Will you self isolate if covid positive test?

[Monopolyiscrap]

Compulsory self-isolation is ending if you test positive with covid. Instead, people are being advised to choose to self-isolate.
In reality, I think many people will not. I would not get paid if I self-isolate but am well enough to work, so why would I forego a week's wages?

So will you self-isolate if you test positive with covid?

YABU - Yes I will self-isolate
YANBU - No I will not self-isolate

@User0458832

I thought it was £30 for a pack of 7 lft.

Is it? I did query it on a thread but got no definitive answer back

5 of us in my household currently. Not going to go far

I'm in ROI, the cheapest tests here are €3 a test, but that's in big supermarkets and they sell out quickly. In smaller pharmacies they're more like €5 and I've paid more than that on occasion.

There is no definitive answer as the government haven’t said definitively how much they will cost.

Yes I will isolate, test and wear a mask.

I also do keep my children home with anything more than a runny nose. I don't send them out with HFM, chicken pox, on antibiotics or to swimming after upset tummy.

However, I understand I don't have to do those things and others don't have to do what I do. In reality I probably cause my children more harm by protecting immune system rather than exposing it. But that's how I am, and having been left with chronic PNA following covid and the pandemic I don't see me changing.

I guess a policy for if they will pay you sick pay when you aren't sick. If they will let you be off for the 5 - 10 days until you test negative again, even though you are well enough to work.

This is the bit a lot are missing. It doesn't matter if you currently have a great sick pay package, being asymptomatically positive for covid will no longer count as off sick. If you want to be off work when you don't need to be off work, it'll be unpaid leave or holiday allowance.

Sorry post above was trying to quote @agirlinacountrysong

@Allelbowsandtoes

Agreed. It’s like (or it should be like) anything that we are asked to do which has a personal cost or inconvenience attached to it : if it’s defined as being a social good then those Who lose out or who are inconvenienced need to be compensated or helped. It’s like recycling or driving less. We should not be asking people to give up the convenience of personal vehicles unless there is a free, seamless, convenient public transport alternative available. We can’t ask people to recycle - then only give them a tiny bin each week and make them drive to the tip if they want to recycle any more. So yes, ask people to test and isolate to protect the more vulnerable - but put in place decent sick pay across the board and effective home teaching for children who are out of school, and paid leave for parents who have to stay home to care for them.

@MargosKaftan

Sorry post above was trying to quote *@agirlinacountrysong*

About the workplaces adopting a policy?

We had that one at our place all through up to a few weeks ago

We were paid to isolate
Paid to be off with covid

People took the piss!! Left the rest of us to cope with a reduced workforce whilst people refused to vaccinate, therefore had to isolate. People sharing tests/doing multiple to keep them off

It was not sustainable

If I felt ill I'd stay home from work but if I felt okay then no, as far as my work would be concerned there'd be no reason for me to

I'll be interested to know how this will work in schools, if children are positive but well enough to be at school?

I can imagine schools asking parents not to send them in - but also if isolation is not legally required, parents will quite rightly be saying that their children are entitled to be there. Tricky.

We are all knackered from covering absences

Making us all ill with stress if nothing else. We cannot magic up cover for all roles

But we still get shouted at by the public who expect 'service'

I can imagine schools asking parents not to send them in - but also if isolation is not legally required, parents will quite rightly be saying that their children are entitled to be there. Tricky

The issue will be that parents won’t be paid to stay at home with their children if isolation is not legally required.

Yes. I think it's insane as a teacher. Twice this week we've had to send year groups home due to a lack of staff. Those ill with covid are ill with it , not the same as a cold. If I discover a child sat in front of me has covid I will be furious. I teach in a windowless room and am waiting for a filter after a monitor has shown how bad the air quality is. Other teachers have said the same. I know many children have been symptomless but it's not true of every one.

No. I've had enough of all this. I want normal life back. I'm jabbed boostered and all that and I won't be testing. And, before people start jumping on me I'm also CEV. I want to live, have fun and enjoy what's left of my life!

