I feel like Sisyphus right after he loses his grip on the boulder. People are finally coming around the realization that high-volume screening of asymptomatic people is a powerful tool for disease control and does not require high-sensitivity tests. (e.g. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/08/cheap-daily-covid-tests-could-be-akin-to-vaccine/ …)
-
Show this thread
-
So what does the
@US_FDA do? Today, they turned around and recommend *exactly the opposite*. It's just a recommendation, because they're talking about off-label use.https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-don-t-use-rapid-covid-tests-people-without-symptoms-n1236802 …17 replies 108 retweets 418 likesShow this thread -
But given that they control the approval process for on-label use of the technology, this is potentially a huge blow. If the
@US_FDA refuses to acknowledge the value of low sensitivity high volume screening, companies won't invest in the technology let alone deploy it.5 replies 75 retweets 418 likesShow this thread -
If the
@US_FDA were trying to undercut any rapid increase of US testing capacity, today's update to their guidelines would constitute a significant step in that direction.4 replies 104 retweets 392 likesShow this thread -
Let's look at their recommendation (7th item under General FAQ at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and-medical-devices/faqs-testing-sars-cov-2#5f36c1c3ddbe9 …) They are talking about screening of asymptomatics not suspected of having COVID-19—and recommend against lower sensitivity tests of the sort that can be carried out cheaply and rapidly.pic.twitter.com/ADqz28B2aQ
9 replies 37 retweets 181 likesShow this thread -
It's exhausting. We are being not merely failed, but absolutely *undercut* by our government agencies at every step of the way. Given Trump's repeated calls for slowing down testing, it's very hard not to see this as a deliberate effort to keep testing to minimum in the US.
32 replies 268 retweets 871 likesShow this thread -
The problem is that when you try to knock out surveillance testing for public relations purposes, you lose the powerful infection control capacity that comes from proactive screening, and the epidemic once again is worse than it had to be.
14 replies 76 retweets 405 likesShow this thread
I wouldn't assume we know why anyone is doing anything.
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.