The seven day average is starting to creep back up as well. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=ltla&areaName=Liverpool
I don’t think you need to. “Spending the equivalent of 77% of the NHS annual revenue budget on an unevaluated underdesigned national programme leading to a regressive, insufficiently supported intervention—in many cases for the wrong people—cannot be defended”
"The false positive rate of 0.6% means that at the current prevalence in Liverpool, for every person found truly positive, at least one other may be wrongly required to self-isolate. As prevalence drops, this will become much worse." I pointed this out on here the other week. Just because a test is is 99% accurate doesn't mean a positive result is 99% likely to be correct.
Given they havent done any for the lockdowns or the tier system youd be pleased to know not one bit has been done on the mass testing.
There's lots of explanations of this on the web, but this a very good one. But don't hold your breath
Matt Hancock wouldn't rule out making a vaccine mandatory and #thegreatreset has been trending for a while since. I don't think the government care about the danger game they are playing. https://www.itv.com/news/2020-11-16...rule-out-making-coronavirus-vaccine-mandatory
And to feed the figures of the current pandemic into this: Let's say the Covid test has a specificity of 95% and a sensitivity of 95%. It's not that good, but let's go with it. I'll round up the UK population to 70 million and we'll say 1 million of those have Covid-19 right now. We test everyone. 69,000,000 healthy people are tested. 3.45 million (5%) return a false positive. 1,000,000 Covid-19 infected people are tested. 950,000 (95%) return a true positive. What are the chances you have the disease if you test positive? 950,000 / 3,450,000 = 0.275 or 28% - Just over 1 in 4. Three quarters of people who test positive don't have it. But it's like hammering a nail into a knot.