86% of Americans are willing/eager to use at-home rapid tests – BUT awareness of rapid antigen tests is low
1/x
This week Congress is considering $46B for testing, including for rapid tests. What does America think about that?
85% of Americans want government to fund these tests & distribute them. Strong support for rapid tests across political spectrum: 94% of Dems and 74% of Repubs.
But support for testing doesn’t come at any price. Willingness to test at-home decreases as $ increases. At $25 (price of the only two currently EUA authorized rapid at-home tests), only 33% of Americans would test themselves regularly.
Whereas if these tests were $1-$5, we have a much higher rate of adoption.
Rapid tests are most effective when used frequently.
4/x
Entrance screening is a popular idea too!
Americans want to use rapid tests to help accelerate reopening the economy – like @EmpireStateDev is doing with #NYForward
5/x
I was not surprised to see that our current testing infrastructure is NOT working.
A full 64% of Americans have NEVER been tested and a good number of Americans believe it would be difficult to get a test if they wanted to.
So then, why is the idea of rapid tests so popular?
Low cost, FAST results and reducing risk exposure at testing sites.
Plus people want to TEST IN PRIVACY of their own home! This is the US afterall - privacy w Medical issues is engrained early into the population.
So with that, let’s talk reporting.
One of the biggest concerns we hear when talking to public health authorities is reporting.
Will people report positive tests if they test in their own homes? YES!
Put the public back in public health and people may surprise you!!!
What about responsible behavior?
Would knowing your status change how you act?
Of course!! Knowing our status is a powerful empowering tool in stopping transmission even if self-isolation wasn’t 100% possible.
9/x
What’s next?
As expected, a majority of people are still concerned about COVID-19. But testing is perceived to be just as important as masks, distancing and vaccines.
Let’s get these tools into people’s hands now – and help end the pandemic.
The tweet thread above by Denis Nash @epi_dude is terrific and contains lots of wonderful data!
For me, It highlights the need for us to re-evaluate what it is we are doing. When our actions weren't working to slow spread, should we have kept forcing the same actions?
2/x
I worry that we get into group-think mentality and peer pressure is immense to "stick with the consensus"...
but when consensus is to stick to a failing test-trace-isolate as control, against our own warnings to our future selves... maybe we should've bucked the trend?
3/x
Essentially, we created a barometer that gives the growth rate (or decay rate) of an epidemic based entirely on whether the distribution of viral loads in ppl at a single time in a population is averaging high (epidemic growing) or low (epidemic declining).
2/x
This property of epidemics (when they are going up, detected virus loads are higher on average) has caused massive confusion.
The virus itself isn’t changing nor are the actual virus loads inside of individual people...
3/x
I’ve spoken on sensitivity and why rapid Ag tests shouldn’t be compared to PCR
Nevertheless, we’re stuck comparing to PCR. So, to deal w this, “we” have taken to comparing rapid antigen tests to PCR results below specific Ct values that may represent contagious virus loads
2/x
In many studies, Ct of <30 or <25 are considered to be likely contagious or “high virus”, respectively
HOWEVER this is bad. We must stop assuming this
Not all labs are the same
A Ct 25 in many labs may = a Ct of 18 elsewhere
This happened in Liverpool w Innova evaluation
3/x
Good thing is the mRNA vaccines provided exceptional efficacy. But that was also when plasmablasts (temporary antibody producing cells) were fully abundant. We don’t know the efficacy after a few months after they all die off. Hopefully will remain very high and protect. But..???
We also do not know (or at least so far I haven’t heard) whether people are getting severely ill or not. If the AZ vaccine prevents severe disease w the new variant, then that can be good enough. I wish this part was reported so far.
Possible we may be starting see a combination of seasonality on our side and likely seeing herd effects kick in.
1/x
On seasonality:
We knew in the summer that this virus was going to roar back in the fall. It did!
While coronaviruses collectively have a broad window each year, We can see that each individual coronavirus in the graph 👆has only a few months when it peaks. And then drops
2/x
This virus started really hitting us hard a second time in November. Oct-Jan may well be this viruses peak transmission window. We could be entering a reprieve from its grasp, at least for a while. If so, could help us get vaccines out and control spread quickly.
3/x
If you see papers/media that show very low sensitivity for rapid Ag tests (i.e. 30%-60% sensitivity) the report is most likely making a common mistake:
Comparing a test meant to detect viable virus to a test that can detect minuscule amounts of RNA is a mistake.
1/x
PCR RNA stays around long after live virus is cleared
So if you see a paper that shows very low sensitivity, ask:
"Are they comparing rapid antigen tests to "anytime" PCR RNA positivity? (Especially studies asking about sensitivity among asymptomatics)
2/x
To interpret this, you should know that only 25%-40% of the time someone is PCR positive are they infectious w live virus.
So... even a test that is 100% sensitive for live virus should only show a 25%-40% sensitivity against PCR among asymptomatic people.
3/x