Coronavirus testing

[yorkie]

The article does state:

Police will not have access to data from the NHS Covid-19 app. The app is anonymous so the government does not know who has been sent instructions to self-isolate.

I think, however, that anyone who should be isolating but isn't, deserves everything they get. In my opinion they shouldn't be fined, they should be carted off to jail to complete their isolation period there.

Good luck with that idea, though it's more suited to another thread.

 

[102 fan]

The app data won't be shared with the police as it's only on your phone. So this is actually a reason to use the app - if you use the manual contact tracing forms then your data could be shared with the police.

I think, however, that anyone who should be isolating but isn't, deserves everything they get. In my opinion they shouldn't be fined, they should be carted off to jail to complete their isolation period there.

Are you seriously saying that people should be incarcerated for not isolating? Are you aware of the slippery slope that would be?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How to stop people downloading their App, and get those that do to delete!

BBC News - Coronavirus: Police get access to NHS Test and Trace self-isolation data

Coronavirus: Police get access to NHS Test and Trace self-isolation data

Forces in England will have access on a "case-by-case basis" to data on whether a person has been told to self-isolate.

www.bbc.co.uk

The app doesn't have any personal details. This refers to manual track and trace.

 

[102 fan]

The app doesn't have any personal details. This refers to manual track and trace.

At the moment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are you seriously saying that people should be incarcerated for not isolating?

Certainly those who have tested positive, yes. If you can't be trusted to do it at home, do it in prison instead. If you have tested positive, then not doing absolutely everything to avoid passing it on is a despicable act.

For contacts, it's a bit less clear cut, but still you should be doing everything you can to comply.

At the moment.

The app won't have any personal details unless you give them to it, now or in the future.

 

[Bikeman78]

I know someone who knew someone who told them that someone they know knew someone who had had this. (that is actually a fact, but serves as a nice example).
It turned out in the end that one of them was lying. Now i'm not suggesting for one minute that this sort of thing doesn't happen, but it is clear that sometimes stories like this are agenda fuelled rather than fact fuelled.

If we look at it from another angle, if someone books an appointment, do they "check in" when they arrive? I don't actually know how it works. If they do, but then have to wait and decide to leave the system may flag a result as lost if it cannot find one. Given this person is only usually supposed to get this test if they have symptoms, IF they cannot display NO RESULT then is it better to default to NEGATIVE where they'll go about their daily business and could infect others that might not be well enough to deal with it, or default to POSITIVE, thus reducing that risk.

How can you have a system that produces results on tests that have not taken place?

 

[102 fan]

Certainly those who have tested positive, yes. If you can't be trusted to do it at home, do it in prison instead. If you have tested positive, then not doing absolutely everything to avoid passing it on is a despicable act.

For contacts, it's a bit less clear cut, but still you should be doing everything you can to comply.



The app won't have any personal details unless you give them to it, now or in the future.

Are there any other circumstances that you would be happy to see unconvicted people incarcerated?

 

[Mag_seven]

It wouldn't be a good idea to put infected people into prisons - the last thing you want is an entire prison infected with all the issues that would bring.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are there any other circumstances that you would be happy to see unconvicted people incarcerated?

It happens for all sorts - it's basically the same as being remanded in custody.

It wouldn't be a good idea to put infected people into prisons - the last thing you want is an entire prison infected with all the issues that would bring.

You'd presumably have a dedicated facility. A commandeered hotel would be more likely, and that's how some countries (generally ones that have done this rather better than us) have done it.

 

[robbeech]

How can you have a system that produces results on tests that have not taken place?

Well, this outlines my question perfectly. People seem to claim it is possible (although the only case i've known has been friend of a friend of a friend etc and turned out they were telling fibs).
But if for some reason they CAN do it (you book a test, you turn up on the day but don't get the test so you're in the system), then you could argue that a false positive is better than a false negative, although a VOID result would be much better.

 

[102 fan]

It happens for all sorts - it's basically the same as being remanded in custody.



You'd presumably have a dedicated facility. A commandeered hotel would be more likely, and that's how some countries (generally ones that have done this rather better than us) have done it.

Being remanded in custody is usually for crimes way more serious than not Isolating.

Unless you want to replicate East Germany in the 50's, then continue to lock people up, you're setting a precedent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Being remanded in custody is usually for crimes way more serious than not Isolating.

Unless you want to replicate East Germany in the 50's, then continue to lock people up, you're setting a precedent.

Of course, you can avoid it by doing as you're told in what is a rather special, once every hundred years case.

 

[island]

How to stop people downloading their App, and get those that do to delete!

BBC News - Coronavirus: Police get access to NHS Test and Trace self-isolation data

Coronavirus: Police get access to NHS Test and Trace self-isolation data

Forces in England will have access on a "case-by-case basis" to data on whether a person has been told to self-isolate.

www.bbc.co.uk

Except that deleting the app makes it more likely, not less, that you will be be caught in this particular dragnet.

