Covid: Greater Manchester stops care home tests over accuracy fears
04/12/2020 | news | health | 220
The rapid tests picked up five infections out of every 10 found by conventional lab tests.
1
You
04/12/2020 15:42:51 16 6
bbc
A 70% accuracy rate amongst those who are most infective will cause carnage in our care homes.
215
05/12/2020 16:36:38 1 0
bbc
It will cause carnage in our care homes YET again, following on from the 1000s of deaths caused in our care homes by NHS staff taking the opportunity to dump their 'bed blockers' into care homes without adequately testing, during the first lockdown.
2
Lee
04/12/2020 15:46:59 3 5
bbc
Conspiracy theorists will just love this piece. The LF test only picking up small numbers on mass testing indicates the UK doesn't have half the problem we are led to believe or the PCR test is more accurate but has been used to drive policies. What do prople think?, I've given up trying to work it out!!
43
dan
04/12/2020 16:26:13 1 5
bbc
PCR used to scare, and drive policy!
3
04/12/2020 15:47:24 39 7
bbc
I think its clear that those types of test can only be used as a risk reduction method. Using them to determine someone could go inside a care home and act like it's pre-pandemic is just stupid. That dose not however mean that the test type should be abandoned altogether. Is has uses, just not sure life or death situation in a care home is one of them!
152
04/12/2020 18:43:25 8 5
bbc
The test can only reduce risk, not eliminate it. It is very useful if used in the right circumstances in the right way.

If care homes want zero risk = zero visits.

Really very simple - no point in blaming the scientists who are doing their best, or the government for the inadequacy of the science.

People should stop whining!
188
04/12/2020 19:57:28 1 1
bbc
Well said
210
05/12/2020 15:36:34 0 0
bbc
It is slightly worrying that this test appears to be not fit for purpose as it is the same test used by Pfizer in their vaccine trials.
4
04/12/2020 15:51:58 10 5
bbc
Its so dangerous for elderly folk, you've got to be very careful.
5
04/12/2020 15:50:58 1 6
bbc
Maybe if they used homegrown UK tests that are proven to be way more accurate. A great example is the test the government themselves commissioned via the UK-RTC which is 99.40% accurate. See https://www.abc19.com/
11
04/12/2020 15:58:15 4 1
bbc
NO! Your supplied link is to an antibody test, not an antigen test.
56
04/12/2020 16:35:43 1 1
bbc
Wrong type of test. That is an antibody test to see if you have had the virus in the past. It’s not an antigen test which tells you if you have an active infection now.
6
04/12/2020 15:53:22 5 11
bbc
wow. how much mis information?

"The government has described rapid testing as way of reducing, rather than eliminating, risk."
you can't eliminate risk. ever.

"people may change their behaviour as a result of a negative test, perhaps stopping social distancing. It's not yet know how big a problem that might be."
did I just rtead that sentence?

just. wow. half-statements, from the BBC.
25
04/12/2020 16:14:05 6 2
bbc
I'm not clear what your issue is?
The testing is described as risk reduction, not elimination. You agree with that.

It acknowledges that there is a possibility that people's behaviour may change if they are told they are not infected with this virus. However, it is not known precisely how their behaviour will change.
What do you not understand in this?
7
04/12/2020 15:53:10 6 4
bbc
We need to know what the difference in false positive rates is between these two tests. Could it be that the more sensitive PCR test is picking up non-active virus remnants and not active virus? It is important to know this.
13
04/12/2020 16:00:25 5 2
bbc
Neither test is picking up active virus. Titrating active virions is a long and labourius lab procedure.
55
04/12/2020 16:33:49 0 2
bbc
No.
8
04/12/2020 15:53:42 6 4
bbc
Maybe if they used their own commissioned UK based tests via the UKRTC that are proven to be 99.4% accurate they would be way more useful.
16
04/12/2020 16:03:42 4 3
bbc
The sensitivity of the UK-RTC test was found to be 97.57% in a recent study in Northern Ireland - so pretty good.

Specificity was 99.59%.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.29.20201509v2
32
04/12/2020 16:10:55 2 1
bbc
The UKRTC test is an antibody test NOT an antigen test. Antigen tests check if you HAVE the virus even if asymptomatic (which is the purpose of these tests) and antibody tests check if you HAVE HAD the virus (although granted they can pick up you HAVE the virus when you are in the later less infectious stages)
9
04/12/2020 15:56:38 16 6
bbc
Dr Mike Yeadon former Cheif Scientific Officer and Head of Allergy & Respiratory Research at Pfizer pedicted this not becuase the new test is inaccurate but becuase the PCR test is with current rates of prevalence. If true, the worst has passed and the lockdowns are a disproportionate response. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1onx7LaNio
54
04/12/2020 16:33:26 14 8
bbc
Mike Yeadon isn’t a virologist, an epidemiologist or an expert in PCR technology. He was a paid advisor to Pfizer with a background in pharmacy and biochemistry. Allergies and viruses are two completely different things. He also said their wouldn’t be second wave in the winter.
141
04/12/2020 18:16:43 0 3
bbc
Ah !!! The wisdom of blind Pugh .
10
04/12/2020 15:57:38 33 3
bbc
I had an email from my Dads care home, part of a larger chain, expressing their doubts about using rapid tests. I tend to think that we’ve been months without normal visiting and vaccinations will be started in the next few weeks it’s not worth the risk.
106
04/12/2020 17:22:46 13 2
bbc
Vaccination as a two-shot process will only show results after Christmas so the misery is set for a while yet :(
Also, care home staff just can't march in and inject their residents: that requires permission from relatives/those with power of attorney - something else the government seems blithely unaware of while trumpeting about it being possible at last to hug granny.
211
05/12/2020 16:00:22 0 0
bbc
Many of our elderly may not be able to have the vaccination according to MHRA advice. As the Pfizer trials did not carry out any medicinal linteraction or contraindications tests, persons on some medication are not recommended to take the vaccine. Also persons suffering from acute ferbile illnesses could also find that they may not be vaccinated.
5
04/12/2020 15:50:58 1 6
bbc
Maybe if they used homegrown UK tests that are proven to be way more accurate. A great example is the test the government themselves commissioned via the UK-RTC which is 99.40% accurate. See https://www.abc19.com/
11
04/12/2020 15:58:15 4 1
bbc
NO! Your supplied link is to an antibody test, not an antigen test.
12
04/12/2020 15:58:31 30 11
bbc
More money down the drain from this hapless government. It will be interesting to find out who's profiting from this latest fiasco.
47
04/12/2020 16:27:59 12 4
bbc
Probably Dido and her friends
7
04/12/2020 15:53:10 6 4
bbc
We need to know what the difference in false positive rates is between these two tests. Could it be that the more sensitive PCR test is picking up non-active virus remnants and not active virus? It is important to know this.
13
04/12/2020 16:00:25 5 2
bbc
Neither test is picking up active virus. Titrating active virions is a long and labourius lab procedure.
19
04/12/2020 16:06:28 0 2
bbc
Exactly PCR picks up the RNA which by itself is not always infectious. The real issue with testing is the cost.
14
04/12/2020 16:00:38 5 4
bbc
The BBC should look into the LAMP test; it's even worse!!!!!! See the article in the FT.
15
04/12/2020 16:03:36 2 2
bbc
I know of a company that spent tens of thousands on testing using a LAMP method ( not for covid) missed thousands of positives
14
04/12/2020 16:00:38 5 4
bbc
The BBC should look into the LAMP test; it's even worse!!!!!! See the article in the FT.
15
04/12/2020 16:03:36 2 2
bbc
I know of a company that spent tens of thousands on testing using a LAMP method ( not for covid) missed thousands of positives
100
04/12/2020 17:17:48 1 1
bbc
whats a lamp test?
8
04/12/2020 15:53:42 6 4
bbc
Maybe if they used their own commissioned UK based tests via the UKRTC that are proven to be 99.4% accurate they would be way more useful.
16
04/12/2020 16:03:42 4 3
bbc
The sensitivity of the UK-RTC test was found to be 97.57% in a recent study in Northern Ireland - so pretty good.

