Do antigen tests work if you are asymptomatic?
The answer is it depends on the brand of the test. Here's what you need to know.
Here’s what you need to know about antigen rapid tests:
In general, each test brand will test for a specific antigen. They may or may not tell you which antigen they detect.
Each brand has a different sensitivity. For low sensitivity tests, it will be fruitless to test if you are not symptomatic because it will almost certainly be negative. It would be nice if they correlated the results with PCR cycle thresholds, but those are non-standard as well.
Unfortunately, as far as I know, there are no standards to inform you on 1 and 2 above. There is no “reference standard” that they compare to.
This of course means that you can be wasting serious money taking tests when you are asymptomatic because the certain brands will never be positive if you are asymptomatic. I want to thank Dr. Byram Bridle for pointing this out to me.
They really should tell you, “Hey, if you aren’t symptomatic, don’t bother to take our test.” The manufacturers are never going to tell you that (since they aren’t required to), but I thought you should know.
And finally, if reading this article has saved you a lot of money, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.
Here is the product insert from a test someone gave me, which I never used. Oddly enough, the instructions spell out what you would do (or not do) if you wanted to ensure a negative test. This product was tested on 172 people and was found by the manufacturer to be 93% accurate.
Read the CORMAN DROSTEN REVIEW REPORT online. A professional peer review of the protocol that lays out the parameters and procedures of ALL SARScoV2 RT PCR tests. The team did a point by point review of the molecular chemistry of the testing protocol and concluded, "the test is so flawed on a molecular and methodological level as to be useless as a medical diagnostic test". The protocol left out the amino acid markers that differentiate between viral microorganisms (no positive nor negative controls). No specificity. It also reads only viral fragments due the fact when the protocol was developed in late 2019 early 2020 the only samples available were synthetic SARScoV, not SARScoV2, from China. SARScoV2 hadnt been isolated at that time. Thus the primers in the protocol were bunch to one side and dont read the entire viral length. Additionally, the amplification rate recommended, 45 Ct, renders a 97 percent false positive rate. The typical rate used in the US and European labs, 35 to 40 Ct, still giving massive false positives. High sensitivity. This protocol was adopted without proper peer review the day after it was submitted by both the WHO and Eurosurveillance, and later by the FDA, CDC and other public health agencies.The team found 10 'errors' that they assert renders the test useless, yet it is the most widely used test across the planet. Used to create an illusionary worldwide pandemic out of a ENdemic that overwhelmingly effects specific medical profiles. Steve, check it out. PU.