Shifting from a state (Victoria) which had two new COVID-19 cases yesterday to a country (the UK) which had 24,470, I’m naturally keen to keep an eye on my negative (I hope) or positive (I hope not) status.
Just like in Australia I could go out, join the queue, get to the front of the line, take an accurate PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test and in 24 or 48 hours get a result.
Or, here in London, I can stroll round to the town hall, pick up a free pack of seven “COVID-19 Self-Test (Rapid Antigen Test)” kits, test myself before breakfast, make my coffee and, by the time I’ve finished, have a result. The bar by the C means I’m OK, a bar by the T would mean I was in trouble, and no bars would mean I did the test wrong.
OK it’s not as accurate as a “gold standard” PCR test, but it’s not bad. And has anyone ever said we can have too much testing? In the past week I’ve tested myself four times: negative, negative, negative, negative.
Unfortunately in Australia we can’t do rapid antigen self-testing. We’re prohibited from having the (Chinese made) test kits the NHS hands out for free.
We’re forbidden to access something which would help the COVID-19 fight; something which would save a lot of people a lot of time; something which would make a lot of us happier.
Of course, the decision to ban self-testing is made by the same government(s) which can’t manage vaccinations and can’t manage hotel quarantine. Did anybody mention “nanny state?”
The problem is false negatives – fine in a country with lots of covid (picking up some asymptotic positives is better than none), not fine if you are aiming for no community transmissions.
The main reason they aren’t approved for use here is because they are not that useful. With a rough 50% sensitivity in asymptomatic carriers, it gives no-one any reassurance whatsoever. As a screening tool, may as well toss a coin. If symptomatic, then the sensitivity rises. But if you are symptomatic, why the hell are you leaving your home??? Even if it ain’t COVID – keep your freakin’ disease to yourself and stay put. No doubt much better testing is just around the corner …..
“… has anyone ever said we can have too much testing?”
Yes, often. Not in the context of this epidemic so much, but in general it is certain we can have too much testing. Unnecessary, excessive or superfluous medical tests cost resources and time, and when they produce false results have further damaging consequences. In extreme consequences unnecessary tests result in unnecessary procedures which cause serious injuries or deaths. Non-medical testing regimes taken to excess also have bad consequences.
Yes, I just had my usual annual blood test. And wow it shows I have cancer! Then a test showed it wasn’t a false positive. Another test has now shown it has not spread, so an operation will save my life. It’s a cancer with no symptoms until it’s too late, so I for one am very thankful for tests. It’s another case of killing 1 to save 100, or 1000. I’m all for it, it just saved my life. Unless the bus crashes on the way to hospital, or the anaesthetic kills me, or I get an infection from the op that kills me or a mad nurse injects me with cyanide. But they too are risks I’ll take, because I’ve analysed them. Everything has a risk but we still cross the road despite the stupid danger of it. So men, get your psa tested and act on the result, or die (badly).
My darling decided for his 50th birthday that a colonoscopy and a PSA test was a good thing.
The colonoscopy was fine and he had 4 second opinions before undertaking hormone suppression for 12 months followed by an open prostatectomy with lymph nodes checks.
23 years on, he is still alive and well and very much loved, when he would have died slowly with bone metastasis.
Note to all concerned: Get your PSA done yearly and steer clear of any Urologist who isn’t that interested in checking the status of Lymph nodes, as my brother- in- law missed one yearly check and the monster was out of the capsule requiring brachytherapy the next.
Sigh. Rapid antigen tests are a waste of time while we have relatively low rates of disease.
False negatives – allow someone with COVID to go to the footy and give it to a dozen other people.
False positives – well any positive test needs a confirmatory PCR test. So all the false positives then consume resources, an unnecessary PCR that takes time, has the person in isolation, slows down everyone elses test results by adding burden to the system, and could have been used for someone who actually had symptoms.
Which is why it’s smart (just this once) for the government to say no.
What a useless article! It contains no useable information and smacks of a cheap takedown.
Why might the Australian Government not want to allow these tests? What role do they play in the UK? What does a positive test result entail? Further testing? Stay at home?
This cannot be the best that you can do.