Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

[andysays]

It is. At least it was for me. Twice. In their instruction they say to click whatever on the gov site but that option never came up. Get the test. Zoe need negatives too for their study.

And it really isn't that obvious when you should test. Not every positive has the 3 symptoms. Children are different agsin and if you were to start a thread on say mumsnet saying you or your child has cold symptoms youd get half saying no dont waste a test its a fucking cold and half saying get a test to be sure and isolate because some test positive with non official covid symptoms.

the official advice is to get tested if you have one of the three symptoms.

as you suggest, there are also positive cases which don't show any of the three main symptoms, but if you have any of those three, there really shouldn't be any need to wonder, just get a test

 

[LDC]

Or failing that just use your NI number.

Under 16s? Plenty of others don't have a NI number, and some have no NHS number.

There really isn't a central and comprehensive database for things like this.

 

[MrSki]

Under 16s? Plenty of others don't have a NI number, and some have no NHS number.

There really isn't a central and comprehensive database for things like this.

So running a credit check on a kid is better?

 

[killer b]

Except that it excludes people. So if you're intent on doing it privately you're already wrong.

every way of confirming ID excludes some people.

Anyway, I don't particularly want to argue the government's case, but I think some level of discussion that goes beyond 'these people are malignant and incompetent' is probably a wise idea, or you end up missing stuff.

 

[LDC]

So running a credit check on a kid is better?

No. Neither works. Testing should be open access, just confirm identity with a selection of official ID documents (passport, driving license, Home Office card, other country ID card, etc.) or option to tick no ID and explain why.

 

[rutabowa]

every way of confirming ID excludes some people.

Anyway, I don't particularly want to argue the government's case, but I think some level of discussion that goes beyond 'these people are malignant and incompetent' is probably a wise idea, or you end up missing stuff.

I feel the same about loud music restrictions in pubs. A lot of friends feel like it is the government introducing fascism by banning rock and roll whereas I think it is more just to stop people spitting in each others faces over the jukebox and so kind of makes sense... but I'm not going to say that to someone trying to keep a bar afloat right now, they got enough stress, but that is what I think.

 

[MrSki]

No. Neither works. Testing should be open access, just confirm identity with a selection of official ID documents (passport, driving license, Home Office card, other country ID card, etc.) or option to tick no ID and explain why.

I agree but I have no photo ID. My passport expired in 2006,don't drive and have nothing else to prove who I am.

 

[Supine]

I agree but I have no photo ID. My passport expired in 2006,don't drive and have nothing else to prove who I am.

You'd think in this day and age an email address and mobile phone is all that's required.

 

[LDC]

I agree but I have no photo ID. My passport expired in 2006,don't drive and have nothing else to prove who I am.

Expired passport could be accepted, and as I said, there should be a box to say no ID and explain why. Anyway, slight derail or belongs on the testing thread.

 

[two sheds]

Would it be possible/legal to share the NHS info/NI details with a private company though? If they were intent on farming this out - and I suppose there's probably plausible reasons to do this, to do with creating capacity as quickly as possible, as well as enriching their mates - then probably using credit checking is the most straightforward & easily accessed way of confirming identity for most people?

Only they've not created capacity as quickly as possible, it's been an almost total fuckup. They could have funded local authorities and/or NHS at a lower cost for much better results, while integrating the test/tracing into existing NHS information. Privatizing the NHS and enriching their mates are why they've done it, while incidentally fucking over poor people who don't have a credit history.

 

[brogdale]

I think some level of discussion that goes beyond 'these people are malignant and incompetent' is probably a wise idea, or you end up missing stuff.

That's a very fair point.
It does seem worthwhile considering how/why civil servants might have discussed the merits of ID verification prior to testing. What I'm more certain of is that the Johnson administration will have been most attracted to the out-sourcing option yielding the greatest potential for private sector enrichment.

 

[two sheds]

Under 16s? Plenty of others don't have a NI number, and some have no NHS number.

There really isn't a central and comprehensive database for things like this.

Agree with NI number but hasn't nearly everyone got an NHS number? And if they haven't they should have if they're going to have tests put on their records. It was an opportunity to make existing systems more comprehensive.

But as you say - bit of a derail.

 

[William of Walworth]

Expired passport could be accepted, and as I said, there should be a box to say no ID and explain why. Anyway, slight derail or belongs on the testing thread.

Is that just speculation?

In many (all?) Civil Service depts, including my own non-health-related one, expired passports are a big no-no for ID stuff

MrSki would definitely need to check on that, I'd say.

(ETA : Sorry for adding to derail )

 

[MrSki]

Only they've not created capacity as quickly as possible, it's been an almost total fuckup. They could have funded local authorities and/or NHS at a lower cost for much better results, while integrating the test/tracing into existing NHS information. Privatizing the NHS and enriching their mates are why they've done it, while incidentally fucking over poor people who don't have a credit history.

Agreed. Could have nationalised all Uni labs & staff. Would have led to a more local testing system along with NHS labs being able to do local tests. Serco et al are the big shit in all this.

 

[killer b]

Only they've not created capacity as quickly as possible, it's been an almost total fuckup. They could have funded local authorities and/or NHS at a lower cost for much better results, while integrating the test/tracing into existing NHS information. Privatizing the NHS and enriching their mates are why they've done it, while incidentally fucking over poor people who don't have a credit history.

