4 ms·

In the UK, if you have a test, you are required to quarantine until you get the results. Is it not the case elsewhere??

by geden 6y ago

Jedd 6y ago
In Australia that's the standard response too - if you're symptomatic (of anything vaguely resembling the wide range of COVID19 symptoms) then you a) isolate, and b) get a test, and c) isolate at least until the test results come back.
evandijk70 6y ago
It's probably the rules everywhere, but I imagine that compliance is a lot lower for people waiting for a test result than it is for people that received a positive test (especially those with mild symptoms)
mensetmanusman 6y ago
In the US it sometimes takes up to two weeks to get a result, in which case the test is pointless.
- dboreham 6y ago
  Lest readers assume this is typical, where I live at present (middle of the US) testing is efficient. Our kids' school runs their own rapid tests also. You can in addition buy saliva PCR tests from many vendors including Costco. These take 3 days max from purchase to result.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
    Right. I had to get a Covid-19 test in October as part of groundwork for another procedure. I could've gotten a rapid test that gave results same day, or the PCR test. I got the PCR test (because more accurate) and had results back within 2 days.
- wegs 6y ago
  In my town, if a child receives a positive test result, the whole classroom is under quarantine. So it's not pointless in that sense. You know who might have been exposed. It's also not pointless for monitoring spread.
lmilcin 6y ago
Not here in Poland. Though, it would very logical as a precaution.
- wegs 6y ago
  YES in Poland. I know people in Poland who avoided getting a COVID19 test because they knew they would have to quarantine if they took the test, and would not have to quarantine if they didn't. That's perverse incentives for ya'. It's very hard to enforce, of course, but if you get caught, there are (in abstract) severe fines.
sp332 6y ago
I'd hesitate to make it a rule because some people take them proactively, or even routinely. But yeah if someone has symptoms, or think they were exposed, that would make sense.
brundolf 6y ago
In the US we don't really have "rules" so much as "suggestions"
rvp-x 6y ago
Not in .il, because of mass-testing efforts and people needing to show a negative result before travel and having no reason to believe they are positive. Quarantine is mandatory if you had exposure or returned from abroad.

In the UK, if you have a test, you are required to quarantine until you get the results. Is it not the case elsewhere??

by geden 6y ago

In the UK, if you have a test, you are required to quarantine until you get the results. Is it not the case elsewhere??

Jedd 6y ago

In Australia that's the standard response too - if you're symptomatic (of anything vaguely resembling the wide range of COVID19 symptoms) then you a) isolate, and b) get a test, and c) isolate at least until the test results come back.

evandijk70 6y ago

It's probably the rules everywhere, but I imagine that compliance is a lot lower for people waiting for a test result than it is for people that received a positive test (especially those with mild symptoms)

mensetmanusman 6y ago

In the US it sometimes takes up to two weeks to get a result, in which case the test is pointless.

dboreham 6y ago
Lest readers assume this is typical, where I live at present (middle of the US) testing is efficient. Our kids' school runs their own rapid tests also. You can in addition buy saliva PCR tests from many vendors including Costco. These take 3 days max from purchase to result.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
  Right. I had to get a Covid-19 test in October as part of groundwork for another procedure. I could've gotten a rapid test that gave results same day, or the PCR test. I got the PCR test (because more accurate) and had results back within 2 days.
wegs 6y ago
In my town, if a child receives a positive test result, the whole classroom is under quarantine. So it's not pointless in that sense. You know who might have been exposed. It's also not pointless for monitoring spread.

lmilcin 6y ago

Not here in Poland. Though, it would very logical as a precaution.

wegs 6y ago
YES in Poland. I know people in Poland who avoided getting a COVID19 test because they knew they would have to quarantine if they took the test, and would not have to quarantine if they didn't. That's perverse incentives for ya'. It's very hard to enforce, of course, but if you get caught, there are (in abstract) severe fines.

sp332 6y ago

I'd hesitate to make it a rule because some people take them proactively, or even routinely. But yeah if someone has symptoms, or think they were exposed, that would make sense.

brundolf 6y ago

In the US we don't really have "rules" so much as "suggestions"

rvp-x 6y ago

Not in .il, because of mass-testing efforts and people needing to show a negative result before travel and having no reason to believe they are positive. Quarantine is mandatory if you had exposure or returned from abroad.