Specificity was 99.59%.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.29.20201509v2
17
04/12/2020 16:04:28 11 2
bbc
So positive means positive and negative means inconclusive
21
04/12/2020 16:11:27 3 2
bbc
Not that good. The specificity is 99.4% and therefore 6/1,000 uninfected people will test positive.
52
04/12/2020 16:31:00 2 2
bbc
Not even that good.
18
04/12/2020 16:05:13 61 19
bbc
Not fit for purpose. However a nice little earner for some and a great headline when it was announced. As ever a poor response from this hapless government.
68
04/12/2020 16:48:35 25 12
bbc
The false negatives obtained from this test and the false positives from some other tests does rather damage the idea that test, test, test as recommended by the World Health Organisation rather than vaccination is the way to manage this pandemic
113
04/12/2020 17:30:04 7 5
bbc
The masks are also a nice little earner for some. I wish I had bought shares in these at the beginning.
185
04/12/2020 19:49:36 2 2
bbc
Not fit for purpose is also a very accurate description of Johnson's and the governments handling of this crisis.

Using this pretty inaccurate test to determine if someone is safe to go into a care home is just plain dangerous.
212
05/12/2020 16:12:42 0 0
bbc
They are fit for purpose if that purpose is to identify half the asymptomatic carriers. That’s the point. A positive means you are positive, a negative means there’s a 50% chance you are negative ie we don’t know
13
04/12/2020 16:00:25 5 2
bbc
Neither test is picking up active virus. Titrating active virions is a long and labourius lab procedure.
19
04/12/2020 16:06:28 0 2
bbc
Exactly PCR picks up the RNA which by itself is not always infectious. The real issue with testing is the cost.
20
04/12/2020 16:08:39 24 4
bbc
It was known several weeks ago, in the BBC's own science radio programmes, that the government has not consulted with its own UK National Screening Programme committees. One wonders why the BBC has not followed up on this important lapse.
28
04/12/2020 16:15:08 27 4
bbc
Perhaps the government knew that the U.K. NSP would recommend that mass testing and testing in care homes should not be carried out in this way.

The govt had made up its mind to do it (Moon shot) and decided to proceed anyway.
17
04/12/2020 16:04:28 11 2
bbc
So positive means positive and negative means inconclusive
21
04/12/2020 16:11:27 3 2
bbc
Not that good. The specificity is 99.4% and therefore 6/1,000 uninfected people will test positive.
60
04/12/2020 16:39:28 0 3
bbc
That's less of an issue, given that the procedure if you get a positive LFT is to go and get a gold standard PCR test, which will show pretty definitively if you have live virus in your system.
22
04/12/2020 16:12:14 48 6
bbc
As Dr Angela Raffle implIed, one of the most important points is that the National Screening Committee - the NHS body responsible for screening tests - was apparently not consulted on the use of these tests for the mass testing in Liverpool or for their use in care homes or other parts of the community.

The government should explain why they bypassed the experts.
51
04/12/2020 16:30:30 35 5
bbc
Because they not want the experts to tell them that these tests aren’t suitable for a screening programme. Madness.
72
04/12/2020 16:54:14 6 4
bbc
The R rate in Liverpool fell quickly when the mass testing was carried out, coincidentally there was a similar fall in R rate in nearby Merseyside boroughs where there was no mass testing
Now that we know the test is flawed perhaps it had nothing to do with the fall in the R rate in Liverpool
81
04/12/2020 16:59:49 2 2
bbc
Because they can!
169
04/12/2020 19:16:52 5 3
bbc
They don't like experts indeed they don't like anyone who tells the truth and shows Boris and his useless government up for what they are liars and fools.
205
05/12/2020 11:21:58 0 0
bbc
They'll always be a financial motive with the Tories don't worry some wheeling and dealing will of went on finance first health second !!!
23
04/12/2020 16:12:45 26 19
bbc
This is the least competent and most callous government in my lifetime, perhaps ever. To knowingly send out highly inaccurate testing kits and claim they are safe when they are clearly not is disgraceful.

