Matt Hancock

[Odds]

In some instances, yes. But symptoms are only a guide for those wanting to establish the quickest way forward for treatment or testing. No point treating for a respiratory illness if your foot hurts. Besides, what's the downside? Testing for Covid is relatively straightforward, swift and conclusive.

If you have a toothache it could also be a symptom of another illness, such as heart disease: referred pain, they call it.
But if you have a nail in your foot, chances are you should look where you're going.

 

[Brigadier]

Testing for Covid is relatively straightforward, swift and conclusive

When half of the country are doing it, and taking big decisions based on it (whether that be missing an appointment, through a holiday, or an operation . Or not, if they test negative), "relatively" could well mean tens of thousands of false results per day.
Not everyone may be as able, competent, fastidious, or honest as yourself.
Which renders it all a bit futile.

Then you've got the supposedly smart, who covid turned into, quite frankly, idiots.

One example:

I swim openwater.
Long story short, but I and a friend shared a car ride to go swimming.
He had been working away with a colleague the days before, sharing the driving too.

On the morning of our Saturday swim, he called me to tell me his colleague had tested positive, and that he wanted to let me know, and what I advised him to do (come swimming, or not).

I asked if he'd tested himself.
Yes, he replied, three times. As had his wife.
All negative.

So I "advised" him, that there was little point doing tests, if you were going to disregard the results anyway; that he might as well treat himself as positive until the pandemic ended, and live in blissful solitude.

He came swimming.

 

[Justin Passing]

PMSL...

Are you trying to suggest that the tests are 100% accurate?

After all that is the definition of conclusive!

So I guess you also reject the proven facts of 'false positives' and 'false negatives' as regards tests

Jab Junkies are truly grasping at straws!

No he isn't suggesting any of that, because he isn't a silly forum troll.
You're drivelling again.

You're adding nothing, mods should bar you.

 

[algas]

My Daughter is in a senior management position at one of the largest hospitals in Devon, she has had to self test every day before leaving home, on a few occasions it showed a positive test, but as the hospital was so under pressure she went in to get a lab test done, they retuned almost immediately and came back negative, so she could continue and work, so the home test kits were un reliable to say the least.

 

[noseall]

Are you trying to suggest that the tests are 100% accurate?

I'm not trying to suggest anything.

PMSL...

Invest in some incontinent underwear.

And worthy of being barred?

I don't think a single poster on this forum would miss you or your lies.

 

[Brigadier]

Something I found interesting (re: testing, testing sensitivity, false negatives and false positives).......

Example.

The incidence of prostate cancer is 1:100.
A PSA test has a sensitivity (true positive rate) of 90%.
The PSA test has a false positive rate of 9%.

You've just tested positive for prostate cancer.
What is your percentage likelihood of actually having prostate cancer?
Rough figure will do.