America Authorizes Its First Covid-19 Diagnostic Tests Using At-Home Collection of Saliva (cnn.com) 65
An anonymous reader quotes CNN:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Friday issued an emergency use authorization for the first at-home Covid-19 test that uses saliva samples, the agency said in a news release. Rutgers University's RUCDR Infinite Biologics lab received an amended emergency authorization late Thursday. With the test, people can collect their own saliva at home and send their saliva samples to a lab for results...
"Authorizing additional diagnostic tests with the option of at-home sample collection will continue to increase patient access to testing for COVID-19. This provides an additional option for the easy, safe and convenient collection of samples required for testing without traveling to a doctor's office, hospital or testing site," FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen M. Hahn said in the FDA's press release on Friday...
The test remains prescription only.
"Authorizing additional diagnostic tests with the option of at-home sample collection will continue to increase patient access to testing for COVID-19. This provides an additional option for the easy, safe and convenient collection of samples required for testing without traveling to a doctor's office, hospital or testing site," FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen M. Hahn said in the FDA's press release on Friday...
The test remains prescription only.
Re: (Score:1)
Often its dead people.
https://www.chicagotribune.com... [chicagotribune.com]
When the deceased stay on voter rolls, it's not that hard to impersonate them.
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless B (Score:2, Informative)
Hmm, I googled dead people voting, looks like you had 31 instances, I wouldnâ(TM)t think that would swing anything in the US:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Because, to quote George Carlin, I was home wanking, i.e. doing essentially the same as you, the difference is, I have something to show for it in the end.
Sorry, but if you want me to vote, give me an actual choice. I want neither the broken blue vase nor the broken red vase. They're both useless.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:1)
>"Sorry, but if you want me to vote, give me an actual choice. I want neither the broken blue vase nor the broken red vase. They're both useless."
The only way we will ever have a real choice is if States start using using some form of ranked voting for primaries and elections:
https://fairvote.org/ [fairvote.org]
Like magic, parties will become accountable, new parties will form with all kinds of positional stances, and you can actually vote for what you want instead of against what you don't want, knowing your vote coun
Re: (Score:2)
*YOU* don't get to dictate to the other 130 million voters who the candidates will be and in the end, there can be only one.
Your stance is immature, entitled, spoiled, and naive-- all at the same time.
In this election- it's critical that we vote. It could mean the difference between a million u.s. citizen's dying or not. And now covid19 appears to be killing kids in NY. You can't keep having your petulant temper tantrum any more.
Vote Blue in November- no matter who.
Re: (Score:2)
And that's gonna change what exactly?
Or rather, what did change in the past, say, 20 years by voting one way or another?
Re: (Score:2)
That's my problem. Unfortunately "neither goofball" is not a valid voting option. One of them will be it. It's basically giving you the free choice between shooting and hanging. Yes, one may be actually worse, but in the end, you're fucked either way.
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless B (Score:2)
In that article of yours, it suggests 78 instances. I wouldnâ(TM)t call that âoemanyâ in a country of over 328,200,000 people.
Doesnâ(TM)t suggest that itâ(TM)s âoeillegalsâ either.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In that article of yours, it suggests 78 instances. I wouldnâ(TM)t call that âoemanyâ in a country of over 328,200,000 people.
Doesnâ(TM)t suggest that itâ(TM)s âoeillegalsâ either.
Just checking, but is that a dialect of Scottish?
Re: (Score:2)
The official name is Mojibake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
But seriously though: it's 2020, and Slashdot STILL doesn't support Unicode. It wasn't acceptable even twenty years ago. Now it feels like folks with asthma who wouldn't get ACA health insurance just to pwn the libs.
Re: (Score:2)
Dialect of Unicode.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
How are illegal people able to vote?
In CA? All of them.
All you need is a name and a zip code to vote.
Even if you're not registered, you can cast a provisional ballot that will be counted once you're registered. (Sometimes they just put it in the real ballot box because fuck it.)
To register, all you do is check a box on the DMV form when you apply for a license, renewal, change of address, or specifically want to register to vote.
Non-citizens are ineligible to vote, but they get the same form as anyone else and there's no validation of citize
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless B (Score:2, Troll)
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless (Score:2)
That sounds unbelievable!
