Morning Briefing
Summaries of health policy coverage from major news organizations
Blood Test Could Help Rectify Shortages Involved With Nasal Swab Method, But Some Scientists Remain Cautious
Stat: The Next Frontier In Coronavirus Testing: Identifying The Outbreak's Full Scope
Scientists are starting to roll out new blood tests for the coronavirus, a key development that, unlike the current diagnostic tests, will help pinpoint people who are immune and reveal the full scope of the pandemic. The “serological” tests — which rely on drawn blood, not a nasal or throat swab — can identify people who were infected and have already recovered from Covid-19, including those who were never diagnosed, either because they didn’t feel particularly sick or they couldn’t get an initial test. (Joseph, 3/27)
The Associated Press: Virus Test Results In Minutes? Scientists Question Accuracy
Some political leaders are hailing a potential breakthrough in the fight against COVID-19: simple pin-prick blood tests or nasal swabs that can determine within minutes if someone has, or previously had, the virus. The tests could reveal the true extent of the outbreak and help separate the healthy from the sick. But some scientists have challenged their accuracy. Hopes are hanging on two types of quick tests: antigen tests that use a nose or throat swab to look for the virus, and antibody tests that look in the blood for evidence someone had the virus and recovered. (Parra, 3/27)
ABC News: Promising New 15-Minute Test For Coronavirus Comes With Caveats
Testing availability has been a significant challenge in the U.S., but the situation is slowly getting better. The CDC continues to distribute its test kits to public health laboratories across the nation, while large diagnostics companies like Quest Diagnostics are ramping up to be able to run tens of thousands of tests per day. (Baldwin, 3/26)
ABC News: Blood Tests Could Help Battle COVID-19 In US
"It tells you that a person was infected with the virus" in the past, said Robert F. Garry, Ph.D., director of the Tulane Center of Excellence, Global Viral Network. "At some point when this is over, we want to go back and see how many people are infected in the community." (David and Salzman, 3/26)
The New York Times: U.S. Coronavirus Testing Hits Milestone But Still Falls Short
The pace of coronavirus testing in the United States has seen a meteoric rise in the past week. But the country still lags in tests relative to its population, despite having the world’s most reported coronavirus cases. (3/26)
The Washington Post: Testing In The DMV: Where And How To Get A Coronavirus Test
Getting tested for the coronavirus is not like getting a flu shot. People who are seeking a coronavirus test have to have a doctor’s referral and then have to pass the screening put in place by the hospital or clinic that’s doing the testing. Showing up without a note from a physician or the local or state health department will not only result in disappointment, it may also delay or prevent testing for first responders, health workers and people at a high risk for death from the virus, medical authorities warn. (Sullivan, 3/26)
ProPublica: Internal Emails Show How Chaos At The CDC Slowed The Early Response To Coronavirus
On Feb. 13, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent out an email with what the author described as an “URGENT” call for help. The agency was struggling with one of its most important duties: keeping track of Americans suspected of having the novel coronavirus. It had “an ongoing issue” with organizing — and sometimes flat-out losing — forms sent by local agencies about people thought to be infected. The email listed job postings for people who could track or retrieve this paperwork. (Chen, Allen and Churchill, 3/26)
NPR: In Defense Of Coronavirus Testing Strategy, Administration Cited Retracted Study
When asked why the United States didn't import coronavirus tests when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ran into difficulty developing its own, government officials have frequently questioned the quality of the foreign-made alternatives. But NPR has learned that the key study they point to was retracted just days after it was published online in early March. (Harris, 3/26)
