# Covid testing - delays - what is the issue ? Just isolate



## cmalone

No expert - why is testing required?

  If person suspects they have covid - isolate and wait out the two weeks to recover ... nothing less. Nothing more.

General treatment is paraceutimol and fluids for majority of patients. Doctor cannot prescribe anything else. 

Understand another five days without symptoms and that’s the height of it. ..,


----------



## odyssey06

What about your contacts...

What if you are a frontline worker with a cold...

If everyone with mild symptoms of a respiratory illness and their contacts isolate for that amount of time it adds up to a lot of people out of action.

Look at the numbers of people with negative tests.

Extensive and fast testing is a key part of any strategy for loosening restrictions








						Coronavirus: Is insufficient testing a big weakness in our attack?
					

Eventual return to any type of normality will be hindered by stalled tests and results




					www.irishtimes.com


----------



## cmalone

Agreed .., pre symptomatic transmission is the most dangerous stage I expect ...


----------



## Leo

cmalone said:


> Agreed .., pre symptomatic transmission is the most dangerous stage I expect ...



Pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic. They're estimating asymptomatic cases now account for 30-50% of cases here.


----------



## cmalone

That’s where the focus should be to guide people most


----------



## Sophrosyne

I haven’t seen the daily news briefings in a while but testing in Ireland seems to have ramped up considerably.

The Worldometer website is showing 153,954 tests or 31,179 per million population.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

cmalone said:


> No expert - why is testing required?



I think that is a very good question and probably will be asked in our planning for a future pandemic.


It takes weeks to get tested
It takes further weeks to get the results.
There are too many false negatives - someone said it is as high as 40%

Not sure how useful such delayed and unreliable information is. 

1) they might well tell someone "You don't have Covid" which could mean any of the following three things

 you did not have Covid when we did the test 10 days ago"
You had Covid but it's a false negative 
You had Covid when you booked the test, but it was gone by the time you had the test
, You did not have it then - but you might have developed it since 

2) They tell someone"You had Covid 10 days ago when we did the test" which could mean

You had it 10 days ago and might have recovered by now
it was a false positive 
Telling someone that they had Covid 10 days ago is probably useful in that they probably have some level of immunity, although this is not certain either.


If the test were quick and reliable, you could use it to test asymptomatic health care workers every couple of weeks. 

Or residents in care homes. 

Brendan


----------



## Ceist Beag

Brendan Burgess said:


> It takes weeks to get tested
> It takes further weeks to get the results.


I don't believe that is accurate Brendan. As of last night Fergal Bowers said that the timeframe (from being referred for a test to getting results) was 3-4 days in the community and 48 hours in hospitals. Have you any official data showing it is still taking weeks both to get a test and then to get results after? I think you are referring to how it was back in March.

The main reason I see testing being so important is to allow restrictions to be eased as testing will then help to calibrate future decisions; either further easing of restrictions or imposing more restrictions again.
It may also allow certain regions to be managed differently, if they have data to show some regions have a high number of cases while other regions don't.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Hi Ceist 

My point is that it's pointless if it's not being done very quickly not just from the test to the results but from the symptoms to booking the test to doing the test to the results. 

Brendan


----------



## Ceist Beag

Agreed Brendan but I think even at 3-4 days turnaround it's a lot better than the weeks and weeks you were suggesting. I'm not sure what they are aiming for in terms of turnaround time but if it was 48 hours that would certainly help the decision makers.


----------



## allaround

is every community facility now reporting a 3-4 day turnaround?, I'm still aware of individuals awaiting test results greater than 8 days


----------



## Ceist Beag

Yeah that would be the concern alright. You hear it said that turnaround is 3-4 days but if anecdotal evidence contradicts it would be good to get honest and accurate data on the real turnaround time.


----------



## michaelm

Ceist Beag said:


> it would be good to get honest and accurate data on the real turnaround time.


Such transparency is disappointingly lacking.  In mid-March Harris said we'd have 100,000 tests per week within a week . . now six weeks later they are saying 100,000 per week in three week time.  Tests are not much use unless they can be procured and results obtained in a short time-frame.  All this is delaying the unwinding of the lockdown. 

