|
Jun 2020
4:19pm, 2 Jun 2020
40,901 posts
|
Lip Gloss
Maybe a daft question but if a test proves you had it but not assume you are immune to getting it again - what is point of the test?
|
|
Jun 2020
4:20pm, 2 Jun 2020
2,632 posts
|
Little Miss Happy
That's what I thought V'rap - trouble is I fear some of those paying for antibody tests which may or may not be accurate in the first place will assume that it does. Until we know I'm not sure what use the test is?
|
|
Jun 2020
4:27pm, 2 Jun 2020
46,874 posts
|
Velociraptor
The point, I suppose, is to shut up a public that is squawking for "a test".
And also because a negative test means that you can assume you definitely ARE susceptible, although again that's of limited use because you should still assume that you're susceptible with a positive test.
|
|
Jun 2020
4:27pm, 2 Jun 2020
46,875 posts
|
Velociraptor
(And better information about persistent immunity may become available later.)
|
|
Jun 2020
4:32pm, 2 Jun 2020
26,980 posts
|
Wriggling Snake
OH, Manchester Royal, no antibody test yet....not able to go to slot offered last week..rather urgent patient at the time (somebody got run over)...back of the queue now...
|
|
Jun 2020
4:34pm, 2 Jun 2020
3,634 posts
|
ndellar
Thanks Vrap. I know what you guys mean, if I did have one it’s not going to change my social distancing behaviour etc and I agree a lot of unknowns around immunity but if offered it I would probably opt in.
|
|
Jun 2020
4:35pm, 2 Jun 2020
26,981 posts
|
Wriggling Snake
Yes. I get the impression is to gauge how widespread the virus is now...which is fair enough in itself...you basically have to behave as if you can pick it up from anyone...
|
|
Jun 2020
4:37pm, 2 Jun 2020
7,525 posts
|
jda
It’s important scientifically to see how many people have had it. I also think it would be unlikely that there isn’t substantial immunity for a period of time - basically no-one has had it twice .
But on the other hand it may make sense to tell people they aren’t guaranteed immune, tests can be wrong and immunity may fade so it’s probably sensible to continue with distancing etc.
|
|
Jun 2020
4:38pm, 2 Jun 2020
11,187 posts
|
larkim
I see it quite differently - the level of infection is still relatively sparse in the population, by all means act as if *you* have it, but there's no real good reason to assume that everyone you come in contact with is a carrier.
|
|
Jun 2020
4:38pm, 2 Jun 2020
11,188 posts
|
larkim
(Replying to WS, not jda!)
|
Coronavirus discussion thread
Feb 2024
