This is the Woolies site for purchasing the COVID-19 rapid antigen tests. They are $50 but if you sign up for their newsletter AND create and account you get free delivery (normally $10) and a $10 discount code emailed to you making the delivered price $40. Plus if you sign up you can also get 40 woolies rewards points.
There are lots of places out there selling 5 for $60-$80 so at $40 delivered it seems like the best price around.
Note : They only ship from 4th November.
Nope. My wife asked me. She's a nurse immuniser. She is hoping to fly to the UK early next year.
Can you use these at home if you are required to get tested? I'm from Vic
Nope, not when dhhs needs it.
Rapid Antigen Tests are not diagnostic. PCR tests are diagnostic.
PCR tests are diagnostic either but they still use it.
PCR tests are generally considered better at detecting the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and are currently the gold standard for diagnosis of COVID-19.
COVID-19 testing in Australia - information for health professionals
This product cannot be shipped to WA or SA due to government state guidelines.
Why? Isn't cheap testing a good thing?
It is and it isn't.
When used correctly it is a good thing but when it's used incorrectly, and it is very easy to do so, it could do more harm than good.
Why do most states (and countries) allow it then, except these 2?
If you haven't noticed WA and SA are two of the more stringent states in Australia.
In Australia it's a bit of a moot point to use these now as we have great accessibility to proper testing (although time taken for results to come back can be up to 48hrs if unlucky with demand). However in countries like America where these tests are not free, they're a cheaper alternative or in third world countries they're more accessible and cheaper.
If you haven't noticed WA and SA are two of the more stringent states in Australia.
and two of the least vaccinated…
@jv: They didn't need to because they had near 0 cases all the time. This is exactly how it was in NSW and VIC before the outbreak.
They didn't need to because they had near 0 cases all the time.
So did Vic a few months back. Why wait for a breakout to occur?
@jv: Yes, only urgency can drive people to get vaccinated. Nothing wrong with that. If people do not feel threatened, they do no go easily with injecting their body.
@jv: We will only know repurcussions of getting this vaccine in 5 to 10 years time. People trust their bodies to handle covid more than the vaccine makers and Govt who will will not and do not know the after effects of vaccine.
On a side note, I am not a anti vaxxer but I did delay till the last moment as I do not trust these quick made solutions we are injecting.
We will only know repurcussions of getting this vaccine in 5 to 10 years time
Why?
How it different from any other vaccine?
@jv: Many reasons. Here’s one, just compare the number of deaths after vaccination compared with all vaccines prior to 2020/2021. https://openvaers.com/covid-data
People trust their bodies to handle covid more than the vaccine makers
The 5 million dead ones don't… Nearly all of which were not vaccinated.
as I do not trust these quick made solutions
Each year's Flu vaccination goes through the same process…
@amsaini15: "People trust their bodies to handle covid more than the vaccine makers and Govt who will will not and do not know the after effects of vaccine."
Please to not make blanket statements and think you are the voice to represent "people". I for one wish not to be represented by your ignorant views. I trust science. I hereby decline your representation and pass you onto the uneducated anti-vaxxers who you say you aren't part of but show all the hallmarks of.
@NoApostrophePlurals: Many people have most other vaccines but will not have this one. Hence you also have ignorant views.
@doowhydiddi: Exactly, the argument of calling someone an “anti-vaxxer” falls apart considering many of the people I know questioning these new vaccine technologies have had all of the others that have gone through a thorough testing and safety process.
@jv: Why only promote the vaccine? What about focussed protection for those most at risk, early treatment options, sound health advice for people most at risk such as the elderly, obese, diabetics, dementia patients and those with existing cardiovascular problems. The vaccine doesn’t stop transmission and it doesn’t stop infection. Best evidence suggests the viral load is the same as someone unvaccinated. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext
Why only promote the vaccine?
So we can reduce risk and live relatively 'normal' lives without lockdowns and minimising the pressure on hospitals.
@jv: So explain how Sweden managed to avoid lockdowns for the most part and were able to live pretty much normal lives over the last 18-20months? Put this on translate in chrome https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2021-11-01/katastrofen-som-aldrig…
@robredo: Sweden is not a good example.
According to worldometers .info :
Australia’s population (2020) 25,499,884, number of COVID cases today is 174,276 and COVID deaths to date 1,768.
Sweden’s population (2020) 10,099,265, number of COVID cases today is 1,175,425 and COVID deaths to date 15,007.
@xerot: Of course it’s not a good example. It’s an outlier that did something different and had better results than most other countries.
@xerot: A fair assessment would actually be to compare Sweden against other Scandinavian countries. And then compare against other European countries for that matter. Different regions may have more susceptibility to dying from covid. Also a greater likelihood they are calculating and categorising deaths from covid in the same way
@robredo: The 3 border countries have all done a lot better than Sweden.
