Covid testing for work on days off

epm-84

Just a thought - maybe say you're planning to visit a relative in another part of the country so won't be able to come in 72 hours before you return to work. If you're not going away you can always say your plans changed if a manager sees you.

[Deleted User]

delete 123

Bobo_Brazil

Where do we stand on this?
They cannot mandate a medical procedure. It's that simple.

Have you asked them why they want a PCR test, when the Government has admitted plain as day, that a PCR test is a mere DNA test and provides no evidence of infection? as Baroness Harding has confirmed in several interviews the last couple of months, that PCR requires correlation with symptoms. Prof. Whitty admitted in a Parliamentary hearing that it is no evidence of infection - SAGE have posted this online.
[p. 3] "Does not provide evidence on the presence of infective virus."
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/945838/S0942_Environmental_Monitoring_of_Viral_Presence_final.pdf

British Medical Journal: "This is because PCR is not a test of infectiousness. Rather, the test detects trace amounts of viral genome sequence, which may be either live transmissible virus or irrelevant RNA fragments from previous infection."
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3699

unforeseen

Bobo_Brazil said:

Where do we stand on this?
They cannot mandate a medical procedure. It's that simple.

Have you asked them why they want a PCR test, when the Government has admitted plain as day, that a PCR test is a mere DNA test and provides no evidence of infection? as Baroness Harding has confirmed in several interviews the last couple of months, that PCR requires correlation with symptoms. Prof. Whitty admitted in a Parliamentary hearing that it is no evidence of infection - SAGE have posted this online.
[p. 3] "Does not provide evidence on the presence of infective virus."
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/945838/S0942_Environmental_Monitoring_of_Viral_Presence_final.pdf

British Medical Journal: "This is because PCR is not a test of infectiousness. Rather, the test detects trace amounts of viral genome sequence, which may be either live transmissible virus or irrelevant RNA fragments from previous infection."
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3699

Did you read the bit that says
" Although it does not measure the presence of infectious virus, RT-qPCR of environmental samples can provide decision makers with valuable information from which to infer infection risk."

In other words it is a valid way to reduce the risk to vulnerable people by removing a possible risk from the environment.

If the PCR is so useless, why do you think the majority of health care staff in hospitals and care homes have to have weekly PCR tests (and also twice weekly LFTs) ? 

JamoLew

Bobo_Brazil said:

Where do we stand on this?
They cannot mandate a medical procedure. It's that simple.

Have you asked them why they want a PCR test, when the Government has admitted plain as day, that a PCR test is a mere DNA test and provides no evidence of infection? as Baroness Harding has confirmed in several interviews the last couple of months, that PCR requires correlation with symptoms. Prof. Whitty admitted in a Parliamentary hearing that it is no evidence of infection - SAGE have posted this online.
[p. 3] "Does not provide evidence on the presence of infective virus."
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/945838/S0942_Environmental_Monitoring_of_Viral_Presence_final.pdf

British Medical Journal: "This is because PCR is not a test of infectiousness. Rather, the test detects trace amounts of viral genome sequence, which may be either live transmissible virus or irrelevant RNA fragments from previous infection."
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3699

No they can't - but as health care Professionals - there may well be consequences of not undertaking something that is put in place for the health and welfare of patients, staff and everyone else

The vast majority of us willingly do this and have willingly (and gratefully) had the vaccination - not just because its the right thing to do socially,morally and professionally but also because unlike the majority of anti-vaxxers - we have seen first hand the damage,pain and suffering (current and future) that this virus has caused

silvercar

Bobo_Brazil said:

Where do we stand on this?
They cannot mandate a medical procedure. It's that simple.

It isn’t a medical procedure. 

“ On 15 December 2020, the law changed. Coronavirus testing has been exempted as a regulated activity under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.”

It’s a test designed to reduce the risk of spreading covid. Don’t make it out to be more than it is.

Whereas I have full sympathy for someone being dragged into work on their days off, that is the discussion we should be having here.

Making out that it is a procedure or that it isn’t a reliable test for covid is wrong. It’s the gold standard available to us. If we don’t use what we have available we will never get a hold on the spread.