COVID Passport

[wizadry]

Sorry. Am I misunderstanding? How do they know they've not got Covid as they walk through the door of the event?

Testing, Phill but you’ve answered what you think about that further up and I’ve only just seen it so no drama mate.

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

Gently.......
Would any of the people I've been jousting with like to explain (ethically) why it's OK to show a bit of paper with your health test results but not OK to show a bit of paper with your vaccination status.

Surely that's just discriminatory East German style bullshit & health apartheid isn't it?

Gently......

 

[ThatJa]

I'm guessing all those that are saying LFTs aren't trustworthy don't have any at home?

Because the NHS ran out of them yesterday and they could be some use to people who actually will use them.

 

[Westran]

The only way to successfully prevent onward transmission is to have a range of options. Vaccination doesn't work on its own because you can still catch it, albeit with reduced risk.

Testing is slow and not always 100% accurate, antibodies last for at least 9 weeks after infection.

Interestingly my team are currently recruiting those with a positive covid test result to an Antibody study, Public Health England are testing for antibody levels from previous infection or vaccination, compared to antibody levels 28 days later from new infection.

There's still lots we don't know about this virus and its mutations. We haven't had a pandemic since the World has been so well connected. False information and a reluctance to follow expert advise because of mistrust in 'the establishment' are making dealing with this an absolute nightmare.

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

I'm guessing all those that are saying LFTs aren't trustworthy don't have any at home?

Because the NHS ran out of them yesterday and they could be some use to people who actually will use them.

I believe that lateral flow tests are a very important part of our defence. I've been using them daily because of the circumstances I'm in. But, a negative self administered test is not an absolute guarantee that you don't have Covid. I treat it as a somewhat reassuring extra layer in reducing risk. I hope I haven't given the idea that they're not trustworthy. They're essential in my view.

 

[TankersleyBlade]

I'm guessing all those that are saying LFTs aren't trustworthy don't have any at home?

Because the NHS ran out of them yesterday and they could be some use to people who actually will use them.

We’ve got loads at home - kids and school testing. My wife did them for 6 days (whilst unwell with symptoms) before finally testing positive. In my opinion they (the existing relatively low quality LFT’s that is) should not form the primary basis of an event testing system. Simply not good enough at identifying positives. Useful as part of a wider testing system, maybe.

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

Testing, Phill but you’ve answered what you think about that further up and I’ve only just seen it so no drama mate.

I'm going to be blunt here & echo some of TankersleyBlade points. In case people don't already know how "showing a negative test to get into an event" works.

You get a test kit from your chemist, test centre or through the post
You waggle the cotton bud near where you think your tonsils are and shove it up your hooter
You wipe the snot into a tube & drip it onto some blotting paper
You wait half an hour
You then log on to a website, give some details (crucially your email or mobile or both) & type in the unique number written on your blotting paper

And then - you - yourself - tick a box for either positive or negative - and you hit SUBMIT.

Minute or two later - you get a text and email confirming what you've told them - positive or negative.

Get to the turnstile/door later that day - show 'em the text message.

Bluntly. If you really wanted to go in that nightclub, you wouldn't even tonsil, hooter, snot, blotting paper. You'd just use the unique number off the blotting paper & report negative, get the text message & away you go.

I hope that explains a bit why there is some nervousness around "why not just show that you haven't got Covid".

As I've said already, I'm a big fan of lateral flow tests, I've used them extensively to manage my situation. But - the process for using them to prove you haven't got Covid to a doorman is flawed

 

[McGoaldrick]

Gently.......
Would any of the people I've been jousting with like to explain (ethically) why it's OK to show a bit of paper with your health test results but not OK to show a bit of paper with your vaccination status.

Surely that's just discriminatory East German style bullshit & health apartheid isn't it?

Gently......