I wonder how many students will get home and hug their parents and grandparents thinking they are negative and then find they have potentially killed a family member a few weeks later?
29
04/12/2020 16:15:32 18 20
bbc
More fake apoplexy from the momentum boys!
86
04/12/2020 17:05:44 4 4
bbc
If the tests are so bad then how come cases in Liverpool have dropped so much after testing? And don't for one minute think that the NHS is foolproof either, they have a vested interest in slagging everyone else off who isn't part of that enormously inefficient and expensive organisation. No-one is perfect.
24
04/12/2020 16:07:36 10 6
bbc
"World beating"
6
04/12/2020 15:53:22 5 11
bbc
wow. how much mis information?

"The government has described rapid testing as way of reducing, rather than eliminating, risk."
you can't eliminate risk. ever.

"people may change their behaviour as a result of a negative test, perhaps stopping social distancing. It's not yet know how big a problem that might be."
did I just rtead that sentence?

just. wow. half-statements, from the BBC.
25
04/12/2020 16:14:05 6 2
bbc
I'm not clear what your issue is?
The testing is described as risk reduction, not elimination. You agree with that.

It acknowledges that there is a possibility that people's behaviour may change if they are told they are not infected with this virus. However, it is not known precisely how their behaviour will change.
What do you not understand in this?
30
04/12/2020 16:15:44 0 3
bbc
it's parroted statements, without any question from the journalist.

maybe that's what journalism is about. just repeating statements, without question.
26
04/12/2020 16:14:34 35 5
bbc
No test or vaccine is 100% accurate.
41
04/12/2020 16:25:50 28 7
bbc
No, but missing 50% is useless.
46
04/12/2020 16:27:19 7 2
bbc
No but 50% is pretty low for a test.
50
04/12/2020 16:29:18 4 2
bbc
True but you except a screening test to be better than 50% accurate.
27
04/12/2020 16:14:37 13 12
bbc
Perhaps they’re more accurate than the PCR test which we know has a high false positive rate?
49
04/12/2020 16:28:48 9 8
bbc
No chance. PCR is much more accurate and reliable. 95% accurate. Very few false positives and a some false negatives. The experience of the people doing the test also affects the results. They are very capricious tests which need to be done with great care.
67
04/12/2020 16:48:12 1 1
bbc
less than 1% is a high rate? It severely affects results if you use it for mass testing in a community with low infection rate, but if you are seeing 8% of tests retuning positive, then 90% of those positives are real positives.
20
04/12/2020 16:08:39 24 4
bbc
It was known several weeks ago, in the BBC's own science radio programmes, that the government has not consulted with its own UK National Screening Programme committees. One wonders why the BBC has not followed up on this important lapse.
28
04/12/2020 16:15:08 27 4
bbc
Perhaps the government knew that the U.K. NSP would recommend that mass testing and testing in care homes should not be carried out in this way.

The govt had made up its mind to do it (Moon shot) and decided to proceed anyway.
23
04/12/2020 16:12:45 26 19
bbc
This is the least competent and most callous government in my lifetime, perhaps ever. To knowingly send out highly inaccurate testing kits and claim they are safe when they are clearly not is disgraceful.

I wonder how many students will get home and hug their parents and grandparents thinking they are negative and then find they have potentially killed a family member a few weeks later?
29
04/12/2020 16:15:32 18 20
bbc
More fake apoplexy from the momentum boys!
You are a moron. Removed
Its not the momentum boys. Its Jeanette Krankie. Removed
88
04/12/2020 17:07:59 1 2
bbc
Be serious - USA is much worse, not to mention, Brazil, Mexico, Scotland...........
I don't think its the momentum boys - its Je4nette Krankie Removed
140
04/12/2020 18:15:40 2 2
bbc
More sociopathic nonsense from the Brownshirts.
25
04/12/2020 16:14:05 6 2
bbc
I'm not clear what your issue is?
The testing is described as risk reduction, not elimination. You agree with that.

It acknowledges that there is a possibility that people's behaviour may change if they are told they are not infected with this virus. However, it is not known precisely how their behaviour will change.
What do you not understand in this?
30
04/12/2020 16:15:44 0 3
bbc
it's parroted statements, without any question from the journalist.

maybe that's what journalism is about. just repeating statements, without question.
48
04/12/2020 16:28:00 2 1
bbc
In an interview, you ask questions.

In a reportage article, you report the information given to you.
31
04/12/2020 16:18:41 16 7
bbc
The govt knew this in mid november but did not act. Let's hope no-one dies as a result.
33
04/12/2020 16:19:53 13 7
bbc
and they tried to suppress the evidence
8
04/12/2020 15:53:42 6 4
bbc
Maybe if they used their own commissioned UK based tests via the UKRTC that are proven to be 99.4% accurate they would be way more useful.
32
04/12/2020 16:10:55 2 1
bbc
The UKRTC test is an antibody test NOT an antigen test. Antigen tests check if you HAVE the virus even if asymptomatic (which is the purpose of these tests) and antibody tests check if you HAVE HAD the virus (although granted they can pick up you HAVE the virus when you are in the later less infectious stages)
31
04/12/2020 16:18:41 16 7
bbc
The govt knew this in mid november but did not act. Let's hope no-one dies as a result.
33
04/12/2020 16:19:53 13 7
bbc
and they tried to suppress the evidence
34
bbc
It's remarkable that we have a cabinet stuffed full of people for whom neither logic, fact nor even morality ever impinges on their feeble brains. They are incompetent to such a degree that it becomes almost funny were it not for the tens of thousands they have killed and the billions of pounds they have squandered.

The dimmest of all must be Williamson beating even Hancock into second place.
Removed
39
04/12/2020 16:25:17 17 5
bbc
"The dimmest of all must be Williamson"

Oooh, Betty!
80
04/12/2020 16:59:37 7 4
bbc
In your post ... as yet to be removed for being off topic ... you just post a rant.

Do you actually have anything to say about the test proceeder, the potential pitfalls ... no ... just a diatribe.

