The "I`ve got it" thread...

JCMaloney

Member
Location
LE9 2JG
The way cases are reported has changed......again! He says crying softly....

Cases that have been identified through a positive rapid lateral flow test will be removed for people who took Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests within 3 days that were all negative.

Cases of this type that were previously reported were removed from the cumulative total, reducing the total by 8,010.

Newly reported cases at regional and local authority level within England are calculated as the daily change in the total number of cases.

This means that for 9 April 2021, these show significantly lower numbers or zero, and should not be considered as the actual number of new cases reported on that date.

This means that Leicester and County figures decreased from yesterday.

City of Leicester "new" figure yesterday was 36034
Today 39 cases were reported to produce a figure of 36073

Leicestershire "new" figure 44043
Today 40 cases were reported to produce a figure of 44083

UHL reported 2 death's.
The death's occurred on 6th April and 7th April.
Total number of UHL death's stands at 1454

I`ll be asking questions later....
 

Hindsight

Member
Location
Lincolnshire
The way cases are reported has changed......again! He says crying softly....

Cases that have been identified through a positive rapid lateral flow test will be removed for people who took Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests within 3 days that were all negative.

Cases of this type that were previously reported were removed from the cumulative total, reducing the total by 8,010.

Newly reported cases at regional and local authority level within England are calculated as the daily change in the total number of cases.

This means that for 9 April 2021, these show significantly lower numbers or zero, and should not be considered as the actual number of new cases reported on that date.

This means that Leicester and County figures decreased from yesterday.

City of Leicester "new" figure yesterday was 36034
Today 39 cases were reported to produce a figure of 36073

Leicestershire "new" figure 44043
Today 40 cases were reported to produce a figure of 44083

UHL reported 2 death's.
The death's occurred on 6th April and 7th April.
Total number of UHL death's stands at 1454

I`ll be asking questions later....

Is this reshuffling the pack? Paul Daniels would be proud!
 

Hindsight

Member
Location
Lincolnshire
Removing false positives from the figures where PCR has overruled the highly inaccurate LF test. Only a really screwed up cynic could see anything wrong with that. o_O

I think it is a good idea. Makes sense total sense from a medical perspective. But at same time produces yet another 'definitive' number that then leads to commentators arguing about the correct number. And using these changes to say the government is playing with the numbers in readiness for the inevitable enquiry later. So, not a cynic on this one. My comment was more that I treat all figures from various governments with some skepticism as there seems to be variance on counting method. Provoked a response if nothing else!
 

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
I think it is a good idea. Makes sense total sense from a medical perspective. But at same time produces yet another 'definitive' number that then leads to commentators arguing about the correct number. And using these changes to say the government is playing with the numbers in readiness for the inevitable enquiry later. So, not a cynic on this one. My comment was more that I treat all figures from various governments with some skepticism as there seems to be variance on counting method. Provoked a response if nothing else!
It is not a variance in counting methods when in January the LF test was introduced and guidelines stated that results from follow up tests using PCR would over rule LF results. There are two problems the LF test is inaccurate and is most frequently performed by unskilled individuals. The problem as I see it is the disruption to family life caused by positive LF tests which are not verified and although the PCR test has thrown up plenty of false positives in the past the LF test seems to be a real can of worms.
 

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
The only good thing about the LF test as I see it is that it will uncover a few verifiable positives that otherwise would have passed unnoticed. I would also imagine that the LF test will produce a high proportion of false negatives for reasons earlier explained.
 

JCMaloney

Member
Location
LE9 2JG
Damned if you change it, to be more accurate, or damned if you don`t for being misleading............. :)

Think of the poor data cruncher in one hospital trust who has set up a nice simple process that sucks the data out of the EPR (Electronic Patient Record) and ratifies it against the test results from the LIMS (Laboratory Intelligent Management System).......... and now has to add in another cross reference for a test that could have been done at a range of places.... and then remove one side of the equation based on date......
 

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
Damned if you change it, to be more accurate, or damned if you don`t for being misleading............. :)

Think of the poor data cruncher in one hospital trust who has set up a nice simple process that sucks the data out of the EPR (Electronic Patient Record) and ratifies it against the test results from the LIMS (Laboratory Intelligent Management System).......... and now has to add in another cross reference for a test that could have been done at a range of places.... and then remove one side of the equation based on date......
All unverified LF tests should be ignored completely. (y)
 

Hindsight

Member
Location
Lincolnshire
Damned if you change it, to be more accurate, or damned if you don`t for being misleading............. :)

Think of the poor data cruncher in one hospital trust who has set up a nice simple process that sucks the data out of the EPR (Electronic Patient Record) and ratifies it against the test results from the LIMS (Laboratory Intelligent Management System).......... and now has to add in another cross reference for a test that could have been done at a range of places.... and then remove one side of the equation based on date......

You have my sympathies!! Do you listen to 'More or Less' with Tim Hartford on Radio 4 and his recent series 'How to Vaccinate the World'.
 

Hindsight

Member
Location
Lincolnshire
All unverified LF tests should be ignored completely. (y)

But they are the linch pin of government policy are they not? Loadsa testing - to allow access to events etc. All with false negatives, false positives. Gonna be great fun. But likely many youngsters will go down this route rather than be vaccinated. If so are the lateral flow tests not always going to be negative. In fact I can say now that all lateral flow test results given to a youngster will be negative!!
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
But they are the linch pin of government policy are they not? Loadsa testing - to allow access to events etc. All with false negatives, false positives. Gonna be great fun. But likely many youngsters will go down this route rather than be vaccinated. If so are the lateral flow tests not always going to be negative. In fact I can say now that all lateral flow test results given to a youngster will be negative!!
Yes, LF tests just another thing to do, keep up the war pretence etc
Wear your mask, have your test etc... collect at the covid bank of positive life changes.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
Testing will only be a relatively short term thing.
Mask wearing will become personal choice depending on where and with whom.
Vaccination will be no different to an annual flu jab.

Feel free to bookmark.
I admire your confidence but not sure you really defining your terms.
Relatively short term ? Already a year? of mass testing to no particular purpose
"Mask wearing will become."..when you think this will be? This year?next?
 

JCMaloney

Member
Location
LE9 2JG
I admire your confidence but not sure you really defining your terms.
Relatively short term ? Already a year? of mass testing to no particular purpose
"Mask wearing will become."..when you think this will be? This year?next?

Masks - on public transport, in large venues but will be optional rather than mandatory. 6 months or so.

Testing - will be used to focus on local outbreaks rather than as it is now. What it is doing now is showing the picture across the country. We do "heat maps" down to postcode level so the testing will almost become by street or by tracing contacts. That gets easier as the volume decreases.

The other testing "thing" will be holiday testing for crossing borders to reduce the risk of import/export. Think vaccination status and a negative test to leave and return.

Lots of our local GP`s are setting up Travel testing clinic`s using our labs, easy money for them!
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 80 42.3%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 66 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 15.9%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,293
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top