Forum menu
The form I was handed yesterday, when being tested, said no outdoor exercise while isolating, which runs 7 days from symptoms first noticed.
The only exception being if the results come back negative, in which case social distancing applies.
Great thread.
OP posts legitimate question about reporting someone who should be at home and they get lambasted.
Then a nurse posts wrong advice, AIDS gets lobbed in and everyone's forgotten what the question was.
Instead of all the discecting and arguing about interpretation of rules, I bet the government wishes they could just say "Rule 1" and be done with it.
Maybe it's changed. It was right at the beginning I had to isolate
Haha bearnecessities my thoughts too.
The rules really aren't difficult to follow and I dont think the isolating aspect has changed.
The form I was handed yesterday, when being tested, said no outdoor exercise while isolating, which runs 7 days from symptoms first noticed.
Exactly: 7 days from symptoms, not from being tested, regardless of result.
(And fwiw I isolated as in neither of us left the house for over seven days from our roughly coinciding symptoms. Not had a test, but if I'd had a positive one on day six, that would not have reset the clock somehow to zero, regardless of tutting.)
The guidance on exercising whilst isolating because of symptoms or symptoms in the household changed.
Initially (until at least 7 April), it said "If possible, you should not go out even to buy food or other essentials, other than exercise, and in that case at a safe distance from others."
More recently (since at least 10 April) it says "If possible, you should not go out even to buy food or other essentials, and any exercise should be taken within your home."
Exactly: 7 days from symptoms, not from being tested, regardless of result.
The form I was given by the testing nurse says ‘What should I do if the test is negative ?
People who receive a negative test result can return to work, provided they feel they have recovered from the symptoms that led them to be tested. Household contacts of people who have received a negative test can also return to work, as long as they are well themselves’
So in Scotland, the 7 days Isolation period can end on receipt of a negative test result.
Like the man in orthopedic shoes I stand corrected. (Should've said 'regardless of positive result' or something.)
^^^ 😂
So if the guy’s had symptoms for week/ten days or so, gets a test towards the end of the week
Many aren’t testing after 72 hours but as said isolation is 7 days from onset.
I bet the government wishes they could just say “Rule 1” and be done with it.
Which is something I'd struggle with.
The guidance on exercising whilst isolating because of symptoms or symptoms in the household changed
Yeah, we came down with symptoms late March but we still went for a short walk through the fields most days as that was the advice at the time.
I was sure I carefully checked! Nice to know the advice changed not that I am totally losing it
The whataboutery about fictitious/actual idiots or remote possibilities is treating responsible adults like primary children.
Epicyclo - we aren't dealing with responsible adults here - we are dealing with the public and he know that 50% of them will have lower that average levels of responsibility! I answered your question - how could a cyclist spread the disease.
Nice to know the advice changed not that I am totally losing it
The two aren't mutually exclusive....
People who receive a negative test result can return to work, provided they feel they have recovered from the symptoms that led them to be tested. Household contacts of people who have received a negative test can also return to work, as long as they are well themselves’
I worried that was the case. Whoever has designed this has not properly understood the (in)accuracy of the PCR test. Yes if there is a sample with Viral RNA in it you will get a positive result; and if there is a sample with no Viral RNA you will not (with very high accuracy 99+%). The problem is the sample collection method is rather crude and unreliable. Some estimates say as many as 46% of positive cases will wrongly give a negative result first time [1]. It may be better that that - but even if its only 10% false negatives, if we tell them and their housemates to go back into society that is an awful lot of disease vectors compared to just saying symptoms = stay home. I've had to do it, its a PITA. Yes we need those vital care workers etc at work (but the stats all suggest we should have fewer symptomatic people now than two weeks ago - and we scraped through then) but we definitely don't need them at work spreading disease because they or a family member has wrongly been given a clean bill of health.
[1]
THe most dangerous thing at the moment would be to stand in a queue ar a supermarket or the DIY shed of choice.
Driving past B&Q on way home from work, spotted 2 paramedics in uniform in the queue and also a nurse ( wasn’t in uniform but who lives in our street and has spoken about working in the Covid 19 ward )
Now shirley they should be setting an example ?
poly
I answered your question – how could a cyclist spread the disease.
OK I'll reframe it.