Perhaps we should just not bother doing anything so you can rant about that instead.
120
04/12/2020 17:43:15 4 4
bbc
Alok sharma appears to be living on a different plane. His answers to even basic stuff seems to be to questions asked 10 years ago. But take your pick from whateley, coffey, Hancock, williamson, patel, truss, mogg...they are all swivel eyed maniacs in safe seats and no ability
144
04/12/2020 18:22:48 5 4
bbc
Spot on doug.
I can't think of a single issue, in relation to covid, that this excuse of a Govt has got right.
Promising the world, but always coming up well short. Incompetence or lies?
You choose.
35
04/12/2020 16:21:41 25 3
bbc
This false negative aspect of these quick tests was known about weeks ago when they were announced . A check on the manufacturers web site will tell you that. I thought about getting my daughter to get one in Boots, since I haven't see her for 6 months because I am a " extremely venerable" , until I read that! Only exit is vaccination if it works as well as anticipated!
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
40
04/12/2020 16:25:31 8 3
bbc
I love that Mr Venerable - I hope you are!
The govt were warned that they were not fit for the moonshot purpose but went ahead anyway
36
04/12/2020 16:23:37 37 8
bbc
50% accurate. May as well toss a coin. Heads you isolate, tails you go free.
42
04/12/2020 16:26:08 21 5
bbc
And if you go free - don't visit your Granny
157
04/12/2020 18:52:01 2 1
bbc
Nope, definitely more useful than flipping a coin. While that would indeed tell 50% of people who'd test positive on a PCR test to isolate, it'd do it by telling 50% of everyone to isolate, whereas these tests have a lower false postive rate and requires considerably fewer people who don't have Covid to do that. (Now, some of the tests rejected in the spring were pretty much that bad...)
29
04/12/2020 16:15:32 18 20
bbc
More fake apoplexy from the momentum boys!
37
bbc
You are a moron. Removed
35
04/12/2020 16:21:41 25 3
bbc
This false negative aspect of these quick tests was known about weeks ago when they were announced . A check on the manufacturers web site will tell you that. I thought about getting my daughter to get one in Boots, since I haven't see her for 6 months because I am a " extremely venerable" , until I read that! Only exit is vaccination if it works as well as anticipated!
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
45
04/12/2020 16:27:08 23 10
bbc
Natural herd immunity doesn’t exist. There isn’t a disease in history that has been eliminated by natural herd immunity. The way to herd immunity is via mass vaccination. Like smallpox, polio, TB and measles vaccinations.
63
04/12/2020 16:46:37 2 4
bbc
Yes but it is still far too early to rely on it, in a years time we might be getting to that once the oldies and vulnerable have had their vaccination- so right now vaccination is the only option for a near normal life
73
04/12/2020 16:54:21 6 6
bbc
Herd immunity will be greatly helped by large numbers of people having the vaccinations when offered. Waiting for this to happen naturally will take much too long and result in extra avoidable deaths.
77
04/12/2020 16:57:52 6 7
bbc
we just have to endure 3 more years of lockdowns and 70,000 deaths a year until then.
93
04/12/2020 17:10:45 5 3
bbc
It’s a combination of things will get us into a good place. Testing where appropriate, vaccines, hand washing, self isolation where necessary, masks and distancing.

It a question of breaking the chain of infection.
116
04/12/2020 17:37:09 4 2
bbc
And how long will it take before C-19 is endemic, and everyone has been exposed to it enough to give us herd immunity? 3 years? 10 years? 20 years?
Do you want even 3 more years of this?
138
04/12/2020 18:13:15 4 3
bbc
What a numpty!
It's remarkable that we have a cabinet stuffed full of people for whom neither logic, fact nor even morality ever impinges on their feeble brains. They are incompetent to such a degree that it becomes almost funny were it not for the tens of thousands they have killed and the billions of pounds they have squandered.

The dimmest of all must be Williamson beating even Hancock into second place.
Removed
39
04/12/2020 16:25:17 17 5
bbc
"The dimmest of all must be Williamson"

Oooh, Betty!
136
04/12/2020 18:10:41 4 5
bbc
Ah diddums !
Hurt your Tory feelings did it ?
Oh sorry - forgot sociopaths don't have feelings.
35
04/12/2020 16:21:41 25 3
bbc
This false negative aspect of these quick tests was known about weeks ago when they were announced . A check on the manufacturers web site will tell you that. I thought about getting my daughter to get one in Boots, since I haven't see her for 6 months because I am a " extremely venerable" , until I read that! Only exit is vaccination if it works as well as anticipated!
40
04/12/2020 16:25:31 8 3
bbc
I love that Mr Venerable - I hope you are!
The govt were warned that they were not fit for the moonshot purpose but went ahead anyway
26
04/12/2020 16:14:34 35 5
bbc
No test or vaccine is 100% accurate.
41
04/12/2020 16:25:50 28 7
bbc
No, but missing 50% is useless.
71
04/12/2020 16:52:05 5 2
bbc
depends what the alternative is. If the alternative is no access to a nursing home as a test is not available then the test is not giving the security you think it is. But if the alternative is allowing unrestricted movement/transmission then you are reducing that risk by half. Also it will quickly confirm an outbreak in a workplace, detecting 5 or 10 cases makes little difference to response.
133
04/12/2020 18:06:33 2 3
bbc
the flaw is in the assumption that the lab tests are the benchmark, unless antibody tests are used to verfiy the +ve result from the PCR and lateral flow tests we don't know if either test is valid. More effort would be better spent on mass screening of the population with validated antibody tests, there could well be a lot more recovered infections than estimated means need for a vaccine
36
04/12/2020 16:23:37 37 8
bbc
50% accurate. May as well toss a coin. Heads you isolate, tails you go free.
42
04/12/2020 16:26:08 21 5
bbc
And if you go free - don't visit your Granny
101
04/12/2020 17:19:33 5 5
bbc
And cause her to waste away from despair and loneliness. Covid isn't the only danger in the world. Lack of love and physical contact is far more dangerous in the longer term. The physiological benefits of physical contact to length and quality of life has been proven many times...
2
Lee
04/12/2020 15:46:59 3 5
bbc
Conspiracy theorists will just love this piece. The LF test only picking up small numbers on mass testing indicates the UK doesn't have half the problem we are led to believe or the PCR test is more accurate but has been used to drive policies. What do prople think?, I've given up trying to work it out!!
43
dan
04/12/2020 16:26:13 1 5
bbc
PCR used to scare, and drive policy!
44
04/12/2020 16:26:48 7 4
bbc
I heard an expert talking about this on R4 a few weeks ago. A real question is how valuable these tests are.
79
04/12/2020 16:59:28 3 7
bbc
Exactly. They're pointless. Like masks. Pointless virtue signalling. The only prevention method is Lockdown. Nothing else currently works.
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
45
04/12/2020 16:27:08 23 10
bbc
Natural herd immunity doesn’t exist. There isn’t a disease in history that has been eliminated by natural herd immunity. The way to herd immunity is via mass vaccination. Like smallpox, polio, TB and measles vaccinations.
59
04/12/2020 16:37:27 13 12
bbc
Oh god, it’s so difficult... right... herd immunity does not mean the disease is wiped out, it means that at any one time there are enough people currently immune to make the spread of the disease minimal. And why the urgency to wipe it out? It’s not very dangerous to 90% of the population. Just vaccinate the old, like flu. That is actually all that is needed.
26
04/12/2020 16:14:34 35 5
bbc
No test or vaccine is 100% accurate.
46
04/12/2020 16:27:19 7 2
bbc
No but 50% is pretty low for a test.
12
04/12/2020 15:58:31 30 11
bbc
More money down the drain from this hapless government. It will be interesting to find out who's profiting from this latest fiasco.
47
04/12/2020 16:27:59 12 4
bbc
Probably Dido and her friends
30
04/12/2020 16:15:44 0 3
bbc
it's parroted statements, without any question from the journalist.

