Rapid Covid tests used in mass UK programme get scathing US report

[Northerner]

The US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) has raised significant concerns about the rapid Covid test on which the UK government has based its multibillion-pound mass testing programme.

In a scathing review, the US health agency suggested the performance of the test had not been established, presenting a risk to health, and that the tests should be thrown in the bin or returned to the California-based manufacturer Innova.

In the UK, these lateral flow Innova tests form the cornerstone of Operation Moonshot, the mass-testing scheme championed by the prime minister’s former chief adviser. The idea was that the ability to deliver results within 30 minutes – without the need for processing in a laboratory – provided a cheap, pragmatic and efficient way to identify people who had caught the virus but not fallen ill. But critics have raised concerns about accuracy.

Given the tests have been offered free to millions in England, for use at home or at test centres, workplaces and schools, with the aim of detecting more cases, breaking chains of transmission and saving lives since April, the FDA announcement is particularly damning.

Rapid Covid tests used in mass UK programme get scathing US report

Innova tests’ performance not proven and they should be returned to manufacturer or thrown in bin, says FDA

www.theguardian.com

Remind me, how much taxpayer's money has the government spent on these? Wasn't a figure of £100m bandied about? Sorry, let me correct that, should be £100 billion 😱

 

[Bruce Stephens]

In a scathing review, the US health agency suggested the performance of the test had not been established, presenting a risk to health, and that the tests should be thrown in the bin or returned to the California-based manufacturer Innova.

FDA have also been criticised for not being willing to authorise such quick (not very accurate) tests. While there are challenges in explaining to people what the results actually mean, there's potential value in such quick tests.

I'm sure there's significant false negatives (and I think the company itself doesn't think it's that useful when used on asymptomatic people) but the evidence that we have suggests false positives aren't that much of an issue. (If/when we have much lower prevalence they may be, but right now they seem to be around 0.03% or so.)

 

[Northerner]

FDA have also been criticised for not being willing to authorise such quick (not very accurate) tests. While there are challenges in explaining to people what the results actually mean, there's potential value in such quick tests.

I'm sure there's significant false negatives (and I think the company itself doesn't think it's that useful when used on asymptomatic people) but the evidence that we have suggests false positives aren't that much of an issue. (If/when we have much lower prevalence they may be, but right now they seem to be around 0.03% or so.)

Is it worth £100 billion though i.e. value for money? given that a top estimate for clearing NHS backlogs is around £40bn,£4bn is being cut from foreign aid, education catch-up spending is only a tenth of what is needed and a couple of £hundred million was all that was needed to feed kids through half term? This government appears to be profligate on some marginally-useful projects and downright miserly on things that actually make a real difference to people's lives

 

[Bruce Stephens]

Is it worth £100 billion though i.e. value for money?

Not a chance. But that's not the figure, is it? (One or two billion would be my guess but I'm not sure it's been published.)

And yes, they're not really suitable for most of the purposes for which the government plans to use them (and is using them), and the government's not that interested in trying to help people understand what a negative LFT means.