Re: Coronavirus
 

My last job said that if you have to self isolate you would only get SSP, otherwise it would be full pay.


This was long before vaccines.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's why people wanted the Government to increase SSP to ensure people who were infected didn't go in back before vaccines were so widely administered.

Re: Coronavirus
 

If you had no symptoms, that would be fine, however, thats not what you said.

If you show symptoms you should isolate and get a test.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/corona...nd-what-to-do/
Since thats the NHS site, Im not clear if thats an actual legal requirement.

Re: Coronavirus
 

you might argue you thought it was just a cold apparently they have similar symptoms.

don't forget the unvaccinated are selfish and evil.........

Re: Coronavirus
 

How so? Fewer tests, fewer positive outcomes.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pointless. I fail to see the reason for needing to isolate.

---------- Post added at 19:19 ---------- Previous post was at 19:15 ----------

Well, it is guaranteed that the fewer tests, the fewer recorded infections.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We should use the percentage of tests that are positive anyway, that's in part why we get hysterical headlines about having the highest cases in Europe that ignore how many tests we do.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What about the people that couldn't get tested or just didn't bother? They are missing from the figures too.
My son needed a pcr test a couple of weeks ago none available either to book or by post so he'll be missing from the figures.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I find it incredible that so many people are not seeing the link between the number of tests and the number of recorded infections.

It’s no wonder the numbers have been so high latterly with the massive increase in PCR testing. With the rules changing which allow for lateral flow tests instead, just watch the numbers plummet.

The focus on these numbers is causing far more alarm than is justified. Most people are getting this with minimal, if any symptoms. Time to get this in perspective. We haven’t been jabbed thrice for no reason.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Time will tell if that's true.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The number of LFT results has already increased faster than PCR tests.

Though about 90% of LFT results are never reported, so really we haven't got a clue what the positivity rate is.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The pandemic doesn’t exist because people test. It exists because people get ill.

It’s no more credible to have a “bury head in sand” approach now than it was in February 2020.

---------- Post added at 20:53 ---------- Previous post was at 20:51 ----------

200,000 people a day didn’t test positive because they felt fine and randomly took a test for entertainment value. Similarly the rise in cases around Europe, America and the rest of the world isn’t some collective mass hysteria.

---------- Post added at 20:59 ---------- Previous post was at 20:53 ----------

Pierre’s either gone full Great Barrington or his pandemic management is even worse than his interpretation of statistics. Or both I suppose.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Possibly, possibly not.


But the fact is that people are encouraged to take LFTs before doing things even if they feel perfectly well.


So what you're saying is somewhat untrue. 200k people, or the vast majority of them, may well have indeed felt perfectly fine, but took a LFT before going shopping, or seeing elderly relatives, or going to a carol service for christmas, or whatever, somehow it ends up positive, they have the virus without realising it.



And those situations did actually show because people tested as opposed to them getting ill.


Add onto that the people who do have symptoms but don't have covid. Whilst strictly speaking with negative tests they can do what they like, is that a good idea?


Asymptomatic spread is an issue with all viruses, whilst the logic to stopping spread is clearly still true, testing people who aren't unwell as a long term measure clearly isn't sustainable.

Re: Coronavirus
 

says the guy who can’t differentiate between % of population and rate per 100,000. Or between rate per population or rate in hospital.

Never mind, I’m sure if I gave you some crayons you would probably eat one and scribble all over a picture of Elsa from Frozen, and not stay within the lines….!

Re: Coronavirus