maybe that's what journalism is about. just repeating statements, without question.
48
04/12/2020 16:28:00 2 1
bbc
In an interview, you ask questions.

In a reportage article, you report the information given to you.
58
04/12/2020 16:36:49 0 3
bbc
and on the BBC website, you start to distrust the information presented to you.

even if it's presented really, really neatly.
27
04/12/2020 16:14:37 13 12
bbc
Perhaps they’re more accurate than the PCR test which we know has a high false positive rate?
49
04/12/2020 16:28:48 9 8
bbc
No chance. PCR is much more accurate and reliable. 95% accurate. Very few false positives and a some false negatives. The experience of the people doing the test also affects the results. They are very capricious tests which need to be done with great care.
65
04/12/2020 16:47:23 3 3
bbc
What do you mean by 95% accurate?

The actual situation is that PCR tests can return very high numbers of false positives when prevalence is low. Some German scientists have reported false positive rates of 90% when high Cts are used

It’s quite possible that the lateral flow tests used in Liverpool were returning more accurate results than the PCR tests. This could be checked using Sanger tests
83
04/12/2020 17:03:26 2 3
bbc
Can you please provide evidence to support your claims for the accuracy of PCR tests. I think you will find that the false positive rate is very high.
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/09/28/false-positive-tests/
189
04/12/2020 19:59:09 1 1
bbc
There have been 42,052,539 tests to date.
Each 1% inaccuracy would therefore mean 420,525 errors.
95% accuracy would mean 2,102,626 errors.
To put that into perspective there have been 1,690,432 Covid19 cases reported in the UK.
The testing, like the use of data and the scientific models in this pandemic are a joke.
26
04/12/2020 16:14:34 35 5
bbc
No test or vaccine is 100% accurate.
50
04/12/2020 16:29:18 4 2
bbc
True but you except a screening test to be better than 50% accurate.
22
04/12/2020 16:12:14 48 6
bbc
As Dr Angela Raffle implIed, one of the most important points is that the National Screening Committee - the NHS body responsible for screening tests - was apparently not consulted on the use of these tests for the mass testing in Liverpool or for their use in care homes or other parts of the community.

The government should explain why they bypassed the experts.
51
04/12/2020 16:30:30 35 5
bbc
Because they not want the experts to tell them that these tests aren’t suitable for a screening programme. Madness.
17
04/12/2020 16:04:28 11 2
bbc
So positive means positive and negative means inconclusive
52
04/12/2020 16:31:00 2 2
bbc
Not even that good.
53
04/12/2020 16:31:29 19 17
bbc
You would think that the Tories have made so many fatal mistakes, wasted so much money, caused so much destruction, killed so many people that no one would even consider excusing them. But no it seems there are still people dim enough to fall for their lies.

A government of unthinking, uncaring half-wits su
74
04/12/2020 16:54:59 6 5
bbc
Doesn't say much about the opposition does it ???
108
04/12/2020 17:23:55 2 4
bbc
yawn. You moaners are so depressingly predictable.
9
04/12/2020 15:56:38 16 6
bbc
Dr Mike Yeadon former Cheif Scientific Officer and Head of Allergy & Respiratory Research at Pfizer pedicted this not becuase the new test is inaccurate but becuase the PCR test is with current rates of prevalence. If true, the worst has passed and the lockdowns are a disproportionate response. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1onx7LaNio
54
04/12/2020 16:33:26 14 8
bbc
Mike Yeadon isn’t a virologist, an epidemiologist or an expert in PCR technology. He was a paid advisor to Pfizer with a background in pharmacy and biochemistry. Allergies and viruses are two completely different things. He also said their wouldn’t be second wave in the winter.
61
04/12/2020 16:39:40 8 4
bbc
And there isn’t. There’s a seasonal increase which we get with all respiratory viruses. It’s just our mad and incompetent leaders have backed themselves into a corner which they can’t get out of so they must keep the fear going,
7
04/12/2020 15:53:10 6 4
bbc
We need to know what the difference in false positive rates is between these two tests. Could it be that the more sensitive PCR test is picking up non-active virus remnants and not active virus? It is important to know this.
55
04/12/2020 16:33:49 0 2
bbc
No.
5
04/12/2020 15:50:58 1 6
bbc
Maybe if they used homegrown UK tests that are proven to be way more accurate. A great example is the test the government themselves commissioned via the UK-RTC which is 99.40% accurate. See https://www.abc19.com/
56
04/12/2020 16:35:43 1 1
bbc
Wrong type of test. That is an antibody test to see if you have had the virus in the past. It’s not an antigen test which tells you if you have an active infection now.
57
04/12/2020 16:35:54 17 6
bbc
Read the paragraph that starts with "Dr Susan Hopkins...". It is not meant to be used on its own, it is an additional tool. Why the hysteria?
69
04/12/2020 16:50:21 15 11
bbc
Because it’s yet another example of the government pushing policies which ignore the science, bypass expert bodies, are extremely expensive and make no sense.

