The SalivaDirect test is the 5th saliva test that has received EUA designation from the FDA…perhaps Quest was talking about one, or more, of the other saliva tests?
Processing saliva by PCR is no faster than processing nasal mucus by PCR, so I don’t think so. Here is an article about how Quest got faster by using a faster RNA extraction method: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/29/quest-says-fda-cleared-new-lab-method-that-will-cut-coronavirus-testing-delays.html
I’m not knocking Yale or PhD’s or improvements in testing. I just don’t think SalivaDirect is the game changer we need to open society safely. I am an optimist and I think we will develop that game changer—hoping for ASAP!
It’s easier, faster and cheaper because they leave out a step, the RNA extraction step, the reagents for which have been in short supply. Also there is no need for swabs or a transport medium; those items have also been in short supply.
I did put those points on my Pros & Cons list in post #1772. However, SalivaDirect must be processed by manual PCR. Even without the RNA extraction, manual PCR is not faster or easier than machine PCR. (Quest and LabCorp use machine PCR.) Could it be cheaper? Maybe. But you need two different rooms in the lab to avoid cross-contamination, and more techs, who must be trained to work under a biohazard hood.
I agree that it would be great to do away with the necessity for nasal swabs. Saliva is the way to go. Now, I’m rooting for a cheap, fast, low tech way to process that saliva.
A cheap “lick the strip and if it turns color in a few minutes or less, then you may be contagious” test would be the most valuable one for public health purposes. People can use it at home before deciding whether to go to work, grocery store, class, etc. versus consulting with their physician. Or it can be used at the entrance to a workplace or classroom building or some such.
But then partiers may not be so careful about using them before going to parties.
double post
Ed Yong’s second article about Covid long-haulers: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/08/long-haulers-covid-19-recognition-support-groups-symptoms/615382/
This kind of disability for so many months (perhaps years, for some) is terrifying. Especially for people under 65 in our healthcare system.
I’m learning so much from Ed Yong’s work. My favorite article of his about Covid is: “Immunology Is Where Intuition Goes to Die“. Fascinating. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/08/covid-19-immunity-is-the-pandemics-central-mystery/614956/
That Ed Yong article is tremendous.
True, correct, and I can’t believe people still have to say that after all this time. In another thread here on CC, someone equated “asymptomatic” with not having to be hospitalized. Ummm…
This might surprise people about polio (source: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/yellowbook/2020/travel-related-infectious-diseases/poliomyelitis)
CLINICAL PRESENTATION
Most poliovirus infections are asymptomatic; about 25% cause minor illness with total recovery. However, about 0.5% of unvaccinated people may develop acute flaccid paralysis. Paralysis may affect 1 or several limbs, and in severe cases it may result in quadriplegia, respiratory failure, and rarely, death. Many people partially recover muscle function, and some recover completely, but worsening of weakness or paralysis may occur 20–30 years later (postpolio syndrome). Adults with poliovirus paralysis have more severe disease and a worse prognosis than children.
My aunt had polio as a child, and recovered “completely”. However, post-Polio syndrome greatly diminished her quality of life throughout middle-age, and she died of its complications when she was 61.
Death due to PPS is rare, but according to the NIH, “Researchers estimate that the condition affects 25 to 40 percent of polio survivors.“
I sent the Ed Yong article to my guys. To me, this was the scariest part:
“In an Italian study, 87 percent of hospitalized patients still had symptoms after two months; a British study found similar trends. A German study that included many patients who recovered at home found that 78 percent had heart abnormalities after two or three months. A team from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that a third of 270 nonhospitalized patients hadn’t returned to their usual state of health after two weeks. (For comparison, roughly 90 percent of people who get the flu recover within that time frame.)”
78% with heart abnormalities. I’m amazed at how many don’t care about that. I’ve wondered if they even realize it’s a thing or if they think death is the one and only concern. The rare times I get to talk with people about the after effects they always seem surprised to hear about them.
They don’t have to care about that because this isn’t going to happen to them. That only happens to other people.
Maybe because heart abnormalities is a bit vague? Does it mean that many are in imminent danger of having a heart attack or something similar? If it does then I am sure many would take it very seriously.
I suspect as the article says it’s different for different people, probably dependent upon where the virus got hold and how much damage it did. My guy fits in with those having fatigue. I used to think it was continued lung damage. Now if I had to place bets, I’d be wondering about his heart.
I remain hopeful he’ll improve rather than having this be lifelong. He’s in his later 20s and was quite healthy - no underlying conditions.
I’m not as positive those of us in our mid 50s or older would get back to normal at all if affected as he was. Youngsters heal quickly, but the older one gets, the longer it takes (or so it seems anyway).
If he hadn’t dropped his health insurance I’d be pressing him more to get assessed.
For me, we’re still going to try hard to avoid it. He’s biologically mine so I don’t have high hopes about being asymptomatic genetically and with the tumor side effects I already deal with - probably for the rest of my life - I just don’t want more.
The German study isn’t the least vague. It says, among other things, that 60% of the study participants had ongoing myocardial inflammation when they were tested, two months after they initially tested positive. Also 78% had evidence (scarring) of past heart injury. There were a lot of other heart tests, blood test values and the like, and the study participants had bad results in them as well.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916
But also, it seems that the after-effects do not get mentioned much in media reports. Media tends to focus on deaths, cases, and whether hospital resources are being overloaded. Someone who only glances at headlines may not have heard anything about the frequency of after-effects.
Part of the issue may be that, while the heart (or lung) abnormalities are noticeable with medical examination and testing, they may not be immediately noticeable to the person in question. If the person in question is an athlete who notices that s/he can no longer exercise as hard, or is an older sedentary person who had little reserve capacity beforehand, s/he may immediately notice the new limitations. But a younger non-athlete may not notice that his/her reserve capacity is lower, and the effects of such may only become apparent decades later.
Just a reminder – ACA open enrollment starts Nov. 1. 
I was going to mention the open enrollment too! It would be good to have an echocardiogram.
I believe people had elevated troponin, at least in some cases. That is a blood test to assess heart damage, usually from a heart attack but could be other factors. That said, I have had elevated troponin from an afib episode without damage shown on an echocardiogram and no ill effects.
@Creekland I hope you son gets better. I wonder if he has seen any improvement, however subtle.
And hope he gets insurance!!!
@compmom He told us he feels better now inside his house doing what he normally does there. This includes hours of speaking online for his job streaming games. That used to fatigue him before, so there’s hope improvement is happening.
He also tells us he hasn’t gone outside to test things there - things like pulling weeds.
Between the lines I think he’s not eager to know and doesn’t want it affecting his job if it happens again. When he gets fatigued he says he’s out for a couple of days before feeling better again.