 

[102 fan]

Except that deleting the app makes it more likely, not less, that you will be be caught in this particular dragnet.

You think it won't extend to the app?

 

[island]

At the moment, it doesn’t. I know that for a fact, because the regulations that require you to self-isolate if contacted by test & trace specifically exclude contact via the app.

If, at a future date, the facts change, I may change my mind.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You think it won't extend to the app?

It can't extend to the app because the app does not contain any personal details.

Only if you book a test via the app, or enter details of an existing test, does it know who the user is beyond the first bit of their postcode.

 

[PeterC]

Given Plusnet pack their internet routers so they will pass through most letter boxes packing these kits in a pack far larger than necessary just doesn't make sense not to mention wasteful of cardboard etc.

Maybe the signature, or at least proof of handover since in my home and work area you just verbally confirm receipt and the postie marks the machine, is to stop the kits getting ' intercepted ' in transit ? Are the contents already personalised or do you just complete the form / labels ? I do wonder though just as in this case how many deliveries and hence tests will be delayed.

Priority Postboxes are something new to me. Given now the latest posting time at many street boxes is 9am or 10am I can understand the idea of the kits for return to be into boxes outside Post Offices or Delivery Offices with collection times 5pm or later if possible again for a quicker return but for some just using the nearest box could be the fastest route back to the test lab.

One of the 3 postboxes in my village has been made "priority" and has a 4pm collection. Handy when I almost forgot to post a birthday card last week.

 

[Richard Scott]

Of course, you can avoid it by doing as you're told in what is a rather special, once every hundred years case.

Yes but we've done that, have realised all these efforts are futile and fed up with everything changing. Be easier to do as we were told if we knew what the rules are but there are loads of them, seems even Government ministers are unsure and they came up with them. Have grown tired of the whole thing and fed up with it all. Sorry but many are feeling the same, can't help how we feel, even many of the vulnerable have had enough (they gave around where I live along with my mother and her friend who would fall into vulnerable category) but the do gooders can't see it.

 

[102 fan]

It can't extend to the app because the app does not contain any personal details.

Only if you book a test via the app, or enter details of an existing test, does it know who the user is beyond the first bit of their postcode.

At the moment. Do you not think if the Police/Government wanted to know they could easily find out?

 

[ASharpe]

I had last week off work so I've been travelling around a bit and been to plenty of pubs. Bu taken care with hand washing and wearing the plague mask.

I started with a bit of a cough on Friday that got worse overnight. Booked a test Saturday morning and had it two hours later at a popup drive though location.

Did the test myself with one stick on the tonsils and then up my nose. It was very unpleasant.

Got a negative results at 04:30 Monday morning - about 40 hours later. Great timing as it meant my daughter could go to nursery and me to work.

 

[Bikeman78]

Wife had been under the weather for a day or two over the weekend, but lost sense of smell and taste quite suddenly on Sunday evening, so she booked a test at the Edinburgh Airport drive through site on Monday morning. I drove her there because she wasn't feeling up to driving herself. It was very easy to book and everything was quick and efficient, but the place was a dystopian horror and I found it very disturbing.

Result - positive - arrived Tuesday at about 1am. I ordered test kits for the rest of us, myself and 2 adult kids (18 and 20). Arrived yesterday, posted in my nearest priority postbox today. Fully expecting 3 more positives because we're all ill.

How's it going? Are you and your family feeling better?

 

[Journeyman]

How's it going? Are you and your family feeling better?

I've never felt so ill in my life, and I still feel absolutely dreadful.

 

[Bantamzen]

At the moment. Do you not think if the Police/Government wanted to know they could easily find out?

No they couldn't find out using the app, as the data is stored only on the device. Only when someone reports a positive result does the users phone transmit data, and even that is anonymised.

 

[duncanp]

Thought I would share this story from the BBC, which shows just how pathetic the Track & Trace system is.

'We had more than 60 calls from test-and-trace'

One family in London say they received scores of long, repetitive calls from contact tracers.

www.bbc.co.uk

So, not only do Track and Trace fail to contact all the people they need to, they often contact the same family multiple times after one member of the family tests positive.

Note the sentence in the article which reads "...Essentially we were dealing with a broken excel spreadsheet, personified by a very nice person...."

Two weeks ago, Martin Usborne, a publisher who lives in east London, found out a close family contact had coronavirus. A few days later his wife, Ann, and their one-year-old daughter, also tested positive.