You sure that isnâ(TM)t a âoetrumpâ fact? Do you have a link to something reliable like this that talks about it?
https://www.npr.org/2019/02/26... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:1)
https://www.politifact.com/fac... [politifact.com]
"Allegations of undue influence over American elections have become fairly commonplace in the Trump era. Trump himself has repeatedly claimed the existence of massive voter fraud and election rigging, which weâ(TM)ve debunked again and again and again and again and again and again and again."
Each of those "again" is a link to debunking claims that illegals are voting in significant numbers.
https://www.politifact.com/fac... [politifact.com]
"News 21 found just 150 alleged cases of double
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless B (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless B (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless Ba (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: California Authorizes Its First Citizenless Ba (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Oh yes, the British were doing a fine job while Hitler was busily turning their country into a golf course.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yes, the British were doing a fine job while Hitler was busily turning their country into a golf course.
What are you talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
Hey ignorant asshole.
Trump is not a realtor.
A realtor is a real estate agent who is a member of a certain trade association, the National Association of REALTORS(R)
Trump doesn't follow the tenants of the National Socialist Party either. You apparently don't know what they are. Educate yourself.
England wouldn't have stayed independent without help in WW II, the U.S. lend-lease act propped it up until USA entered war.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm a Californian, and when I register to vote, they require an ID that verifies who I am as well as a social security number.
California started the movement to not require any federal ID when getting a state driver's license because we needed to be better at removing unlicensed, uninsured drivers from the road (we needed to discourage/prevent the use of Mexican driver's licenses). Maybe you live 1000 miles from the border. I don't, some days I can see it from my house, and I've been here about 40 years. Th
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a Californian, and when I register to vote, they require an ID that verifies who I am as well as a social security number.
You're a liar. What county are you in?
It's trivial to look up their site and guidance. Hint: Show up with a name and zipcode and you can vote.
Re:California Authorizes Its First Citizenless Bal (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm a Californian, and when I register to vote, they require an ID that verifies who I am as well as a social security number.
You're a liar. What county are you in?
It's trivial to look up their site and guidance. Hint: Show up with a name and zipcode and you can vote.
Well, this online California voter registration site does seem to require social security number info, and claims that if you don't have a CA driver license more stuff will be needed.
https://registertovote.ca.gov/ [ca.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly the point. As has already been pointed out, non-citizens can get CA drivers licenses and also can check a box saying they are citizens and would like to vote. Easily exploitable. Non-citizens (not just illegals) are on the honor system not to vote in California. The question isn't if they have made it easy for non-citizens to vote, the question is how many non-citizens have exploited the ability to vote with no checks. I mean, they could easily be a registered voter, just an illegally registered vot
Re:California Authorizes Its First Citizenless Bal (Score:4)
Exactly the point. As has already been pointed out, non-citizens can get CA drivers licenses and also can check a box saying they are citizens and would like to vote. Easily exploitable. Non-citizens (not just illegals) are on the honor system not to vote in California.
They are on the honor system pretty much EVERYWHERE. If you are going to lie about your status, you can pretty much show up in any state with documentation showing residency and get registered to vote without proof of citizenship. We are ALL on the honor system.
Illinois does not require proof of citizenship in order to register - just proof of residency:
https://www.voteriders.org/ufa... [voteriders.org]
Arizona does not require proof of citizenship in order to register - an AZ driver's license will do:
https://www.voteriders.org/ufa... [voteriders.org]
Same for every place I checked: Mississippi, Georgia, Texas - I can't find anyplace where you need to document your citizenship status. Can you?
https://www.voteriders.org/get... [voteriders.org]
None of the states I have looked at requires proof of citizenship. Everyone accepts birth certificates and passports as of proof of identity (or part of such proof), and I assume that every place tells you that you need to be eligible to vote and requires you to affirm that you are eligible, but nobody seems to require proof of such.
Is this a problem? Well, pretty much all of the studies show a vanishingly small amount of fraudulent voting. They also tend to show a higher number of fraudulent or erroneous voter registrations, but still relatively small.
In my opinion, the problem of non-voting by eligible citizens is vastly larger than the problem of voting by people who are in-eligible. There are pretty strong penalties to punish those who commit voter fraud, making it more difficult for EVERYONE to register is not something I feel is justified.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the UK is doing an excellent job!!!