Having failed on both testing and nursing homes it now looks like that advising against masks may have been another misstep and they now seem to be preparing the ground for a volte-face on same.  We had a week or two more than some badly affected countries to prepare and learn lessons, we could have, and should have, done better.


----------



## Purple

This New York Times article says that those in groups which have a high risk of spreading the disease (medical sector, food processing, delivery and logistics, shop employees etc) should be tested every 5 days.


----------



## Purple

To do this in Ireland we'd need to be conducting hundreds of thousands of tests a week.


----------



## losttheplot

But the accuracy of the swift tests outside hospitals makes them useless. UK wasted millions on home testing kits.


----------



## michaelm

We need next day results (or 48 hour results at a minimum).  We've had months to iron out the testing regime, but alas.


----------



## confused12

Here in Aus we get a test within 1-2 days and results in 24 hours. Pretty good. But a much bigger country etc


----------



## christopher..

The testing of the virus is only a fire fighting measure. It tells you if you are positive at a set moment in time. It helps to prevents the spread of the virus and reduce the human to human transmission by making the person aware they are positive. 

We are a host for the virus helping it to replicate. Wealth, politics, age and gender are immaterial. People are dying every day. A young woman died today without any of her family because of the virus.

How do we utilise testing to reopen the country and keep our families safe? Laboratories are or will be able to test for current and past infections. Extra research should be carried out in tandem with infection testing. 

Home kits are similar to pregnancy kits. False positives and negatives are possible. The medics advised against them.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

I heard this Nobel prize winner on the radio yesterday 









						Paul Romer - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




He says that we should be just testing people who don't have symptoms. 

It is pointless testing people who have the symptoms.

Brendan


----------



## Sunny

Brendan Burgess said:


> I heard this Nobel prize winner on the radio yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Romer - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He says that we should be just testing people who don't have symptoms.
> 
> It is pointless testing people who have the symptoms.
> 
> Brendan



But is the issue then you get a load of negative results and those same people then go out the next day feeling invincible and then get infected and then they have infected a load more people by the time they get symptoms. You would need to be continuously testing people without symptoms. I can understand why it has to do be done to see what community transmission is happening but I am not sure I agree that it is pointless testing people with symptoms.


----------



## christopher..

Using testing data, enables the HSE to identify clusters, monitor the spread of the virus by statistically calculating the probability of the spread, perform contact tracing and identify outbreaks in the future. 

It is difficult to test the entire population due to the time constraints and availability of testing commodities. 

We should be following New York's lead and perform random sampling to identify asymptomatic carriers or people who have antibody immunity. This will reassure and help more people back to work. 

Why are universities and outlets not performing research? Surveys of the irish population via social media or newspapers? Future symptoms post covid

We need entrepreneurs to create gagets to help how companies comply with social distancing.

The WHO said in a live broadcast of the importance of identifying the intermediate host to prevent a pandemic again.


----------



## Leo

christopher.. said:


> Why are universities and outlets not performing research? Surveys of the irish population via social media or newspapers? Future symptoms post covid



There is tonnes of research underway on all facets of COVID-19. A survey via social media or newspapers wouldn't meet the criteria to be taken seriously as scientific research though, you can't implement proper controls on the data set.




christopher.. said:


> We need entrepreneurs to create gagets to help how companies comply with social distancing.



They already exist. You can get room density scanners that monitor the number of people in a space, numbers coming through doors, etc., but they're not cheap. You're talking billions to install across all large workplaces. We have had some on trial in our workplace since before this broke.


----------



## allaround

community test results are still taking in excess of 7 days, don't get caught up in the waffle of a quick turnaround, this MUST be improved prior to any restrictions being lifted, hospital test results take a matter of hours


----------



## Sunny

To be honest, to have an average turnaround of 5 days for tests after two months of lockdown is not acceptable. I gave them the benefit of the doubt but we bought the HSE and public health bodies a significant amount of time to get all this in place. Easing restrictions with such a long turnaround is dangerous. What is the delay? Not hearing about delays with getting tested so where is the bottleneck? Is it labs? Lack of equipment?


