Covid Testing Shambles Again

[eve1974]

Hancock forced to prioritise who gets Covid-19 tests in face of increased demand

....

last week they were encouraging all and sundry to get tested. Hence running low on tests again

Where’s the balance guys?

[Mamyalynne]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-uk-cases-lockdown-rule-6-social-gatherings/

[grumpy01]

This shower are in over their heads.Surely the Conservative Party have better than these second eaters available.

[grumpy01]

Sorry,Second raters.

[iluvmargie]

If it's one of those where you get a 'stick' pushed all the way up your nose or right to the very back of your throat - they can keep it, thanks!!

[Bobbisox1]

That's the one I did ILM, not a nice experience

[woofgang]

Actually last week they weren't. At the briefing, Boris clearly said "If you haven't got symptoms, don't get a test unless you have been told to"

[eve1974]

Woofgang it was all those in close contact with symptomatic people too wasn’t it?

In March I had what I think (???) might have been covid. I rang 111 etc but cldnt get a test (fair enough Cos they were saving them for key workers sensibly) I wish i hadve been able to get one Cos I’d really like to know if it was covid .... or not

[woofgang]

eve I don't think so. So far as I recall it was get a test of you have got symptoms or if you are told to do so. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/testing-and-tracing/get-a-test-to-check-if-you-have-coronavirus/

[fiction-factory]

It is not working as well as it should given that tests are reported to be difficult to book locally in many areas, including areas of concern (Bradford, Leicester, Bolton , Oldham.
Is there a problem with getting postal tests though?

But if we are doing between 2-3 million tests a month now that seems on the face of it to be far, far higher than the number of people with Covid in the country, and more than the numbers who have symptoms, so maybe there needs to be a better system for identifying who really needs a test. For example should we give low priority to those who have had covid previously since we know it's so unlikely they will have it again

Having said that it's better to be safe than sorry so capacity and speed of service needs to be improved significantly.

[woofgang]

Its not the tests that are the issue but the lab processing capacity. The system is set up so that tests can't be booked or sent out unless the labs have got capacity which kind of makes sense. And of course lab capacity is not as easy to increase quickly.

[iluvmargie]

17:34, I remember that Bobbi.

[New Judge]

//...so maybe there needs to be a better system for identifying who really needs a test.//

Indeed. Two days ago my sister received a letter inviting her to take part in a Coronavirus exercise. She didn't ask for a test, has no other illnesses and has no symptoms. The exercise will last a year (yes, twelve months). For the first three months she will be tested weekly, a tester will come to her home to take the samples. After three months she will be tested monthly "and possibly more frequently". If she develops any symptoms she must inform the people running the exercise and she will no longer be tested. At the end of the year she will be paid £425.

So, people who have symptoms are having trouble getting tested but my sister will be tested weekly without having to leave her front door (unless she develops symptoms, that is). Just who is running this circus?

[diddlydo]

My son had Covid back in March but wasn't tested. It was confirmed that he'd had it by a later antibody test (arranged and paid for by his company). In late July he started having symptoms again i.e. breathlessness (even though he's very fit), rang the relevant number and was told to get a test. He did - it was negative. Talk about mixed messages that change by the day. No wonder the whole thing is a shambles.

[10ClarionSt]

Can people not do the maths? The general thing in this country is that if people get a headache, a sore throat, stomach ache, backpain etc, they go to the doctors because they think they're ill. Now that can't happen because the doc will only hold a telephone appointment. So where do they go? They flock to the Covid testing centre because they think they're ill with the virus. The poor things have got to go and tell someone that they've got a pain. That's what people do in this country. Hence, you cannot get a test because lots of hypchondriacs have a pain somewhere. Simples.

[fiction-factory]

Well I think those tests you refer to ARE important, NJ. It's the only way PHE or whoever can get a clear picture of infection rates over time. To just get data from those who book a test for whatever reason doesn't give a true picture of infection rates and is why some claim the increase in infections is simply reflecting the fact that we do more tests now

[fiction-factory]

So what you say is a 'circus' is actually good practice, NJ.

[fiction-factory]

Maybe there should be some sort of pre-test- a bit like the triage at A&E. Maybe a temperature check and questions. Only those who pass the criteria would be given the full test.

[fiction-factory]

Is part of the OP's question flawed though.
Is it true that "last week they were encouraging all and sundry to get tested"? Have you got a link to support that, eve?

[fiction-factory]

diddlydo-are you saying your son was wrong to attend and take up a place someone else could have used?

[New Judge]

//Well I think those tests you refer to ARE important, NJ.//

I would agree if those who needed a test were able to get one. But they can't. A GP was on the news tonight. He has been unable to work for four weeks because he has symptoms but could not get a test. Getting a "clear picture of infections over time" is a "nice to have". We're not in a position to have luxuries. Testing people who display symptoms - especially key workers - is a must and at present they are failing spectacularly to do that. What I certainly don't agree with is shelling out £425 of taxpayers' hard-earned.