. @President_MU
I recognize youve heard things like “50% sensitivity”
In light of your comments it’s clear there are key pieces youve missed
Sensitivity nears 100% to catch potential superspreaders and others currently transmitting, for example.
See
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00425-6/fulltext
I recognize youve heard things like “50% sensitivity”
In light of your comments it’s clear there are key pieces youve missed
Sensitivity nears 100% to catch potential superspreaders and others currently transmitting, for example.
See

50% sensitivity is vs PCR. But as CDC (and hopefully you) know, PCR remains pos long after isolation & contagiousness end
Rapid Ag tests don’t stay positive past the infectious stage.
50% isn’t a lack of sensitivity of Ag... it’s a lack of specificity of PCR for infectiousness
Rapid Ag tests don’t stay positive past the infectious stage.
50% isn’t a lack of sensitivity of Ag... it’s a lack of specificity of PCR for infectiousness
And importantly, public health screening w rapid tests should not detect people after they have been infectious. Simply, when you say 50% sensitivity, you’re comparing apples and oranges.
One, a medical diagnostic. The other, a public health tool to answer “Am I infectious now”
One, a medical diagnostic. The other, a public health tool to answer “Am I infectious now”