Coronavirus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Onceinawhile

Where did you see that? Must admit I'm surprised because the flu vaccine isn't a taxable bik.

Would have thought at the very least this came under the trivial benefits exemption.

---

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53324101

I thought about the flu jab when I posted, but didn't know it wasn't covered in BIK

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocky

Have you got a link that shows PCR tests can pick up asymptomatic cases? Not saying you're wrong, I just can't find anything to support that assertion. The info I've seen suggests they only have 70% sensitivity in symptomatic cases (in other words they only pick up on 70% of positive cases).

Interestingly I understand they only have around 95% specificity too (a measure of false positives). This would mean that of 100 people who don't have the virus, 5 of them would incorrectly return a positive result. Presumably in the case of Scotland that means that there are around 150 people testing positive each day based on 3,000 cases. I assume there must be some kind of mechanism to retest people who come up positive to check if it was a false result.

---

I've not got a link, but clearly remember months ago it being reported that Kenny Dalgleish tested positive while in hospital for another procedure and he was asymptomatic and did not develop any symptoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir David Gray

You would think that but, after I made a similar point, I was told that because we have less than 1% of people testing positive every day, it's actually a sign that we're testing enough people to make our figures reliable.

---

I get your point. If capacity is there and not being used, surely it makes sense to test hospital staff regularly to get on top of the hospital acquired infections, or even "ramp up" surveillance testing, and utilise the available capacity to the max.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53324101

I thought about the flu jab when I posted, but didn't know it wasn't covered in BIK

---

This is from HMRC's manual:-

Seasonal flu immunisations Where an employer provides employees with immunisations against seasonal flu (“flu jabs”), the benefit should be treated as trivial. This treatment only applies to routine seasonal flu jabs and does not apply to medical treatment of any sort or to other immunisations, such as immunisations against pandemic flu or other diseases.

So they are correct in applying the rules. But I suspect HMG will modify them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Jonesy-

Bolsonaro tests positive, surprised it took this long to be honest

---

Still shrugging it off by removing his mask as his country's death toll nears 70,000.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and...-covid-19-test

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocky

Have you got a link that shows PCR tests can pick up asymptomatic cases? Not saying you're wrong, I just can't find anything to support that assertion. The info I've seen suggests they only have 70% sensitivity in symptomatic cases (in other words they only pick up on 70% of positive cases).

Interestingly I understand they only have around 95% specificity too (a measure of false positives). This would mean that of 100 people who don't have the virus, 5 of them would incorrectly return a positive result. Presumably in the case of Scotland that means that there are around 150 people testing positive each day based on 3,000 cases. I assume there must be some kind of mechanism to retest people who come up positive to check if it was a false result.

---

Maybe I’m getting confused as to what you are saying but there has been numerous reports of positive tests with no symptoms.

Here’s a link that stated quite clearly symptoms are not required.

https://www.medicaldevice-network.co...y-pcr-antigen/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

This is from HMRC's manual:-

Seasonal flu immunisations Where an employer provides employees with immunisations against seasonal flu (“flu jabs”), the benefit should be treated as trivial. This treatment only applies to routine seasonal flu jabs and does not apply to medical treatment of any sort or to other immunisations, such as immunisations against pandemic flu or other diseases.

So they are correct in applying the rules. But I suspect HMG will modify them.

---

This HMRC rule quoted here doesn't seem to apply in this case. Tests are not immunisations. Tests are not (I would suggest) medical treatment. So this rule is not relevant, I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

Maybe I’m getting confused as to what you are saying but there has been numerous reports of positive tests with no symptoms.

Here’s a link that stated quite clearly symptoms are not required.

https://www.medicaldevice-network.co...y-pcr-antigen/

---

I'm sure you're right about this. The swab test is looking at the actual presence of the virus in the sample. It's nothing to do with the body's response to its presence.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...box=1594201416

U-turn again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...box=1594201416

U-turn again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Who on earth thought that was a good idea in the first place? Mind boggling.

Well, glad to see they've seen sense and won't be making it a bik. Madness to even think of it tbh. Sneaking it out on Monday was quite possibly a devious move as well with it being p11d deadline day, but maybe I'm just being overly cynical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

I'm sure you're right about this. The swab test is looking at the actual presence of the virus in the sample. It's nothing to do with the body's response to its presence.

---

Agree that the PCR test is looking for the presence of the virus in the swab but the amount of virus in the swab (and therefore the chance of the test detecting it) is in part dictated by the body's response. I.e. if the virus has been prevented from multiplying by the immune response, or if the infection is still at an early stage, there won't be much virus to detect.

This was the explanation given for not extending testing to people who have been traced as contacts of positive cases - the test was unlikely to tell them anything useful, as a negative result wouldn't be reliable, and a positive result would just mean they should do what they're doing anyway, I.e. stay home for fourteen days even if no symptoms develop.

Weekly NRS figures;

17 deaths registered in the 7 days up to 5th July in Scotland where Covid-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, more than half the figure of the previous week and the 10th weekly reduction in a row.

