of how widespread it actually is, 2000 in the country isnt that many of a population of 64 million, even over a week thats only 14000, not much , especially when people aren't going into hospital with said cases.

A competient running of this would isolate cases in the coutnry rather than blanket lock down entire regions for what could be a small area being at fault. If you got 100 positive tests in a factory for example, is the problem the city or the one location?

but hasn’t the working assumption been that people without symptoms aren’t positive (even though it’s known this isn’t the case)?

testing everyone would clearly give us a better picture of the overall situation, but it would also be likely that the situation is worse than is currently thought, as asymptomatic individuals would be identified. we also need to consider that at present they are not even able to fulfil demand for testing among people with only an opt-in, ie request the test, system.

there is also the problem of the government actively planning to test everyone as a means of giving away large amounts of public money to friends of theirs.

how often would you propose that everyone is tested?

 

[vapesmarter]

I see the comments over a negative and positive thing

the test has a major flaw which is the human factor

originally we were told the test was 70% accurate now the tests are supposed to be better but the test is only as good as the person giving you the test the same as the nurse who is shite at taking blood or the on call doctor missing a key bit of info

I know speaking to an itu nurse they were rushing a patient to be incubated he had 5 tests all negative he had covid he needed oxygen and fast as they were rushing him in a nurse ran up and said “ he’s positive the test is in” that was the 6th test so how accurate in those days have the tests got better it’s something I’m not 100% on

 

[TheLiqidator]

I see the comments over a negative and positive thing

the test has a major flaw which is the human factor

originally we were told the test was 70% accurate now the tests are supposed to be better but the test is only as good as the person giving you the test the same as the nurse who is shite at taking blood or the on call doctor missing a key bit of info

I know speaking to an itu nurse they were rushing a patient to be incubated he had 5 tests all negative he had covid he needed oxygen and fast as they were rushing him in a nurse ran up and said “ he’s positive the test is in” that was the 6th test so how accurate in those days have the tests got better it’s something I’m not 100% on

The home kits are pretty much useless in that case then.

The percentage of positive results was sitting at an average of roughly 1% a few weeks ago. It was 5.7% last I seen so the amount of positive results is definitely rising but that's fine, well all stay in for a bit again and it'll go away.

 

[Simon G]

there is also the problem of the government actively planning to test everyone as a means of giving away large amounts of public money to friends of theirs.

how often would you propose that everyone is tested?

All this random testing people over and over again is pointless. If they tested everyone once, if you are positive you isolate for a couple of weeks, if you aren't then you carry on as normal. Job done isn't it? They could have done this while we were locked down for fucking months. None of it makes any sense to me.