Someone I know in Chicago went to SARS-CoV-2 testing facility and was told insurance could cover the test but results might take a week, but for $150 a rapid antigen test could be done… so if you have money, you can get rapid testing, albeit with a test that is not as sensitive.
And what is this rapid test you can get if you have $150 cash; it's an antigen test w/EUA approval… of 59 people testing + w/PCR, 80% tested + w/this test. And remember the PCR test may only be 70-80% sensitive. It is the wild west out there…crazy. cardinalhealth.com/content/dam/co…
And not sure if I was more bothered with the idea that if you have money then you get the rapid test…if not,wait. Or that the person was not informed that the rapid, expensive test was faster but worse than the PCR test. Is it any wonder why our pandemic performance is so bad...
So many of us said very early… get the testing right…lots of testing, good testing, inexpensive or free testing is a path forward. It is penny wise and pound foolish otherwise. @zackcooperYale wrote eloquently about this. And many others.
@zackcooperYale My colleague and friend @NathanGrubaugh has submitted an EUA for a saliva test (validate w/@NBA); he will put the technology in the public domain and it is dirt cheap to run. This is the type of innovation we need. Eager to see what @US_FDA says. @YaleMed @YaleSPH
@zackcooperYale @NathanGrubaugh @NBA @US_FDA @YaleMed @YaleSPH Also people being tested need to know… how good are the tests… that should be part of the process in the testing workflow. What can be inferred from the result. I still hear people saying they tested negative as if that proved they are not infected or infectious.
@zackcooperYale @NathanGrubaugh @NBA @US_FDA @YaleMed @YaleSPH So people can't get tested because reagents in short supply; people who are tested are often getting bad tests; or having to wait a week (useless for controlling spread);or having to pay a lot out of pocket for a rapid bad rapid test. We're waiving a white flag to the virus.
