Off Topic Coronavirus

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
qprbeth said:
The tests per day yesterday indicated that 1 in every 3 tests was a retest.
This for one of three reasons.

1. These are genuine resamples, when a person was tested once, because they were ill....and then a second to see if they had recovered
2. Because the test did not work the first time (result unclear)
3. Test repeats. (I ran a diagnostic series of tests in which the result was very important for the patient's health, we would only send a result after a retest, to make sure).

For any of the above reasons, it means that we are being misled about the tests and to test 100,000 people a day, we need to so 133,000 tests...to do 200,000 people 266,000 tests
Click to expand...
Beth, is there a point to doing random testing in the community to get a sense of prevalence of the virus? I note that in the Recovery document the Government estimates that on 9 May there were 136,000 infected people in the country, whereas the Kings app that we use is estimating over 230,000. There is no way to know which is more accurate (though I tend to think the Kings one might be). On something so basic it can’t be good that we are still in the dark on this.The Italians tested an entire village in Veneto sometime in March, which was when we started talking about symptomless carriers, because they found loads of them.
 
qprbeth said:
The tests per day yesterday indicated that 1 in every 3 tests was a retest.
This for one of three reasons.

1. These are genuine resamples, when a person was tested once, because they were ill....and then a second to see if they had recovered
2. Because the test did not work the first time (result unclear)
3. Test repeats. (I ran a diagnostic series of tests in which the result was very important for the patient's health, we would only send a result after a retest, to make sure).

For any of the above reasons, it means that we are being misled about the tests and to test 100,000 people a day, we need to so 133,000 tests...to do 200,000 people 266,000 tests
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying Beth.
I think the claim is 100k tests not people tested though. I realise they haven't done the 100k tests very often.
 
West WindsR said:
Curious to know what in the science has changed recently to make face coverings advisable months after foreign science.
Click to expand...

My theory (for what is worth) is that the benefit overall isn't that clear cut. Staines has given reasons why they may even be counter productive. It seems in recent weeks they have agreed they may help stop the spread but will not protect the individual wearing them. However, i think this was quite convenient because I don't believe there were sufficient masks around. If the public had gone all "toilet roll" then that may have led to a shortage for those that they knew actually did need them it healthcare and key workers. There may not be such a shortage now, hence the apparent change of tack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyD and Staines R's
CroydonCaptainJack said:
My theory (for what is worth) is that the benefit overall isn't that clear cut. Staines has given reasons why they may even be counter productive. It seems in recent weeks they have agreed they may help stop the spread but will not protect the individual wearing them. However, i think this was quite convenient because I don't believe there were sufficient masks around. If the public had gone all "toilet roll" then that may have led to a shortage for those that they knew actually did need them it healthcare and key workers. There may not be such a shortage now, hence the apparent change of tack.
Click to expand...
They are explicitly asking people not to use proper face masks, but to make their own ‘cloth face coverings’. I don’t think there is any proven benefit, and (according to a couple of doctors on the news just now) some concerns that they won’t work even as a way to prevent spread if people don’t wear them properly (ie as Stainsey says, not fiddling etc), think they don’t have to keep 2m distant or wash their hands frequently, and don’t realise that cloth masks themselves are surfaces which help transmission so should be thrown away - just like most medical/construction masks - after one use.

Presumably if there was any evidence to say these things worked they would be compulsory on public transport or in shops etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Staines R's and SW Ranger
CroydonCaptainJack said:
My theory (for what is worth) is that the benefit overall isn't that clear cut. Staines has given reasons why they may even be counter productive. It seems in recent weeks they have agreed they may help stop the spread but will not protect the individual wearing them. However, i think this was quite convenient because I don't believe there were sufficient masks around. If the public had gone all "toilet roll" then that may have led to a shortage for those that they knew actually did need them it healthcare and key workers. There may not be such a shortage now, hence the apparent change of tack.
Click to expand...

Very good point and makes sense. The thing that gets to me is that when I ask people why they wear a mask (I really do this a lot as I’m genuinely interested in their reasoning), the vast majority say it’s to protect themselves from the virus.....being the pedantic **** that I am, I take great enjoyment In telling them that they are offering themselves no real protection, that studies say there is a possibility that it can be contracted through their eyes ( which I tend to believe as this makes sense AND we are obligated to wear compulsory eye protection at work) and that I am very grateful that they are actually protecting others from the virus, as long as they wear it correctly.

I realise I might get a whack at sometime :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ninj, Steelmonkey, SW Ranger and 2 others
No visitors please....

Coronavirus: Non-essential trips to Scotland 'could break law'
You must log in or register to see images

Nicola Sturgeon urged people in England not to travel to Scottish beauty spots

People who travel to Scotland for anything other than essential purposes are "potentially in breach of the law", Nicola Sturgeon has said.

The Scottish first minster said there was no need for "confusion", even as different lockdown rules come into effect in different parts of the UK.

Boris Johnson has urged more people to return to work as part of a plan to gradually ease restrictions in England.

But Ms Sturgeon said that in Scotland, "lockdown remains in place for now".

She said: "If you are in Scotland, then the law in Scotland applies - and the law says that just now you can only be out of your own home for essential reasons."

And she stressed that "it is not OK to drive into Scotland to beauty spots to visit places and for leisure".

The prime minister is to set out further details about his "roadmap" towards lifting the virus lockdown later on Monday, having unveiled the "first careful steps" in a television address on Sunday evening.

He said people in England who cannot work from home should start to return to the workplace, while rules around outdoor exercise and recreation are to be eased.

Ms Sturgeon said the law and guidance in Scotland had not changed, and said: "I would hope all employers would respect that."
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwiqpr
sb_73 said:
They are explicitly asking people not to use proper face masks, but to make their own ‘cloth face coverings’. I don’t think there is any proven benefit, and (according to a couple of doctors on the news just now) some concerns that they won’t work even as a way to prevent spread if people don’t wear them properly (ie as Stainsey says, not fiddling etc), think they don’t have to keep 2m distant or wash their hands frequently, and don’t realise that cloth masks themselves are surfaces which help transmission so should be thrown away - just like most medical/construction masks - after one use.

Presumably if there was any evidence to say these things worked they would be compulsory on public transport or in shops etc.
Click to expand...

I will 'aim' to wear one.

I might fail, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sb_73
bobmid said:
Just trying to stay up to date mate. I'm sure we were promised 100,000 tests daily by the end of April. I may be mistaken.
Click to expand...
Oh yea of little faith, they said 100,000 tests by end of April, don’t panic BOB it’s only May, ff’s the end of April is still 11 months away, plenty of time :1980_boogie_down::1980_boogie_down::1980_boogie_down::1980_boogie_down:
Apart from that is all well in the Bobmid house , Mrs Bob ok ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mapleranger, Steelmonkey, kiwiqpr and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back