 |
By *arol321 OP Woman
over a year ago
Poole |
This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss "
Because you could meet someone not tested  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ltra72Man
over a year ago
edinburgh |
"This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss "
I agree, I’ll need to take you from behind though. At least to keep some kind of distance  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss "
It's a good point. I suppose it's about risk reductions and what is essential v what is desirable.
In theory though they should allow it. And we are patiently moving in that direction. Out of interest though I believe (happy to be proved wrong) that lft tests depend on how well the sample is taken and then in clinical condition have 75% accuracy for positive tests. Ie 1 in 4 is a false positive. Negatives I think were something like 98% accurate. And of course they may have improved in the last months.
Can you imagine the 1st date nerves as you both sit their waiting 30 minutes while your self test develops. And the disappointment when one comes back with a positive... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *arol321 OP Woman
over a year ago
Poole |
"This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss
It's a good point. I suppose it's about risk reductions and what is essential v what is desirable.
In theory though they should allow it. And we are patiently moving in that direction. Out of interest though I believe (happy to be proved wrong) that lft tests depend on how well the sample is taken and then in clinical condition have 75% accuracy for positive tests. Ie 1 in 4 is a false positive. Negatives I think were something like 98% accurate. And of course they may have improved in the last months.
Can you imagine the 1st date nerves as you both sit their waiting 30 minutes while your self test develops. And the disappointment when one comes back with a positive... "
I know but how great would it be when both are negative and you could have some fun for the first time in months |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss
It's a good point. I suppose it's about risk reductions and what is essential v what is desirable.
In theory though they should allow it. And we are patiently moving in that direction. Out of interest though I believe (happy to be proved wrong) that lft tests depend on how well the sample is taken and then in clinical condition have 75% accuracy for positive tests. Ie 1 in 4 is a false positive. Negatives I think were something like 98% accurate. And of course they may have improved in the last months.
Can you imagine the 1st date nerves as you both sit their waiting 30 minutes while your self test develops. And the disappointment when one comes back with a positive...
I know but how great would it be when both are negative and you could have some fun for the first time in months"
How do you prove that? Think about it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Basically it has always been up to you if you wanted to meet. Most did not and rightly so. While the numbers are low it safer, these antigen test are as accurate as the PCR? So if you wanted to be sure get the PCR and make sure the other/s have too. Pretty safe but still breaking rules not laws. I guess they think kids education is more of a priority that our sexual gratification, bastards  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *arol321 OP Woman
over a year ago
Poole |
"This was raised with me the other day:
If the rapid testing kits give an accurate enough result to allow schools, factories, businesses etc to open and work why aren’t they good enough to allow us to meet?
Discuss
It's a good point. I suppose it's about risk reductions and what is essential v what is desirable.
In theory though they should allow it. And we are patiently moving in that direction. Out of interest though I believe (happy to be proved wrong) that lft tests depend on how well the sample is taken and then in clinical condition have 75% accuracy for positive tests. Ie 1 in 4 is a false positive. Negatives I think were something like 98% accurate. And of course they may have improved in the last months.
Can you imagine the 1st date nerves as you both sit their waiting 30 minutes while your self test develops. And the disappointment when one comes back with a positive...
I know but how great would it be when both are negative and you could have some fun for the first time in months
How do you prove that? Think about it "
Surely if you’ve sat in the garden together and done the tests at the same time and they are both negative that’s proof enough? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *moretwoCouple
over a year ago
Feltham |
We completely agree with the OP if both couples etc take the test in front of each other in the garden while chatting, if all negative it defiantly would make things a lot safer for all. if the other couple etc have also had the vaccine that's about as safe as you can make it.
i will defiantly the way forward for us. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Because they're only 60-70% accurate outside of lab conditions, they're only really useful if you're being tested regularly, ideally daily.
On top of that, the majority of people haven't had full vaccines...
LvM |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
