Spot On

[Nick]

So Pappy, can we assume by your silence that you in fact can't explain it?

It has been explained to you by several people. Personally I think you are pretending to be thick, just to wind people up.

Show me where someone has explained the benefits of testing using the above scenario?

[papasmurf]

So Pappy, can we assume by your silence that you in fact can't explain it?

It has been explained to you by several people. Personally I think you are pretending to be thick, just to wind people up.

[Nick]

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you

None of this is anything to do with Australia testing in areas they KNOW have very little if any cases of CV-19.

So Pappy, can we assume by your silence that you in fact can't explain it?

[Nick]

Off topic - but if you're going to tell someone else to "sort out your quoting" you better be damn sure you don't mess up your own quoting in response 

That's not my quote. My quote has been absorbed by Pappy's quote and then propagated into my post. I have fixed it anyway.

[Nalaar]

Off topic - but if you're going to tell someone else to "sort out your quoting" you better be damn sure you don't mess up your own quoting in response 

[Nick]

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you

None of this is anything to do with Australia testing in areas they KNOW have very little if any cases of CV-19.

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

Excellent, explain away old man, I've given you the scenario so let's have it.

BTW, you sort out your quoting before you post your smarty pants answers.

[papasmurf]

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you

None of this is anything to do with Australia testing in areas they KNOW have very little if any cases of CV-19.

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

[Nick]

Virus testing is used mainly for diagnosis of COVID-19.
Antibody testing is used mainly in surveys to assess the extent of COVID-19 spread in a population.
Regular testing gives information on the rate of spread, where the spread is occurring (even before symptoms of illness appear), and aid decisions on what restrictions should be imposed over what areas to limit the spread of the virus.
All seems perfectly clear and sensible...

Same old blurb with no substance. So here is a real life scenario, (Me).

Beginning of the year I travelled to Italy twice, The Netherlands, France, Estonia, Latvia and a week in New York.
Don't know if I've had it but if I was tested what would this show?

As we all know but are dancing round the fact, the spikes are within the Asian community where there are 3 generations in the same house. Oldham, Blackburn, Leicester and Preston. All got large Asian populations.

None of this is anything to do with Australia testing in areas they KNOW have very little if any cases of CV-19.

[patman post]

Virus testing is used mainly for diagnosis of COVID-19.
Antibody testing is used mainly in surveys to assess the extent of COVID-19 spread in a population.
Regular testing gives information on the rate of spread, where the spread is occurring (even before symptoms of illness appear), and aid decisions on what restrictions should be imposed over what areas to limit the spread of the virus.
All seems perfectly clear and sensible...

[Nick]

But it's encouraging that you now rest all your faith in the BBC.

Actually I don't, the sooner everyone in Britain is tested and retested at regular intervals the better.  (But that does require better and quicker testing than currently.

You've still not shown what testing actually does to stop the virus.

E.G.

1 Person is tested and has had it. What does that show?
1 Person is tested and hasn't had it. What does that show?

The person that has got it is isolated so therefore cannot be tested.

Great testing!

[papasmurf]

But it's encouraging that you now rest all your faith in the BBC.

Actually I don't, the sooner everyone in Britain is tested and retested at regular intervals the better.  (But that does require better and quicker testing than currently.

[Nick]

How does that help in the fight against Covid?

I have to ask, how old are you? Don't you have access to TV news and current affairs, the testing subject has been done to death again this morning and I expect will be throughout the day.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53806117

You do realise the comments are in reference to the OP?  But it's encouraging that you now rest all your faith in the BBC.

[papasmurf]

How does that help in the fight against Covid?

I have to ask, how old are you? Don't you have access to TV news and current affairs, the testing subject has been done to death again this morning and I expect will be throughout the day.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53806117

[Nick]

You all keep saying test test test. What useful data do you get? You've not come up with anything yet.

How many people have Covid-19 or have had it. (It isn't rocket science.)

How does that help in the fight against Covid?

[johnofgwent]

I've not got it, I neither know nor care if I've had it. I've not been tested and testing me will show what exactly?

Until more is known, nobody can be sure. But testing and gathering information from as many people as possible will help to build up a picture of its contagion parameters and spread.
As has been said: for the many not the few...

You all keep saying test test test. What useful data do you get? You've not come up with anything yet.

Another problem I see is the testing that is being pushed daily by numerous adverts is focussed solely on finding out if you have the disease now and need to isolate.

I see various press releases from four months ago lauding and applauding the launch of free of charge antibody tests but nothing on that in a Google search dated later than may.

I can see a value in random testing to determine the existence of typhoid Mary's, but little else if a positive antibody test is not a guarantee of immunity to the pox