1. They compare same-day PCR against self-administered/interpreted rapid tests.
For most ppl, that's not reality. It's RAT today or PCR result in 1-3 days (or do both).
A fairer comparison would be a RAT today versus a PCR yesterday (since you'd have to wait for results).
2. They excluded 13% of the sample who were "confirmatory testers" (weird term) -- basically, people who had just tested RAT+ and were coming in for a PCR.
Basically, they excluded the people for whom the test easily worked. Drug trialists pull this stuff all the time.
3. The study excluded ppl with symptoms. Some people use RATs before socializing to reduce risk (hopefully with other Swiss Cheese slices). BUT many use RATs when symptomatic. I don't think the study fairly represents how RATs are being used.
4. As RATs became more common, many novices started using them without following instructions well. It would have been helpful if the researchers also administered and interpreted a RAT. I suspect the diminished utility is more "user error" than a property of the test. Fixable.
5. RATs detect most closely the infectious window. A PCR will flip positive a litter earlier & stay positive longer. If a goal is to prevent forward transmission, rather than merely diagnosis, then studies like this are not testing hypotheses with real-world significance.
Mina:
Overall, I see RATs as an important piece of mitigation. Even in this anti-RAT study, positive & negative predictive values were 85%-98% across tests (Table S2).
That's about as efficacious an N95 among a novice wearer. All of our shields have holes, so we combine them.
RAT efficacy estimates are much higher than many "too good to be true" interventions you see pushed heavily: SSRIs, enovid, nasal sprays. 🤣🤣🤣
The evidence that those protect against COVID is so poor as to harm by distraction. Go buy some bittrex.
🔥Biggest uptick since Jan
🔥1 in 167 actively infectious
🔥>2 million weekly infections
🔥700-1,200 resulting excess deaths from weekly infections
Track transmission closer to home w/our new state & international resources 👇
🧵1/6
PMC COVlD Dashboard, Jun 23, 2025 (U.S.)
🔹With >90% probability, we have entered the 11th COVlD wave.
🔹In a room of 50 people, there is already a 1 in 4 chance of an exposure.
🔹We expect nearly 15 million infections in the next month, and rising.
🧵2/6
PMC COVlD Dashboard, Jun 23, 2025 (U.S.)
We continue to expect transmission to break 500,000 daily infections in the U.S. around July 9th.
This is the same prediction as last week, as the forecast was dead on. Yet, there is considerably uncertainty around this timing.
Current transmission (red line) closely tracks that of summer 2023 (yellow line).
We expect to break 500k daily infections between July 9 and the end of July. Our current forecast...
2) PMC COVlD Dashboard, June 16, 2025 (U.S.)
Our current forecast is a bit more aggressive, predicting breaking 500k daily infections by July 9. The 2023 trend suggests end of July.
The 95% confidence interval shows large variation. Note that...
3) PMC COVlD Dashboard, June 16, 2025 (U.S.)
Note that CDC and Biobot both had retroactive corrections to last week's data, meaning the relative "lull" will last a little longer than the uncorrected data suggested. No big news on NB.1.8.1.
1) Here's a quick example of how the federal government is censoring the best scientific research. It's not just cuts to ongoing research.
It's new grant submissions too...
2) In January, I re-submitted a promising Covid/cancer grant to a non-federal funder. Hundreds of pages. Hundreds of hours of work. The best proposal I've submitted as a scientist.
Out of curiosity, I used Sean Mullen's Scan Assist tool to see how many banned words it had...
3) The proposal had 1,750 banned words. No big deal -- they're non-federal.
BUT I had planned to submit a smaller version to NIH this month as a "back up." Impossible!
It's not a matter of using a thesaurus or the find/replace command. The grant is on *Covid*...
CDC wastewater surveillance data show transmission rising. This is our forecast if transmission growth follows typical patterns.
The high & low estimates could be thought of as optimistic & pessimistic scenarios for NB.1.8.1.
2) PMC COVlD Dashboard, June 9, 2025
Notice that current transmission (red line, lower left) tracks closely with two years ago (yellow), slightly below the median (gray), and not far below last year (orange).
Consider each of these trajectories realistic scenarios.
3) PMC COVlD Dashboard, June 9, 2025
All indications are that we are headed into the start of an 11th national wave in the U.S.
We could percolate near the lull point another couple weeks (fingers crossed), but that scenario is becoming less likely.
National COVlD transmission recently fell to its lowest levels since the pre-Delta era.
It's go-time for many who have delayed medical appointments. The situation will likely get much worse in Jul/Aug.
2/ PMC COVlD Dashboard, June 2, 2025 (U.S.)
An estimated 1 in 211 are actively infectious. Most states are "low" or "very low" per CDC.
The situation remains serious even in a relative "lull." >1.5 million weekly estimated infections to result in 600-900 excess deaths.
3/ PMC COVlD Dashboard, June 2, 2025 (U.S.)
By the end of the month, we forecast an increase to 450k daily infections. If NB.1.8.1 takes off, closer to 600k. If overhyped, percolating only slightly higher.
🔥1 in 180 actively infectious
🔥1.9 million weekly infections
🔥>93,000 new #LongCOVID cases from the week's infections
🔥1,100 excess deaths from the week's infections
This is a "lull."
2) PMC Dashboard, May 26, 2025 (U.S.)
The forecast calls for a near-doubling in transmission the next month to 450k daily infections.
The 95% confidence interval includes flat transmission (percolating), or escalating to 650k (if NB.1.8.1 takes off).
3) PMC Dashboard, May 26, 2025 (U.S.)
Looking at year-over-year transmission, 2025 (red) is closely tracking the median (gray).
It transmission accelerates, it could look more like last year (orange). If it slows, more like two years ago (yellow).