Tests for the Coronavirus help, chains of Infection to break and can save lives. For US President, Donald Trump you, however, are: a welcome scapegoat. With a view to rising infection numbers in the US, the culprit was quickly found: “Because we test more, we have more cases,” he played recently the Situation down. “If we were to make half of the Tests, we would have a lot less cases.” The United States are among the hardest hit by the pandemic-affected countries in the world. More than three million Americans have been infected already confirmed with the Coronavirus.
More Tests lead to more confirmed infection cases, – in this point, Trump is right. A country that leads, for example, no Tests, it could be noticed therefore never with high Infection. Nevertheless, the logic of the US President is amazingly one-dimensional. In fact, Tests for the Coronavirus are the most effective measures in the fight against the pandemic Is to be tested a lot, decreases the number of unreported cases. Local outbreaks and chains of Infection can be quickly brought under control, contact persons are identified and quarantined to be sent. Who tests a lot, can control – provided that the political will is there. Who does not test, can outbreaks only endure – and takes photographs of the Sick and Dead in the time of purchase.
Aerosols on the plane
Researchers warn: In the plane, the risk is great, the Coronavirus to infect
Two common test methods are: a variant aimed at the Virus itself, its genetic Material, the so-called PCR-Test. The Test fails even for the smallest quantities of Virus, because the genetic Material is duplicated during the test procedure.
In the second method, the detection of via antibodies from the blood, it can be survived, the disease already. A positive test result only gives an indication that the Person has come in the past with the pathogen in contact. In Germany, for example, pharmaceutical giant Roche has a permit for such a Test. It can be according to the manufacturer, for example, for health care Workers is useful and allows to draw conclusions on workers who have already developed a degree of immunity to Sars-CoV-2.
Test methods for direct virus detection
Many commercial companies are currently trying, however, to develop test methods for direct virus detection or to optimize. Because unlike the anti-body Test can be recorded so that active infections. And actually, there is a need in the field for optimization.
Munich-Based Cohort
The reveal of the first Corona-cases in Germany about the Virus
A disadvantage of the well-proven PCR test is that it is considered to be resource-consuming, and a lot of time devouring: Medical personnel must equip themselves with mouth protection and gloves, before it can take a swab from the mouth, nose or throat of patients. For the subsequent evaluation, it needs chemical substances, a laboratory that has a PCR machine. The often long transport ways for the sample material itself. Many people need to be tested in a short period of time, pass, sometimes days, until the test result is available.
Should remedy this, a quick test of the Bosch by the end of March presented, and thus a huge media caused the echo. The device have approximately the size of a coffee maker and could also be in doctors ‘ offices operated, it said in a press release. An advantage is that “directly” tested could be used to transport routes accounted for. But as it turned out, the Test cylinders is not permitted at that time. Another Problem is the Test capacity was. Bosch stated that a single device can evaluate, within 24 hours, up to ten samples – insufficient for an application in the “broad masses”, was the verdict of an expert.
The Bielefeld University is conducting research to optimized test methods and wants to speed up common processes. According to their own statements, they have developed a method, the results ten times faster test result than a conventional Test. The heart of the method is an optimized PCR system for a Dutch company, in the the for the test result of the necessary chemical processes to be faster to run. Instead of the usual more than two hours to take the Test with the device only about 16 minutes, it says in a statement. This sounds promising, but the time for the sampling is still to come, the treatment of the material and the subsequent evaluation. All of this is likely to be expensive as is the case with the current PCR Tests. The study was not assessed, learning by independent science.
Saliva as a research approach
Researchers at Columbia University are pursuing a different approach: they seek evidence of the causative agent by using the saliva of patients. Who wants to test, you must fill only a small Tube with saliva. The liquid comes in a tube with enzymes and reagents, and is heated. After about 30 minutes at 63 degrees Celsius, and the contents of the tube turns yellow, if a Virus is genetic material available.
Unlike conventional PCR Tests, it would require no costly device, thermal cycler called, says a press release from the University. A simple water bath is sufficient to heat the Material. The often perceived as unpleasant smear is eliminated.
First Tests of the method show promising results: In 60 samples that had been pre-tested with the gold standard PCR, the saliva test once the mark – he had not detected a Coronavirus-Infected correctly as such. The scientists therefore indicate the proportion of false negative results with under five percent. According to the University of the saliva test to beat, even very low quantities of Virus. The sample was relatively small. The result should still be larger is confirmed by testing.
Sensitivity and specificity
It is a fact that Good testing methods are difficult to develop. You need to score with a simple application and at the same time provide accurate results. Scientists distinguish between two measurements: The sensitivity of a test indicates how many infected patients are correctly identified. The specificity indicates to what percentage of a Test actually Healthy as healthy recognize. Thus, it provides information on how many patients are incorrectly classified as sick.
Coronavirus
Blood group A is equal to high risk? What’s up with the Corona-blood groups-a study on
From the infectious point of view of especially poor sensitivity is problematic – it is a Diseased correctly identified as such, he can be infected unconsciously more people with the pathogen. A corona test from the house of Abbott, which was also used by the White house, was advised, therefore, least of all in criticism. According to information from CNN, it does not give messages about the fact that the small portable device, Corona-Infected right so those recognized and thus false-negative results could deliver. Abbott disagreed, and pointed to studies, the exact test results are close.
In the fight against the pandemic is portable testing or mobile test equipment to provide accurate results on-site within a short period of time would be, indeed, a great gain. The staff of hospitals could be tested regularly, as well as patients who are admitted to a hospital or a nursing home. Useful a use would be where many people come together in a confined space and there is an increased risk of infection. Effective Tests could also have a bit of normality in everyday life for some refreshment.
Many resource-saving approaches are still in their infancy – to market for many months should pass away. Until then it is: test, test, test – and with the methods that are currently available.
Even if that is not likely to favor one or the other politician.
Sources: University of Bielefeld / University Columbia / CNN