Forget the headlines! These are not less accurate. They are perhaps MORE accurate to tell when transmitting
Ill explain
1/
nytimes.com/2020/08/06/hea…
But the MAJORITY of time someone is PCR positive, those remnants do not indicate transmissible virus. They indicate remnants of a recently cleared infection
2/
Despite this, contact tracers are deployed to trace their contacts during the two days before the collection. This is useless!
3/
To defeat this virus we need to narrow the scope of positivity. We need a MORE accurate test than PCR, that turns positive when someone is able to transmit
4/
They are not less accurate than PCR if the goal is detecting transmitting people.
They are potentially more accurate bc PCR is usually detecting people no longer transmitting.
5/
RNA detection alone is NOT useful for sensitivity comparisons if your goal is detecting transmissibility.
RNA is not specific for this and we can’t expect a transmission detecting test to be positive just bc PCR is.
6/
They don’t need to be perfect to work. Herd immunity is achieved when 60% of the population is immune, not 100%.
Similar concept exists with these daily tests.
7/
If we can stop most superspreaders from walking into classrooms or restaurants, we will all be safer.
As more and more people start using the tests, transmission chains will crumble and outbreaks curbed.
8/
But the population level effect is what wins the day.
If we can stop community transmission overall, then we are all safer
9/
1)break transmission
2)drop R below 1
3)create an artificial herd immunity-like effect
This stops deaths and buys us a lot of time to get vaccines built properly.
10/
The full force of the US Govt should be pushing for these tests - billions of $$ should be spent to refine and manufacture these at scale today, like warpspeed!
They’re our ticket out now! We need urgency for them!!
11/11