Quantcast
Connect with us

Harvard researchers want less accurate tests for COVID-19

Published

on

Photo: Shutterstock

The aphorism “perfect is the enemy of good enough” has been played out to tragic effect in the US’s inadequate testing for the coronavirus, according to researchers calling for quick tests that cost only about a dollar each, and which may not be as accurate but can be carried out several times a week by the whole population.

Michael Mina, assistant professor of epidemiology at Harvard University, has for weeks been pushing for what he calls “crappy” tests.

ADVERTISEMENT

His idea is to move away from the current high-precision molecular tests, known as PCR tests, which are still scarce in large swathes of the country and which people often have to wait hours to get done, and then have to wait days — or up to a week — for the results.

He has called for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to authorize the sale of rapid tests which can be done out at home using a strip of paper that changes color in a quarter of an hour to give a result, similar to a pregnancy test.

These tests have a low sensitivity, which means they miss a lot of positive results, and hence give a lot of “false negatives,”

But for Mina and other experts, such a strategy would be more effective in terms of public health because across the whole population, the number of cases identified would be higher than under the current system.

The quick tests tend to be good at detecting people who emit a large amount of virus, which is when they are more contagious, right at the beginning, while the PCR tests are very sensitive and can detect even small concentrations of the virus, when people are no longer as contagious.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We’re so focused on high-end expensive tests that we’re not testing anyone,” said Mina in the podcast “This Week in Virology.”

“Maybe we only need a really crappy test,’ he said.

“If it’s cheap enough to use it very frequently, then if it doesn’t detect less than five percent of people when they’re transmitting, maybe it detects 85 percent of people when they’re transmitting. And that’s a huge win over what we have right now.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The head of Harvard’s Global Health Institute, Ashish Jha, touched on the subject on Monday.

“They’re not actually crappy tests,” he told reporters. “In certain circumstances they are not so sensitive when you have very low amounts of virus, and you’re not doing much spreading. But when you’re actually really infectious, you have large amounts of virus in your throat elsewhere and the test becomes much, much better,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“From an epidemiologic point of view, that’s when you want to capture people. You want to get them when they’re infectious,” he said.

Even if rapid tests miss half the cases, it is likely that with two tests a week, they will end up detecting them.

It must also be noted that the current system is thought to be missing nine cases out of ten because so few people are being tested, according to estimates by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

ADVERTISEMENT

The FDA has still not authorized the sale of any of the paper strip tests, which would cost between one and five dollars.

“I’m worried that our federal government is still stuck in a mental model that doesn’t make sense for this pandemic,” said Jha.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

2020 Election

‘He told us to use his words against him’: Early AM protest outside Lindsey Graham’s home over RBG replacement

Published

on

"In the spirit of RBG, we will not allow a double standard in how our Congress deals with late-term Supreme Court appointments."

Taking Sen. Lindsey Graham up on his 2016 advice to use his words opposing the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland against him should a Supreme Court seat open in the final year of a Republican president's first term, a group of demonstrators gathered outside of the South Carolina Republican's Washington, D.C. residence early Monday morning demanding that he oppose the filling of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat until after the November election.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump makes fun of Kamala Harris’ name during extended Fox & Friends rant

Published

on

President Donald Trump made fun of Sen. Kamala Harris' name during an appearance on "Fox & Friends."

The president called in to the show he apparently watches most mornings for a wide-ranging interview, where the hosts asked how he'll fare against Joe Biden in next week's debate.

"Well, look, I think he's a professional," Trump said. "I don't know if he's all there, but I think he's a professional. I have to assume that he's a professional and that he can debate. I don't understand what's going on, he doesn't seem to be answering questions, and he can't answer questions, and much worse a little while ago when he was on the stage with the Democrats, he couldn't do well. He did okay with Bernie [Sanders], it was sort of a tie. It was nothing great. I always say it wasn't Winston Churchill, but it was okay. He was horrible when he was debating the Democrats."

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

Lindsey Graham ‘is in danger of an upset’ loss: top elections forecaster

Published

on

Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-SC) re-election campaign looks increasingly in peril, according to one of America's top elections forecasters.

The latest update from the University of Virginia's Center for Politics claims that Graham today "is in greater danger of an upset" than he was just weeks ago, which has led to a ratings change in Graham's race against Democratic rival Jamie Harrison from "likely R" to "leans R."

Among other things, the Center for Politics points to Harrison's gaudy fundraising numbers as too big to ignore.

Continue Reading
 
 
Democracy is in peril. Invest in progressive news. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free. LEARN MORE