-
Lateral flows are basically good at picking up asymptomatic people with high viral load if used widely in the community
Theoretically, correct.
However, Innova (who unless things have changed since the 10th June supply the LFD's), are impressively ineffective:
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safety-communications/stop-using-innova-medical-group-sars-cov-2-antigen-rapid-qualitative-test-fda-safety-communication
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/06/17/daily-contact-testing-trials-in-schools-are-unethical-and-extending-them-to-include-the-delta-variant-puts-everyone-at-risk/You also hit the key point earlier on- namely- a negative LFD + symptoms suggestive should still warrant a formal PCR test, but usually don't.
At which point their role becomes tenuous.
You are reading a single comment by @deleted and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
deleted
I like to think of lateral flows as either positive or not positive (rather than negative) - I think saying they’re negative gives way too much reassurance/equivalence to a negative PCR which is a much more robust result. Lateral flows are basically good at picking up asymptomatic people with high viral load if used widely in the community, and screening clinically suspicious patients in hospital when other rapid tests are hard to come by, as a positive LFT is pretty likely to represent Covid.