#COVID19

[in_the_top_one]

Don't you have to report anything afterwards?

 

[in_the_top_one]

Vaccine status clearly isn't an adequate substitute for a clear test. So it isn't an informative test event. There will have been a lot of covid there.

At least you were kettled outdoors. Ventilation is crucial.

 

[Basha73]

Vaccine status clearly isn't an adequate substitute for a clear test. So it isn't an informative test event. There will have been a lot of covid there.

At least you were kettled outdoors. Ventilation is crucial.

And there are still far too many false negative tests so even a clear test is far from a guarantee.

According to my test I don’t have COVID and yet I have all the symptoms and the doctor is adamant that I have it.

 

[in_the_top_one]

And there are still far too many false negative tests so even a clear test is far from a guarantee.

According to my test I don’t have COVID and yet I have all the symptoms and the doctor is adamant that I have it.

Lateral flow test, presumably?
When do you get pcr?

 

[in_the_top_one]

And there are still far too many false negative tests so even a clear test is far from a guarantee.

According to my test I don’t have COVID and yet I have all the symptoms and the doctor is adamant that I have it.

Actually, on reflection, I'm guessing you were referring to your pcr test.

Pcr is much better at correctly identifying positives than correctly identifying negatives. When it says negative, you can only be 90 ish percent sure it is correct, so you might be one of the others. It is usually a badly administered swab. A second pcr test would be revealing.

You could also lateral flow test yourself as many times as you want to be confident.

 

[weejockmcplop]

Actually, on reflection, I'm guessing you were referring to your pcr test.

Pcr is much better at correctly identifying positives than correctly identifying negatives. When it says negative, you can only be 90 ish percent sure it is correct, so you might be one of the others. It is usually a badly administered swab. A second pcr test would be revealing.

You could also lateral flow test yourself as many times as you want to be confident.

PCR is also heavily dependent on the staff running it.
I would be surprised if results are reported with 90% confidence.
From what I've heard there are huge practical issues with the testing centres, staffing etc.

 

[Ingy]

If you care to go back a pip and thoroughly read young Radz posts, you might just get it.

Otherwise I will elucidate.

That reminds me chap..how were the sack of mushrooms Bert dropped off chap?

 

[da fuq]

The Johnson variant

 

[in_the_top_one]

PCR is also heavily dependent on the staff running it.
I would be surprised if results are reported with 90% confidence.
From what I've heard there are huge practical issues with the testing centres, staffing etc.

There were certainly some problems but I don't know how isolated they were. Or how long ago. You would hope things have improved, at least since that panorama.

 

[weejockmcplop]

There were certainly some problems but I don't know how isolated they were. Or how long ago. You would hope things have improved, at least since that panorama.

There are some inherent issues with PCR testing for viruses/illnesses. It tends to vary in accuracy depending on the stage of the illness. Also, being used as it is for mass testing, PCR as a method is just... stressful on the staff. Often samples need to be retested as a matter of course when using PCR. You get alot of false positives and undetermined results due to the sensitivity of the machines running the samples, and when a certain number of samples needs to be processed every day, it encourages staff to just accept results instead of rerunning samples. In january when I was sick I had to take 4 tests in a row at one point because the results kept coming back undetermined.
We used to have such huge problems with PCR in our lab on an almost daily basis. The entire time I was working there they were trying to figure out a way of running the lab without having to use PCR at all, because its a nightmare.
When i saw that Panorama it didn't look like the issues involved were particularly fixable - despite being Panorama and very much geared towards blaming people. If you want to be processing huge numbers of samples every day, you're going to sacrifice alot of accuracy to be able to do that.
These tests are always much better in theory than they are in practice, as the theory assumes the elimination of human factors, and that the staff will follow the method to the letter even when they don't have time to do so. The time pressure of needing a certain number of tests done every day leads to staff cutting corners to get that done, especially when the staff are new, poorly trained or inexperienced with PCR.

 

[Basha73]

Lateral flow test, presumably?
When do you get pcr?

I have another appointment with the doctor tomorrow so will see what she says. My test was a PCR test so not sure where to go from there as the doctor believed it would show up negative because I had the symptoms for a few weeks before taking the test.

I suffer from Asthma and Rhinitis and also get hay fever so the tight chest didn’t register as anything too unusual and nor did the loss of my sense of smell as that happens quite frequently.

The chest problems got worse though and I started feeling even more tired than normal which is when I contacted the doctor and also ordered a test kit.

This week I have felt too unwell to do anything more about it but will see what happens tomorrow as I don’t seem to be shaking it…

 

[paz1967]

There are some inherent issues with PCR testing for viruses/illnesses. It tends to vary in accuracy depending on the stage of the illness. Also, being used as it is for mass testing, PCR as a method is just... stressful on the staff. Often samples need to be retested as a matter of course when using PCR. You get alot of false positives and undetermined results due to the sensitivity of the machines running the samples, and when a certain number of samples needs to be processed every day, it encourages staff to just accept results instead of rerunning samples. In january when I was sick I had to take 4 tests in a row at one point because the results kept coming back undetermined.
We used to have such huge problems with PCR in our lab on an almost daily basis. The entire time I was working there they were trying to figure out a way of running the lab without having to use PCR at all, because its a nightmare.
When i saw that Panorama it didn't look like the issues involved were particularly fixable - despite being Panorama and very much geared towards blaming people. If you want to be processing huge numbers of samples every day, you're going to sacrifice alot of accuracy to be able to do that.
These tests are always much better in theory than they are in practice, as the theory assumes the elimination of human factors, and that the staff will follow the method to the letter even when they don't have time to do so. The time pressure of needing a certain number of tests done every day leads to staff cutting corners to get that done, especially when the staff are new, poorly trained or inexperienced with PCR.