----------



## Mackem

I think it is high time the HSE got their collective fingers out and gave us the level of testing that they promised us many weeks ago i.e. 15k per day. Heading into the weekend before last we were told that they would have testing complete in the nursing homes by the end of that weekend but this evening we were told that they have just finished in the nursing homes this weekend. Testing (or lack of it) is now the obvious weakest link in the whole plan and has been from very early on and the so called journalists at the daily press conferences don’t seem to want to ask their hosts any really awkward questions in this regard.


----------



## Ceist Beag

Sunny said:


> To be honest, to have an average turnaround of 5 days for tests after two months of lockdown is not acceptable. I gave them the benefit of the doubt but we bought the HSE and public health bodies a significant amount of time to get all this in place. Easing restrictions with such a long turnaround is dangerous. What is the delay? Not hearing about delays with getting tested so where is the bottleneck? Is it labs? Lack of equipment?


Agreed Sunny. We have been told since the beginning that testing is crucial. As you say we have all played our part but those in charge of testing have not done their bit based on their own promises and it's getting quite frustrating. We should be told the real story, what is holding it up and what is the reason for that. Is it still the lack of reagent (which we're told is out of their control) or is it something within our control. We keep hearing of promises around the number of tests to be carried out but tbh at this stage I'm more concerned with the time taken from requesting a test to getting the results.


----------



## myate

My other half works in a nursing home. Tested last week. Still no results! Was actually told their results (maybe tests) (not just hers, a good few of them) are gone missing.


----------



## Purple

Imagine someone who has spent 20 years sitting on a couch, eating crisps and watching daytime TV. Now they are trying to run a marathon. They are 100% committed to running it and are trying their best. But they can't; They are 20 stone and get out of breath going to the fridge.
That's the HSE; they, collectively, have resisted reform , encourages waste and inefficiency and have collectively brainwashed themselves into blaming everyone else for their shortcomings. Now they have a hero complex. How on earth do you expect them to be better than this?


----------



## Sunny

According to the briefing today, there were about 44000 tests carried out in the past week. Are we not supposed to be at double this at this stage??? Nobody seems to be questioning anymore. They do the briefing, announce some figures and off we go. Where exactly are we with testing? Clusters in nursing homes, prisons, direct provision and in Roma and traveller communities. Are they any clusters in the general population? In any towns, villages, cities that cant be explained by the above groupings. There might well be but the figures dont suggest there are. But that could be because we have no idea what is there. So back to original point. Where are we with testing?


----------



## llgon

Sunny said:


> Nobody seems to be questioning anymore. They do the briefing, announce some figures and off we go.



Perhaps it's part of our culture?



Sunny said:


> Again, I am not in any position to question either the WHO or the HSE. Just like they are not in a position to question what I do in my job.


----------



## Sunny

llgon said:


> Perhaps it's part of our culture?



That's weeks and numerous briefings where testing was going to be in place the following week and we were on track. We are 8 weeks down the line, testing half what they said they would and say things will be better once they automate sending negative results back to people. There is a limit. If they come out and tell us where the issue is then fair enough. But 8 weeks of pushing the can down the road is enough.

Never mind the tracing app that was going to be crucial for the restrictions to be lifted. Now it will a role to play but it will be a small one.


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> That's weeks and numerous briefings where testing was going to be in place the following week and we were on track. We are 8 weeks down the line, testing half what they said they would and say things will be better once they automate sending negative results back to people. There is a limit. If they come out and tell us where the issue is then fair enough. But 8 weeks of pushing the can down the road is enough.
> 
> Never mind the tracing app that was going to be crucial for the restrictions to be lifted. Now it will a role to play but it will be a small one.


The organisations involved have a strong culture of not having any real accountability. They can't change that in 8 weeks; it is bred into them. Leadership, decision making, accountability and good process design are simply alien concepts.They are the fat guy on the couch. They are doing their best but there are just lots of things, lots of skills, that they simply don't have.


