#insidehealth tonight @BBCRadio4 . Jan 12th the government announced rollout of lateral flow self administered tests to people who can't work from home to give 'complete confidence' that their workplace is safe. () https://www.gov.uk/government/news/asymptomatic-testing-to-be-rolled-out-across-the-country-starting-this-week

here it the evaluation from the Liverpool pilot of lateral flow tests, published Dec 23rd. Compared to the PCR (lab) tests, the lateral flow tests (faster, community tests) missed 60% of cases overall + a third of the people with the highest viral loads. https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/media/livacuk/coronavirus/Liverpool,Community,Testing,Pilot,Interim,Evaluation.pdf

it's a rule-in, not rule-out test. false positives low, false negatives high. we can argue about fine print/%s, but people need clarity about what the results mean. I think it's important that the risk of false negs is spelled out.

Here is Lewisham https://lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/coronavirus-covid-19/health/community-testing-for-covid19
it's 'great news' if you test negative.

Here is Blackpool "you were not infectious when the test was done" https://www.blackpool.gov.uk/Campaigns/Coronavirus/Getting-tested.aspx?ContensisTextOnly=true

Luton; a negative test "did not detect you had Coronavirus on the day you were tested" https://m.luton.gov.uk/Page/Show/Health_and_social_care/coronavirus/Pages/Coronavirus-testing.aspx

Gloustershire "a negative result does not mean you won’t go on to catch COVID-19" https://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/covid-19-information-and-advice/community-testing/

Sunderland . they do use 'likely' to indicate uncertainty (good), (and have some other helpful info further up) but emphasise risk of future infection rather than false neg https://www.sunderland.gov.uk/article/17795/Testing-for-people-without-Covid-19-Symptoms-FAQs

Gateshead: as above https://www.gateshead.gov.uk/article/16881/Local-COVID-19-testing "A negative test not prove that an individual is completely safe. A person could pick up the virus or display symptoms within hours of taking a test. Therefore, these tests are only effective if taken regularly."

Some LAs are testing "more than once if you would find that helpful" Sunderland https://www.sunderland.gov.uk/article/17795/Testing-for-people-without-Covid-19-Symptoms-FAQs

"regularly" - Lewisham https://lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/coronavirus-covid-19/health/community-testing-for-covid19

"once a week" Bradford https://www.bradford.gov.uk/health/health-advice-and-support/coronavirus-testing-in-bradford-district/

"We encourage you to get tested twice a week " Havering https://www.havering.gov.uk/covid19testing 

categorically not blaming anyone in local authorities. people working extremely hard with good intentions. I am worried about a screening programme being set up ad hoc, with large variance of information, esp false negs, different advice on testing times, outwith quality trial.

UK has been spectacularly good setting up RCTs at pace to test drugs. world leading. we shouldn't assume that interventions like screening are harmless - bad information on false negs may lead to personal/policy/employer decisions that cause more harm>good. may be ££ fig leaf.

urgently need fair tests to find out if screening with lateral flow tests helps us. if it does, how best to do it. & a test is only a test. it can't isolate people, get food on table, contract trace. It is only as good as the system it is in.

have been writing on screening for >20 years. it's complicated, it often unexpectedly doesn't deliver/ unanticipated side effects. It needs fairly tested, system organisation, independent evaluation. the UK National Screening Committee are experts - why are they not involved?