| Refusing to self isolate 08:48 - Dec 1 with 3160 views | GeoffSentence |
I know someone who has tested positive for covid, she has been told by test and trace to self isolate but is refusing to do so because she has a spa session booked in Bath in a few days time and does not want to miss that. |  |
| |  |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:51 - Dec 1 with 2344 views | Herbivore |
Never speak to her again. |  |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:53 - Dec 1 with 2316 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
She is all that's wrong with some people in this country. A spa session ...that could kill people, FFS. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:53 - Dec 1 with 2313 views | N2_Blue |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:51 - Dec 1 by Herbivore |
Never speak to her again. |
I’d report her. This is not some kind of joke but her recklessness could literally end up killing people.
But humans are a selfish kind so unfortunately it doesn’t really surprise me anymore. |  |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:54 - Dec 1 with 2311 views | davblue |
that's a disgrace. They should be ashamed of themselves. |  | | |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:54 - Dec 1 with 2309 views | Weekender |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:51 - Dec 1 by Herbivore |
Never speak to her again. |
and report to the authorities. Its now law |  |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:56 - Dec 1 with 2268 views | Herbivore |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:54 - Dec 1 by Weekender |
and report to the authorities. Its now law |
Absolutely. This is just completely insane. The spa will refund or reschedule if she provides evidence of a positive Covid test. There's just no excuse for being that much of a selfish bumbaclot. | |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:58 - Dec 1 with 2240 views | LeBlue |
Just plain selfish, dangerous, stupid and unacceptable.
I'm fed up with restrictions etc, as I'm sure most are, but what the hell gives people the right to think that their 'fun' should be at the expense of putting others at risk? |  | | |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:58 - Dec 1 with 2238 views | homer_123 |
FFS |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:58 - Dec 1 with 2232 views | Mookamoo |
It's difficult not to go all Stasi, but is it also your responsibility to say something? Maybe call the spa or get advice from 101. There are going to be a lot in the vulnerable category trying to squeeze one more spa day in before any possible restrictions. |  | | |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:58 - Dec 1 with 2227 views | timothyeo |
Depressingly hearing more of this and you can guarantee they'll be the same people kicking off most about another lockdown without any realisation of irony. |  | | |
| Refusing to self isolate on 09:18 - Dec 1 with 2135 views | giant_stow |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:58 - Dec 1 by Mookamoo |
It's difficult not to go all Stasi, but is it also your responsibility to say something? Maybe call the spa or get advice from 101. There are going to be a lot in the vulnerable category trying to squeeze one more spa day in before any possible restrictions. |
Grassing is a difficult area, but in this case, probably go for it - she might end up killing someone. |  |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:19 - Dec 1 with 2152 views | GeoffSentence |
With sincere apologies to those who have responded. I did this to illustrate how easy it is to get hold of the wrong end of the stick when only some of the facts are known, and why I so despise The Daily Mail et al, who do exactly that for maximum shock effect.
Everything in the OP was true.
But there is more.
She has recently recovered from a bout of Covid and was told not to do a PCR test for 90 days as it would show up as positive even though she was no longer infectious.
A few days later she was asked to do a PCR test for research purposes, which being a civic minded person she agreed to.
As expected the test came back positive.
What she hadn't expected was that, given the circumstances, the research people would report that result to Test and Trace and that test and trace would contact her to tell her that she had to self isolate.
In better news, having been on the phone to Test and Trace for 2 hours this morning and having the 'isolate' instruction confirmed, she was advised to call 119 as she was disputing it. She has now been advised that she has to email evidence that it was for research purposes, then she will be exempt from self-isolation.
Once more, apologies to all those I misled by omission. | |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 09:24 - Dec 1 with 2056 views | Cotty |
| Refusing to self isolate on 08:58 - Dec 1 by Mookamoo |
It's difficult not to go all Stasi, but is it also your responsibility to say something? Maybe call the spa or get advice from 101. There are going to be a lot in the vulnerable category trying to squeeze one more spa day in before any possible restrictions. |
Calling the spa sounds like the right call to me, if you know which one it is. |  | | |
| Now for the whole story on 09:25 - Dec 1 with 2057 views | giant_stow |
| Now for the whole story on 09:19 - Dec 1 by GeoffSentence |
With sincere apologies to those who have responded. I did this to illustrate how easy it is to get hold of the wrong end of the stick when only some of the facts are known, and why I so despise The Daily Mail et al, who do exactly that for maximum shock effect.
Everything in the OP was true.
But there is more.
