Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Lloyds pharmacy in Sainsburys had them yesterday. I got the standard two packs not the one the sign said they were giving out due to high demand.


Getting them by post we got them the next day although it says it can be longer. They don?t seem to have been affected by problems with our post for other items.

KalamityKel Wrote:

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

> It's old but useable stock :)

> You also don't need to do the throat if you can't.



Really? Does it still work with just the nose? I assumed they were totally different tests.


I can do the throat but I hate doing it (well, I don't suppose anybody likes doing it!)

Really? Does it still work with just the nose? I assumed they were totally different tests.


I believe the pathogens appear earlier in the throat than the nose, so a full screen may pick up infection earlier - but if you are symptomatic the chances are that they are in the nose by then. So throat and nose are more thorough. So long as one bar appears you will know that the test 'has worked'. If you were prepared to 'waste' a test you could try just nose and then throat and nose on another slide to see if the results were the same. I suspect that for many, when they do both test sites, their throat swab was anyway ineffective - it's quite difficult to hit the right spot on yourself, so many apparent dual tests were actually really just a nose swab.

I've seen mention, much earlier, of swab sampling by medical staff having been more effective in picking up infections. Not surprising really, as they'll generally be more able and willing to do procedures which are maybe transiently unpleasant, like inducing a gag reflex or touching more sensitive parts of the upper nostril. I think I rememember doing a dry run myself, throat and nose, using a cotton bud, when self-administered PCR tests were first mentioned here. Personally, I'd much rather I got a widely based sample rather than doing it ineffectively.


LFT pack sizes. I was surprised when I picked up my pack from a library, to find when I got home that it contained seven tests rather than one. That pack will probably be all I need. When I had a look at the ones in Dulwich Library several weeks ago, I saw they were packs of twenty. I worried about that being potentially wasteful for some folk, unless thay were willing and able to share their packs with others. Now, more so, when there'll be scope for minor black marketry when they're no longer free. OTOH, I don't doubt there are some households where there is a real need for ongoing multiple tests. Have any usage figures been published anywhere?


"Usable". I checked before getting a pack. The buffer solution has a declared shelf life of two years. May as well check about fridge storage, before any warm weather arrives.

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • was the price not displayed on the menu?
    • It has come to this author’s attention that the world of 4+ admissions — that most enigmatic of educational rites — continues to bewilder even the most composed of parents. Fear not. For in a former life, I was not merely a humble observer, but a seasoned educator of over twenty years, and Head of Pre-Prep for a distinguished dozen. Now, with quill exchanged for touchscreen, I have taken to that most modern of salons — Instagram — to dispense guidance, answer frequently whispered questions, and illuminate the shadowy corners of school selection with clarity and calm. Each post bears my signature twist: a blend of insight, levity, and the occasional raised eyebrow. Should you find yourself adrift in the sea of admissions, I suggest you peruse my latest dispatch. It may well be the lifeline you seek. The Delicate Dilemma of the Summer-born 4+ Scholars Yours in solidarity and scholastic savvy, Lord Pencilton  🎩✏️
    • Perhaps Gooseygreeny was not familiar with the wildlife before Gala was imposed on the park, since when its value to wildlife has deteriorated. The Park had never been disturbed before, as the council had respected it as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, so only the Common was licensed by them as a site for events. The first time Gala held their event, there was a tree with woodpeckers nesting in it right in the middle of the main field they used and thrushes, blackbirds and great tits nesting within the shrubs and trees immediately surrounding the field. The woodpeckers were thriving on ants from the anthills in the grass. To those of us who used to enjoy watching the wildlife, it was very obviously a Site of Importance for a variety of birds. Despite being accessed by the public and their dogs, it had been relatively undisturbed,  which was one of the main reasons why it was so special and why I have been opposed to the Gala festival being held during the bird nesting season.
    • So dangerous!    Can you be more specific about the road this was in and when you report it?  Maybe there’s some CCTV footage available
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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