Ridiculous isolation rules for school kids

[Vargas]

So my friend's dd was playing football outside at school with a child who subsequently had a positive lateral flow test. My friend's dd now has to isolate for 10 days which now means no school until after Easter after only 1 week at school. This is even if she has a negative PCR test. Both children asymptomatic of course. Surely this is completely ridiculous??

It is ridiculous. Parents should withdraw consent. These LF tests are unhelpful, invasive and unnecessary.

2 posters have now said False negative PCR tests more likely than False negative LFTs. So why does the NHS (and many workplaces) rely on PCRs to send people back to work? I thought PCRs were more reliable?

This is why several of my friends are not allowing testing in school but doing it at home instead. If you test positive at home, you do a far more accurate PCR & if negative , you go on as normal. This is how lateral flows work in every other workplace.

The govmt have decided to have an entirely different rule for secondary schools for reasons no-one can work out.

It PCRs overrule lateral flows for NHS staff, it suggests lateral flows aren’t all that accurate let’s face it.

Argh - Sorry I messed that up. 2 posters said that False negative PCRs more likely than False Positive LFTs.

Just out of interest are the lateral flow and PCR tests administered the same way?

Do schools accept lateral flow test results? (Or is it dependent on the LA or even down to individual school?)

We're considering not giving consent for DS to do the LF tests over the concerns around false positives, also apparently the lower the prevalence of covid the more likely you are to get false positives - not sure why.
I'd be absolutely fine with it if pupils had to isolate until the point that the negative results of a PCR test were given, but to have to continue to self isolate with a negative test is ludicrous, particularly considering how much education our DCs have missed over the past year.

Yes, and if one positive LFT trumps any subsequent negative PCRs then won't many parents/kids not bother to do the LFTs at home?

The rules for LFTs done at home are different. A positive home test has to be followed up with a PCR and in this case a negative PCR would override the positive LFT.

The negative PCR hit is the issue. This SHOULD overrule a LFT result and in almost all other contexts it does. The issue appears to be an administration issue when the lft is done at school - it can't then be overruled.

Dh's colleagues son had been hit with this - positive lft and then two negative pcr results. Because lft was at school is stands regardless leading whole family to have to isolate. Both parents are critical workers and it is having a big impact on emergency work not being done for ten days, but another sibling also not allowed to school.

I fully support the testing etc but the pcr should always overrule IMO

@Cornettoninja

Not disagreeing with you!
As a teacher, I know that schools are trying to be extra cautious - which is good, I agree, but more often than not we are not allowed to be cautious! Hence why it seems strange to me in this instance.

@HipTightOnions

Yes, and if one positive LFT trumps any subsequent negative PCRs then won't many parents/kids not bother to do the LFTs at home?

The rules for LFTs done at home are different. A positive home test has to be followed up with a PCR and in this case a negative PCR would override the positive LFT.

I didn't know that, that's really useful info.

Abraxan - I fully support the testing too, but the differing rules just seem so unnecessary and harmful, particularly in your example!

Another issue with the lft standing in these issues is that the child is now down as having had Covid.

This means said child cannot not be tested for 90 days but will still be able to return to school etc after ten days. So it's now another untested child going into school for three months.

If the pcr result was acknowledged this child would still be being tested twice weekly during this time.

Let's hope he doesn't actually catch Covid during that time now and unknowingly spread it across his classes.

Fortunately this issue will stop soon once the lft are being done at home (only first 3 are done at school) as once they are done at home a positive lft has to be confirmed by a positive pcr.

And yes false positives aren't as common as false negatives BUT they do exist. Using the research on them even the low percentage of false positives can equate to approx one per secondary school (about 1 in 1000)

All seems a shambles to me. I know someone whose 5 year old is SI again as a child in their year had a positive LFT at home. They don't even think there's any close contact

This has been an ongoing issue this week and they said if a subsequent PCR comes back negative they should be able to go back, didn't they?
To be honest if that's not the case I would consider withdrawing consent as the LFT have a high rate of false positives

If either of our kids test positive at school we will get a PCR test and if that is negative we will not isolate at home. Neither of us go in to work so we will continue with daily exercise, shopping etc. Yes the kids will have to home school but like hell will I stop them going out to exercise if they have a negative pcr. I've genuinely abided by pretty much every rule so far, I even have the actual legislation bookmarked on my phone, but either a PCR matters or it doesn't, can't have it both ways.