I don't disagree with this, but these are market fundamentalists we're dealing with. In their world, outsourcing always provides more efficient and quicker service, and that's what will have been argued when they were deciding how to roll this out. Then when it became clear it wasn't going to be more efficient or quick, it was too late to change course...

 

[two sheds]

Indeed, totally agree with you but the other discussion is about the best way to do it.

 

[killer b]

what do you mean?

 

[two sheds]

best way to approach test & trace - using for example NHS number, funding local authorities/NHS etc.

 

[killer b]

FWIW while I certainly don't think the government have gone about this the right way, as someone who's had a lot of dealings with local authorities over the years, the idea that this could be smoothly and efficiently handled by them instead is also a little far-fetched.

 

[MrSki]

Surely they could get a handle on it better than a company that has had a number of fines for fucking it up?

 

[two sheds]

indeed - shame the effort hasn't been put into improving them over the years, although it's a fairly low bar with Serco and their mates. Fund the NHS to do it instead.

 

[MrSki]

I don't disagree with this, but these are market fundamentalists we're dealing with. In their world, outsourcing always provides more efficient and quicker service, and that's what will have been argued when they were deciding how to roll this out. Then when it became clear it wasn't going to be more efficient or quick, it was too late to change course...

It didn't stop them when after the trials on the IOW that the initial APP was deemed totally crap & not fit for purpose. Dumped it & went for something else.

 

[souljacker]

Yes, the Zoe test is part of a research project so you’ll be contributing data to that (positive or negative result). You should do it.

OK, I've ordered a postal one.

 

[killer b]

It didn't stop them when after the trials on the IOW that the initial APP was deemed totally crap & not fit for purpose. Dumped it & went for something else.

the level of physical infrastructure necessary for the test and trace programme makes it a little different from just dumping your programmers and signing up with google though.

 

[LDC]

Is that just speculation?

In many (all?) Civil Service depts, including my own non-health-related one, expired passports are a big no-no for ID stuff

MrSki would definitely need to check on that, I'd say.

(ETA : Sorry for adding to derail )

Could/should/whatever. The fuss around the sanctity of passports is ridiculous anyway, it's hangover from some weird analog national fetish imo. An expired passport could easily be accepted as valid enough as of a form of ID for this.

 

[MrSki]

the level of physical infrastructure necessary for the test and trace programme makes it a little different from just dumping your programmers and signing up with google though.

Dump the shite contract with mates of mates & have a word with Germany who had it up & running and adopt their system. It is not rocket engineering. FFS just use something that is proven to work rather than trying to have your own 'world beating' APP.

 

[Spandex]

Have we had this article yet?

Covid cases doubled under most local lockdowns in England

"In 11 out of 16 English cities and towns where restrictions were imposed nine weeks ago, the infection rate has at least doubled, with cases in five areas of Greater Manchester rising faster than the England average in that time."

Seems the local lockdowns aren't proving to be a great success. Of course, we don't know how bad things would be without the lockdowns, but if the current rules were effective you'd hope to be seeing case numbers dipping by now.

While there's lots of emphasis on what you can't do in the lockdown areas - mixing households, groups of more than six, etc - there does seem to be a lot you can still do - going to pubs, cafes, restaurants, exercise classes, organised sports, shops and definately keep working, plus travel between these. The only things that seem actually to have been forced shut are nightclubs and pubs/restaurants at 10pm.

It's like they hope the fabled Swedish approach will work on a local level, and the evidence so far suggests it's not.

 

[LDC]

Dump the shite contract with mates of mates & have a word with Germany who had it up & running and adopt their system. It is not rocket engineering. FFS just use something that is proven to work rather than trying to have your own 'world beating' APP.

Germany is also having problems, and the UK is testing more afaik.

 

[killer b]

Dump the shite contract with mates of mates & have a word with Germany who had it up & running and adopt their system. It is not rocket engineering. FFS just use something that is proven to work rather than trying to have your own 'world beating' APP.

You can do that with an app, relatively pain free - the barriers to doing that with a physical testing programme with hundreds of sites all over the country which are - mostly - actually operating just fine, as the second wave starts to hit are a bit more substantial.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Have we had this article yet?

Covid cases doubled under most local lockdowns in England

"In 11 out of 16 English cities and towns where restrictions were imposed nine weeks ago, the infection rate has at least doubled, with cases in five areas of Greater Manchester rising faster than the England average in that time."

Seems the local lockdowns aren't proving to be a great success. Of course, we don't know how bad things would be without the lockdowns, but if the current rules were effective you'd hope to be seeing case numbers dipping by now.

While there's lots of emphasis on what you can't do in the lockdown areas - mixing households, groups of more than six, etc - there does seem to be a lot you can still do - going to pubs, cafes, restaurants, exercise classes, organised sports, shops and definately keep working, plus travel between these. The only things that seem actually to have been forced shut are nightclubs and pubs/restaurants at 10pm.

It's like they hope the fabled Swedish approach will work on a local level, and the evidence so far suggests it's not.

Doesn't sound good, but I wonder how much the increased testing focused on those areas has played into those numbers.