How does a solo cyclist spread it when they are travelling, at say 10mph, on a road where anyone passing is encapsulated in a car and passing at a social distance, or a cyclist passing well excess of 2 metres away on the other side of the road (and is only that close for a fraction of a second).
The OP did eventually make it clear that he was talking about egregious behaviour in crowded spaces, so I'd support a word in the right ear in that case.
However I don't accept that half the population have below average responsibility in this case. IMO it is a small percentile at the far end of the bell curve who will never behave, namely the "gammon" types or the very special people who don't get commoners diseases like the Cheltenham crowd.
That is why it up to each of us to take personal precautions against picking it up. By being sensible we can reduce our risk to everyday life levels. We don't lock ourselves inside as a guaranteed protection against getting killed crossing the street or being involved in a motor accident. Fear is useful but it is a bad master.
However I don’t accept that half the population have below average responsibility in this case.
Then you don't understand how averages work.
Any any case, my anecdotal observations would suggest that of those out and about the ones taking it seriously vs the ones giving zero shits is about 50:50.
Then you don’t understand how averages work.
Don't be mean, half the population is below average intelligence.
Overhead in Tesco. Customer chatting to a member of staff in thr milk aisle.
I just want to get it and be ill for a week or so then i can stop worrying about it and get back to normal..
21,000 people might disagree with you love, but with this level of crass stupidity you sre clearly not a thinker and i bet you are outdide cheering the n h s.on a thurs evening
Presumably you wrote that within the confines of some sort of Whitehall bubble – anyone who’s been in the real world for the last 5 weeks knows simply setting a 2m rule is not a magic solution.
1. 2m is an arbitrary number which seems about right, had a little bit of science behind it, and is achievable to some degree. The risk isn’t zero at 2.01m.
Mostly 2m as an arbitrary number doesn't apply to moving at 2ms-1 (which is about 4.5 mph) so multiply by a number...then factor in you are doing it for an extended period, not just walking past someone.
Then you don’t understand how averages work.
Don’t be mean, half the population is below average intelligence.
Mean? That's his Mode-us Operandi
"Operandumb"
Cougar
Then you don’t understand how averages work.
Yeah, got me there. 🙂
I'll rephrase that too.
I don't accept that there is a huge proportion of the public acting irresponsibly. It's patently evident. The streets are deserted. People you meet on the daily constitutional move right out of the way.
It's rare to see anyone doing anything stupid.
How does a solo cyclist spread it when they are travelling, at say 10mph, on a road where anyone passing is encapsulated in a car and passing at a social distance, or a cyclist passing well excess of 2 metres away on the other side of the road (and is only that close for a fraction of a second).
individually they possibly don’t, but the reality is that there’s an awful lot of people who aren’t as nuanced as you and who then think if it’s ok for epicyclo to carry on as normal then it must be ok for me - who either don’t understand, or don’t want to understand the subtle difference between jogging in a busy park and cycling totally alone. Add to that all the contrived examples in my earlier post and you really might be making the difference between R=0.99 and 1.01 which is the subtle difference between it getting better and worse.
or the very special people who don’t get commoners diseases like the Cheltenham crowd.
1/4 of a million people attended cheltenam festival this year... at that time only 300 people had been officially diagnosed, if, as was suggested at the time R0 = 2-3 then they will have passed it on to up to 900 other people in the uk about to spread it to others. Even if they were all infectious at the time of cheltenam and had no symptoms (or so selfish/stupid they went with symptoms) that’s 0.0015% of the population who were potential disease vectors or at most 1 person at cheltenham on any one day... assuming you need to be within 2m of someone who is infectious your exposure at cheltenham would be very small.
We don’t lock ourselves inside as a guaranteed protection against getting killed crossing the street or being involved in a motor accident. Fear is useful but it is a bad master.
And yet now we have 160k people officially diagnosed, probably 40-50x that undiagnosed. Obviously many have now recovered but there must still be something like 1:50 people who are infectious (I may be wrong today, but would be right a week ago). Far more likely to come in contact with one of them today on a bike ride than a cheltenham on the 10th of March...
Now, if cars took on a life of their own and unabated were likely to kill 1/4 million pedestrians in the next three months (that’s 2000x more dangerous than normal) I think we might be hiding indoors until things calmed down...
As for that nonsense about touching gates and transmitting CV19, there's a simple technique to avoid doing that...
It’s the way the dog doesn’t react that gets me.