@CovidPostingName

If either of our kids test positive at school we will get a PCR test and if that is negative we will not isolate at home. Neither of us go in to work so we will continue with daily exercise, shopping etc. Yes the kids will have to home school but like hell will I stop them going out to exercise if they have a negative pcr. I've genuinely abided by pretty much every rule so far, I even have the actual legislation bookmarked on my phone, but either a PCR matters or it doesn't, can't have it both ways.

I was hospitalised with covid despite a negative PCR, would you have been happy for me to be around you?

SimonJT - so we should all ignore all PCR test results?

@Vargas

SimonJT - so we should all ignore all PCR test results?

Why are you asking me that?

@SimonJT If you were symptomatic, no I wouldn't, especially if you were ill enough to be hospitalised - covid or no covid. But that's a bit of a straw man, we're talking about asymptomatic kids here. If my kids do show any symptoms at all, including those not on the ridiculously incomplete government list, we will test them immediately and abide by the results including isolation/quarantine etc.

[quote CovidPostingName]@SimonJT If you were symptomatic, no I wouldn't, especially if you were ill enough to be hospitalised - covid or no covid. But that's a bit of a straw man, we're talking about asymptomatic kids here. If my kids do show any symptoms at all, including those not on the ridiculously incomplete government list, we will test them immediately and abide by the results including isolation/quarantine etc.[/quote]
My asymptomatic son gave me covid (he is very generous!). Asymptomatic doesn’t mean non-infectious.

Abraxan - my ds had Covid end of Dec, positive PCR at the time, and has been told by school that he shouldn't do any tests for 90 days due to residual virus.

I may have this completely wrong (very obviously not scientific at all) but don’t PCR tests have a threshold for amount of virus? So if PCR testing only counted ten particles of virus as a positive if your particular test only showed eight it would be a negative? Whereas LFT’s show a positive for whatever it is they’re looking for regardless of amount? All of that ties into the not testing for so long after a confirmed infection and negatives in people who are clinically diagnosed.

A bit like how you can still test as pregnant on a home kit for some time after a miscarriage yet a more detailed blood test would show declining hormones as your body cleared the pregnancy.

It is frustrating that a PCR test can't trump the LFT

Similar situation here - LFT picked up a positive case within DS's bubble, day before they were due to properly go back to school. DS has nothing to do with this child, sits totally opposite end of the classroom to him.

Now all isolating . Didn't even make it in for one normal school day. Gutting really, I know it's good these LFT's are picking up cases, but I'm frustrated that PCR's aren't then done to confirm the case like they are in other situations. That's 20 families now impacted by a potential false positive.

@SimonJT Agreed, asymptomatic does not mean nor positive nor not infectious. But had your son had a positive lft test? Followed with a negative pcr test? No? Then that's not what we're talking about here.

@needadvice54321

It is frustrating that a PCR test can't trump the LFT

Similar situation here - LFT picked up a positive case within DS's bubble, day before they were due to properly go back to school. DS has nothing to do with this child, sits totally opposite end of the classroom to him.

Now all isolating . Didn't even make it in for one normal school day. Gutting really, I know it's good these LFT's are picking up cases, but I'm frustrated that PCR's aren't then done to confirm the case like they are in other situations. That's 20 families now impacted by a potential false positive.

That is brutal, sorry to hear it. At least it looks like when they are home testing the PCR will trump the LFT so hopefully there won't be as many stories like this.

Similarly my friend's dd was playing football when 'exposed', just skills training and outside, no tackling or hugging. Chances of infection must be infinitesimal!