Am I right in thinking 48hrs is the "danger zone"

[icarriedamelon]

I saw a friend last Thursday (exactly a week ago)
We went for a walk with our small children(who were both in prams)

Whilst we kept our distance it was difficult to maintain 2m as some of the walkways were small so we were more like 1m apart.

She text this afternoon saying she's having a test as she has developed a cough today.

I've been looking online and from what I understand, track and trace are only interested in the people you have seen and had close contact with, 48hr prior to developing symptoms or from days 1-10 of having symptoms.

Am I right in thinking that I don't need to isolate as I didn't see her within 48 hours or her developing the symptoms?

[covetingthepreciousthings]

This is how I have understood it, that it's 48 hours prior to symptoms that track and trace are interested in.

[DamitJanet]

That’s true, if she’s positive then you won’t have to isolate. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible for her to have passed it to you in that time frame, just much less likely than those she would have seen within the 48 hours so energies are focussed where they’d have the biggest impact.

[onlinelinda]

Well that's news! I thought they believed you could get it up to 14 days previously? It matters to me, as it may suggest how I got it and whether a particular family member likely had it too.

[LilyPond2]

@onlinelinda Make sure you distinguish between two different things. The incubation period is up to 14 days (though there is a wide range and I understand most people start to show symptoms within a week of infection if they develop symptoms at all). However, it's clear that Test and Trace think the main danger time for being symptom free but infectious is in the 48 hours before a person starts to show symptoms.