. . .
oh, wait. No they aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I found a loophole in your bogus argument.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're happy to be second last as long as you're not dead last? Plenty of countries are doing a lot better in per capita deaths than the US, and at the current rate you're set to overtake Italy sooner or later.
So what? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"By the time you got the kit, sent it back and got the results you'd either be recovered or dead"
I agree this product isn't very useful for most any case I can think of. If you have no symptoms, there is no point (and why would it be prescribed?) If you are sick, then you are sick- knowing if it is COVID-19 changes pretty much nothing, you should still ASSUME it is COVID-19 and take precautions to prevent spread (like you had been doing before, right?) If you test positive, it doesn't change being si
Who thought approving that was a good idea? (Score:5, Informative)
Let's for a moment dissect what we're looking at here. This ain't no home preg test, ok? It's not "piss (or spit) on this, wait 5 minutes and cry yourself to sleep when it turns blue". You're supposed to drool on it, hope that the preservation fluid properly mixes with it, hope that you can put it back into the send back envelope without spilling, hope that your local post office doesn't just throw it away because FFS, why should they be tasked mailing what's essentially a potential health hazard especially since it has BIOHAZARD printed all over it like it's the latest installment of Resident Evil, hope that the sample is still in a testable condition when it arrives, hope that you didn't fuck up in the process and then...
Do I have to go on or does this have "false positive/negative" already written all over it enough for your tastes?
Good, because that's what we're heading for. This is about as reliable as the average magical 8 ball, and I'm not even questioning that they did what they could but they certainly did not take into account what I lovingly dubbed the "bigger idiot theory" of test kit design: That is, if you make a test kit with instructions that the average trained healthcare professional can follow even if he's been drunk or working for 48 hours or presumably both, the average trained healthcare professional will fuck it up at least one out of 10 times, if they have experience with the kit and got some training.
Now let's imagine the average layman without any training and you can with some credibility expect better results when you're having a bunch of bi-polar asthmatics do the mountain etappe of the Tour de France.
There will be false negatives up the ass. Why negatives you ask? Because false positives are fortunately at least with this test near impossible, but with this amount of variables it's almost ensured that people will not be able to deliver a sensible sample. And that's assuming that they are actually following procedures and not try to be clever, e.g. by having the whole family spit into the testing funnel because it's cheaper to get all of us tested in one go.
Re:Who thought approving that was a good idea? (Score:5, Insightful)
hope that your local post office doesn't just throw it away because FFS, why should they be tasked mailing what's essentially a potential health hazard especially since it has BIOHAZARD printed all over it
All right, calm down, take a breath. The post office is actually staffed by people who not only know what they are doing, but also don't get a kick out of committing federal felony offences on a daily basis.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't mean they would break the law, but I do know that at the very least since the Anthrax scare of post-9/11 there's at least in my jurisdiction no longer a requirement to transport anything that is likely to contain material that may endanger the health of postal workers.
I'd guess we see this being used to challenge transportation of those samples.
Re: (Score:3)
Millions of people have already done the exact same thing for DNA testing, with decent enough success rate that the companies keep making a profit. Many of my friends have done it and I haven't heard of a sample being rejected. It's not hard. Certainly easier than doing the swab test by yourself.
Now, in the case of this virus the test will likely miss some infections (say, if the virus is primarily in the GI tract) but presence in the saliva is a fairly good proxy for presence in exhaled air, which is the p
Re: (Score:2)
DNA testing is a fundamentally different beast. First, getting a valid sample is heaps easier because pretty much any body fluid of yours contains sufficient quantities of DNA to pretty much ensure you can't mess this up, there's a reason why even police personnel usually manage to get a sensible sample. And, let's face it, for civilian purposes, unless you're charcoal black and the results come back with your ancestry being half from Ireland and half from Sweden, how would you even know that it was unusabl
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't this the same method people use to do ancestry type DNA testing? It seems to work well enough for that.
I read that they have detected the virus in semen (Score:2)
I read that with a little dyslexia. (Score:2)
Thought it said diagnostic test using salvia. Now there is a test we could finally pass on here.
EDITORS: Please delete this entire subject/thread (Score:2)