General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUniversity of Illinois low cost saliva covid test:
Known as Shield T3, the new organization will make the technology available nationally and was established in response to inquiries from universities and institutions across the country. Interest surged after researchers in Urbana-Champaign unveiled the technology to promote safety when on-campus instruction resumes later this month. Since then, it has been expanded to the U of I Systems universities in Chicago and Springfield.
Along with the new university-related organization, the U of I System has already created a new internal unit that is working to make the tests available in Illinois. The unit, known as SHIELD Illinois, will continue building current testing capacity, and hopes to ultimately offer testing to institutions and entities across the state.
U of I System President Tim Killeen said the initiatives reflect a commitment that the university system has carried for more than 150 years.
We were created to serve our state and our nation, a role we have filled with distinction during the COVID-19 crisis, from leading-edge epidemiological modeling to front-line care at our healthcare enterprise in Chicago, Killeen said. Expanding our breakthrough, saliva-based testing will be a real game-changer, providing fast and efficient results that will protect lives and livelihoods.
Gov. J.B. Pritzker praised the U of I Systems innovation, and efforts to spread the groundbreaking technology across the state and beyond.
The University of Illinois is living up to its reputation as a world-class research institution, with these promising innovations in rapid saliva testing during this pandemic, Pritzker said. Im proud of their effort and what they have achieved so far, and look forward to what this promising breakthrough can mean for our state and the world.
https://news.uillinois.edu/view/7815/1904934500
lark
(23,138 posts)Hoping it works out.
crickets
(25,982 posts)to either ramp up production or get more involvement nationwide to produce this for everyone.
Amishman
(5,559 posts)Accuracy any lower and they be borderline too inaccurate to use.
lark
(23,138 posts)The inaccurate one was the "instant" one, the nasal swabs were correct.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,873 posts)how accurate it is. Or what percentage of false positives or false negatives occur. Those numbers are hugely important.
Celerity
(43,469 posts)ProfessorGAC
(65,134 posts)...comparable to the current nasal swab.
So, there are the same issues with false numbers, but it's much cheaper.
So, retesting is a pretty strong option.
I thought I read it on the Chicago Sun-Times site, but I couldn't find it there. Sorry about that.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,873 posts)And exactly how accurate is that? Again, nothing concrete is being given.
ProfessorGAC
(65,134 posts)I think you're being cynical on this.
Given the speed, low cost & self-adminstration, "comparable" is a positive.
Cheaper, faster, easier for similar results?
Not sure how you see a negative here. Because it's not perfect?
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,873 posts)There seem to be a very large number of different ones out there. Early on I was seeing false negatives and false positives, often both for the same test, as high as 30%. All of a sudden those numbers have simply disappeared. I should not have to be the one researching, trying to figure out precisely which test is being used, and what it's accuracy and reliability is. That should be put out there.
When a vaccine is first started being given, I will bet you anything all we will ever be told is "safe" and "reliable" without any actual statistics connected to it. Influenza vaccines have notoriously low efficacy, although most years the percentage of good it does is made public.
I'm not asking for perfection. I'm only asking for solid numbers. Which shouldn't be an unreasonable expectation.