The journey that COVID-19 will take us on

[husaberg]

Why mention R650? What I was referring to had nothing to do with what he said as I didn't even read his post.

Ok I'll try making this real simple for you, as it appears you need help with it.


Person A feels ill and does a RAT test, which yields a positive result.

They then isolate as per MOH guidelines for 7 days.

At the end of the 7 days they feel fine, and don't need a negative result as per MOH guidelines to return to work. They read the documentation that accompanied the RAT test that also says they don't need to perform another test at the end of the 7 days, as it most likely will be positive as they still have the virus in them, but as long as they feel fine they can return to normal life.

But they do a test anyway, and it's positive. So they think they still have covid but as they feel fine they can return to work. As per the guidelines. The following day they bump into someone and say 'don't get too close, I have covid'. And this person wonders why they are out in the community.

Please explain to me where and how transmission rate affects that exact scenario playing out? Sure in terms of risk it matters, but with regards to stopping that conversation taking place it plays no part.

Why mention R650R why that's because the posts pritch made was also had reply to R650R twice, in fact.
ps that's for repeating what i have posted again. Even you originally claimed it was totally irrelevant. but as i posted it i kind of was already aware of it?
Firstly they can only return to work according to the guidelines if they have no symptoms. You keep missing out on that.

I posted the reason for the change and that generally, the Rat has a 3-day delay in detecting the virus so day 7 is actually day 10 in the timeline of the infection, on day 7 if you don't have symptoms you can return to work.
You claimed this was irrelevant i disagreed. I still do.
As its highly unlikely at day 10 without symptoms, you will be transmitting the disease. as i said it's about risk vs reward. if we were in the eradication there would be a further long period of isolation. but we are not.

The incubation period of omicron is about 2 days faster than the original variant. a whole day faster than delta add that in with a rat test which is generally being used now instead of the PCR so it ends up with further delay of about three days so by the time you test positive you have nearly had it a week.
This is why it's so hard to contain.
The side effect of the omicron variant is far less likely to result in the life-threatening than delta which was lower than the original variant as well. this follows the traditional pattern of virus's as their success relies on spreading fast and not killing its' host. so the riules becom slaker as eradication is not the aim but a slow spread is to manage and mitigate the effects on the health system.


But shit Fraser i am wasting my time, its obvious you are clearly, so much smarter than i am.
You have a nice day. i will just keep on not being as smart as you are.

[FJRider]

Seriously, what does this have to do with anything I'm discussing?

YOU stating the term ... Guidelines.

Guidelines: a general rule, principle, or piece of advice. ie: "the organization" has issued guidelines for ...

A "Guideline" is neither LAW or RULE.

it is simply (as above) a Guide.

Hence ... GUIDE line.

Guidelines CANNOT be enforced by law. Simply because they are NOT law.



Which part of THAT is NOT understood ,, ??

[onearmedbandit]

Why mention R650R why that's because the posts pritch made was also had reply to R650R twice, in fact.
ps that's for repeating what i have posted again. Even you originally claimed it was totally irrelevant. but as i posted it i kind of was already aware of it?
Firstly they can only return to work according to the guidelines if they have no symptoms. You keep missing out on that.

We recently had covid in our household, my wife was the first to be infected. We went into isolation as per the guidelines. This began on a Sunday a couple weeks back. Our daughter then tested positive on the Thursday. Wondering if we need to start the 7 days isolation again I turned to the MOH website for guidance. No, only our daughter needed to restart the 7 day period. The rest of the household only needed to test positive on the 7th day of the original isolation period. Except my wife. It clearly states on the MOH website that the original infected person does not need to return a negative result, they just needed to be feeling ok with no obvious symptoms. I looked at the documentation that accompanied the RAT test and it also confirmed the person who was originally affected should not perform a test on the 7th day, as they would most likely return a positive result as they still would have Covid-19, but as long as they felt ok they could leave isolation.

So therefore you could be covid positive (as my wife was on the 7th day) and return to work.

The reasoning matters not, I was just explaining how someone could see themselves as being covid positive, and be out at work etc, and still be following the MOH guidelines.

Yeah once again it's clear you don't quite follow. Pritch described a situation where he bumped into someone who said he had covid and was out in public and he said he had questions regarding that. I explained how that scenario could be, that as far as the person knew they were still positive (like the RAT test indicated to my wife after 7 days) but were out in public AND following the MOH guidelines. Do you understand?

The reasoning about being very unlikely to transmit (lets say there were no chance of transmission) is irrelevant to the scenario. My wife could've been in that situation, the test indicated she still was still positive so she could've met someone at work/the supermarket/anywhere and said she 'has it' and been following MOH guidelines.