The overall number of deaths in that same 7 days period is 4% lower than the 5 year average for the same week in the year. First time we've had a lower than average number of deaths in a week, for 2 weeks in a row, since March.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocky

Agree that the PCR test is looking for the presence of the virus in the swab but the amount of virus in the swab (and therefore the chance of the test detecting it) is in part dictated by the body's response. I.e. if the virus has been prevented from multiplying by the immune response, or if the infection is still at an early stage, there won't be much virus to detect.

This was the explanation given for not extending testing to people who have been traced as contacts of positive cases - the test was unlikely to tell them anything useful, as a negative result wouldn't be reliable, and a positive result would just mean they should do what they're doing anyway, I.e. stay home for fourteen days even if no symptoms develop.

---

Agree there is an ideal window of likelihood of test accuracy and it is more likely to be when symptoms are showing.

On the bit in bold, they must be doing that now? Else, why send mobile testing units to Dumfries?

I probably overstated earlier point by saying PCR tests "can't" detect asymptomatic cases, it's more that they "can't reliably" detect them. So wider population testing would give some benefit I guess as it would pick up a proportion of the asymptomatic people. Not really sure how much benefit that would give over the current approach of testing everyone with symptoms and tracing their contacts though? And at a practical level where would we find another 17,000 people a day to randomly test? Bearing in mind that with a specificity of 95-99% up to 850 of those people per day would return positive tests even if they don't have the virus. Not sure I'd volunteer for that tbh with a risk of having to self isolate for 14 days even if I don't have the virus!

This article is quite interesting and I'll admit I'm a bit confused by some of the detail so some of what I'm saying may well be wrong - more than happy to be corrected as I'd like to understand it better myself.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/369/bmj.m1808.full.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Agree there is an ideal window of likelihood of test accuracy and it is more likely to be when symptoms are showing.

On the bit in bold, they must be doing that now? Else, why send mobile testing units to Dumfries?

---

Not sure, maybe they've implemented different procedures as that's been classed as an "outbreak"?

I can't find the explanation now that said asymptomatic contacts of positive cases would not be tested, but I came across this:

https://www.gov.scot/publications/co...can-be-tested/

Towards the bottom of the page it says:

People who do not have symptomsThe test is only reliable for those who have symptoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocky

I probably overstated earlier point by saying PCR tests "can't" detect asymptomatic cases, it's more that they "can't reliably" detect them. So wider population testing would give some benefit I guess as it would pick up a proportion of the asymptomatic people. Not really sure how much benefit that would give over the current approach of testing everyone with symptoms and tracing their contacts though? And at a practical level where would we find another 17,000 people a day to randomly test? Bearing in mind that with a specificity of 95-99% up to 850 of those people per day would return positive tests even if they don't have the virus. Not sure I'd volunteer for that tbh with a risk of having to self isolate for 14 days even if I don't have the virus!

This article is quite interesting and I'll admit I'm a bit confused by some of the detail so some of what I'm saying may well be wrong - more than happy to be corrected as I'd like to understand it better myself.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/369/bmj.m1808.full.pdf

---

At a practical level, they could start regularly checking hospital staff to use the 17,000 test capacity.

Daily Scottish update;

7 new cases since yesterday
Increase of 68 in hospital but a decrease of 18 in the confirmed cases
Increase of 4 in intensive care - all suspected cases
4106 have left hospital since 5th March
1 death registered since yesterday

From 10th July for the 39 "green" countries on the UK government's list you won't need to quarantine on your return to Scotland.

Spain not on the list at the moment, next review 20th July.

Thought Sturgeons part was really good there, explaining exactly why she was making certain decisions and backing it up with hard evidence, biased as I liked her before this but so glad we have her in charge right now instead of what's going on down south

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir David Gray

From 10th July for the 39 "green" countries on the UK government's list you won't need to quarantine on your return to Scotland.

Spain not on the list at the moment, next review 20th July.

---

Not that it affects me but have you seen the list anywhere

UK government making eating at restaurants 50% off in August Monday to Wednesday, bizarre one ha

They've also announced a reduction in VAT from 20% to 5% for the hospitality and tourism sectors.

Ha ha the Tories implementing policies Jezza would be proud of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

UK government making eating at restaurants 50% off in August Monday to Wednesday, bizarre one ha

---

Called and I **** you not....

“Eat our to help out”.

Snig-ger

J

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Not that it affects me but have you seen the list anywhere

---

It should be published on the Scotgov website soon.
It does includes Australia. Curried is going to be furious. :greengrin

Cut in stamp duty is great, hopefully Scotland is included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

UK government making eating at restaurants 50% off in August Monday to Wednesday, bizarre one ha

---

Up to a maximum discount of £10 per head. Meerkat meals is a better deal. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skyehibee

Cut in stamp duty is great, hopefully Scotland is included.

---

We replaced Stamp Duty with the Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (LBTT) so it will be down to our own Government to match that if they think it’s worth doing here.

Anyone got a full list of the countries you can now travel to?