IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Manximus Aururaneus]

1 minute ago, P.K. said:

Call me old-fashioned but if you're the boss there's nobody to sack you.

Even Boris can't hide behind 3 Billion face masks...... Oh err, hang on ...........

[Kopek]

You're old fashioned! There's a vote of no confidence from your majority govt.party members, a rising of the people, the Queen could sack him!!!

OK. there's no one to sack Boris!

[Andy Onchan]

12 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Stockpiling works.

And if it has a shelf life, like PPE, it needs to be managed. Which, lets face it, it not exactly an onerous task...

Of course PPE manufacturers (like 3M) would insist on a shelf life well before their product actually starts to degrade. It means regular business for them. As soon as the expiry date is printed on the product that has just been packed then they'll start planning for when the next repeat order comes in. 

[wrighty]

5 minutes ago, WTF said:

so test everyone and see where we really stand. some people being tested doesn't cover it.   if you don't ask the question you can't get an answer you didn't want.

Simultaneously? How? What if someone is tested, and gets symptoms a day or two later.  Test them again?

You have to have a testing policy of some sort, otherwise it becomes a free for all.  Even though our current capacity is more than adequate for our needs right now, there is no way you could test everyone in a reasonable period of time.  Theoretically  it'd be great if you could tell everyone to freeze, test them, get a result in seconds and then isolate your positives.  Then assuming your test was 100% sensitive you'd have eliminated Covid in 14 days time.  If only that were possible.

Antibody tests, if and when they arrive, should be able to give us an idea of who's had it at some point, and it may be possible over time to check the whole population.  But currently we're testing for active infection.

[WTF]

19 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Simultaneously? How? What if someone is tested, and gets symptoms a day or two later.  Test them again?

You have to have a testing policy of some sort, otherwise it becomes a free for all.  Even though our current capacity is more than adequate for our needs right now, there is no way you could test everyone in a reasonable period of time.  Theoretically  it'd be great if you could tell everyone to freeze, test them, get a result in seconds and then isolate your positives.  Then assuming your test was 100% sensitive you'd have eliminated Covid in 14 days time.  If only that were possible.

Antibody tests, if and when they arrive, should be able to give us an idea of who's had it at some point, and it may be possible over time to check the whole population.  But currently we're testing for active infection.

obviously not unfortunately,  but if someone who works at the hospital has cause to believe they should be tested, test them, no point in finding out days or weeks later you should have done so and have ended up taking a backwards step.

[the stinking enigma]

The girl that returned from Cheltenham then tested positive had none of the symptoms which would get somebody a test. Presumably she was tested because of her return from the festival.  

Must admit, when I heard we were upping our test capacity I thought it would be for cases like this, to stop them days earlier than waiting for them to infect others, then the incubation period, then to get tested. I thought it was to take a more pro-active approach.

[Uhtred]

Someone posted on Facebook (yeah, I know) that they worked at Noble's and even though their duties meant that they'd been in close proximity with a colleague who had tested positive, they themselves weren't tested as they had no symptoms. If true - big if perhaps - that seems extraordinary.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

23 minutes ago, WTF said:

obviously not unfortunately,  but if someone who works at the hospital has cause to believe they should be tested, test them, no point in finding out days or weeks later you should have done so and have ended up taking a backwards step.

What, you mean pander to a persons paranoia when they are showing no signs of illness ?

They already target test.  That is the correct approach.

If there is spare capacity then perhaps selective testing of none symptom showing people could be utilised.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

4 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Someone posted on Facebook (yeah, I know) that they worked at Noble's and even though their duties meant that they'd been in close proximity with a colleague who had tested positive, they themselves weren't tested as they had no symptoms. If true - big if perhaps - that seems extraordinary.

Not really.  If someone is in full PPE then the chances of cross infection to a colleague would be minimal.   They are all in PPE so why would you test?

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by The Dog's Dangly Bits

[Andy Onchan]

1 hour ago, wrighty said:

Simultaneously? How? What if someone is tested, and gets symptoms a day or two later.  Test them again?

You have to have a testing policy of some sort, otherwise it becomes a free for all.  Even though our current capacity is more than adequate for our needs right now, there is no way you could test everyone in a reasonable period of time.  Theoretically  it'd be great if you could tell everyone to freeze, test them, get a result in seconds and then isolate your positives.  Then assuming your test was 100% sensitive you'd have eliminated Covid in 14 days time.  If only that were possible.

Antibody tests, if and when they arrive, should be able to give us an idea of who's had it at some point, and it may be possible over time to check the whole population.  But currently we're testing for active infection.

But that's the same for other medical tests isn't it, diabetes, cholesterol etc? Any record of health/fitness is only as good as your last test but it's still done regularly for those who might be at risk. So until antibody tests and vaccines are available what other method is there to monitor and, more pertinently, control the virus? 

[WTF]

39 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Someone posted on Facebook (yeah, I know) that they worked at Noble's and even though their duties meant that they'd been in close proximity with a colleague who had tested positive, they themselves weren't tested as they had no symptoms. If true - big if perhaps - that seems extraordinary.

which was what i was referencing to earlier on.

[P.K.]

2 hours ago, Andy Onchan said:

Of course PPE manufacturers (like 3M) would insist on a shelf life well before their product actually starts to degrade. It means regular business for them. As soon as the expiry date is printed on the product that has just been packed then they'll start planning for when the next repeat order comes in. 

That does not seem to have happened for the UK PPE stockpile. Otherwise they would not have had a lot of time expired kit.

Expect lots of " Now is not the time...." etc etc.

But someone has f~cked up.

[Kopek]

Todays announcement from Ashford is a reference to that Facebook whistleblow. He says testing is only for those showing symptoms!

Last week, it was obvious that the DHSC had narrowed the poster down to one of two people. Hope there wont be any repercussions or warning to others not to go public.

[Cambon]

3 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

It would be interesting to see a split of tests being undertaken now.  I wonder how many of the general public (who are not working at say the Hospital) are getting tested.  Looks to be very very low.

Basically, "Awaiting testing" are those in the general public whom have called 111 and have been given a date and time to attend the Grandstand. "Awaiting results" is everyone whom has been tested (hospital patients, staff, recovered and Grandstand) and are still waiting. 

[Max Power]

1 hour ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

What, you mean pander to a persons paranoia when they are showing no signs of illness ?

They already target test.  That is the correct approach.

If there is spare capacity then perhaps selective testing of none symptom showing people could be utilised.

So they keep on working, possibly infecting others?