She has recently recovered from a bout of Covid and was told not to do a PCR test for 90 days as it would show up as positive even though she was no longer infectious.
A few days later she was asked to do a PCR test for research purposes, which being a civic minded person she agreed to.
As expected the test came back positive.
What she hadn't expected was that, given the circumstances, the research people would report that result to Test and Trace and that test and trace would contact her to tell her that she had to self isolate.
In better news, having been on the phone to Test and Trace for 2 hours this morning and having the 'isolate' instruction confirmed, she was advised to call 119 as she was disputing it. She has now been advised that she has to email evidence that it was for research purposes, then she will be exempt from self-isolation.
Once more, apologies to all those I misled by omission. |
Plot twist!! | |
| |
| Refusing to self isolate on 09:41 - Dec 1 with 1966 views | clive_baker |
She's a c***.
Also if its the Thermea Spa in Bath it's going to be absolutely rammed. It's utterly wrong regardless of her activity, but going to a Spa of all places, a few weeks before Christmas mingling (often with elderly family) knowing you're positive with Covid is genuinely one of the most selfish things imaginable. |  |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:42 - Dec 1 with 1954 views | Herbivore |
| Now for the whole story on 09:19 - Dec 1 by GeoffSentence |
With sincere apologies to those who have responded. I did this to illustrate how easy it is to get hold of the wrong end of the stick when only some of the facts are known, and why I so despise The Daily Mail et al, who do exactly that for maximum shock effect.
Everything in the OP was true.
But there is more.
She has recently recovered from a bout of Covid and was told not to do a PCR test for 90 days as it would show up as positive even though she was no longer infectious.
A few days later she was asked to do a PCR test for research purposes, which being a civic minded person she agreed to.
As expected the test came back positive.
What she hadn't expected was that, given the circumstances, the research people would report that result to Test and Trace and that test and trace would contact her to tell her that she had to self isolate.
In better news, having been on the phone to Test and Trace for 2 hours this morning and having the 'isolate' instruction confirmed, she was advised to call 119 as she was disputing it. She has now been advised that she has to email evidence that it was for research purposes, then she will be exempt from self-isolation.
Once more, apologies to all those I misled by omission. |
Boo! Click bait! | |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:42 - Dec 1 with 1949 views | GeoffSentence |
| Now for the whole story on 09:42 - Dec 1 by Herbivore |
Boo! Click bait! |
Yep, sorry, it would be perfectly reasonable to hate me. | |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:43 - Dec 1 with 1937 views | galacticoblue |
| Now for the whole story on 09:19 - Dec 1 by GeoffSentence |
With sincere apologies to those who have responded. I did this to illustrate how easy it is to get hold of the wrong end of the stick when only some of the facts are known, and why I so despise The Daily Mail et al, who do exactly that for maximum shock effect.
Everything in the OP was true.
But there is more.
She has recently recovered from a bout of Covid and was told not to do a PCR test for 90 days as it would show up as positive even though she was no longer infectious.
A few days later she was asked to do a PCR test for research purposes, which being a civic minded person she agreed to.
As expected the test came back positive.
What she hadn't expected was that, given the circumstances, the research people would report that result to Test and Trace and that test and trace would contact her to tell her that she had to self isolate.
In better news, having been on the phone to Test and Trace for 2 hours this morning and having the 'isolate' instruction confirmed, she was advised to call 119 as she was disputing it. She has now been advised that she has to email evidence that it was for research purposes, then she will be exempt from self-isolation.
Once more, apologies to all those I misled by omission. |
To confirm, are you actually saying people are legitimately allowed to be out and about, if they have recently had a bout of COVID, whilst testing positive for COVID???
If the case that is very odd. | | | |
| Now for the whole story on 09:46 - Dec 1 with 1908 views | clive_baker |
| Now for the whole story on 09:19 - Dec 1 by GeoffSentence |
With sincere apologies to those who have responded. I did this to illustrate how easy it is to get hold of the wrong end of the stick when only some of the facts are known, and why I so despise The Daily Mail et al, who do exactly that for maximum shock effect.
Everything in the OP was true.
But there is more.
She has recently recovered from a bout of Covid and was told not to do a PCR test for 90 days as it would show up as positive even though she was no longer infectious.
A few days later she was asked to do a PCR test for research purposes, which being a civic minded person she agreed to.
As expected the test came back positive.
What she hadn't expected was that, given the circumstances, the research people would report that result to Test and Trace and that test and trace would contact her to tell her that she had to self isolate.