Why mention R650? What I was referring to had nothing to do with what he said as I didn't even read his post.

Ok I'll try making this real simple for you, as it appears you need help with it.


Person A feels ill and does a RAT test, which yields a positive result.

They then isolate as per MOH guidelines for 7 days.

At the end of the 7 days they feel fine, and don't need a negative result as per MOH guidelines to return to work. They read the documentation that accompanied the RAT test that also says they don't need to perform another test at the end of the 7 days, as it most likely will be positive as they still have the virus in them, but as long as they feel fine they can return to normal life.

But they do a test anyway, and it's positive. So they think they still have covid but as they feel fine they can return to work. As per the guidelines. The following day they bump into someone and say 'don't get too close, I have covid'. And this person wonders why they are out in the community.

Please explain to me where and how transmission rate stops that exact scenario playing out? Sure in terms of risk it matters, but with regards to stopping that conversation taking place it plays no part.

Didn't mention 'no symptoms' huh? Well except in my very first post, then subsequently by referring to the MOH guidelines. Hmmm what do they state about returning to work...

After 7 days, you can leave isolation as long as you are not feeling unwell. You may receive a text message confirming the end of your isolation. You do not need to wait for an official message or release to leave isolation. A negative RAT test is not required to return to work or school.

https://www.health.govt.nz/covid-19-...thers-covid-19

I posted the reason for the change and that generally, the Rat has a 3-day delay in detecting the virus so day 7 is actually day 10 in the timeline of the infection, on day 7 if you don't have symptoms you can return to work.
You claimed this was irrelevant i disagreed. I still do.
As its highly unlikely at day 10 without symptoms, you will be transmitting the disease. as i said it's about risk vs reward. if we were in the eradication there would be a further long period of isolation. but we are not.

The incubation period of omicron is about 2 days faster than the original variant. a whole day faster than delta add that in with a rat test which is generally being used now instead of the PCR so it ends up with further delay of about three days so by the time you test positive you have nearly had it a week.
This is why it's so hard to contain.
The side effect of the omicron variant is far less likely to result in the life-threatening than delta which was lower than the original variant as well. this follows the traditional pattern of virus's as their success relies on spreading fast and not killing its' host. so the riules becom slaker as eradication is not the aim but a slow spread is to manage and mitigate the effects on the health system.

None of this matters to whether the situation I described could take place or not. None of it.

But shit Fraser i am wasting my time, its obvious you are clearly, so much smarter than i am.
You have a nice day. i will just keep on not being as smart as you are.

Weak.

[onearmedbandit]

YOU stating the term ... Guidelines.

Guidelines: a general rule, principle, or piece of advice. ie: "the organization" has issued guidelines for ...

A "Guideline" is neither LAW or RULE.

it is simply (as above) a Guide.

Hence ... GUIDE line.

Guidelines CANNOT be enforced by law. Simply because they are NOT law.



Which part of THAT is NOT understood ,, ??

What the fuck are you on about? I'm not discussing whether they can be enforced by law or whatever, I'm merely quoting them because that is the applicable government departments advice. What your employer chooses to do is up to them but it matters not a bean on what is being discussed.

[husaberg]

Didn't mention 'no symptoms' huh? Well except in my very first post, then subsequently by referring to the MOH guidelines. Hmmm what do they state about returning to work...

None of this matters to whether the situation I described could take place or not. None of it.
Weak.

The only issue is you created the scenario in your own mind to fit what you wanted to have happened. Then decided the reason why it was actually irrelevant was irrelevant, you did this as you decided to appoint yourself as the sole judge of relevance. but you chop and change what is relevant as your mood dictates.
Like i said you are too smart for me Fraser, you appear to operate on a level all of your own.
Creating scenarios ignoring evidence and deciding what is relevant.
You are the sole judge, So everyone else if just orbits on the periphery of your greatness.
What can i say, men are from mars Fraser from uranus

if the sun rises a little later tomorrow i am sure its just because of you.
Have a nice day..

[FJRider]

What the fuck are you on about? I'm not discussing whether they can be enforced by law or whatever, I'm merely quoting them because that is the applicable government departments advice. What your employer chooses to do is up to them but it matters not a bean on what is being discussed.

Perhaps you should keep your fucking Government Departments ADVICE (freely available to those that seek it) to yourself then ... MOST workplaces have their OWN RULES on the subject. THOSE individual businesses have THEIR own policy on that subject. THEY ... try to KEEP Covid free.

Those in employment seeking advice on the subject ... SHOULD seek their OWN employers advice FIRST.