@ShallWeTalkAboutBruno

I can imagine schools asking parents not to send them in - but also if isolation is not legally required, parents will quite rightly be saying that their children are entitled to be there. Tricky

The issue will be that parents won’t be paid to stay at home with their children if isolation is not legally required.

Yes, this too. I don't know how it's going to work 🤷🏻‍♀️

Probably couldn't!

Work in a school. There's such a staff shortage due to covid even though so many pupils are also off with it.

I very much doubt any school children will stay home with it once isolation ends (well be back to unwell children being sent in "dosed up"and flaking by lunchtime.).

Pressure will return on school staff to work when unwell - even if they could just about manage a day the demands means it's takes longer to get well again.

I am not against removing isolation but I am concerned on the impact of staffing in schools as staff will catch it from kids and some staff aren't well enough to carry on and it won't be offset by pupil absence which currently makes it manageable (just!)

Yes. I work in a hospital so apart from it being massively irresponsible not to, it will most likely remain policy to do so.

I'd certainly stay away from people if I could, but I doubt my work place will be happy with me so they'll expect me in - my work colleagues won't be impressed though so that's another matter

I probably won't isolate as tightly as I have previously though - so I'd take the dog for a walk somewhere quiet/quiet time of day etc

@EveryFlightBeginsWithAFall

I've had covid twice and I wouldn't say it made me really ill but I wasn't well enough to go out the first 3 or 4 days anyway

I was the same, if I ended up feeling that rubbish again I probably wouldn't feel up to going out anyway!

Schools won't ask for kids to stay at home when they are positive but not sick. They haven't asked children to stay at home when negative but everyone else in their household is positive. (Even though within a few days those kids usually are positive as well!)

I do find it interesting that many people still get outraged when others compare covid to flu - as though flu is trivial and absolutely nothing and that covid is a far more serious illness.

I think we forget flu is an absolute killer. Many elderly people die with it than is ever recorded because we’ve never routinely tested like we have for covid. Prior to the pandemic, we were always advised to keep away from the doctors because there was nothing they could do and you risked spreading it so there were no doubt potentially millions of infections slipping under the wire.

I’ve had flu twice in my life - both times I was fit and healthy - and it completely floored me. For a week I could barely drag myself out of bed to get to the toilet, I was exhausted with any effort, I couldn’t eat and I felt like I was coughing my lungs up. I could do absolutely nothing except sleep. It took me weeks to finally shake off the symptoms. Flu can easily progress into pneumonia and cause long term lung damage but you never heard about ‘long flu/pneumonia’ before. We also never heard of asymptomatic flu - although 20% of those infected fall into this category and would have been unwittingly further spreading it to the potentially vulnerable, but again, without getting the whole population to test there would be no way of knowing.

Every one of us walk around carrying a whole ecosystem of bacteria and viruses that we are completely unaware of because our immune systems are primed to deal with them, so unless anyone is experiencing symptoms, testing is now a waste of time.

@Shelby1981

I'll be interested to know how this will work in schools, if children are positive but well enough to be at school?

I can imagine schools asking parents not to send them in - but also if isolation is not legally required, parents will quite rightly be saying that their children are entitled to be there. Tricky.

I can’t imagine loads of parents paying £30 for a box of 7 LFTs to test their children. If you’ve got a couple of kids that you’ve been testing a few times a week, that’s £30 a week.

So the school may well say not to send kids in with covid, but they can’t require parents to buy the LFTs. So any asymptomatic or mildly ill children will be in - more obviously ill children could reasonably be sent home for the day but presumably without any requirement to get a PCR if you have symptoms, they can come back the next day if better. Any policy or request by the school won’t really be relevant if no one is testing.

Well no I’m not trying to catch you out

But someone said “why would you test if not asymptomatic?” And you responded with “to stop the spread”.

Tbh I thought it was daft because unless you’re going to test every single time you leave your home when showing no symptoms - your point simply doesn’t stand to scrutiny at all. And sure enough I asked a clear question. You answered clearly. And confirmed that your point to the PP only stands when visiting aged relatives

That was to @TheOrigRights

if asymptomatic