I mean the point I think he’s making is that ‘showing your papers’ was a key part of nazi germany and the aim was to stop certain people enjoying life. Covid passports will stop certain people enjoying life, without actually taking into account who has contracted covid. You will inevitably have negative unvaccinated people turned away, while positive vaccinated are welcomed, based solely on vaccination status. Note I didn’t use that term myself but I think I understand the point being made.

To answer you, I have never had to show my health test results anywhere but a doctors, especially not to get into a club or football stadium

 

[Ball_Sup (Phil)]

I mean the point I think he’s making is that ‘showing your papers’ was a key part of nazi germany and the aim was to stop certain people enjoying life. Covid passports will stop certain people enjoying life, without actually taking into account who has contracted covid. You will inevitably have negative unvaccinated people turned away, while positive vaccinated are welcomed, based solely on vaccination status. Note I didn’t use that term myself but I think I understand the point being made.

To answer you, I have never had to show my health test results anywhere but a doctors, especially not to get into a club or football stadium

I fully understand that argument. I was more driving the question at some posters who (I may have misunderstood) seemed to be OK with using proof of a negative test - but not OK with proof of vaccination. My point is/was - why do those posters think one is OK, but not the other.

 

[Oldun]

For everyone using the ‘most at risk should stay at home and protect themselves’ argument look at Neil Etheridge. 31. Presumably fitter than most people on here, and most people in the stands at BDTBL. Ended up hospitalised with Covid on nasal high flow oxygen. It’s not just old and frail people that this affects.

 

[Oldun]

The only way to successfully prevent onward transmission is to have a range of options. Vaccination doesn't work on its own because you can still catch it, albeit with reduced risk.

Testing is slow and not always 100% accurate, antibodies last for at least 9 weeks after infection.

Interestingly my team are currently recruiting those with a positive covid test result to an Antibody study, Public Health England are testing for antibody levels from previous infection or vaccination, compared to antibody levels 28 days later from new infection.

There's still lots we don't know about this virus and its mutations. We haven't had a pandemic since the World has been so well connected. False information and a reluctance to follow expert advise because of mistrust in 'the establishment' are making dealing with this an absolute nightmare.

SIREN study?

 

[McGoaldrick]

I fully understand that argument. I was more driving the question at some posters who (I may have misunderstood) seemed to be OK with using proof of a negative test - but not OK with proof of vaccination. My point is/was - why do those posters think one is OK, but not the other.

Tbh mate I’m one of those people I think but I’m not keen on either. I’m really frustrated with the finger pointing and general assumption that everyone is a threat to each other. Not good for anyone’s mental health. Would love no conditions of entry. But I think a lot of people including myself have backed down and/or are more willing to compromise because there’s clearly a big opposition with valid points. I’m not one to dictate to people what they should or shouldn’t do. Mandatory or heavily coerced vaccination just isn’t acceptable. I think it’s fair to say we’ve established that neither method (test or vaccine) is 100% effective so there needs to be a choice

 

[Westran]

SIREN study?

No PPATI (Post-Positive antibody testing initiative)

 

[McGoaldrick]

I fully understand that argument. I was more driving the question at some posters who (I may have misunderstood) seemed to be OK with using proof of a negative test - but not OK with proof of vaccination. My point is/was - why do those posters think one is OK, but not the other.

Tbh mate I’m one of those people I think but I’m not keen on either. I’m really frustrated with the finger pointing and general assumption that everyone is a threat to each other. Not good for anyone’s mental health. Would love no conditions of entry. But I think a lot of people including myself have backed down and/or are more willing to compromise because there’s clearly a big opposition with valid points. I’m not one to dictate to people what they should or shouldn’t do. Mandatory or heavily coerced vaccination just isn’t acceptable. I think it’s fair to say we’ve established that neither method (test or vaccine) is 100% effective so there needs to be a choice

Also to my point, a test is one and done. If (god forbid) you get complications from the vaccine, you’re stuck with that shit

 

[Bookers Mullet]

There's still lots we don't know about this virus and its mutations. We haven't had a pandemic since the World has been so well connected. False information and a reluctance to follow expert advise because of mistrust in 'the establishment' are making dealing with this an absolute nightmare.

