Of course it could be better, I’m simply saying it’s still better than nothing, and you’ve already paid for it so why not use it while you lobby for / invent an improved one? A false positive only means isolation until you get your PCR test result. Took a family member the other day and from booking to receiving result was around 20 hours. Bearing in mind the maximum chance of a false positive is 1/100 that’s not great risk imho, match that against the chance of finding you’ve got a serious virus that you weren’t aware of (minimum 1/3 probably much higher) it’s a no brainier imho
Doesn’t explain why you wouldn’t use the ones available while you do whatever lobbying you can for the other type? It’s still better than no test whichever way you look at it with a very small chance if a false positive with pretty short term implications anyway
I think the main problem with the Innova tests is that they are being promoted as giving a green light for people to attend events and this is widely considered to be a dangerous misuse of the technology - even the manufacturers originally advised against the use of their tests for asymptomatic testing and agreed that they could only be used to signal a red light for some people. An important finding of Prof Deeks' research is that the accuracy of the test depends heavily on the skill and training of the person collecting the sample - laboratory trained staff top this league, experienced medical professionals are not quite as good and those with limited medical experience achieve the lowest level of accuracy. However, there are no proven figures for the achievable accuracy of testing when people collect their own test and this is where John Deeks has specific concerns - his personal experience is, as I mentioned previously, is that the accuracy can drop away to as low as 3%. This suggests that "minimum 1/3 probably much higher" accuracy could well be way too optimistic and might actually be "minimum 3/100 but hopefully higher". Perhaps the final nail in the Innova coffin was the FDA assessment in the USA - they are usually very reliable and their bottom line was that anyone with Innova tests at home should actually bin them.
I wasn’t talking about them being used as a green light for events, nor saying I agree with Govt policy and/or procurement. I largely don’t. The entire point I was making was that regardless of how good they are…we’ve all paid for them & they are better than nothing so why wouldn’t you use them if no better alternatives were freely available to you ? That’s the only choice the public has for free, whether we like it or not. Use them or don’t use them. So given that fact is there a reason not to?
I fail to see the point of taking a test if you have absolutely no confidence in it. I personally will not take one for that reason. You do what you like. Have you had your vaccination yet Chazz?
I think that, for all that they have been a huge waste of money, the Innova tests are not completely useless if used properly and with full understanding of their limitations. It is accepted that they will detect a small percentage of asymptomatic cases in the community and if these are followed up by reliable track and trace steps (big if there though) there could be a limited beneficial effect on disease spread. You are clearly aware of the test limitations but I suspect that the majority of people who are testing themselves are being given false re-assurance and it is very worrying that the organisers of large events are allowing attendance on the basis of self administered, negative lateral flow results.
Yeah I’d figured you weren’t using the tests. I wish you or someone else would explain why though? Even if it’s only 33% effective, and it could be more, it’s free, it gets delivered to your home without you needing to be in, it’s easy to do, it takes about a minute of your time, it’s incredibly unlikely to give you a false positive…and it might help you realise you have covid, in fact if you’re using them twice a week it’s most likely to after it signposts you to a very accurate test, so you can make sure you don’t infect someone who might be vulnerable (such as a friend of mine who has had bone cancer and although he’s relatively fine and has been for years, is immunosuppressed but isn’t allowed to be vaccinated) Sorry but it seems a little selfish to me unless there’s a reason better than ‘it might not work every time’ that I’m missing?
Comms could be much much better certainly. I suppose community testing without self admin would be even less likely to attract those who can’t even be bothered to do it themselves mind you which might skew figures on a population scale Either way they’re better than nothing I think as long as you do recognise the limitations
It's not a question of it "not working every time" its more of "it might work half of the time if your lucky". Therefore, a negative result would tell me nothing at all. A positive result would suggest a PCR test would be in order. I would happily take a PCR test every week if available but time from test to result needs to be vastly speeded up if its going to be used that way. An old cricketing buddy of mine used to be high up in a diagnostic test company. He used to say that as you can't patent immuno-diagnostic tests, the you need to be "first to market" to make money. One a test and maker are established, other companies don't bother to develop better tests unless they can produce incredibly better ones as its almost impossible to break into the market. What worries me is that us buying millions of Innova tests has prevented better ones from being developed/used.
This is also a worry, imagine paying a fortune for a ticket then getting a positive test. Dilemma, honesty or match? (I'm not suggesting OLM would do this, but some would)
None of which you have any control over (I assume) You can’t get a PCR test every week, and you can’t get other better tests developed either. So those options are irrelevant Yes a negative test tells you nothing. So what? Assuming you are liable to infect someone without you knowing, a positive test will tell you something pretty vital, to other vulnerable people certainly, more than one in three times.
This self-isolation lark isn't as bad as it's cracked up to be if you follow the rules set out by Domicic Cummings. With 3.5m expected to be contacted to stay at home soon no wonder they're planning to ease restrictions.
As I said earlier I’m not arguing how they should be used for events (although still better than letting people in using nothing as some people are honest) All I’m saying is whether you agree with Govt policy you have a free service that might detect it, so why not use it