Have you had any sort of Covid test?

[advent2016]

Until there is reliable testing for have CV, had CV and carry CV without symptoms things are going to carry on like this for a while and it just won't be safe for people to resume jobs where they come into contact with others.

I've had various tests in various organised groups  and thus far (a few weeks ago in March) "the had and recovered group" tests were inconclusive, false positive, false negative or same accuracy as throwing a dice, although some of the tests have  identified other problems in the test group.

I'm now working from home as I consider myself in an at medically risk group. I'll miss seeing young female nurses at close quarters, wandering and driving around deserted parts of London with impunity taking photos.

Has anyone else had CV test and would like to share  the outcome?

[Doc Holliday]

I've had various tests in various organised groups  and thus far (a few weeks ago in March) "the had and recovered group" tests were inconclusive, false positive, false negative or same accuracy as throwing a dice, although some of the tests have  identified other problems in the test group.

Are you saying you have taken part in antibody testing trials?

[advent2016]

I am not a doctor or have any medical training.

Volunteers were asked for. I was ordered to volunteer

Yes. It was covid antibody testing using a few drops of blood and applying some chemical in a similar method to other well understood infections. Also larger amounts of blood were taken for more complex analysis along with mouth, nasal and other swabs.
Partly it was to test the logistics. All they said was don't talk to the press.

[Doc Holliday]

Thanks for that. Really interesting that this was a few weeks ago. The larger blood sample and swabs will give the accurate results for the individual which can then be compared to the finger prick test results. The latter as an antibody test are never likely to be 100% accurate in fact some may be only 90% accurate. This fits with your experience in the trials.

This I believe is the stumbling block. When the government told us lied to us they had ordered 3.5 million antibody testing kits, they will have relied on the manufacturers figures and wanted to conduct their own tests before putting them into general use, which we are told is now happening. The government will want the highest possible accuracy but there is an argument that given the scale of all this and to get an overall idea of how many people may have had it then they should be used. The counter argument is that a false positive may result in that person being put at risk and a false negative putting others at risk.

This raises further doubt that the antibody test in the UK will be available 'soon'?

[Strawberry]

Thanks for that. Really interesting that this was a few weeks ago. The larger blood sample will give the accurate results for the individual which can then be compared to the finger prick test results. The latter as an antibody test are never likely to be 100% accurate in fact some may be only 90% accurate. This fits with your experience in the trials.

This I believe is the stumbling block. When the government told us lied to us they had ordered 3.5 million antibody testing kits, they will have relied on the manufacturers figures and wanted to conduct their own tests before putting them into general use, which we are told is now happening. The government will want the highest possible accuracy but there is an argument that given the scale of all this and to get an overall idea of how many people may have had it then they should be used. The counter argument is that a false positive may result in that person being put at risk and a false negative putting others at risk.

This raises further doubt that the antibody test in the UK will be available 'soon'?

I wonder how much spin is being applied, in non-technical terms I get a sense a lot of 'waffling' is going on.

To answer the OP I haven't had a CV-19 test so far no reason nor medical need.

[Doc Holliday]

External Link/Members Only

The accuracy of these quick tests is never going to be 100%. I recall reading China had already produced one which the West had rejected as not being accurate enough. You will always have to accept less than 100% accuracy. One wonders about the German one?

I would imagine any certificate would have a disclaimer about the accuracy. You would need to take a full blood sample and laboratory testing to get close to 100%.

Then there is the real elephant in the room. Firstly the presence of antibodies will 'assume' immunity. The only way you can test this is for large numbers of people to come into contact with it again and await the outcome?

Secondly and more importantly is how long that immunity lasts for and it may well be as short as a few months in line with the other human coronaviruses that produce the common cold?

[advent2016]

I've been here before with boots, body armour, snatch Landrovers - Government said "these will protect you."

"Oh, we didn't expect Semtex IED's, we thought they'd throw rocks, spears, or grenades"

All Governments end up being the same, they think wringing their hands and blaming the previous lot is OK
..
Sorry I seem to have got all political all of a sudden, I forgot where I was. :-$

[winkywanky]

So it seems this new and keenly awaited test will be great news for the country as a whole, to monitor trends and define future strategy.

But the lack of total accuracy would endanger an inevitable percentage of people at an individual, personal level.

Very tricky.

[Happylad]

Why would I want a test?

With my health problems at my age, if I get it I`ll be dead in less than a fortnight,  If I haven`t then I won`t.
I prefer to just wait and see.

[timsussex]

Why would I want a test?

With my health problems at my age, if I get it I`ll be dead in less than a fortnight,  If I haven`t then I won`t.
I prefer to just wait and see.

Well thats one way to look at it
Personally I have a few scores to settle - will be difficult though if I'm gasping for breath but I'll die trying