-
I'm not sure what result these people are hoping to get from their test, but then people aren't rational when it comes to these kinds of decisions.
How do you know you didn't need a test without having a test ?
'better safe than sorry' is probably the rationale.
not4sale-
How do you know you didn't need a test without having a test ?
'better safe than sorry' is probably the rationale.More the point that, by the time you get the negative result a few days later, you could be positive, contagious and either pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic.
But, yes, 'better safe than sorry' is how we use our ONS results to decide when we go to visit elderly relatives. If we've made the decision to go and see them then going shortly after getting the negative result is the 'least unsafe' time to do so, and we've still got to be careful about our movements/interactions in the week between being tested and seeing the relatives.
(Note I use 'least unsafe' rather than 'safest'. There are much safer mitigations such as just doing it on Zoom or not going at all.)
Greenbank
Everyone should be worried that they might have the virus and don't want to spread it. But that alone doesn't qualify you for a free NHS test. The page I linked to sets out quite clearly the reasons why you should get a free NHS test and, if you don't meet them, that you should pay for a private test.
Scarcity of resources (or fear of scarcity of resources) means that people will go out of their way to obtain the resources that they don't strictly need right now.
Reports of panic-buying bog roll = lots of people go out and stockpile bog-roll for fear or running out and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
Reports of tests not being available when needed = lots of people going out and getting a test when they don't really need it or qualify for it
I'm not sure what result these people are hoping to get from their test, but then people aren't rational when it comes to these kinds of decisions.