----------



## Sunny

Well years of complete mismanagement is showing up now when different hospitals are using different computer systems that can't talk to each other or else are using out of date operating systems. Crazy that any organisation would allow that to happen. I know the argument that they can't be spending money on IT projects when there are waiting lists but it is a false economy. I know it is very difficult to build something like this up from scratch but to be still talking about automating text messages for negative results at this stage is a bit crazy.

Also I heard them say that tracing now is more complicated with patients in residential settings because they might not be able to verbalise so it is taking longer. If a residential setting can't at this stage give the name of every person that has been in contact with a patient over the two weeks, we need to start talking negligence.


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> Well years of complete mismanagement is showing up now when different hospitals are using different computer systems that can't talk to each other or else are using out of date operating systems. Crazy that any organisation would allow that to happen. I know the argument that they can't be spending money on IT projects when there are waiting lists but it is a false economy. I know it is very difficult to build something like this up from scratch but to be still talking about automating text messages for negative results at this stage is a bit crazy.


 The problem isn't the IT systems, it is getting the workforce to agree to use them. Every change is resisted and in effect everyone has a veto. Therefore nothing changes from a systems and process perspective and billions are wasted every year. Then the same people complain about lack of resources, waste and inefficiency.


----------



## Leo

Purple said:


> The problem isn't the IT systems,



Exactly, when they have tried to implement national standard systems, each hospital group still insist that the solution must comply to all their current idiosyncratic work practices and procedures to the point that it becomes nigh on impossible integrate them all. Changes to work practices are resisted unless they comes with more money, even when the proposed changes would make everyone's lives easier.


----------



## Sunny

To be fair to staff, it is not them that decide that many of their PC's/Laptops still run on Windows 7 and need to pay over 1m this to Microsoft for extended support. I don't care how complicated your business is. You know that operation systems have shelf lives and you plan. To allow over 60% of your computer hardware to run on end of life operating system is just careless. Even the simple idea that they have a case of Mac's trying to talk to Pc's and that is leading to testing delays shows how totally disjointed the whole system is.


----------



## Leo

Sunny said:


> To be fair to staff, it is not them that decide that many of their PC's/Laptops still run on Windows 7 and need to pay over 1m this to Microsoft for extended support.



Those managing the IT infrastructure, or failing to do so, are staff too.


----------



## Purple

Leo said:


> Those managing the IT infrastructure, or failing to do so, are staff too.


Yes; they are the HSE. So are the nurses and doctors and administrators and everyone else. The HSE is not some abstract concept, it is the people who work there.


----------



## Sunny

Leo said:


> Those managing the IT infrastructure, or failing to do so, are staff too.



I don't know what happens where you work but I certainly don't get a say in company's worldwide IT strategy and certainly not involved in keeping an eye on things to ensure that my computer is going to work tomorrow. I am not paid to do that. I get paid to do other things. But hey lets blame all staff for every shortcoming. Bloody lazy public sector. Blaming IT failures on nurses, doctors, cleaning staff and others in the HSE is like blaming the pilot for crashing a plane that wasn't maintained properly because the airline decided to save costs and use cheap parts. Why didn't the pilot take the plane apart before flying it? Oh right, because other people are paid to that job and he trusted them to do it.


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> I don't know what happens where you work but I certainly don't get a say in company's worldwide IT strategy and certainly not involved in keeping an eye on things to ensure that my computer is going to work tomorrow. I am not paid to do that. I get paid to do other things. But hey lets blame all staff for every shortcoming. Bloody lazy public sector. Blaming IT failures on nurses, doctors, cleaning staff and others in the HSE is like blaming the pilot for crashing a plane that wasn't maintained properly because the airline decided to save costs and use cheap parts. Why didn't the pilot take the plane apart before flying it? Oh right, because other people are paid to that job and he trusted them to do it.


Do you get a veto over every proposed change in your employers IT system that has any impact on you? No? Okay, that's the difference.


----------



## Sunny

Purple said:


> Do you get a veto over every proposed change in your employers IT system that has any impact on you? No? Okay, that's the difference.




Either do HSE staff. Do you think they held a vote to decide to upgrade off Windows 7 or not??


