First Covid tests that give immediate result to user at home authorised in US:
The USFood and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the first self-testing Covid-19 diagnostic kit that can deliver results within minutes at home.
Emergency approval was granted for the single-use All-In-One Test Kit made by Lucira Health on Tuesday.
The rapid testing kit uses nucleic acid amplification technology, considered more accurate than antigen tests.
"In 30 minutes or less, the results can be read directly from the test unit's light-up display that shows whether a person is positive or negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Positive results indicate the presence of SARS-CoV-2," the agency said.
It can be used on anyone aged 14 or older who is suspected of having Covid-19, and works simply by swirling the nasal swab in a vial that is then placed in the test unit.
The test is authorised only for prescription use at the moment. Apart from home use, the product is also authorised to be used in hospitals and at doctor's clinics.
"This new testing option is an important diagnostic advancement to address the pandemic and reduce the public burden of disease transmission," FDA Commissioner Stephen M Hahn said.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @11:52AM (5 children)
But if people could simply self diagnose more things it would save them money and that would be a bad thing for the whole medical profession. Can't have that.
Insurance companies also don't mind paying premiums because their profits are a percentage of their costs (premiums pay) according to ACA. Larger costs/payouts = larger premiums charged = larger profits.
Clinics and hospitals don't mind receiving payments either.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday November 19 2020, @12:47PM (1 child)
Yes, because pregnancies test totally ruined the whole medical profession. Add another one and the only medical professional you will see will be the stuffed specimens in museums.
In other news, tired to the bone [apnews.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @08:49PM
As to medical professionals, as opposed to people with degrees and able to parrot terminology, we are already very near that goal.
Ability to send you to a dozen of tests, then look at printouts and pronounce "I don't know" as "of indeterminate etiology" does not a professional make.
(Score: 2) by Tokolosh on Thursday November 19 2020, @02:25PM (2 children)
Why do you think there is a requirement for a prescription?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @03:58PM (1 child)
The news announcement included the fact that the kit will be dispensed by prescription only for $50.00.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @09:10PM
maybe because some people are sleeping in a piled up heap of surgical masks in the corner of the bedroom while unrolling one toiletpaper roll after another going "weeeeeeh!" all the while?
(Score: 2) by legont on Thursday November 19 2020, @12:41PM (7 children)
A NYC eatery already declared that it will require testing at the door - twice a week - and it will charge $50 reservation fee for that.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @12:48PM (6 children)
That's fascist!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @01:48PM (4 children)
While I think you were trying to be funny... Just in case I'll point out that the restaurant is a business and they can make any requirement they feel like*, for example, you may not be allowed in without formal attire.
* within legal bounds: for example the restaurant can't make a requirement (in USA) that discriminates against people of certain racial background or sexual orientation.
(Score: 2) by Tokolosh on Thursday November 19 2020, @02:28PM (3 children)
If they can discriminate on the basis of health status, then maybe they will test for gender dysphoria.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @07:29PM
That would be a neat objective test to have. Fortunately gender dysphoria is way easier to cure than COVID when it's caught early around age 7 or 8.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2020, @12:05AM (1 child)
It's not health status, it's health risk. To others.
If someone's vomiting or shitting themselves in my booth I can ask them to leave. If someone's spewing coronaviruses I can too.
We don't have laws protecting people with broken arms because they don't face bigotry. We do protect groups that face pernicious discrimination from the likes of you, because your abhorrent behaviour forces us to encode in law what should be embedded in how we treat other humans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2020, @02:23PM
This reminds me of a quote I heard recently (about providing restrooms for guests), "Guests will relieve themselves in your restaurant, you can provide a location for this, or let them pick one."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @03:40PM
No idiot, it's racist! Get your "ists" straight.
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Thursday November 19 2020, @01:55PM (1 child)
Ah, a garden-path title. The tests are, of course, only for people living at homes that are authorized in the US.
Seriously, this is good news, presuming a reasonable test accuracy. Of course, TFA doesn't indicate the false-positive or false-negative rate, and some of the quick tests out there are pretty dreadful. I assume everyone read about Elon Musk: of his first four tests, two were positive and two were negative - and those were professionally administered.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2020, @01:46PM
It's probably like pregnancy tests were you'd want a second, more accurate test, to be used in order to verify. Unlike a pregnancy test, having a false result in either way is a serious issue that can get people killed.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Thursday November 19 2020, @03:12PM (3 children)
Why? Is there a danger of overdose, or addiction?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @04:01PM
If you use the test more than twice in a week your skin turns orange.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by istartedi on Thursday November 19 2020, @06:33PM (1 child)
Yeah, I don't always get why a *test* would be prescription-only under ordinary circumstances. Given that these are not ordinary circumstances, it could be a form of rationing to make sure that people don't hoard the tests, re-sell them for profit, etc. In some cases I think tests are made prescription-only because you might need counseling for the results. Just throwing a test for AIDS or cancer out there without doctor-patient interaction could have negative consequences.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2020, @01:50PM
Tests are prescription only for a few reasons. One is that taking a test is not exactly risk free in many cases, if it requires more than a urine or spit sample, there's the possibility of serious consequences. There's also the issue of knowing how to interpret the results of the test. Just because it gives you a result of positive or some range doesn't mean that you'd know what to do with the results afterwards. Requiring a prescription means that some medical personnel are aware that you think you need the test, likely need the test and that it gets added to your medical record as appropriate, without a prescription, it's much less likely that you'll benefit from it later on.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @03:30PM
Hope the can recover their costs before the vaccine makes them obsolete
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday November 19 2020, @03:52PM (5 children)
Looks like it's $50 for a single use.
https://abc7news.com/lucira-health-covid-19-all-in-one-test-kit-at-home-coronavirus/8078096/ [abc7news.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @04:49PM
They're going to make a killing!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @07:58PM
$50 per unit tax write-off when it eventually is offered for free.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 19 2020, @09:16PM (2 children)
Plus $100 or so to a doctor to write the prescription.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2020, @01:52PM (1 child)
You make that sound like it's a bad thing. Doctors have costs associated with providing their services, it's not just the literal time they're in the office, it's the time they spend reviewing your records and the cost of their staff and having an office that they also have to pay for. The real issue tends to be the for profit insurance companies that are in the middle adding expenses that aren't always reasonably related to service.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Saturday November 21 2020, @12:34AM
That report came out earlier this year (iirc) saying fully 1/3 of medical costs are administrative, mostly insurance and med. staff dealing with forms, appeals, etc.
And then there's the malpractice insurance, which can be mind-numbing: $150k / yr. for some.
https://www.leveragerx.com/blog/medical-malpractice-insurance-cost/ [leveragerx.com]