Aug 2020
7:52pm, 12 Aug 2020
5,521 posts
|
Metro_Nome
That surprises me they were advised that LG- everything I’ve seen her is pretty clear only to get tested if you have symptoms
|
Aug 2020
7:56pm, 12 Aug 2020
17,320 posts
|
Rosehip
As I understand it, we are only supposed to get tested if we have symptoms. It's self-isolation for contact with anyone who tests positive.
That in itself is a problem if you come out of isolation only to have contact with another positive person!
|
Aug 2020
8:07pm, 12 Aug 2020
42,998 posts
|
Lip Gloss
I was surprised too and also thought it won’t be lint before we run out of kits if they are testing randoms
|
Aug 2020
8:08pm, 12 Aug 2020
42,999 posts
|
Lip Gloss
*long*
|
Aug 2020
8:09pm, 12 Aug 2020
5,522 posts
|
Metro_Nome
It also just seems a bit pointless. If they’ve had a close contact and they really think they might have it, a negative test doesn’t change anything and they should still be isolating. If it’s not actually thought they could have it, seems a real waste of a test.
|
Aug 2020
8:13pm, 12 Aug 2020
18,708 posts
|
Serendippily
I suppose if you test positive then people you’ve seen in the period between the contact and the warning can also know they’re at risk
|
Aug 2020
8:14pm, 12 Aug 2020
43,000 posts
|
Lip Gloss
No close contact intact no contact at all as they never even saw the person so pointless as far as I’m concerned but I never sent them for the test!
|
Aug 2020
8:16pm, 12 Aug 2020
5,523 posts
|
Metro_Nome
True seren
And yes I know LG- sorry wasn’t meaning to sound like I was having a go
|
Aug 2020
8:16pm, 12 Aug 2020
43,001 posts
|
Lip Gloss
|
Aug 2020
8:25pm, 12 Aug 2020
18,709 posts
|
Serendippily
Sorry LG I was responding to M_N without reading above properly
|