FDA approves first rapid, take home HIV test

[pinto]

Source: Yahoo News (Health)

By Matthew Perrone | Associated Press – 59 mins ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration has approved the first over-the-counter HIV test, allowing Americans to test themselves for the virus that causes AIDS in the privacy of their homes.

The OraQuick test detects the presence of HIV in saliva collected using a mouth swab. The test is designed to return a result within 20 to 40 minutes.

Government officials estimate one-fifth, or about 240,000 people, of the 1.2 million HIV carriers in the U.S. are not aware they are infected. Testing is one of the chief means of slowing new infections, which have held steady at about 50,000 per year for two decades.

FDA officials said the test is aimed at people who might not otherwise get tested.

"The availability of a home-use HIV test kit provides another option for individuals to get tested so that they can seek medical care, if appropriate," said Dr. Karen Midthun, director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/fda-approves-first-rapid-home-hiv-test-161546781--finance.html

---

Long used in Public Health Department across the country. Good to see this available for home use. Some folks just can't, or won't, go to a health care facility for a test.

And good to see that Orasure is establishing some level of trained call center counselors to support individuals who test + and provide local medical follow-up resources. ~ pinto

[valerief]

1. And what happens when you find out you have it but can't afford the treatment?

Does the kit come with THAT?

[Posteritatis]

2. Yes, let's just dismiss it because of that. Oy. (nt)

[pinto]

3. All states have ADAPs (AIDS Drug Assistance Programs) though some are very underfunded

and have waiting lists. It varies state by state. I would hope that the call centers have a comprehensive list of locally available options for early HIV medical interventions. And, to be honest, if caught early, professional medical recommendations may include "do nothing" except track T-cell counts and viral load every 3 months.

And overall, knowing is better than not knowing, imo.

[goclark]

5. You are so right pinto

knowing is better than not knowing.
That is good advise for everyone regarding their health problems.

[closeupready]

6. Knowing is better than not, but not if the CDC is involved, IMO.

I would never trust any state agents with that information, since there is no real penalty for violating your right to private health information. I mean, that's just my humble feeling.

Yes, if this test is truly at home - where you take a sample at home, process the results AT HOME, without anyone else being involved, it's terrific.

Otherwise, in light of Tukegee and Guatemala and other kinds of abuses, I'm generally fearful of state authorities, in that regard.

[pinto]

8. I worked in HIV test counseling (State trained, County Public Health based). Testing was anonymous.

Positive results were correlated by self-reported gender, age, ethnicity and risk factor. No more, for local and state stats.

AIDS diagnoses made by an MD are reportable by law. Yet even then, the identity of the patient is encrypted on the State report to the CDC.

HIPPA is taken *very* seriously in this setting, believe me. I've been there both as a test counselor and as a patient.

Additionally, the epidemiological data is vital across the prevention, care and treatment spectrum.

[closeupready]

9. Reassuring, thanks.

[pinto]

10. ...

[goclark]

21. Good information to know ~ thanks

[snooper2]

7. Well at least you won't be going around infecting anybody else

or at least, shouldn't be...

[bitchkitty]

4. Good news - and way overdue, in my opinion. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

13. +1

I remember the older tests that took three weeks to get the result...A lot of fingernail-chewing during the wait, I can tell ya....

[pinto]

14. Yeah, and in the blood draw days, two week turn around, we had some no-show clients for follow up.

Some were positive, some at real possible risk and some that initially came in for positive reinforcement. Some no-shows may have been purely logistical - no transportation, moved, broke off a relationship, etc. It was troubling at times, in our role. And troubling for the clients as well, we assumed.

[bitchkitty]

15. I feel ya, hon.

I only had to wait 10 days when I was tested, but by the time I went in for results (they would not give results on the phone) I had worked myself into such a state. Back then there were no such things as protease inhibitors, just AZT which in its early days killed more than a few, as I'm sure you know. I was sure that my test would turn out positive, and when they said non-reactive I didn't understand for a moment, then shrieked! I had to go back 6 months later, of course, but I took the wait much better and the negative result much more calmly!

An at home test would have saved me a lot of stress and worry.

[Yavin4]

11. This May Lead To More Unprotected Sex

Folks will give each other this test and then engage in unprotected sex. There will be major unintended health consequences because of this.

[Posteritatis]

12. *facepalm* (nt)

[bitchkitty]

16. Forget the sarcasm thingie? n/t

[Yavin4]

17. No Sarcasm. It May Lead To More Unprotected Sex.

Why is that not true?

[bitchkitty]

23. Because it's not.

That's along the lines of saying condoms encourage premarital sex. Or that marijuana leads to heroin addiction. It's just not true.

IMO, the kind of person who, in this day and age, is stupid enough to have unprotected sex with strangers is probably not going to be concerned about an HIV test, no matter how easy and convenient it would be.

[Fearless]

22. If the test is accurate...

I'd trade a global increase in some STI's for a decrease in HIV. In the end, people will still be alive, and that's what counts. Of course we should discourage unsafe practices, but people will be people.

[Rhiannon12866]

18. K&R! Terrific news!

And long past time. And the follow-up is essential...

[tawadi]

19. Hope it's accurate. eom

[Nihil]

20. What about the one that causes AIDS in public?

> allowing Americans to test themselves for the virus that
> causes AIDS in the privacy of their homes.

[XemaSab]

24. Good catch