Thread by @michaelmina_lab

“I will plan to return to work in person at the conclusion of the ten day quarantine following a negative rapid test..."

Great use of a rapid test!

Importantly she’s not using a PCR test bc she’d still remain PCR pos, potentially for weeks.

Thread
1/

thepostmillennial.com/breaking-jen-p…

Why is this important?

Bc imagine that she did not test early and isolate and got a PCR positive AFTER the day her isolation would have ended.

SHE would have to START an isolation that day, for ten days, even though she was NO LONGER INFECTIOUS

Furthermore…

2/

Let’s say in this scenario that @PressSec was not in contact w @POTUS when she was actually infectious bc Biden was in Europe.

But then they were in contact AFTER the infectious period, and just before she got the 1st (in this scenario) positive PCR test

3/

@PressSec @POTUS Not only would she have to erroneously isolate for ten days for no reason, but The President of the United States would erroneously be told that he was exposed and he’d have to quarantine for 14 days.

This would be a disastrous mistake with immense consequences…

4/

@PressSec @POTUS This is an example of why, If we’re going to take public health action & isolate/quarantine ppl based on a pos test result - we MUST use tests that do not remain positive for weeks after people are infectious

PCR is not specific here and is positive AFTER ppl are infectious

5/

@PressSec @POTUS This problem of staying positive for weeks or months on a PCR test has already caused millions and millions of people to quarantine and isolate when they did not need to.

This isn’t rocket science, we need tests that only turn positive for the reasons we use them for…

6/

@PressSec @POTUS If goal is to answer “do I need to isolate” then use a rapid Antigen test

If goal is to answer “could I have been infected recently or within a few weeks” then use a PCR

But dont use a PCR to answer the first question. That can easily lead to poor public health consequences

7/