Thread: @BorisJohnson just admitted the government has been sending infectious people back to work in care homes, hospitals, and schools for the last two months. Every journalist seems to have missed this massive and scandalous story. Here's what happened... During today's 1/20

Liaison Committee, Johnson was asked about the new track and trace system. He was asked about people who have had contact with known cases, and whether they could go back to work if they could got a negative test. His answer was a surprisng "no”: he announced that people 2/20

with negative test results will have to self-isolate for 14 days regardless. He said this was a policy change and it was supported by scientific advice. He also said this was happening because there were "too many false negatives".

What does this mean and why is it 3/20

important? This is one of the few really sensible decisions the government has made this week. But it's also revealed a massive scandal. Since February we have known there are really big problems with the tests: only positive results are accurate. If you get a positive 4/20

result there is 99+% certainty that you have COVID. But the negative results are different. If you get a negative result this is only 70% accurate. This means many people who have COVID, and who may be infectious, will have got negative tests.

Why is this a scandal? Back 5/20

in March the government decided that people who got a negative test could be sent back to work. At the time they already knew that negative test results were not a good indicator that people were free of the virus. It had widely been reported in the scientific literature as 6/20

early as January. Regardless, the government let them return to work. This was a colossal fuck up. Potentially infectious people who had had symptoms were sent back to work in care homes, hospitals, and schools. They almost certainly infected people, and many will have died 7/20

as a result of this crazy policy. Finally today - over two months later - the government are starting to put this right, without admitting that they ever got it so wrong.

Everyone needs to know that a negative test result does not mean you are COVID free, and does not mean 8/20

that you’re definitely not infectious. These mistakes by the government and senior health officials have caused a big public health problems: lots of people think that if they get a negative test they can go back to normal, and shouldn't self-isolate. Jenny Harries has even 9/20

encouraged going back to normal in such circumstances. So changing this advice is going to be hard. If the government had not made a mess of this the first time it wouldn't have been a problem. Lots of people will now refuse to isolate for 14 days after a negative test, 10/20

believing results to be much more accurate than they are.

How did this happen? The answer is a little complicated. In March, senior public health people and the government became obsessed with the idea of accurate antibody/serology tests. They were a promise of a test 11/20

that would accurately tell you if people could go back to work. When those tests didn’t work (remember the millions we ordered but which were not accurate), the government and its medical advisors started behaving as though a test showing you had antibodies was just the 12/20

same as a test saying you didn't have COVID. Despite not being the same thing at all, the tests we had (with their huge 30% false negative rate) were sold to the public as a quick way to "get back to normal” or for key workers to “get back to work".

This should never 13/20

have happened. It was a terrible mistake and many people will have died as a result. It has been particularly strange that senior medics like Jenny Harries and Chris Whitty have played along with this. The government will try to cover this up, saying the reason for now 14/20

not trusting negative test results is that they will be testing more asymptomatic people. This is not right and is not supported by the science. Although it's true that absolutely asymptomatic carriers may be less likely to give accurate test results, the problem with the 15/20

false negatives is the same for symptomatic and pre-symptomatic cases alike. Most of the problems with testing are a consequence of difficulty getting a good swab, and are not about whether the patient has symptoms or not.

This story, about 16/20

how the government sent sick and infectious people back to work with vulnerable people needs to get out. Some of us have been trying to raise the alarm on this for months. The change in policy is to be welcomed by everyone. But it needs to lead to serious questions. People 17/20

in the media need to ask the government when they first understood about high rate of false negatives in the tests. And why, even when they knew this, they used negative test results to send people back to work in care homes, hospitals, and schools. They should be 18/20

questioned on how many people died as a result of this policy, and why it took two months to change it. This can’t be covered up any more. 19/20

I really hope some journalists pick this up and actually go look at this. For those of us watching all this unfold over many months it has been so infuriating. I only have a small voice but I hope others can get this story out. 20/20