Also, people are quite rightly worried that people who are infectious but test negative will be allowed into care homes.
139
04/12/2020 18:14:07 1 2
bbc
Why the blinkers ?
48
04/12/2020 16:28:00 2 1
bbc
In an interview, you ask questions.

In a reportage article, you report the information given to you.
58
04/12/2020 16:36:49 0 3
bbc
and on the BBC website, you start to distrust the information presented to you.

even if it's presented really, really neatly.
45
04/12/2020 16:27:08 23 10
bbc
Natural herd immunity doesn’t exist. There isn’t a disease in history that has been eliminated by natural herd immunity. The way to herd immunity is via mass vaccination. Like smallpox, polio, TB and measles vaccinations.
59
04/12/2020 16:37:27 13 12
bbc
Oh god, it’s so difficult... right... herd immunity does not mean the disease is wiped out, it means that at any one time there are enough people currently immune to make the spread of the disease minimal. And why the urgency to wipe it out? It’s not very dangerous to 90% of the population. Just vaccinate the old, like flu. That is actually all that is needed.
66
04/12/2020 16:47:44 10 3
bbc
10% of the population is still an awful lot of people!
21
04/12/2020 16:11:27 3 2
bbc
Not that good. The specificity is 99.4% and therefore 6/1,000 uninfected people will test positive.
60
04/12/2020 16:39:28 0 3
bbc
That's less of an issue, given that the procedure if you get a positive LFT is to go and get a gold standard PCR test, which will show pretty definitively if you have live virus in your system.
54
04/12/2020 16:33:26 14 8
bbc
Mike Yeadon isn’t a virologist, an epidemiologist or an expert in PCR technology. He was a paid advisor to Pfizer with a background in pharmacy and biochemistry. Allergies and viruses are two completely different things. He also said their wouldn’t be second wave in the winter.
61
04/12/2020 16:39:40 8 4
bbc
And there isn’t. There’s a seasonal increase which we get with all respiratory viruses. It’s just our mad and incompetent leaders have backed themselves into a corner which they can’t get out of so they must keep the fear going,
214
05/12/2020 16:29:21 0 0
bbc
Because the first lockdown succeeded in only
kicking the can down the road, it was very obvious that as soon as the lockdown was being lifted the cases would increase. It is similar to what is now happening in Wales with their increasing number of cases following their 'circuit breaker'
62
04/12/2020 16:43:25 2 3
bbc
All the tests have a high failure rate whether it be high numbers of false positives or a failure to detect at all. With around 40% of people likely to be totally asymptomatic and ,therefore, not submitting themselves for testing at all, the numbers being banded about are largely irrelevant.
76
04/12/2020 16:57:42 1 5
bbc
Testing is a pointless waste of money. Negative today, positive tomorrow. Positive in two months time. Millions testing when they have no symptoms and will be back again when they have symptoms. Go to a test centre. Catch Covid19.
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
63
04/12/2020 16:46:37 2 4
bbc
Yes but it is still far too early to rely on it, in a years time we might be getting to that once the oldies and vulnerable have had their vaccination- so right now vaccination is the only option for a near normal life
64
04/12/2020 16:47:05 3 3
bbc
Hope the vaccine has a better success rate than the testing or we really are in trouble
49
04/12/2020 16:28:48 9 8
bbc
No chance. PCR is much more accurate and reliable. 95% accurate. Very few false positives and a some false negatives. The experience of the people doing the test also affects the results. They are very capricious tests which need to be done with great care.
65
04/12/2020 16:47:23 3 3
bbc
What do you mean by 95% accurate?

The actual situation is that PCR tests can return very high numbers of false positives when prevalence is low. Some German scientists have reported false positive rates of 90% when high Cts are used

It’s quite possible that the lateral flow tests used in Liverpool were returning more accurate results than the PCR tests. This could be checked using Sanger tests
59
04/12/2020 16:37:27 13 12
bbc
Oh god, it’s so difficult... right... herd immunity does not mean the disease is wiped out, it means that at any one time there are enough people currently immune to make the spread of the disease minimal. And why the urgency to wipe it out? It’s not very dangerous to 90% of the population. Just vaccinate the old, like flu. That is actually all that is needed.
66
04/12/2020 16:47:44 10 3
bbc
10% of the population is still an awful lot of people!
27
04/12/2020 16:14:37 13 12
bbc
Perhaps they’re more accurate than the PCR test which we know has a high false positive rate?
67
04/12/2020 16:48:12 1 1
bbc
less than 1% is a high rate? It severely affects results if you use it for mass testing in a community with low infection rate, but if you are seeing 8% of tests retuning positive, then 90% of those positives are real positives.
18
04/12/2020 16:05:13 61 19
bbc
Not fit for purpose. However a nice little earner for some and a great headline when it was announced. As ever a poor response from this hapless government.
68
04/12/2020 16:48:35 25 12
bbc
The false negatives obtained from this test and the false positives from some other tests does rather damage the idea that test, test, test as recommended by the World Health Organisation rather than vaccination is the way to manage this pandemic
85
04/12/2020 17:04:57 9 5
bbc
As all these different tests are being use worldwide it would seem that every country is in the same boat.
135
04/12/2020 18:08:49 4 1
bbc
It is when you use the correct testing and don't just fish for good headlines.
194
al
04/12/2020 20:24:09 1 1
bbc
Do you really believe that the WHO told countries to test INSTEAD of vaccinating?
??
57
04/12/2020 16:35:54 17 6
bbc
Read the paragraph that starts with "Dr Susan Hopkins...". It is not meant to be used on its own, it is an additional tool. Why the hysteria?
69
04/12/2020 16:50:21 15 11
bbc
Because it’s yet another example of the government pushing policies which ignore the science, bypass expert bodies, are extremely expensive and make no sense.

