Government set to announce those with positive LFT will not need PCR

[TikTokBitches]

news.sky.com/story/covid-19-around-a-million-people-isolating-due-to-coronavirus-in-uk-as-testing-rules-set-to-be-relaxed-12509316 COVID-19: People who test positive on lateral flow tests won't need follow-up PCR, govt to announce - as 'around a million' isolating 

Whilst this sounds like a good idea, what about those of us who have recently had positive lateral flows and negative pcrs? There seems to be a lot of us.

I would be interested to know the figures of how many had a positive LFT then a negative PCR. Does the govt keep this data?

@Leftbutcameback

I would be interested to know the figures of how many had a positive LFT then a negative PCR. Does the govt keep this data?

I think it is a lot of people and it is a problem, because a positive LFT is much more likely to be correct than a negative PCR.

They will keep PCR tests for people who are symptomatic.

@Weloveyotodaily

My whole extended family has just got covid and it took between 3-5 days for our LFTs to go positive after a positive PCR which we had all taken as we had been identified as close contacts so I hope this doesn’t mean that people just rely on LFTs as we would all have been negative on LFT for days even after symptoms started! We asked test and protect about this and they said this was very common.

They have now found that LFT's are good at showing positive when you are infectious, so although you may have low levels of the virus and test positive on a PCR, you may not have high enough levels for a positive LFT. So many people are effectively testing too soon i.e. after contact, rather than when they are most infectious. This is why they can change the rules to rely more on LFT's which are actually very good at letting you know when you are more likely to spread the infection.

From where I’m sitting it’s almost certainly to do with supply/demand. (Which, as an aside, is largely a consequence of the governments change in policy to test for several days as a contact as well as testing twice for early release from isolation. Looks like they failed to take into consideration the high demand given infection rates imho).

Symptomatic people, I presume, will still be required to do a PCR.

Some people will still need to do them to claim the £500 if you are off work, also don't some workplaces want them so that you get paid

@KiloWhat

Why do they always leak stuff it makes it confusing. Just announce your announcement.

This. However stuff is always “leaked” presumably to try and figure out what journalists think before they actually announce it. Possibly with tweaks!

Well if you treat positive lft as confirmed positive case and everyone isolate, then it won't cause harm by scrapping pcr when there's so many positive cases and testing capacity is over the limit.

If people in certain jobs have to test daily, and the LFT are known for false positives, aren't we just going to end up in the same, if not worse position of people being in isolation when well?

@rainrainraincamedowndowndown

Well if you treat positive lft as confirmed positive case and everyone isolate, then it won't cause harm by scrapping pcr when there's so many positive cases and testing capacity is over the limit.

Agree. A small number may have had false positives though and may end up isolating unnecessarily.

@Cornettoninja

From where I’m sitting it’s almost certainly to do with supply/demand. (Which, as an aside, is largely a consequence of the governments change in policy to test for several days as a contact as well as testing twice for early release from isolation. Looks like they failed to take into consideration the high demand given infection rates imho).

Symptomatic people, I presume, will still be required to do a PCR.

I suspect this is right.

There will likely be changes in other countries as demand increases due to high numbers

@Potatodrivers

If people in certain jobs have to test daily, and the LFT are known for false positives, aren't we just going to end up in the same, if not worse position of people being in isolation when well?

LFT are NOT known for false positives. False positives are very, very rare.

Seems a good thing to me. I didn’t bother getting a PCR after a positive lateral flow. Why bother? LF might miss positive cases but if you show positive, you’ve almost certainly got covid. No point faffing with A PCR as well.

If you’ve got symptoms & your LF is negative. Still get a PCR.

If you’ve got symptoms & your LF is positive. Simply isolate.

Simple 👍🏻

Lft's are not known for false positives, and found out to be quite accurate on recent studies, if I remember correctly.

LF have false negatives, they rarely have false positives.

@Bobholll

LF have false negatives, they rarely have false positives.

That was my understanding too, I thought the problem was that their negatives couldn't necessarily be trusted. Not the positives.

@rainrainraincamedowndowndown

Lft's are not known for false positives, and found out to be quite accurate on recent studies, if I remember correctly.

Correct. Our December school outbreak started when kids tested positive on LFTs then negative on PCRs then went back to school. . Hopefully this could be avoided.

Ahh my bad. I must have it backwards in my head. That makes more sense then as you could hopefully still access a pcr if it was a negative but you had symptoms.

However stuff is always “leaked” presumably to try and figure out what journalists think before they actually announce it. Possibly with tweaks! ah I see. Very annoying though. They should just be able to decide what to do without journalist's views, who is running through country!

Because that's the new guidance - negative test on day 6 and 7 to be able to end isolation early.

That's fine but what about the people who do them every day after a positive PCR? I've seen quite a few of those on here and on Twitter.

The most I've done is 6 of the 7 daily tests after being in contact with a positive case. If it hadn't been Christmas and I wasn't desperate to see my family I wouldn't have bothered on the days I wasn't going out and just done one on day 7.

Seems odd. My dh had multiple negative LFT but a positive PCR - he did have symptoms though. It strikes me as permission to rely on your lat flow results - I know it technically isn’t, but people will interpret it this way. Dh was adamant he didn’t have covid, even though he clearly did, because his lat flows were negative.

I had contact with a positive family member on Boxing Day. They lied about having a negative lft. Within 48 hours we were dropping like flies. Out of 12 people , 7 had symptoms and +lft tests (me included). But I've never tested + on a pcr, despite my lft being very clearly + every day until today. We ask had the same symptoms, same progression, same cough etc.

Sounds like they want to manipulate the statistics, as relatively few people with positive LFTs will bother to register them with the NHS.

@Boogaloony

I had contact with a positive family member on Boxing Day. They lied about having a negative lft. Within 48 hours we were dropping like flies. Out of 12 people , 7 had symptoms and +lft tests (me included). But I've never tested + on a pcr, despite my lft being very clearly + every day until today. We ask had the same symptoms, same progression, same cough etc.

Same here - both DC had +ve PCRs but never tested positive on an LFT. I had 10 straight days of +ve LFT and 2 negative PCRs. I was the only one with symptoms which I had through days 1-8 of that 10 day day period.

"I’m pretty sure that the sky article in wrong as it suggests isolation is delayed until you do a pcr test whereas it starts when you get positive lft or symptoms."

Isn't there something about having to do the PCR within 2 days to start the timing from the lateral flow? If people are struggling to get PCRs this will create a problem.