Read on Twitter
New efforts w mass testing in Liverpool have dropped incidence by 2/3rds in weeks
Not a “clean” pilot study of rapid tests bc other interventions also started at same time.
There are a few items that I’m not so aligned with that they are doing...
1/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/liverpool-mass-testing-coronavirus/2020/11/26/b7421f8c-29cb-11eb-9c21-3cc501d0981f_story.html
Not a “clean” pilot study of rapid tests bc other interventions also started at same time.
There are a few items that I’m not so aligned with that they are doing...
1/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/liverpool-mass-testing-coronavirus/2020/11/26/b7421f8c-29cb-11eb-9c21-3cc501d0981f_story.html
First I think it’s great that they are using rapid tests for asymptomatic screening! This absolutely needs to happen - particularly as evidence builds that transmission peaks before symptom onset.
So that is great!
2/
So that is great!
2/
Also, for those in the US - know that UK is purchasing their rapid tests from a California based company!! Shipping 1 million tests to the UK for mass rapid test screening.
Wouldn’t it be nice if Americans could also reap the benefits of this American innovation... :/
3/
Wouldn’t it be nice if Americans could also reap the benefits of this American innovation... :/
3/
What I am not aligned on is the decision not to offer these at home.
The rollout of these by soldiers and others increases the program costs dramatically, which leads to a lot of people feeling that this is not the best use of funds.
It also leads to other issues...
4/
The rollout of these by soldiers and others increases the program costs dramatically, which leads to a lot of people feeling that this is not the best use of funds.
It also leads to other issues...
4/
Besides excessive cost of having the simple rapid tests be administered by someone else, it increases disparity in access to the test.
The moment someone has to go out of their way, this dramatically cuts down on access... further disenfranchising the disenfranchised
5/
The moment someone has to go out of their way, this dramatically cuts down on access... further disenfranchising the disenfranchised
5/
It also greatly limits frequency with which these tests can be used! For a fraction of the cost, the tests could be delivered to homes via postal service and people could use them 1x-2x /wk. Access would be equitable and effectiveness greatly increased!!! And cost decreased
6/
6/
To sum...
Very excited to see this program being out to use.
But would really like to see it be more distributed. It’s OK to put the PUBLIC back into public health! People can do this on their own!
(One more item about the article...)
7/
Very excited to see this program being out to use.
But would really like to see it be more distributed. It’s OK to put the PUBLIC back into public health! People can do this on their own!
(One more item about the article...)
7/
The article 
says these tests miss up to 50% of positive people.
These people are no longer infectious! We must stop comparing Antigen tests to PCR.
The tests detect >90% of PCR positive people who are currently infectious! Perhaps >95%.
The concern is outdated.
8/8
says these tests miss up to 50% of positive people. These people are no longer infectious! We must stop comparing Antigen tests to PCR.
The tests detect >90% of PCR positive people who are currently infectious! Perhaps >95%.
The concern is outdated.
8/8
Finally - in the first tweet I said it’s not a clean pilot study bc other interventions are also ongoing. I didn’t mean to imply that those should not be happening. YES THEY SHOULD. I was simply preempting inevitable comments that it’s not the testing alone, etc.