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> Either do HSE staff. Do you think they held a vote to decide to upgrade off Windows 7 or not??


No, but they, through their union, get to veto any substantive change or reform which would standardise everything from contracts to IT systems.


----------



## Leo

Sunny said:


> I don't know what happens where you work but I certainly don't get a say in company's worldwide IT strategy and certainly not involved in keeping an eye on things to ensure that my computer is going to work tomorrow.



I do get a say, yes. But just in part of course, because I only manage a small part of a massive international infrastructure. But, in my company, I manage my piece for the enterprise, so the decisions my team and I make for the technology areas we manage affect all our sites around the globe. Where my efficient organisation differs from the HSE is that there isn't an equivalent of my role in every single office around the world, all getting to make their own decisions on how to address each requirement. 



Sunny said:


> But hey lets blame all staff for every shortcoming. Bloody lazy public sector. Blaming IT failures on nurses, doctors, cleaning staff and others in the HSE is like blaming the pilot for crashing a plane...



Where did I all say nurses, doctors or cleaners were the issue here, or all staff? It's clearly not all staff, but it's the hundreds of decision makers, the decentralised and duplicated decision making and multiple vested interests all putting themselves before everything else. My wife works in a front line role in one of the major hospitals, I get to hear all her frustration about repeated failures in decision making, purchasing and procurement. Remember the Dail printer scandal? She has multiple similar stories from her hospital alone. She's not in a management role, but is involved in decision making on major contracts because her direct managers who are the decision makers for that service in that hospital have no idea what they're doing, so they delegate and she does it because if she doesn't, they end up with equipment they can't use.

You seem to believe that HSE staff are not making purchasing decisions, who do you think does?


----------



## Sunny

Leo said:


> I do get a say, yes. But just in part of course, because I only manage a small part of a massive international infrastructure. But, in my company, I manage my piece for the enterprise, so the decisions my team and I make for the technology areas we manage affect all our sites around the globe. Where my efficient organisation differs from the HSE is that there isn't an equivalent of my role in every single office around the world, all getting to make their own decisions on how to address each requirement.
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I all say nurses, doctors or cleaners were the issue here, or all staff? It's clearly not all staff, but it's the hundreds of decision makers, the decentralised and duplicated decision making and multiple vested interests all putting themselves before everything else. My wife works in a front line role in one of the major hospitals, I get to hear all her frustration about repeated failures in decision making, purchasing and procurement. Remember the Dail printer scandal? She has multiple similar stories from her hospital alone. She's not in a management role, but is involved in decision making on major contracts because her direct managers who are the decision makers for that service in that hospital have no idea what they're doing, so they delegate and she does it because if she doesn't, they end up with equipment they can't use.
> 
> You seem to believe that HSE staff are not making purchasing decisions, who do you think does?



So you would introduce a piece of local technology that would mean that your part of the organisation couldn't talk to another part in another country and you would still have a job? You can have all the local staff you want making decisions on a decentralised basis but I bet you that you still have to adhere to 1000 policy and standard documents about what can be done and can't be done to ensure that there is some uniformity across the organisation in areas such as network security. Otherwise you would have entity in Country deciding that skype was great and another entity deciding that Zoom was great and then arrange a conference call. Does your company have a Chief Technology Officer? I bet he does and I bet he doesn't let you do what you want with your local infrastructure and technology at the expense of the entire company.

Most 'Staff' are not decision makers. The nurses and doctors just want to give the best care for their patients. The kitchen staff want to make the best meals. The admin staff want to ensure paperwork is accurate and processed quickly. The lab technicians want to ensure testing is correct. The IT system admin guys want to ensure everything works and is safe.  The majority of 'staff' are not paid to worry about IT software or infrastructure budgets. Majority of staff don't have any decision making involvement in procurement or IT. They rely on highly paid senior managers of which there are plenty of them in the HSE to this for them and dictate strategy and budgets. 

I am sure your wife those a great job. But I am also sure there are thousands of people just like her in the Health Service that don't deserve to be included in the term 'staff' when discussing HSE failures.. Just like I am sure that there are plenty of wasters like in every organisation. They work for a dysfunctional organisation that has been a football for politicians to kick around, a weapon for trade unions and a cash cow for plenty of parasitic private companies.


