1/ Sharing our new piece in @washingtonpost on using rapid tests for epidemic control.

It shouldn't have taken 8 months for the idea to pick up- the same arguments were made for Ebola, Zika & other epidemic prone diseases by @RanuDhillon @sri_srikrishna
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/08/17/rapid-coronavirus-testing-pcr/
2/ The key is reducing the period of time between when someone is infected and when they are diagnosed+isolated.

We don't need a test that tells us that perfectly as much as we need a test that tells us that *quickly*, even if it wrong some of the time.
3/ This matters for breaking transmission chains.

Even if the test sometimes gives you a false negative result, we are weighing this against not being tested at all or extremely slow results.

Without diagnosis, every missed case is functionally a "false negative" anyways.
3.5/ And, if used daily, rapid tests will still be exceptionally good *when you are most infectious*, which is the key here.

@michaelmina_lab & colleagues have a great website which explains these concepts clearly/ways to advocate as well --> https://www.rapidtests.org 
4/ In the piece, we also talk about false positives.

These can be problematic for a couple of reasons-- people may think they had been infected, & follow the CDC 3 month "clearance" period where they don't quarantine + it can also strain the contact tracing system.
6/ @j_g_allen had a great video explanation here which is definitely worth your while.

Many of us are proponents of the rapid testing strategy-- we need all forces pushing for this so that we can feasibly bring transmission under control quickly. https://twitter.com/j_g_allen/status/1294600163244347392?s=20
You can follow @AbraarKaran.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.