New device can diagnose Covid-19 from saliva samples:
Engineers at MIT and Harvard University have designed a small tabletop device that can detect SARS-CoV-2 from a saliva sample in about an hour. In a new study, they showed that the diagnostic is just as accurate as the PCR tests now used.
[...] “We demonstrated that our platform can be programmed to detect new variants that emerge, and that we could repurpose it quite quickly,” says James Collins, the Termeer Professor of Medical Engineering and Science in MIT’s Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES) and Department of Biological Engineering. “In this study, we targeted the U.K., South African, and Brazilian variants, but you could readily adapt the diagnostic platform to address the Delta variant and other ones that are emerging.”
The new diagnostic, which relies on CRISPR technology, can be assembled for about $15, but those costs could come down significantly if the devices were produced at large scale, the researchers say.
[...] The researchers first tested their device with human saliva spiked with synthetic SARS-CoV-2 RNA sequences, and then with about 50 samples from patients who had tested positive for the virus. They found that the device was just as accurate as the gold standard PCR tests now used, which require nasal swabs and take more time and significantly more hardware and sample handling to yield results.
The device produces a fluorescent readout that can be seen with the naked eye, and the researchers also designed a smartphone app that can read the results and send them to public health departments for easier tracking.
The researchers believe their device could be produced at a cost as low as $2 to $3 per device.
Journal Reference:
Helena de Puig, Rose A. Lee, Devora Najjar, et al. Minimally instrumented SHERLOCK (miSHERLOCK) for CRISPR-based point-of-care diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 and emerging variants [open], Science Advances (DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abh2944)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @02:21PM (2 children)
That's super cool, especially the goal of producing it at such a low cost! Unfortunately, no doubt the US 'healthcare' eco-system will corrupt that low cost and balloon what it costs a patient to benefit from this into multiple hundreds of dollars.
Things like this get us closer to a universal tricoder: spit in the thing and be told what ails ya.
On a broader note: these types of devices get closer and closer to "any moron can run them", and thus I wonder: at what point do we get into a state where you run the diagnostics at home and don't need a doctor anymore (for things that can be done like this, say COVID, flu, strep-throat, etc...). Once that happens, if you have a positive result from one of these diagnostic tests, why would you still need a doctor to actually prescribe you something as opposed to showing the (authenticated) diagnostic result to a pharmacist and getting the meds to cure your ailment.
Case in point: if you have been diagnosed with diabetes, why does a doctor need to keep prescribing you your insulin? Why not just show a pharmacist your blood-strip and go "insulin please"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @02:30PM
Development funded by the chewing tobacco manufacturers.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Monday August 09 2021, @03:16PM
well the first question we would need to answer is, "who gets sued?" You know, when people invariably get their own diagnosis wrong and need someone else to take responsibility. Secondly, how much money does this steal from deserving insurance company middle management? Finally, does this in any way cut into government official kickbacks?
I see many hurdles for a more self-administrated health system.
incidentally, actual, practical field medicine isn't brain surgery. there are many good books. you can buy suturing practice kits online. learning about common infections in your area is really pretty fun, unless you live somewhere tropical. then it's horrific and mentally damaging.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Monday August 09 2021, @06:32PM
"Quantity has a quality all its own". Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina has argued for having so many quick-result at-home test kits that everyone could check themselves twice a week and isolate before having more time to spread.
Not everyone would, obviously, but he's an epidemiologist and his professional opinion is there would be useful results even at 50$ uptake.
https://time.com/5912705/covid-19-stop-spread-christmas/ [time.com]
There could even be a reduction of the need for contact tracing. If all your contacts are testing themselves already every few days, there's only a small advantage to notifying them before the next test.
(Score: 2) by gawdonblue on Wednesday August 11 2021, @07:04AM
... and having waited in line for 3 hours to do the test in the first place ...
When can Australia get hold of these tests?
Or does "Gold Standard" Gladys still think that New South Wales is f*cking perfect.