It's also 125,000 people that have been told they've tested negative when they could actually be positive - Giving them free-rein to go about their daily businessWell, we're not pissing millions up the wall as you're suggesting. Yes they're less reliable, but they are one tool in the arsenal of testing and tracing within the UK.
If you get a positive using a LF test, you're obliged to take a more reliable PCR test to prove that you are positive, which removes the likelihood of false positives.
The false-negatives is more of a concern, however the quicker and cheaper LF tests improve the shear number of people who can be tested on a daily basis.
Even if you're looking at 50% false negatives, which is a worst case scenario by the way, 50% of say 250,000 tests is 125,000 still correct - that's helpful.
That's 125,000 tests that would not have took place without the use of lateral-flow tests.
That's more damaging than anything else.