Testing woes

[Enoch]

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?

If i had the answer to that my friend then I would hope one of the elected would as well!

It has been 6 months however, we should be in a position of beinfg able to test as many as possible. The fact we waited 2 months to begin with was incompetent, locking a country down but having no way of testing even a small amount, until we know how many have it in the country at one time, we can't ever manage it out of transmission.

 

[Crewella]

Aaaaaaaaargh ................ @zouzounaki 's gonna love this one.

https://www.theguardian.com/educati...id-testing-machine-only-in-the-private-sector

 

[Mr Ripple]

That's the difference between state and private schools.
Private schools pass out the begging bowl and it gets filled.
State schools cant even get funding for the begging bowl let alone it getting filled when needed.

 

[Badboybez]

But they've struggled to do 21M tests over 6 months ............. to do nearly 68M in a week!

This is the thing, as you say they are struggling to do XXXXX number of tests a day, mainly from what I have gleaned is that there is simply a worldwide shortage of reagents to perform the results.

But how many tests do you have to do in a day to be anywhere near controlling things.

Okay, so the current "incubation time" is supposedly 3 days, that would mean that with 68 million people in the UK you would have to do over 20 million test a day to make sure the virus was not being passed around !

Even if you worked on the "self isolation" time of two weeks, you would have to test 654 thousand people each, and every day.

 

[Badboybez]

What you're saying makes sense but you need to factor in stupidity. Local news up here has reported that a returning holidaymaker didn't do the 2 week isolation on return but went on a pub crawl instead. This has lead to more people being infected due to him being infected.
On testing some of the public seem to lack the common sense. Again, local report on the news last night talking about difficulty of getting a test. The first person they spoke to, who had been trying to get a test, said "I returned from holiday & isolated for the required 14 days but wanted a test despite not showing any symptoms."

Anyone returning from outside the UK should have to do a test at the airport, and again 3 days later, irrespective of where they have come from, and whether it was business, or pleasure.

 

[Badboybez]

That's the difference between state and private schools.
Private schools pass out the begging bowl and it gets filled.
State schools cant even get funding for the begging bowl let alone it getting filled when needed.

Not quite true though is it.

Private schools don't "pass out the begging bowl" they are funded by parents paying fees so that their children get a good education with all the materials needed to achieve it.

State schools on the other hand have to rely on what is doled out by the government of the time, and what is not squandered by the governors of each school.

I have experienced both, until I was 11 I went to a private school, once I was 11 I was sent to a state school, I went to a Grammar School, rather than a Comprehensive (the old system) so the outcome of the private schooling was good, as soon as I was at a state school my learning, and results went downhill, and after a few years I was deemed a trouble maker.
But things got better, and when I left I went to College, to an Apprenticeship, which led to a lucrative career over the next 40 years.

On the other hand, I could not at the time send my daughter to a private school, so she went though the modern "lower, middle, and upper" school system.
Both the middle school, and upper school, when you uncover the truth are rife with corruption, particularly the upper school she has just left.
Several teachers have been forced to leave "under a cloud" after serious irregularities were found in the accounts over several years.
But the teachers concerned were never reported to the police, even when Ofsted became involved......................

Over the years I have still had to fund many thousands of pounds towards her schooling from school trips to Austria for skiing, New York for geography, with flights, and accommodation, and food costing far more than when I was travelling for work, to Ipads, laptops, and Macbooks.
Hopefully it will cost me less when she starts at University next month, mind you that has already cost me £1500 for a new Macbook, and I have had to act as guarantor on her accommodation.........................

I suppose the point I am making is that you can pay extra for private schooling, or you can pay for "extras" if your child goes to a state school.
Looking back, it would probably have worked out the same.

Just as it is with medical treatment in the UK, pensions, job searches, etc, etc.

 

[Jon The Vape]

This is who we need

 

[Mr Ripple]

This is who we need
View attachment 228957

But this is what we've got