Also, people are quite rightly worried that people who are infectious but test negative will be allowed into care homes.
97
04/12/2020 17:12:49 0 3
bbc
"Because it’s yet another example of the government pushing policies which ignore the science, bypass expert bodies, are extremely expensive and make no sense. "

What, you mean like legalising cannabis for example.
107
04/12/2020 17:22:56 2 5
bbc
The government pushed this through, ignoring the science, did it? lol
70
04/12/2020 16:51:53 6 2
bbc
I didn't realise that so many experts on Covid actually use HYS!!
104
04/12/2020 17:21:12 2 4
bbc
Oh yes. And they all know that it's Boris' fault that the test isn't 100% accurate.
41
04/12/2020 16:25:50 28 7
bbc
No, but missing 50% is useless.
71
04/12/2020 16:52:05 5 2
bbc
depends what the alternative is. If the alternative is no access to a nursing home as a test is not available then the test is not giving the security you think it is. But if the alternative is allowing unrestricted movement/transmission then you are reducing that risk by half. Also it will quickly confirm an outbreak in a workplace, detecting 5 or 10 cases makes little difference to response.
22
04/12/2020 16:12:14 48 6
bbc
As Dr Angela Raffle implIed, one of the most important points is that the National Screening Committee - the NHS body responsible for screening tests - was apparently not consulted on the use of these tests for the mass testing in Liverpool or for their use in care homes or other parts of the community.

The government should explain why they bypassed the experts.
72
04/12/2020 16:54:14 6 4
bbc
The R rate in Liverpool fell quickly when the mass testing was carried out, coincidentally there was a similar fall in R rate in nearby Merseyside boroughs where there was no mass testing
Now that we know the test is flawed perhaps it had nothing to do with the fall in the R rate in Liverpool
192
04/12/2020 20:14:23 3 1
bbc
Cases in Liverpool peaked on October 7th.
Tier 3 lockdown in Liverpool began on October 14.
The mass testing scheme began on 6 November.

Doris and co. can`t take credit for the fall. It won`t stop them trying...
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
73
04/12/2020 16:54:21 6 6
bbc
Herd immunity will be greatly helped by large numbers of people having the vaccinations when offered. Waiting for this to happen naturally will take much too long and result in extra avoidable deaths.
164
04/12/2020 19:05:52 3 3
bbc
Community immunity already exists in some parts of the country - including some London Boroughs
213
05/12/2020 16:20:17 0 0
bbc
As the vaccine is designed only to relieve covid symptoms, excluding those requiring hospitalisation, or those causing death it is difficult to see its role in mass immunity.
53
04/12/2020 16:31:29 19 17
bbc
You would think that the Tories have made so many fatal mistakes, wasted so much money, caused so much destruction, killed so many people that no one would even consider excusing them. But no it seems there are still people dim enough to fall for their lies.

A government of unthinking, uncaring half-wits su
74
04/12/2020 16:54:59 6 5
bbc
Doesn't say much about the opposition does it ???
90
04/12/2020 17:09:36 2 3
bbc
Says much about the voters though
75
04/12/2020 16:55:42 2 9
bbc
Rushed through by mates of ministers for millions. Will they pay for the funerals of the dead?
102
04/12/2020 17:20:07 1 5
bbc
yawn.
62
04/12/2020 16:43:25 2 3
bbc
All the tests have a high failure rate whether it be high numbers of false positives or a failure to detect at all. With around 40% of people likely to be totally asymptomatic and ,therefore, not submitting themselves for testing at all, the numbers being banded about are largely irrelevant.
76
04/12/2020 16:57:42 1 5
bbc
Testing is a pointless waste of money. Negative today, positive tomorrow. Positive in two months time. Millions testing when they have no symptoms and will be back again when they have symptoms. Go to a test centre. Catch Covid19.
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
77
04/12/2020 16:57:52 6 7
bbc
we just have to endure 3 more years of lockdowns and 70,000 deaths a year until then.
29
04/12/2020 16:15:32 18 20
bbc
More fake apoplexy from the momentum boys!
Its not the momentum boys. Its Jeanette Krankie. Removed
44
04/12/2020 16:26:48 7 4
bbc
I heard an expert talking about this on R4 a few weeks ago. A real question is how valuable these tests are.
79
04/12/2020 16:59:28 3 7
bbc
Exactly. They're pointless. Like masks. Pointless virtue signalling. The only prevention method is Lockdown. Nothing else currently works.
It's remarkable that we have a cabinet stuffed full of people for whom neither logic, fact nor even morality ever impinges on their feeble brains. They are incompetent to such a degree that it becomes almost funny were it not for the tens of thousands they have killed and the billions of pounds they have squandered.

The dimmest of all must be Williamson beating even Hancock into second place.
Removed
80
04/12/2020 16:59:37 7 4
bbc
In your post ... as yet to be removed for being off topic ... you just post a rant.

Do you actually have anything to say about the test proceeder, the potential pitfalls ... no ... just a diatribe.

Perhaps we should just not bother doing anything so you can rant about that instead.
150
04/12/2020 18:42:51 3 2
bbc
The test is dangerously inaccurate although Tories don't seem to understand that or more likely won't admit it.
22
04/12/2020 16:12:14 48 6
bbc
As Dr Angela Raffle implIed, one of the most important points is that the National Screening Committee - the NHS body responsible for screening tests - was apparently not consulted on the use of these tests for the mass testing in Liverpool or for their use in care homes or other parts of the community.

