Thanks, Timmy. I took.a look at the author, Alice Paul’s profile and given that she is a “senior writer” at a mainstream, reliable magazine, we can be pretty sure about what she relates. However, I’m leaning more toward learning directly from scientists right now, not just reliable journalists.

Here’s an example of why:

I’m also asking Alice Paul’s question: “Why aren’t all COVID-19 tests run using the faster technology?”

Her answer: “One reason has to do with volume; traditional genetic tests can process hundreds or even thousands of tests a day; the ID NOW system can only run about four samples an hour.” Ah… this just sounds circular to me: the faster tests can’t process as many as the traditional tests so they are slower?

She also says: “And while traditional tests may take longer to produce results, researchers don’t need to spend as much time developing the test itself so it can start testing people sooner.” This doesn’t help me to understand WHY the rapid test takes longer to produce. Nothing wrong with this sentence. It’s just not helpful.

More reporting here: “The rapid test ‘takes quite a bit of optimization and refining,’ says John Frels, vice president of research and development at Abbott Diagnostics. That means it requires more up front development time and takes longer to get up and running.” I want to find out what involved int the optimization process, not just be told it’s needed.

Do you think I’m being too picky?

Right now, I’m thinking this might be more helpful Update: US FDA issues Emergency Use Authorization for Abbott’s 5-min #COVID19 test. See our full coverage on fast, portable tests