Sorry ... BUT ... YOU aren't far enough up the food chain to countermand THEIR requirements.

Requirements that YOU wont be aware of ... let alone ... have the power/authority to overrule.



AGAIN ... which part of THAT is NOT understood .. ??

[onearmedbandit]

The only issue is you created the scenario in your own mind to fit what you wanted to have happened. Then decided the reason why it was actually irrelevant was irrelevant, you did this as you decided to appoint yourself as the sole judge of relevance. but you chop and change what is relevant as your mood dictates.
Like i said you are too smart for me Fraser, you appear to operate on a level all of your own.
Creating scenarios ignoring evidence and deciding what is relevant.
You are the sole judge, So everyone else if just orbits on the periphery of your greatness.
What can i say, men are from mars Fraser from uranus

if the sun rises a little later tomorrow i am sure its just because of you.
Have a nice day..

Ignoring what evidence? I'm not debating whether they are safe to be back at work or not (for the record I trust the reasoning why it's ok to return), that's your assumption. I'm simply saying that someone could think they are covid positive still (due to the 7th day RAT test) and yet be following the MOH guidelines. At no stage did I say that was the right or wrong thing to do.

The rest of your dribble isn't worth responding to.

[onearmedbandit]

Perhaps you should keep your fucking Government Departments ADVICE (freely available to those that seek it) to yourself then ... MOST workplaces have their OWN RULES on the subject. THOSE individual businesses have THEIR own policy on that subject. THEY ... try to KEEP Covid free.

Those in employment seeking advice on the subject ... SHOULD seek their OWN employers advice FIRST.

Sorry ... BUT ... YOU aren't far enough up the food chain to countermand THEIR requirements.

Requirements that YOU wont be aware of ... let alone ... have the power/authority to overrule.



AGAIN ... which part of THAT is NOT understood .. ??

The part where I don't give a fuck about anyone's employers decision WHEN WE ARE DISCUSSING THE MOH INFORMATION and not that of individual employers.

[FJRider]

The part where I don't give a fuck about anyone's employers decision WHEN WE ARE DISCUSSING THE MOH INFORMATION and not that of individual employers. And be careful up on your high horse there buddy, the fall can hurt...

And YOU have no right to tell ANYBODY (or even suggest) ... to strictly follow MOH ADVICE (because it is MOH advice. NOT information) ... on when they SHOULD return to work after a positive Covid result. When ... possibly ... THEIR own company's have different REQUIREMENTS.

I doubt the Company I work for ... is the only company that has that requirement.



I'm sure TDL will now quote you as another Governmental "Follow the Government advice at all costs .. or else" Plebe ...



Something to look forward too ...

[FJRider]

The part where I don't give a fuck about anyone's employers decision WHEN WE ARE DISCUSSING THE MOH INFORMATION and not that of individual employers.

Why the edit of your post ... it looks like a threat in the original .. ???

[husaberg]

Ignoring what evidence? I'm not debating whether they are safe to be back at work or not (for the record I trust the reasoning why it's ok to return), that's your assumption. I'm simply saying that someone could think they are covid positive still (due to the 7th day RAT test) and yet be following the MOH guidelines. At no stage did I say that was the right or wrong thing to do.

The rest of your dribble isn't worth responding to.

So now as well as being the sole judge of relevance, you are the adjudicator of assumptions as well. i am not sure but is that a Promotion? congratulations,
ps you are not debating you would have to counterpoint rather than just lambast and decide what you think is relevant hen lambast again.
Good evening.

[onearmedbandit]

So now as well as being the sole judge of relevance, you are the adjudicator of assumptions as well. i am not sure but is that a Promotion? congratulations,
ps you are not debating you would have to counterpoint rather than just lambast and decide what you think is relevant hen lambast again.
Good evening.

Yes you're right, I'm not debating anything. In fact I even stated that in the post you quoted. My god...

[onearmedbandit]

Why the edit of your post ... it looks like a threat in the original .. ???

Yup I said 'careful up there on your high horse, the fall can hurt'. Then I removed it because it occurred to me you'd be the sort of person to take it as a threat.

[husaberg]

Yes you're right, I'm not debating anything. In fact I even stated that in the post you quoted. My god...

oh, So you're chief fact-checker as well, as master of what is pertinent and relevant and what is assumed
Silly me i thought the next step was actually declaring yourself god or is that part of tomorrow's mission?

[FJRider]

Yup I said 'careful up there on your high horse, the fall can hurt'. Then I removed it because it occurred to me you'd be the sort of person to take it as a threat.

Is it ......