Trial where when positive PCR you carry on as normal?

[Hairyfairy01]

Has anyone heard of this? So basically you are part of a trial where if you get a positive PCR for Covid you carry on as you normally would. No need to isolate etc. Does anyone know what this trial is called?

I still call bullshit. I would escalate this to someone in senior management of the hospital and ask for their guidelines to the study s to why a less than 10 day positive covid patient is allowed to visit someone. Go above the ward staff, thank you for caring.

@ChristmasGrogu

I still call bullshit. I would escalate this to someone in senior management of the hospital and ask for their guidelines to the study s to why a less than 10 day positive covid patient is allowed to visit someone. Go above the ward staff, thank you for caring.

Thank you. I think I will.

@Hairyfairy01

Long story short. Apparently someone I know, who has tested positive via a PCR, is part of a trial. They have been told to carry on as normal. This includes being able to visit their sick relative in hospital. I just can't believe this is correct. I was hoping someone might be part of the same trial so I can research it.

They are lying because having to isolate would be inconvenient for them.

I guess the point of the trial would be to monitor the person's transmissions rates? Ie - How contiguous their strain is?

How would they get any meaningful data: Hand out a calling card with the words "I am covid positive, please take a pcr in 5 days and text the result to 111111 saying when you met me and how long for"?

@ChristmasGrogu

I still call bullshit. I would escalate this to someone in senior management of the hospital and ask for their guidelines to the study s to why a less than 10 day positive covid patient is allowed to visit someone. Go above the ward staff, thank you for caring.

This.

The infection control team might be a good place to start. I suspect they might have 1 or 2 things to say about it.

As there is zero way of knowing how many people they personally infect, this is clearly a bogus excuse they have come up with. There is nothing statistical to be gained by doing this. It's bollocks

I think the person has misunderstood and needs to clarify this 'trial' asap.

Considering many hospitals still won’t allow healthy relatives in PPE to visit, I find it very unlikely someone with covid would be welcomed in.

Thankfully I've not needed to visit anyone in hospital lately, but is a negative test result required before being allowed to visit or enter hospitals now?

@Wellbythebloodyhell

Considering many hospitals still won’t allow healthy relatives in PPE to visit, I find it very unlikely someone with covid would be welcomed in.

Thankfully I've not needed to visit anyone in hospital lately, but is a negative test result required before being allowed to visit or enter hospitals now?

My local hospital will only allow one visitor (the same, nominated/regular, person) in. They need evidence of a negative LFT, and can only visit a max of three times per week with at least a day off in between. And not all of their wards will allow visitors.

I don’t believe this. They’re making it up or got entirely the wrong end of the stick.

Instead of asking here why don’t you just ask them what this trial is called. We were given teams of paperwork and information just for doing the ONS lateral flow test survey at home.

Yes, contact the infection control team at your hospital.
They will be able to make the final decision, and I suspect they won't be too happy about this visitor being allowed in!!

When I visited a friend in hospital I didn’t need to provide evidence of a negative lateral flow. They didn’t ask if I was vaccinated or anything either.

I agree that you should escalate it and make sure it’s legit, but I don’t think it’s impossible.

They might be running the trial in specific areas and then watching to see how much it pushes up rates overall compared to other areas, to gather evidence for a later rollout when the time comes for that.

It’s crazy for that person to go into a hospital though, even if they are technically allowed!

We are part of a trial and my child has repeatedly tested positive. After her first isolation period they were not required to isolate again despite a further positive PCR. Could this be a similar story but something lost in translation about the first period of isolation?

Surely if someone was part of an official, registered trial that involved breaking the law, they would be issued with proof?

@TheElderleyBrothers

We are part of a trial and my child has repeatedly tested positive. After her first isolation period they were not required to isolate again despite a further positive PCR. Could this be a similar story but something lost in translation about the first period of isolation?

Is she symptomatic with the later positive tests? Because I think asymptomatic tests within 90 days of previous covid infection aren’t advised because you can test positive anyway. So maybe that’s the difference. If it’s a trial involving lots of asymptomatic testing, no one would agree if it could mean repeated asymptomatic isolations following an initial covid infection.

if your managers have ok'ed this, sounds like could there be some misunderstanding/chinese whispers at some point...have you expressed your concerns directly to your ward manager? maybe they know extra info that you aren't party to? There was a trial where people could take daily lfts and avoid quarantine if they'd had close contact with a household member who had tested positive (Michael Gove was on this one),could it somehow be that?

also ,if the person in question is NOT vaccinated then they are still meant to isolate for 10 days if a close household contact....so it could well be very likely this scenario that they are trialling, ie. whether that person will develop COVID via household transmission, as I imagine they will want to remove this obligation at some point and convert it to daily LFT;s or a certain number of PCR's.

This is basically what happened with immensa in the south west. 43,000 people who were covid positive were told they weren't and to crack on. The result was skyrocketing cases, with the south west going from among the lowest case numbers in the country to the highest in a very short space of time. Hospitalizations are increasing rapidly, deaths will eventually increase once the time lag between infection and death filters through. Schools were in total chaos, classes closed due to vast numbers of infected children, entire year groups sent home because schools had no staff left to teach them...
Some people said when the news first broke that they suspected it being a covert government trial of what would happen if we stopped testing and just got on with life as if covid didn't exist.

AnonAnnie2977

When I visited a friend in hospital I didn’t need to provide evidence of a negative lateral flow. They didn’t ask if I was vaccinated or anything either“

Interested to know where you are. Visiting is still actively discouraged her (NW) and at home (Cornwall). Both operating a one nominated visitor, by appointment only system and they are asking if that visitor is vaccinated.

@Hairyfairy01

Has anyone heard of this? So basically you are part of a trial where if you get a positive PCR for Covid you carry on as you normally would. No need to isolate etc. Does anyone know what this trial is called?

Is that the one Boris was part of, or was it Gove?

Sounds really silly, tbh. So we are heading into unpredictable winter, and trying to let people who are positive carry on as normal? If this is true, it's really fucked up.

Agree with everyone this sounds like dangerous bullshit. I cannot believe someone would be so arrogant to walk into a hospital knowing they are positive.

I hope management take this seriously- even if there was such a trial, surely common sense would have kicked in to prevent infection in a hospital setting.

This makes no sense : you wouldn't sign people up for a trial on the off chance they catch Covid...it's not guaranteed?

Gove wasn't positive. He was a contact at the time when contacts were meant to isolate.