Thing is, the ONS testing is the only useful type IMO. They just test everyone (on their list) whether or not there are symptoms, so we have an idea of the actual prevalence in the population. Which is obviously much, much less than the "%positive tests" quoted in the daily figures and even now, waaaaayyy lower than the magic 5%. I'm not sure what happens with the figures - whether they go straight into the daily figures, or not (I'd hope both positives and negatives would if they do) but overall I don't really think they are skewing the results, and if anything, the huge numbers of negatives should show a better picture than just tests from symptomatic people!
DH is supposed to register to test whenever he goes into the office - he's going tomorrow for something. They're trialling a "gob in a pot" approach, which sounds interesting - it's a trial of a way of doing PCR but much cheaper and less tonsil-pokey. But anyway, he's not done it as a) he's not actually going to be seeing anyone so it's a bit pointless, and b) I would bury him under the patio if he ends up stopping us from going away.
I think I've got to the stage where I don't really care if I'm "passing anything on". Obviously if I do, and it's someone who ends up getting really ill, that's unfortunate, and, if I knew, I'd feel bad. But some bastard has passed a cold to us, and I don't hold anything much against them. That's the risk we take being in society. I'd take extra care not to cough/breathe over anyone old, or in hospital or anything, but assuming these people "passing it on" aren't ill, and the people passed on to aren't ill as a result (either naturally mild disease, or through vaccination), and on and on, does it matter?