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> The admin staff want to ensure paperwork is accurate and processed quickly. The lab technicians want to ensure testing is correct. The IT system admin guys want to ensure everything works and is safe. The majority of 'staff' are not paid to worry about IT software or infrastructure budgets. Majority of staff don't have any decision making involvement in procurement or IT. They rely on highly paid senior managers of which there are plenty of them in the HSE to this for them and dictate strategy and budgets.


That's the problem right there, thaat perception.
In the HSE, or any State body, everyone effectively has a veto, through their union, over any real change. So the CTO or any other high level manager can try to introduce any change they like but if one department in one hospital or administrative centre doesn't like that change and gets their union involved then it doesn't happen. That's the reason for process duplication, inefficient system and waste  which diverts resources away from where they are needed and causes those trolly numbers and kills people. Those doctors and nurses and administrators and technicians are, along with the managers who came from the same stock, the problem.


----------



## Leo

Sunny said:


> So you would introduce a piece of local technology that would mean that your part of the organisation couldn't talk to another part in another country and you would still have a job?



No, unlike the HSE, I'd be on a performance plan and managed out the door if I signed-off on something that wasn't fit for purpose. There's no way I'd be left in my position to continue making bad decisions that cost the company money.



Sunny said:


> You can have all the local staff you want making decisions on a decentralised basis but I bet you that you still have to adhere to 1000 policy and standard documents about what can be done and can't be done to ensure that there is some uniformity across the organisation in areas such as network security.



Of course we have policies on what is, and is not allowed. They're not prescriptive to the point of becoming burdensome to comply with, but they ensure that I, and all others making purchasing or system specification decisions do so with full knowledge of the environment our solutions need to operate in. The HSE is sadly lacking in such clarity.



Sunny said:


> Otherwise you would have entity in Country deciding that skype was great and another entity deciding that Zoom was great and then arrange a conference call. Does your company have a Chief Technology Officer? I bet he does and I bet he doesn't let you do what you want with your local infrastructure and technology at the expense of the entire company.



That's my whole point, we appoint a single person to be responsible for each service or technology for the entire organisation. We have a single person responsible for deciding on what conferencing tool we will use. They decide that, and every site adopts it. If they just suit the local needs and fail to take the wider org into account, that's considered a failure. People are people, we all make mistakes, but if those in decision making roles in my org don't learn from their mistakes, they are moved to a different role or they're managed out the door. In the HSE world, you can have every single hospital making their own decisions with no view on the wider org, with no repercussions for poor decisions, so the same bad decisions gade made time and time again.




Sunny said:


> But I am also sure there are thousands of people just like her in the Health Service that don't deserve to be included in the term 'staff' when discussing HSE failures..



Those thousands of people are still staff. We need to accept when people are critical of inefficiencies in the HSE, those criticisms are not being leveled at every single staff member. Many of those in decision making roles in the HSE worked their way up through the system, they are intimately aware of the shortcomings and challenges, but yet fail to address them. 



Sunny said:


> Just like I am sure that there are plenty of wasters like in every organisation. They work for a dysfunctional organisation that has been a football for politicians to kick around, a weapon for trade unions and a cash cow for plenty of parasitic private companies.



Politicians certainly don't help, but they don't set the culture.


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> But I am also sure there are thousands of people just like her in the Health Service that don't deserve to be included in the term 'staff' when discussing HSE failures


People can do a great job while also being part of the problem. If the current system or process is inefficient and you are blocking changes which would improve it then you are part of the problem. At the same time you could be working you ass off, going above and beyond, in the existing inefficient system.
Think of it this way; 
You work on a production line performing two tasks which required you to move 20 feet every 90 seconds.  There are 20 people performing the same task in the business and you are, by far, the fastest operator on the line.
Your boss proposed a restructuring of the production line which would move your two tasks 2 feet apart and thereby increase productivity by 25% and reduce headcount by 15%. You refuse to accept the change.

You are simultaneously the best worker there and the biggest problem.

