Confused about secondary testing

[bathsh3ba]

So we have received information from school about the testing (secondary). If anyone gets a positive result, they have to be collected and then isolate for 10 days. But it says you don't have to follow it up with a PCR test and I thought you did? And also it doesn't say if siblings would be sent home. Presumably the whole household would have to isolate?

This is so utterly right wing though - claiming that the most dreadful thing is the prospect of someone "locking themselves away, unable to earn" for 10 days. When actually the greater danger to society comes from false negatives meaning that infectious people are left to continue normal life which increases the R rate and more people needlessly die.

Either or the point is if they are this inaccurate why would we do it? What’s the point? We’re better off taking them to an actual test centre for a PCR test to get a more accurate result

@JanFebAnyMonth

This is so utterly right wing though - claiming that the most dreadful thing is the prospect of someone "locking themselves away, unable to earn" for 10 days. When actually the greater danger to society comes from false negatives meaning that infectious people are left to continue normal life which increases the R rate and more people needlessly die.

I’m intrigued to why a false positive is such a big deal and no one is kicking off about false negatives meaning infection is still spreading. Particularly when the chance of a false negative is so much higher.

In terms of fucking up the vaccine roll out, giving a breeding ground to new variants and causing a 4th wave (and 4th lockdown) the false negative rate is of far more concern. The BMJ thinks so

www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n238

but in terms of children and their mental health (something the government was oh so worried about when they wanted to open schools with 30 to a classroom and no extra money) I have to agree with PP who say why on earth would you do the tests AT ALL if it's going to mean the whole family having to isolate repeatedly even if a PCR test is negative?

It's bonkers. No-one's going to do it.

Which makes me suspect the very inaccurate lateral flow debacle is more about funnelling money away from schools into the pockets of Tory donors rather than actually providing a tool that is at all useful in reducing infection levels of covid.

And the reason the media is going on about false positives and not false negatives is because schools are safe, dontcha know.

If you point out the extent to which false negatives could cause kids with covid to spread it in schools you have to admit that schools are in fact crowded, indoor environments perfect for covid (and new variant) spread and not the magical bastions of covid security we've been told.

Well, what if the false pos risk is lower than the risk of a false neg PCR test...

Yes that is a valid point @fiveoldteddies , however to know that we'd have to understand what causes false pos LFD results, whether those factors have an effect on PCR tests too, and we don't at all.

@fiveoldteddies

Well, what if the false pos risk is lower than the risk of a false neg PCR test...

It is , false positive rate on PCR is around 2.4%, false positive on LFD is estimated at between 0.001-0.003%

@mightyducks but it's the false negative rate on PCRs that's the worry in relation to false positive on LFTs

It's all pretty confusing!

Why would secondary students need to be collected, unless they normally use school transport?

Because they may live too far to walk / because they're supposed to isolate immediately.

The whole thing is a huge mess, in my opinion.

On the one hand, you've got a LFT which will only pick up 50% of positive results, so you'll have loads of kids with COVID still milling around school (and probably taking more risks, as behaviourally getting a negative result means that people are less cautious) spreading their COVID, and then you've got the false positives which now can't be overridden by a PCR, so you will have whole families off school and off work unnecessarily, and possibly several times.

I have given consent for my son to be tested (despite the fact he's got ASD and will really struggle with the testing) because I thought it was in the best interests of both him and others, but I really don't think that is the case now.

@testingtesting321

The whole thing is a huge mess, in my opinion.

On the one hand, you've got a LFT which will only pick up 50% of positive results, so you'll have loads of kids with COVID still milling around school (and probably taking more risks, as behaviourally getting a negative result means that people are less cautious) spreading their COVID, and then you've got the false positives which now can't be overridden by a PCR, so you will have whole families off school and off work unnecessarily, and possibly several times.

I have given consent for my son to be tested (despite the fact he's got ASD and will really struggle with the testing) because I thought it was in the best interests of both him and others, but I really don't think that is the case now.

Yes, I agree with all this.

The false negatives might increase the risk.

The false positives are detrimental to those unfortunate to get one (and their family, and their fellow students deemed to be close contacts) and should definitely be overruled by a negative PCR test. Not allowing this is ridiculous and cruel.

@JanFebAnyMonth

Because they may live too far to walk / because they're supposed to isolate immediately.

I mean the students who don't rely on school transport. In some cases it may be quicker for a parent to collect (if they drive) but for others it may take much longer. The parent needs to be contacted (not always immediate, a secondary contact may need to be contacted instead), if at work they may need to speak to their manager, then travel from work to school. If they rely on public transport then it could be a while!

It would take my DS less than 10 minutes to get home, 25 minutes for me to get to him (after the school gets in contact with me, depends if they call my work number or just try my mobile then go to secondary contacts) then the same 10 minutes to get home.

It was confirmed on Andrew Marr this morning that positive LFTs at school do not need a PCR test follow up and any negative PCR test that follows will not count. This means that a pupil and family all still need to isolate for 10 days purely as a result of the LFT 😳🤦‍♀️

I am considering not consenting to school LFT for this reason and instead will do the tests at home.

JanFebAnyMonth I can only guess that it was "compared" with PCT throat/nose swabs ,. I could only (in my haste" find something about the ones that were pos were those with "weak" lines

@Poundaminute this isn't true! Negative PCRs do count (regardless of what was said) but PCRs aren't required after an at school test.

It is 100% true.

We have had confirmation from the school that a positive LFT at school will result in 10 days isolation even if they have a negative PCR on the same day. This isn't the case of the LFT is done at home though and the PCR result overrides the LFT result.

Looks like there is a government U turn imminent, from the guardian live feed pasted below

the spokesman did announce an important U-turn on the rules relating to pupils who test positive using a lateral flow test.

At the weekend the government said that these pupils would have to self-isolate, even if a subsequent PCR test showed they were negative. (PCR tests are recognised as more accurate.) Vicky Ford, the children’s minister, confirmed that this morning. (See 9.19am.)

But now No 10 is saying that, if a pupil tests positive in a lateral flow test administered at home, then if they do subsequently test negative with a PCR test, they can return to school. The spokesman said:

If a child takes lateral flow at home, so not in a controlled environment, then if they receive a positive, they will then receive a PCR test. If the PCR is positive, the child needs to continue to isolate at home. If the PCR is negative, then the child can go back to school.

This brings the rules relating to self-isolation and lateral flow tests for pupils into line with the equivalent rules for adults. The rules differentiate between lateral flow tests conducted in a controlled environment (where someone is there to ensure the process is being carried out properly) and lateral flow tests being conducted at home (where errors are more likely).

Right, so my understanding is that you can go for a PCR test, which you usually do in your car, parent swabs child, and whatever the result is, it stands, regardless of how qualified that parent is to do the test.

And yet if it’s the LFTs being done at home, in exactly the same scenario, parent swabs child, if it’s positive then the result is questionable, so they have to go to get a PCR where again it’s taken by the same unqualified parent that took it the first time? Riiiiiiiiight.

It’s not the fucking swabber that’s the problem, it’s the shitty lateral flow tests!!!

🤞 Frazzled

Finally they may have seen sense.

I collected mine from the test centre yesterday. They said test once, then 30 minutes later.

If positive do a proper test and notify all results on the NHS app.

I think all positive LFT should have a PCR, regardless of where they were done (home, school etc)

I’m just going to ignore anything Gav says and test my child if LFT is positive.

He never says anything of any use ever. Not sure why he even exists tbh.