From that moment on, Martin says his wife's phone would not stop ringing. Over the course of 10 days, Ann had 30 separate calls from NHS Test and Trace that she managed to pick up. On top of this were another 27 calls that were missed. And then there were the half a dozen calls her husband received.
"At one point she would finish one call and as soon as she put the phone down - literally seconds later - another contact tracer would ring. And as soon as that call was over, test-and-trace would call my phone.
"This really was not the easiest situation to deal with, particularly while looking after our two small children," Mr Usborne told the BBC.
Some calls were made because Ann had been in contact the family acquaintance, who works in her home, while others were to tell her that her young girls (one and three years old) had been near the same person.
'Dog with the wrong bone'
Next came the calls because Ann had tested positive, calls because her little one had tested positive and then calls to alert her older toddler that she had been in contact with someone else one who had the virus (this time her mother).
The family understands some of these calls were necessary and is keen to stress that everyone they spoke to was kind and considerate and did their job well, but Mr Usborne is very concerned there has been a significant waste of resources.
"The majority of calls were long and repetitive, with different callers reading out the same script each time, asking the same questions and giving the same answers," he says.
And the family say when they told contact tracers they had heard the exact same thing several times already, the callers apologised but said they would have to complete the entire phone call or it would not register and someone else would simply ring again.
Mr Usborne told the BBC: "Essentially we were dealing with a broken excel spreadsheet, personified by a very nice person.
"In a way it was quite impressive as they were really persistent - but it was like a dog who had got the wrong bone."
Later in the week, calls from contact tracers became more helpful, with some checking the family were OK and giving them information on when their isolation would end.
But Mr Usborne says they received conflicting advice about how long they had to remain at home. The NHS Covid-19 app recommended his wife stay indoors a few days longer than contact tracers suggested, for example.
He added: "The people were super-nice about it but one contact tracer admitted they worked on a different system to the app and would continue to use theirs. Which one is right?"
'Losing trust'
They are now not quite certain when exactly it is safe to go out and are isolating for the longest suggested time. And, more crucially, they say they are not sure if they can trust the advice at all.
The family feels there needs to be a lot more done to join up the dots, so that contact tracers are alerted if someone has already been called and the system recognises when callers have already spoken to parents or carers responsible for small children in the same household.
Mr Usborne also feels there should be a way for the hard-working humans on the other end of the phone to override the computer system if a family tells them they have received multiple, repetitive calls, all week long.

 

[102 fan]

No they couldn't find out using the app, as the data is stored only on the device. Only when someone reports a positive result does the users phone transmit data, and even that is anonymised.

At the risk of repeating myself, that's what's happening at the moment, but given the way things are going, do you actually trust the government not to gain access to this at some point?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've never felt so ill in my life, and I still feel absolutely dreadful.

Get well soon.

At the risk of repeating myself, that's what's happening at the moment, but given the way things are going, do you actually trust the government not to gain access to this at some point?

There's nothing there to get access to. You don't give it any personal data, ergo it hasn't got any to gain access to.

The conspiracy theory might have it that it's tieing itself into your Google account, but as the source is public it'd be hard to get away with that.

 

[Bantamzen]

At the risk of repeating myself, that's what's happening at the moment, but given the way things are going, do you actually trust the government not to gain access to this at some point?

There's nothing for them to get, the data is stored locally on the device unless the user agrees to send data as the result of a positive test. Even then the data is anonymised and is designed to send messages directly to other registered devices that may have been in close contact of the one reporting the positive test. This is been heavily discussed in the thread on the app.

 

[Bikeman78]

I've never felt so ill in my life, and I still feel absolutely dreadful.

Ouch, that's not good. Hope you all feel better soon.

 

[trebor79]

So, based on the WHO's recent estimate of an IFR of 0.23% and some cigarette packet maths, and the number of deaths that we've had, roughly 27% of the population. This is fairly concurrent with the combined facts of the 8% estimate, and the studies from sweden that suggest a 2:1 ratio on T cells to antibodies, giving a spread of 24% as a base level.

I have seen some scholarly articles suggesting the same thing. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as just applying 0.23% IFR to the number of deaths et voila. We know for example that the virus was seeded into many care homes through and incompetent and ill-thought out plan to empty the hospitals in advance of the expected wave of COVID patients. Some care homes saw a third or more of the residents die as a result.
Essentially, the virus was seeded into high-risk populations at a far higher prevalance than in the general community. You can't apply a population-wide IFR and get the right number - we would need to know the IFR for the particular cohort that was infected.
So you'd need to break down the deaths into age bands, apply the IFR for each age band and then work out what that means for an indicative proportion of the population who have so far been infected.

Total number of people so far infected is likely to be somewhere between the 8% Whitty et al cited on the telly a few weeks ago and the 30% ish a straight back-calculation of the overall IFR yields.

 

[DustyBin]

Could this explain the high rate of infection in the UK versus South Korea and Japan, who many believe have the virus under control?:

Daily COVID-19 tests per 1,000 people

7-day rolling average. Comparisons across countries are affected by differences in testing policies and reporting methods.

ourworldindata.org