In the health service those are the people responsible for patient deaths and long waiting lists.


----------



## lff12

michaelm said:


> We need next day results (or 48 hour results at a minimum).  We've had months to iron out the testing regime, but alas.



Hospital tests give results within 8hrs because they have a lab they can walk to.

Others are using couriers to move the results to the labs. There is no central system to record tests.
So some test labs take longer than others - that is why there is inconsistencies depending on where you took the test.

Then again, if you are going into hospital, they test you at 8am the day before. You go in, take your test, and 4pm someone phones you to say if you have it or not. The problem with that is that this presume a) it isn't a false negative or b) the patient doesn't then catch covid19 in the interim, and goes into a non covid19 ward in the hospital where they then infect other patients and staff.

The same scenario is potentially possible also outside healthcare. You test everyone on Wednesdays, get the results Friday - but colleagues who happily tested negative on Wednesday went somewhere last night so they don't know that in fact they are positive, by which time they've already infected 3 or 4 others who also had negative tests and are going out tonight to celebrate.

Its essential we keep up social distancing and restriction movement as much as possible. Testing only tells you what you had on the day you were tested. But what happens after that is up to you.


----------



## odyssey06

By way of comparison - Denmark to roll out testing to the general population regardless of symptoms or risk status.








						The Copenhagen Post - Danish News in English
					

Move is part of Denmark’s new national testing strategy. All adults in Denmark can be tested for coronavirus this week




					cphpost.dk


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> By way of comparison - Denmark to roll out testing to the general population regardless of symptoms or risk status.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Copenhagen Post - Danish News in English
> 
> 
> Move is part of Denmark’s new national testing strategy. All adults in Denmark can be tested for coronavirus this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cphpost.dk


Yep, in a country with a lower per capita spend on healthcare than Ireland. 
Their heroes seem to do a better job than our heroes.


----------



## mathepac

At least one European country willing to learn from the outstanding work done by the South Koreans. They developed a virus test within days of the first case being detected, rolled out their "test and trace" strategy almost immediately and got cooperation from financial institutions and telecomms providers to share location and movement information.

They mobilised a nationwide network of testing facilities and were the first to implement the "drive-through" test centre concept. Not all their fast tracked testing was 100% accurate, but it seems it erred on the side of caution when reinfections seemed to flare up. These turned out to be c. 2.5% false positives in some tests.

The price for their outstanding performance was acceptance by the general population that certain types of personal data were available for test and trace  and the pay-back was no shut down of their economy; slow-down yes but industry and vital services stayed operating.

This exceptional performance from a country closer to China than most of us (if in fact China is the source of the virus) and one that describes the Japanese as "lazy Koreans".

The Koreans as a nation were deeply ashamed of their performance during 2015 MERS outbreak and put plans in place to ensure they could cope better if future widespread health emergencies arose. Superb execution of an existing plan is what differentiated South Korea from most of the rest of the world who were left floundering, just like our pathetic so-called health service.

[EDIT: MERS is classified as a betacoronavirus]


----------



## odyssey06

Plan to antibody test a sample of the population being evaluated to start in June.








						Study to test for coronavirus antibodies in the Irish population expected to begin in June
					

Dr Cillian de Gascun said a random sample of the population will be invited to take the test.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## mathepac

Does anyone challenge the utter balderdash these guys are coming out with? So many promises, all broken in terms of dates and test targets achieved.

The only way to establish the prevalence of the virus in the population is to conduct mass testing and then track and trace contacts for positive tests, Anything else is akin to the mathematical modelling nonsense that held the population in thrall but achieved sweet fanny addams in terms of preserving precious lives.


----------



## Sunny

The lack of testing is bizarre. We are only using a fraction of the testing capacity. People are not contacting GP's with symptoms. If they believe that the virus is still at large in a significant amount in general population without symptoms, then as you say we should be testing up to our capacity every single day. From listening to them, recent cases seem to be meat factories and care facilities. So just how many general cases of the virus are in the general population at the moment? Going by the numbers they are reporting, the economic cost we are paying is completely out of sync with the health risk currently seen in the Country.


----------