Sounds fantastic work you are doing, it's good and reassuring to hear actual people at the forefront.

Maybe going forward 'the establishment' that people are exposed to (IE the government), can be more open, honest and transparent?

People might be more trusting if the establishment weren't twisting, breaking or inventing new rules to fit their needs. Also never a good look to be seen profiteering from something they have claimed to be so deadly.

 

[ThatJa]

I believe that lateral flow tests are a very important part of our defence. I've been using them daily because of the circumstances I'm in. But, a negative self administered test is not an absolute guarantee that you don't have Covid. I treat it as a somewhat reassuring extra layer in reducing risk. I hope I haven't given the idea that they're not trustworthy. They're essential in my view.

What about 2-3 LFT's 2 or 3 hours apart. Surely 3 negatives is more accurate than just one showing negative.

 

[Westran]

Maybe going forward 'the establishment' that people are exposed to (IE the government), can be more open, honest and transparent?

People might be more trusting if the establishment weren't twisting, breaking or inventing new rules to fit their needs. Also never a good look to be seen profiteering from something they have claimed to be so deadly.

I agree, that would be great. It makes it impossible to do things that benefit society when leaders who are supposed to represent us profiteer and take decisions based on winning votes rather than what benefits the population best. But the establishment isn't completely to blame, online misinformation has a massive impact too.

 

[McGoaldrick]

I agree, that would be great. It makes it impossible to do things that benefit society when leaders who are supposed to represent us profiteer and take decisions based on winning votes rather than what benefits the population best. But the establishment isn't completely to blame, online misinformation has a massive impact too.

Problem with misinformation is that it’s misinformation until proven true, which isn’t easy when it goes against the narrative. Genuine scientists were getting banned from social medias etc for saying that the AZ caused blood clots just days before the conference in which they addressed it causing blood clots. But obviously there are some absolute mentalists online too. Glad this thread is free of any mentions of 5G lmao, touch wood

 

[Oldun]

No PPATI (Post-Positive antibody testing initiative)

Brilliant - really really valuable work mate.

 

[YES Blade]

I'm going to be blunt here & echo some of TankersleyBlade points. In case people don't already know how "showing a negative test to get into an event" works.

You get a test kit from your chemist, test centre or through the post
You waggle the cotton bud near where you think your tonsils are and shove it up your hooter
You wipe the snot into a tube & drip it onto some blotting paper
You wait half an hour
You then log on to a website, give some details (crucially your email or mobile or both) & type in the unique number written on your blotting paper

And then - you - yourself - tick a box for either positive or negative - and you hit SUBMIT.

Minute or two later - you get a text and email confirming what you've told them - positive or negative.

Get to the turnstile/door later that day - show 'em the text message.

Bluntly. If you really wanted to go in that nightclub, you wouldn't even tonsil, hooter, snot, blotting paper. You'd just use the unique number off the blotting paper & report negative, get the text message & away you go.

I hope that explains a bit why there is some nervousness around "why not just show that you haven't got Covid".

As I've said already, I'm a big fan of lateral flow tests, I've used them extensively to manage my situation. But - the process for using them to prove you haven't got Covid to a doorman is flawed

I did the lateral flows to get into Wembley for the Euros and couldn’t believe the lateral flow system. I guarantee there would’ve been people at Wembley that didn’t even bother taking the test but still showed a covid negative result. Not that it even mattered, they didn’t even check IDs so the covid result could’ve been a screenshot from google!

You would think that you’d need to at least take a photo of the negative result so that they can randomly check that a negative result is correct. Yes, it would still be open to abuse, but it at least takes a bit more effort by the person reporting a false negative.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

I fully understand that argument. I was more driving the question at some posters who (I may have misunderstood) seemed to be OK with using proof of a negative test - but not OK with proof of vaccination. My point is/was - why do those posters think one is OK, but not the other.

