Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not true. Unless she?s got a temperature?

From https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance/stay-at-home-guidance-for-households-with-possible-coronavirus-covid-19-infection#SymptomsPositiveTest


?You do not need to take any more LFD tests after the 10th day of your self-isolation period and you may stop self-isolating after this day. This is because you are unlikely to be infectious after the 10th day of your self-isolation period. Even if you have a positive LFD test result on the 10th day of your self-isolation period you do not need to take any more LFD tests after this day and you do not need a follow-up PCR test. If you are concerned you may choose to limit close contact with other people, especially those who are at higher risk of severe illness until 14 days after the start of your self-isolation period.?

Also


"From Monday 17 January, people with COVID-19 in England can end their self-isolation after 5 full days, as long as they test negative on day 5 and day 6"


https://www.gov.uk/government/news/self-isolation-for-those-with-covid-19-can-end-after-five-full-days-following-two-negative-lfd-tests

  • 2 months later...
To be honest, the conditions of self-isolation are much softer now. I even stopped worrying about it. My job became remote a year and a half ago. I spend a lot of time at home but I have been able to expand my social contacts online. You can read the recommendations in this article. That is, I no longer feel my isolation from the fact that I may not be able to show standard social activity now. It seems to me that this is a good skill for the current time.
  • 2 weeks later...

Can someone tell me what is the current situation, as the latest NHS advice (page last reviewed 14 April) is unclear, at least to me.


If someone has had symptoms, but now doesn't have any symptoms at all and feels completely normal, but is still testing positive on the seventh day, do they have to continue to self-isolate?


111 refused to give any advice, on the basis that the person had no symptoms !!!!


(It isn't me who had it, I'm asking for someone elae).

Peckhampam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is no requirement to self isolate at all!



Well, there's a moral obligation, I would say. I probably wasn't clear in my post. What I should have said was, are they still likely to be transmitting the virus.


The person phoned 111 again and this time actually got put through to a medic, who advised that he should not be around other people if still testing positive, so he is continuing to self isolate.


ETA: The reason such a large proportion of the population now have Covid is precisely because all the "requirements" were taken away.

If you have tested positive with symptoms you are likely to be less infectious by day 5/6 after testing - and probably not infectious after day 10. If you have tested as a consequence of a contact testing positive, but you have no symptoms, you cannot tell when it was likely you were infected [you could have infected the contact, or been infected at some other time by some other person] - so leaving 5 days after testing again is sensible but not 'required'. If symptomatic you have probably become so 2-3 days after infection.


If your are positive but asymptomatic (no sneezing or coughing) your chances of infecting others will be reduced, particularly if you wear a mask when in enclosed spaces. As has been said, there is now no legal requirement to self isolate, but as also been said normal consideration of others would suggest you are careful, particularly if you know you will be in contact with someone at risk through a function of age or other health problems.


Unfortunately most current symptoms mimic 'normal' cold symptoms - so without testing you cannot know, if symptomatic, the proximate cause.


Whilst there was a huge surge of Covid infections around and after Christmas 'excess deaths' as measured by the NHS in England showed as 'negative' (there were fewer deaths than statistically expected, from any cause) for the months after Christmas until mid March, when they did start to climb (into treble figures by April although that may not be statistically significant) - the cause of these deaths may well not have been Covid. What I am saying is that Covid's impact on public health as regards mortality (or probably serious illness) seems much diminished against the earlier 'waves' of infection, probably as a result of vaccinations and recovery from earlier infection offering a protection against the severity of the possible effects.

He has made the decision to follow the advice given by 111 and not to go anywhere where he would be mixing with people until he tests negative (which he still hasn't done. Tenth day now.)


He realises the chances of transmission are small at this point, especially if he wears an FFP2 mask, but he doesn't want to risk infecting anybody else, however smnall the risk.


He had symptoms initially, but has been symptom- free for a few days now.

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> until he tests negative (which he still hasn't

> done. Tenth day now.)

>

> Some people continue to test positive for many

> days over the 10; it is however most unlikely that

> at that stage they are actually still infectious.

> Though not, of course, impossible.



Well, he is continuing to abide by the advice given by a medic on 111.

Yes. I happened to catch some expert answers to viewers' Covid questions on BBBC1 Breakfast this morning. I'll try to get an audio version of the relevant bit, which more or less confirmed my own view, that the LFT positive test should be taken as definitive. I'd also be inclined to add a few days' leeway once that stops, even with mask etc, at least before any contact with anyone particularly vulnerable.


The guy did mention cases where traces of virus lingered on in a few people for months without their necessarily being infectious, though I suppose that doesn't rule out the possibility of a Typhoid Mary carrier type very occasionally existing. It's really all a matter of probabilities and making fairly reasonable judgements about them.

ianr Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's really all a matter of

> probabilities and making fairly reasonable

> judgements about them.



Yes. I think mingling with people in a crowded room after a positive LFT test, however relatively low the risk to them, is antisocial to say the least.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...