In better news, having been on the phone to Test and Trace for 2 hours this morning and having the 'isolate' instruction confirmed, she was advised to call 119 as she was disputing it. She has now been advised that she has to email evidence that it was for research purposes, then she will be exempt from self-isolation.
Once more, apologies to all those I misled by omission. |
Still not happy.
Hope she falls off the rooftop pool. | |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:47 - Dec 1 with 1905 views | Herbivore |
| Now for the whole story on 09:43 - Dec 1 by galacticoblue |
To confirm, are you actually saying people are legitimately allowed to be out and about, if they have recently had a bout of COVID, whilst testing positive for COVID???
If the case that is very odd. |
It's really not. If you've had Covid but are through the period of being infectious you will return a positive PCR for weeks afterwards. They suggest you don't take one if you've had Covid within a 6 week period. | |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:50 - Dec 1 with 1874 views | GeoffSentence |
| Now for the whole story on 09:43 - Dec 1 by galacticoblue |
To confirm, are you actually saying people are legitimately allowed to be out and about, if they have recently had a bout of COVID, whilst testing positive for COVID???
If the case that is very odd. |
Yes, after you have had covid and recovered, PCR tests will still give a positive result for up to 90 days afterwards. You haven't got it, you aren't infectious, but the PCR tests are so sensitive they still pick up the remnants of it.
This will be the case for everyone who has had covid, but most people do not take a PCR test within 90 days of recovering.
In this case my friend was invited to do so for research. She wishes she hadn't now, being very decent and very law abiding person she has been under a lot of stress getting it sorted out.
The test and trace people are basically call centre bodies who know very little beyond their scripted knowledge.
The advisor on 119 was much more clued up and told her that the test and trace people wouldn't know about anything she had told them. | |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 09:57 - Dec 1 with 1817 views | galacticoblue |
| Now for the whole story on 09:47 - Dec 1 by Herbivore |
It's really not. If you've had Covid but are through the period of being infectious you will return a positive PCR for weeks afterwards. They suggest you don't take one if you've had Covid within a 6 week period. |
Not saying you are wrong but would like the gov confirmation on this.
So basically if I contracted COVID I would not be able to got do international travel, go to the office or other environments that require negative tests for at least 2 months.
There is no guidance from my workplace on this. | | | |
| Now for the whole story on 10:05 - Dec 1 with 1769 views | Herbivore |
| Now for the whole story on 09:57 - Dec 1 by galacticoblue |
Not saying you are wrong but would like the gov confirmation on this.
So basically if I contracted COVID I would not be able to got do international travel, go to the office or other environments that require negative tests for at least 2 months.
There is no guidance from my workplace on this. |
Speak to your workplace, they should be aware of this issue. I think you can get some sort of certification to show you've recently had Covid in lieu of being able to provide a negative PCR in the weeks that follow.
Edit - actually as Geoff has pointed out the window is actually 90 days after a positive PCR test. [Post edited 1 Dec 2021 10:07]
| |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 10:06 - Dec 1 with 1765 views | bluelagos |
| Now for the whole story on 09:19 - Dec 1 by GeoffSentence |
With sincere apologies to those who have responded. I did this to illustrate how easy it is to get hold of the wrong end of the stick when only some of the facts are known, and why I so despise The Daily Mail et al, who do exactly that for maximum shock effect.
Everything in the OP was true.
But there is more.
She has recently recovered from a bout of Covid and was told not to do a PCR test for 90 days as it would show up as positive even though she was no longer infectious.
A few days later she was asked to do a PCR test for research purposes, which being a civic minded person she agreed to.
As expected the test came back positive.
What she hadn't expected was that, given the circumstances, the research people would report that result to Test and Trace and that test and trace would contact her to tell her that she had to self isolate.
In better news, having been on the phone to Test and Trace for 2 hours this morning and having the 'isolate' instruction confirmed, she was advised to call 119 as she was disputing it. She has now been advised that she has to email evidence that it was for research purposes, then she will be exempt from self-isolation.
Once more, apologies to all those I misled by omission. |
Just surprised no one suggested publicly naming and shaming her... |  |
| |
| Now for the whole story on 10:14 - Dec 1 with 1703 views | itfcjoe |
| Now for the whole story on 10:05 - Dec 1 by Herbivore |
Speak to your workplace, they should be aware of this issue. I think you can get some sort of certification to show you've recently had Covid in lieu of being able to provide a negative PCR in the weeks that follow.
Edit - actually as Geoff has pointed out the window is actually 90 days after a positive PCR test. [Post edited 1 Dec 2021 10:07]
|
Yep, it automatically goes on the NHS app as my wife has it on hers now |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
