The Lemon Fool

The Newbury site will not do the testing on site. The swaps are taken there and then will be sent to one of a number of sites across the country where the actual PCR test are conducted.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ur-samples

The whole process could break down at any stage though.

The swaps need to be done correctly.

The test kit needs to be fit for purpose

The sample needs to be analysed correctly.

When a sample is positive there are cross checks that take place to double check results, however since the large majority of test are negative, it would be easier to miss a false negative.

John

Mike4 wrote:The thing about this still unclear to me, having read the links and heard the BBC report on R4, is whether the Newbury Showground testing centre has its own PCR testing lab on site or whether the swabs/samples taken there are sent away to a lab accepting samples from all over the south of England.

Covid test lab in Wolverhampton suspended over wrong results

BBC News

Around 43,000 people in England and Wales may have been wrongly told their Covid-19 test was negative because of errors at a lab.

"Testing at the Wolverhampton laboratory has been suspended following an investigation by NHS Test and Trace."

I just can't believe that they didn't pick this up earlier, where were the positive controls? This sort of thing just beggars belief. Perhaps I just belong to an earlier generation that still believed PCR was witchcraft and so always included positive and negative controls. That and spending the best part of a year trying to debug PCRs where certain samples contained PCR inhibitors...

XFool wrote:

Mike4 wrote:The thing about this still unclear to me, having read the links and heard the BBC report on R4, is whether the Newbury Showground testing centre has its own PCR testing lab on site or whether the swabs/samples taken there are sent away to a lab accepting samples from all over the south of England.

Covid test lab in Wolverhampton suspended over wrong results

BBC News

Around 43,000 people in England and Wales may have been wrongly told their Covid-19 test was negative because of errors at a lab.

"Testing at the Wolverhampton laboratory has been suspended following an investigation by NHS Test and Trace."

Perversely, this is Good News, assuming (although still no-one has actually stated this) that this rogue lab is where Newbury are/were sending their samples to for testing. The other possibility was a new strain of virus was emerging capable of swerving a PCR test.

This report still doesn't explain why the Newbury site was singled out for news comment.

Mike4 wrote:This report still doesn't explain why the Newbury site was singled out for news comment.

I think it was just that Berkshire were the first to say anything to the media, whereas the ones in the West Country have been more reticent, so journos go where the quotes are to be had.

On a different subject this new paper in Science suggests vax immunity is pretty durable :

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm0829

Haven't read that extremely long page
but my positive blood antibodies turned negative after 4 months, I know there is more to it than that, but it doesn't instil confidence !

Mike4 wrote:This report still doesn't explain why the Newbury site was singled out for news comment.

"Everybody's got to be somewhere!" As Eccles once replied when Bluebottle asked him: "What you doing down there, Eccles?"

XFool wrote:

Mike4 wrote:This report still doesn't explain why the Newbury site was singled out for news comment.

"Everybody's got to be somewhere!" As Eccles once replied when Bluebottle asked him: "What you doing down there, Eccles?"

Was he in Newbury then?

pje16 wrote:Haven't read that extremely long page
but my positive blood antibodies turned negative after 4 months, I know there is more to it than that, but it doesn't instil confidence !

As I think I've pointed out to you before, antibodies are just one of many ways in which one's 'immune system' responds to infection.

Mike4 wrote:

pje16 wrote:Haven't read that extremely long page
but my positive blood antibodies turned negative after 4 months, I know there is more to it than that, but it doesn't instil confidence !

As I think I've pointed out to you before, antibodies are just one of many ways in which one's 'immune system' responds to infection.

Do you like having a go
What did i say
"I know there is more to it than that"
or do you have trouble reading

pje16 wrote:

Mike4 wrote:

pje16 wrote:Haven't read that extremely long page
but my positive blood antibodies turned negative after 4 months, I know there is more to it than that, but it doesn't instil confidence !

As I think I've pointed out to you before, antibodies are just one of many ways in which one's 'immune system' responds to infection.

Do you like having a go
What did i say
"I know there is more to it than that"
or do you have trouble reading

And do you have trouble being courteous to other posters?

so how do you think
"As I think I've pointed out to you before" comes across

pje16 wrote:or do you have trouble reading

As an observation - that comment of yours is the first in to come across as "having a go", I don't think you realise how a scientific person would read what you said. The "more to it than that" barely registers compared to how much you'd upset a reader with what you said before comparing your personal experience to a complex research paper in one of the absolute top-rated scientific journals. It reads something like

"I've not listened to the Berlin Philharmonic playing Beethoven's Fifth, but I think my rendition of Frere Jacques on the recorder is a greater contribution to music. I know that there's more to it than that, but I don't think musicality, complexity and years of training should count for much compared to my personal experience."

You may have intended it as a throwaway comment, but it doesn't read like that to some other people. Just be aware of that.

Hallucigenia wrote:

pje16 wrote:or do you have trouble reading

As an observation - that comment of yours is the first in to come across as "having a go", I don't think you realise how a scientific person would read what you said. The "more to it than that" barely registers compared to how much you'd upset a reader with what you said before comparing your personal experience to a complex research paper in one of the absolute top-rated scientific journals.
You may have intended it as a throwaway comment, but it doesn't read like that to some other people. Just be aware of that.

OK Boss
Thank you for the mild reprimand
Do you really expect us all to consider what sort of mind the reader has, ie have to consider if it is scientific or any other type before we post
This is a forum where you should be able to make a comment without it being picked apart
Debate is fine, critcism, go easy

pje16 wrote:Do you really expect us all to consider what sort of mind the reader has, ie have to consider if it is scientific or any other type before we post

It's a basic rule of communication that you think about your audience when trying to communicate with them.

And one of the attractions of this place and its predecessor is that there's usually someone who knows more about a subject than oneself - or at the very least a bunch of smart people trying to make sense of the available evidence, in a spirit of humility, openness and mutual respect (most of the time...). In this particular case, you're in an environment where people are quoting data and scientific papers, it's a fair guess that it's a different audience to Fred and Trevor down the bingo club. So rhetoric that works in other environments may come across as unwarranted cockiness here - and will get called out as such.

You do NOT make the rules
and have no right to tell me or anyone else how or what they post

SUGGESTION FOR A NEW BOARD

Could we have a "Children's Corner" please?


Julian F. G. W.

Not just about the coronovirus, but clearly related:

Prof Sarah Gilbert, Covid vaccine creator: Now let’s take on 12 more diseases

BBC News

Medical science has transformed the pandemic, and the experimental technologies that helped develop vaccines in record time have strapped rocket boosters to scientific ambitions. Could we be entering a golden age of new vaccines?

jfgw wrote:SUGGESTION FOR A NEW BOARD

Could we have a "Children's Corner" please?


Julian F. G. W.

If it has a ball pit in all for it!

Hallucigenia wrote:in a spirit of humility, openness and mutual respect

pje16 wrote:You do NOT make the rules

I wasn't making rules, merely giving some friendly advice. But let's see what "the rules" say :

"To make this a valued and successful discussion forum, LemonFool asks all users to be respectful, understanding and helpful to other posters...

Wilful and disruptive behaviour is unacceptable, such as trolling or repeatedly arguing in an unconstructive and unhelpful manner...

[debate] must remain polite and respectful at all times. Stick to the facts and argue the points discussed, rather than criticise the poster...

mutual understanding and respect is requested."

Anyway, teaching you how the site works is getting way off-topic for the matter at hand, so with apologies to other Lemons, that's all I will say on the matter.