if anything like our labs, different 'machines' will give different numbers. We use chromatography and it could be a reading of 0.2 in house and 0.3 in anotherr lab with the same equipment and this is serious equipment

 

[weejockmcplop]

if anything like our labs, different 'machines' will give different numbers. We use chromatography and it could be a reading of 0.2 in house and 0.3 in anotherr lab with the same equipment and this is serious equipment

Yeah that is also common.
There is a bit of an issue when it comes to how a method looks on paper to a highly educated, smart and high ranking scientist and how it works out in real life when you have McDonald's wages staff responsible for administering the test. Add into that machines designed by different companies to different standards, especially PCR machines that break every goddamn 5 seconds and businesses that expect their min wage staff to run everything without a hitch and only allow them time to run the test without issues, and you can see where the problems creep in.

 

[in_the_top_one]

You highlight several important and real issues and paint a very grim picture but, despite the problems, I don't think it is quite that bad.
For example, calibration of machines isn't too much of a big deal if you are only testing for presence or absence. Also, the lighthouse labs, with your McDonald's-style workforce, are only part of the picture.
In any case, as you know, pcr is the best we have and, on the whole, pretty good.

 

[weejockmcplop]

You highlight several important and real issues and paint a very grim picture but, despite the problems, I don't think it is quite that bad.
For example, calibration of machines isn't too much of a big deal if you are only testing for presence or absence. Also, the lighthouse labs, with your McDonald's-style workforce, are only part of the picture.
In any case, as you know, pcr is the best we have and, on the whole, pretty good.

Yeah, I'm being a bit doom and gloom about it but the fact is that these problems are not all specific to PCR, and mostly occur throughout the biochem/chem testing industry.
The reason I think they are worth highlighting is because Covid set us some specific challenges with getting large labs on board with testing very quickly, and imo we're still seeing issues that were never seriously addressed.
A sibling of mine was working to help set up a lab recently for chemistry testing. 2 years later and they are still working through the preliminary issues and don't have anything close to a working lab yet.
Covid labs have often been set up within weeks/months and alot of us are looking at that and thinking.... how? The accreditation process is extremely thorough in normal circumstances and I'm curious as to whether standards were relaxed for this project.
PCR is indeed the best test we have though, and we have to work with what we have, so if you are going to trust a test result, sure get the PCR test and trust the result, but I don't think people should blindly trust them, and I really struggle if policy is going to rely on a test with so many issues.

I'm also highlighting it so that people can have some appreciation for what the industry has managed to do. Its practically a miracle that they are processing so many of these tests so quickly and I assume so cheaply. Its one of those situations where people have managed to achieve something that looks close to impossible for the good of everyone, but its worth being aware that there's a reason it looks close to impossible to set up these labs so quickly, and that is that sacrifices are made elsewhere to get it done.

 

[Old Red Fart]

One thing that Covid has revealed is that speed is of the essence. From what I've read about the UK it seems as though you have worked at great speed to get the majority of vaccinations done and are now taking the next step of getting back to what may pass for normal. I may have that wrong but that's the impression I get.
On the other hand we in Oz have made a pig's ear of vaccinating folk and so far figures seem to fluctuate between 7% and 14% of people who have been jabbed. At the moment we are in a serious position of lock down and it's so tight that many shops and malls are shut and one heavily populated section of Sydney is very nearly closed off. This will last at least until the end of August and that's being optimistic.
In the meantime over 30,000 Australians are stuck overseas with no chance of getting home yet, this is due to our Govt decree, and it's highly unpopular.

It will be interesting to see the results of both countries.

 

[Bremen Tree]

I'm sure you'd be offended if I called you selfish.

Nah. He'll be proud of it.

 

[jbacsta]

Yeah, I'm being a bit doom and gloom about it but the fact is that these problems are not all specific to PCR, and mostly occur throughout the biochem/chem testing industry.
The reason I think they are worth highlighting is because Covid set us some specific challenges with getting large labs on board with testing very quickly, and imo we're still seeing issues that were never seriously addressed.
A sibling of mine was working to help set up a lab recently for chemistry testing. 2 years later and they are still working through the preliminary issues and don't have anything close to a working lab yet.
Covid labs have often been set up within weeks/months and alot of us are looking at that and thinking.... how? The accreditation process is extremely thorough in normal circumstances and I'm curious as to whether standards were relaxed for this project.
PCR is indeed the best test we have though, and we have to work with what we have, so if you are going to trust a test result, sure get the PCR test and trust the result, but I don't think people should blindly trust them, and I really struggle if policy is going to rely on a test with so many issues.

I'm also highlighting it so that people can have some appreciation for what the industry has managed to do. Its practically a miracle that they are processing so many of these tests so quickly and I assume so cheaply. Its one of those situations where people have managed to achieve something that looks close to impossible for the good of everyone, but its worth being aware that there's a reason it looks close to impossible to set up these labs so quickly, and that is that sacrifices are made elsewhere to get it done.

It would not surprise me if the whole testing system was at some time in the future found to be a complete load of bollocks thrown together as a PR exercise. I just hope and pray that the same wont apply to the vaccines.

 

[jbacsta]

And that herd immunity was the strategy from day one, get a vaccine into as many arms as possible in a set time frame and then let it rip( starting tomorrow)

 

[Will.NFFC]

the selfish & stupid can swan around not wearing masks or bothering with social distancing.

So just to be clear, you think if young 19/20 year olds who haven’t been able to have a night out or enjoy the best years of their life socially for 16 months, which you got to when you were younger, go for a legal night out next week at a club, then they are ‘selfish and stupid’?