Yes, i know it’s not the same level of social distancing but by virtue of the testing capabilities of the Pl compared to say a Mcds or shop, the risk of spread is reduced considerably. Unless you are suggesting that testing is that ineffective that it will make no difference to the comparative spread in these industries?
I’m a bit confused, are you asking me how I can be so sure you can’t spread a virus you don’t have ? You’re gonna have to enlighten me on that bit, maybe I’ve misread?
I mean the internet is there, you can find loads of information on high quality kit/machines, bad quality ones. We know the Pl is intending on investing on the best available.
Testing should never be an indicator of safe to proceed? Then why the feck are we even bothering with anything? The whole basis for us carrying on as a society is implementing a track and trace method via testing.
And that cancer comparison makes no sense.
I’m an essential worker and that’s what I’ve been personally emailed.
This is of course with symptoms, but even mild. Ideally, I’d like to get tested every time I turn up for work regardless of symptoms but unless there’s a 2 minute diagnostic machine out there that can test hundreds a day that won’t be happening.
Can’t answer that but I Imagine the theory will be this is staff being taken away from covid wards. The reality will of course be different.
Again, please refer to post #9922 and #9943.
I keep explaining that testing is a diagnostic tool, not a precaution. How is it supposed to reduce the risk of transmission? Are you suggesting doing scans every day could lower the risk of getting cancer? Yes, testing in an industry alone (except healthcare) is ineffective in controlling the spread and it makes no difference at all.
What I'm asking is that how can you be so sure that you don't have the virus. According to WHO, the sensitivity of rapid tests ranges from 34% to 80%, and even with the best ones, 80% is far from ideal. So you've got to develop a rapid kit with 100% sensitivity, or you are just crossing your fingers hoping the players don't fall into the 20%.
https://www.who.int/news-room/comme...t-of-care-immunodiagnostic-tests-for-covid-19
As a healthcare professional I feel obligated to clear the misleading information about testing. Testing aims to screen potential transmission in high risk individuals (i.e. people with symptoms, those with close contacts with a confirmed COVID-19 patient, healthcare professionals). We are looking for positive cases so that we can manage them, not negative cases so that we feel safe and do whatever we want.
The actual point of testing is for epidemiological study so that the government can have a better picture about the rate of transmission, make estimation and tighten/loosen the measures accordingly. A single negative result is meaningless and not indicative, you should only feel happy when the absolute majority of the society is tested negative and that's the time for us to go out.
I don't need the look for the Internet as I work in this field and I know all the kits, their advantages and disadvantages. I actually wonder how your plan works, are you suggesting the Premier League to outsource the testing, or it sets up a lab on his own and does all the testing itself?