I don't think they are necessarily against the proof aspect (they may be, I'm uncomfortable with it).
I think the point is, if you can't or don't want to be vaccinated, why not be able to show a negative test result instead.

As you've pointed out, probably because it is immediately fakable.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

I did the lateral flows to get into Wembley for the Euros and couldn’t believe the lateral flow system. I guarantee there would’ve been people at Wembley that didn’t even bother taking the test but still showed a covid negative result. Not that it even mattered, they didn’t even check IDs so the covid result could’ve been a screenshot from google!

You would think that you’d need to at least take a photo of the negative result so that they can randomly check that a negative result is correct. Yes, it would still be open to abuse, but it at least takes a bit more effort by the person reporting a false negative.

Barely none, you'd just dip it in water instead. Lat flow and self PCR both rely on the user trying to do it right.

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

Ultimately, this is a merging of two rhetorics, the 'life can't be on hold forever' and the 'life needs to be as safe as is possible' agenda. So, when it comes to opening up large-scale events (in the current context, where cases are rising) and with a view and hope to open up and stay open (sports, concerts) etc, then intuitively it follows that the govt may look to trial larger events with the 'safest' (i.e. most protected) crowds first. This may on the surface seem like discrimination, but in reality, it's trialling viability with what ought to be most secure sample population.

Within that, there will be compromises as it won't be possible to please everyone. The most obvious compromise being at present, be vaccinated and be part of the trials for crowds or need to wait until ticket sales can include those without vaccinations. It's as others have stated, about the well-being of all.

 

[SUFC Guy]

.

The only way to successfully prevent onward transmission is to have a range of options. Vaccination doesn't work on its own because you can still catch it, albeit with reduced risk.

Testing is slow and not always 100% accurate, antibodies last for at least 9 weeks after infection.

Interestingly my team are currently recruiting those with a positive covid test result to an Antibody study, Public Health England are testing for antibody levels from previous infection or vaccination, compared to antibody levels 28 days later from new infection.

There's still lots we don't know about this virus and its mutations. We haven't had a pandemic since the World has been so well connected. False information and a reluctance to follow expert advise because of mistrust in 'the establishment' are making dealing with this an absolute nightmare.

Not trying to be a smart arse honestly, but is that a typo as I read that anti-bodies are still present after 9 months from infection?

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[Carlton Blade]

Covid 19 is still an extremely young virus. Almost everything we know about it is based on our knowledge of other viruses.

It's all guesswork

 

[pudseyblade]

Do we all want to watch more football? If the answer is yes, then stop worrying what everyone else is doing and just be the best you can be at not spreading. This is happening, we are opening up, just make sure you are comfortable with the position of you and yours and let them and theirs do their own silly things. Yes it might impact you, but that should be part of your own individual assessment. Personally, I just want to watch football again and there are certain risks I will and won't take to do that.

 

[Oldun]

Covid 19 is still an extremely young virus. Almost everything we know about it is based on our knowledge of other viruses.

It's all guesswork

Wow. So the scientists, virologists, researchers, academics around the globe who have spent the last 18 months studying Covid have been wasting their time then?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Wow. So the scientists, virologists, researchers, academics around the globe who have spent the last 18 months studying Covid have been wasting their time then?

Have they provided an isolated genome from an infected person?

 

[Carlton Blade]

Wow. So the scientists, virologists, researchers, academics around the globe who have spent the last 18 months studying Covid have been wasting their time then?

In terms of long term projections

 

[Westran]

Have they provided an isolated genome from an infected person?

Not sure what the point is behind this question, but yes they have. And in Sheffield alone we genome sequence dozens of samples of infection from positive tests daily.

The scientist who made that claim showed a distinct lack of understanding at how viruses work

Fact Check-SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and its complete genome has been sequenced

An interview with a late Canadian writer has resurfaced on social media and shows him making several false claims about COVID-19. Among them, he questions the existence of coronaviruses by saying they have never been isolated. This is not true, and such a claim reveals the...

www.reuters.com