The government should explain why they bypassed the experts.
81
04/12/2020 16:59:49 2 2
bbc
Because they can!
82
04/12/2020 17:01:29 7 6
bbc
Perhaps it is the PCR tests that are too sensitive rather than vice versa.
49
04/12/2020 16:28:48 9 8
bbc
No chance. PCR is much more accurate and reliable. 95% accurate. Very few false positives and a some false negatives. The experience of the people doing the test also affects the results. They are very capricious tests which need to be done with great care.
83
04/12/2020 17:03:26 2 3
bbc
Can you please provide evidence to support your claims for the accuracy of PCR tests. I think you will find that the false positive rate is very high.
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/09/28/false-positive-tests/
84
04/12/2020 17:03:46 10 1
bbc
I'm a covid 19 tester at a drive in centre. The biggest problem for inaccurate testing is that swab hasn't touched the glossopalatine arch, either side of the uvula (the dangly bit) and the very back of the throat.
Touching the sides of the mouth or tongue, invalidates the test.
96
04/12/2020 17:12:34 5 1
bbc
yep the test shouldn't get too wet.
191
04/12/2020 20:06:14 0 0
bbc
However gave minus to this will be the next statistic
68
04/12/2020 16:48:35 25 12
bbc
The false negatives obtained from this test and the false positives from some other tests does rather damage the idea that test, test, test as recommended by the World Health Organisation rather than vaccination is the way to manage this pandemic
85
04/12/2020 17:04:57 9 5
bbc
As all these different tests are being use worldwide it would seem that every country is in the same boat.
119
04/12/2020 17:41:01 5 6
bbc
That was the fault of the WHO. Dr Drosten in Germany used his friends in the WHO to persuade as many countries as possible to adopt RT-PCR testing
23
04/12/2020 16:12:45 26 19
bbc
This is the least competent and most callous government in my lifetime, perhaps ever. To knowingly send out highly inaccurate testing kits and claim they are safe when they are clearly not is disgraceful.

I wonder how many students will get home and hug their parents and grandparents thinking they are negative and then find they have potentially killed a family member a few weeks later?
86
04/12/2020 17:05:44 4 4
bbc
If the tests are so bad then how come cases in Liverpool have dropped so much after testing? And don't for one minute think that the NHS is foolproof either, they have a vested interest in slagging everyone else off who isn't part of that enormously inefficient and expensive organisation. No-one is perfect.
206
05/12/2020 11:30:19 0 0
bbc
Don't think the private sector is cracked up to be that good, I've worked in both and both have their flaws !!!
87
04/12/2020 17:07:35 4 2
bbc
So they miss 50% overall, but a third of people with high viral loads. How many of those high viral loads also had symptoms? i.e. what % missed from high viral loads (so contagious) also had no symptoms. That's the real danger. As people with symptoms shouldn't be going near care homes. Overall it needs to be balance to give these elderly a family connection after too long.
29
04/12/2020 16:15:32 18 20
bbc
More fake apoplexy from the momentum boys!
88
04/12/2020 17:07:59 1 2
bbc
Be serious - USA is much worse, not to mention, Brazil, Mexico, Scotland...........
89
04/12/2020 17:08:08 0 2
bbc
How many people are actually in care homes, does anyone know?
98
04/12/2020 17:13:31 2 6
bbc
about 55,000 less than when they threw all the old folks out of hospitals back into care homes so they could spread it to everyone. Then they give "do not resusitate" orders despite hospitals coping fine and nightingale hospitals only used for a handful of people. That's murder in my book.
74
04/12/2020 16:54:59 6 5
bbc
Doesn't say much about the opposition does it ???
90
04/12/2020 17:09:36 2 3
bbc
Says much about the voters though
91
04/12/2020 17:09:42 1 3
bbc
The normal test misses 30% of positive cases (false negatives) so is essentially unfit for purposes at an individual level and has probably caused way more infections than it prevented as people assumed they no longer need to self isolate with a negative test.

It doesn't - if you are symptomatic it's isolate for 14 days
92
04/12/2020 17:10:30 6 3
bbc
More likely the new tests aren't giving enough false positives to keep this agenda going. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis has said they can detect miniscule amounts of anything you choose to look for and they shouldn't be used to see if someone is infected. Don't take my word for it, look it up and do some research for once in your lives.
124
04/12/2020 17:48:03 3 2
bbc
He also disagreed with scientific evidence supporting climate change, ozone depletion, and that HIV causes AIDS. He believed in astrology, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis
38
04/12/2020 16:24:42 23 46
bbc
" Only exit is vaccination "

No it isn't. Herd immunity will gradually increase over time, making this no worse than any number of common respiratory infections.
93
04/12/2020 17:10:45 5 3
bbc
It’s a combination of things will get us into a good place. Testing where appropriate, vaccines, hand washing, self isolation where necessary, masks and distancing.

It a question of breaking the chain of infection.
165
04/12/2020 19:06:15 2 4
bbc
Masks ... don’t be silly
94
04/12/2020 17:06:34 11 2
bbc
I haven't seen all the comments, but how many of you have had a Rapid Lateral flow test. I had three, luckily all negative. To me it was reassuring but I didn't change my habits and still follow the Government guidelines. Additionally, in Liverpool, if you were positive, it was followed up with a PCR test.
29
04/12/2020 16:15:32 18 20
bbc
More fake apoplexy from the momentum boys!
I don't think its the momentum boys - its Je4nette Krankie Removed
84
04/12/2020 17:03:46 10 1
bbc
I'm a covid 19 tester at a drive in centre. The biggest problem for inaccurate testing is that swab hasn't touched the glossopalatine arch, either side of the uvula (the dangly bit) and the very back of the throat.
Touching the sides of the mouth or tongue, invalidates the test.
96
04/12/2020 17:12:34 5 1
bbc
yep the test shouldn't get too wet.
69
04/12/2020 16:50:21 15 11
bbc
Because it’s yet another example of the government pushing policies which ignore the science, bypass expert bodies, are extremely expensive and make no sense.

Also, people are quite rightly worried that people who are infectious but test negative will be allowed into care homes.
97
04/12/2020 17:12:49 0 3
bbc
"Because it’s yet another example of the government pushing policies which ignore the science, bypass expert bodies, are extremely expensive and make no sense. "

What, you mean like legalising cannabis for example.
89
04/12/2020 17:08:08 0 2
bbc
How many people are actually in care homes, does anyone know?
98
04/12/2020 17:13:31 2 6
bbc
about 55,000 less than when they threw all the old folks out of hospitals back into care homes so they could spread it to everyone. Then they give "do not resusitate" orders despite hospitals coping fine and nightingale hospitals only used for a handful of people. That's murder in my book.
103
04/12/2020 17:20:39 2 1
bbc
Murder.... No, most definitely not but miss management.... Yes.
15
04/12/2020 16:03:36 2 2
bbc
I know of a company that spent tens of thousands on testing using a LAMP method ( not for covid) missed thousands of positives
100
04/12/2020 17:17:48 1 1
bbc
whats a lamp test?