Finland’s population 5,552,225, number of COVID cases today is 160,948 and COVID deaths to date 1,176.
Norway’s population 5,477,868, number of COVID cases today is 211,755 and COVID deaths to date 902.
Denmark’s population 5,819,461, number of COVID cases today is 393,199 and COVID deaths to date 2,717.
@xerot: No answer? Thankfully, some people have already done the analysis https://mobile.twitter.com/ImDarrenDunn2/status/144846042022…
@xerot: Thanks for those readily available stats. Now tell me what the difference is in excess mortality for the whole of 2020 amongst those countries? We’ll use excess mortality because it’s a more reliable indicator of whether the measures actually made a difference. Also, it’s not affected by discrepancies in how deaths from covid are tabulated.
The vaccine doesn’t stop transmission and it doesn’t stop infection.
No, but it significantly reduces the risk of infection, transmission, and the severity of symptoms in most people.
@jv: Reducing the risk of infection in someone who likely wouldn’t be hospitalised by covid anyway I.e. under 60 without underlying conditions. ?
who likely wouldn’t be hospitalised by covid anyway
'likely' doesn't include everyone…
lots of 'healthy' people have died from covid.
I know someone right now, in their 50's who is intensive care, have been on a ventilator several times already. They cannot get enough air to breath properly. They can't even talk on the phone to their family, who can't go visit them. They were not vaccinated and now very much regretting they hadn't.
@jv: But when we mention the term vaccination, the goal is to vaccinate “everyone”. Everyone has different individual health circumstances. The evidence shows the risks from covid are age stratified.
I know people who have got the vaccine and died shortly after, what’s your point? This is why we don’t use anecdotal evidence but rather look at the science.
@robredo: If 20% of Victorians are not vaccinated, that is 1.4 million people.
There's a good chance that all of them will come into contact with Covid now that we are not in lockdown.
If only 5% of those need to go to hospital, that is 70,000 people. Do we have 70,000 hospital beds?
@jv: You are presenting hypothetical numbers. If the vaccines work so well, explain the obfuscation ? https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theaustralian.com.au/bre…
You are presenting hypothetical numbers.
No, they are factual numbers based on our population in VIC.
There only variable is what % end up needing hospital treatment.
Do the maths…
@jv: Only variable? What about the variables like when someone is considered fully vaccinated? Is it 14 days after the second dose? What CT are they using to test vaccinated individuals compared with unvaccinated? Not sure it’s simple math…
What about the variables like when someone is considered fully vaccinated?
I'm not sure you understand the figures I quoted.
"If 20% of Victorians are not vaccinated, that is 1.4 million people."
If any vaccinated people need hospitalisation, that will only add to the hospital burden.
Although the chances of hospitalisation by fully vaccinated people is considerably less than for unvaccinated.
@jv: I understand your numbers, they just don’t mean anything. Maybe some hard facts and scientific evidence may help me to understand what the real numbers are
@robredo: Those aren’t variables and the queries / information you’re querying is widely available.
Also the statistics you linked earlier from the openvaers website doesn’t state the 17,000 Covid vaccine deaths aren’t all directly attributed to the vaccine. Let’s assume they all are to support your cause - are you aware 425 million doses have been administered in the US? Which would put the most extreme adverse affects (death) at a lower rate that what the TGA approves?
The only credit I’ll give you in comparison with other anti vaxers is that you’re capable of using the internet & reading articles, you haven’t blamed bill gates or microchips and you’re not repeatedly using the word freedom. Outside of that, you’re almost the same.
@aaronmr: I agree correlation doesn’t equal causation but we are in the biggest experiment in human history so I think it’s a safety signal that needs thorough investigation. Mass vaccination in the US historically gets halted once a total of 50deaths is reached. TGA has only provisionally approved the vaccines. FDA has only given EUA (if you think they’re fully approved, that only applies to the Comirnaty product for Pfizer and try getting that over there). No longitudinal studies, yet we’re mandating vaccination. If there’s risks with the vaccine, people need to be able to weigh up those risks and decide for themselves what’s best.
@robredo: Are you aware of the NRMA timeline? And that it’s first clinical trials where in India more than 10 years ago? Anyway, it’s all out there.
@aaronmr: I can see you may need some help in understanding the idea that each and every product that’s developed for human use requires thorough safety and efficacy studies performed through properly designed clinical trials. By way of example, Moderna uses 3 X the dose of mRNA compared with Pfizer. Each of the current vaccines whether it be AZ/J&J(viral vector), Moderna/Pfizer (mRNA) have markedly different safety and efficacy profiles. These vaccines were rolled out after only having 2 months worth of clinical trial data in the RCTs.
Yes, mRNA technology was first developed in the late 80s early 90s. It’s never been used in humans before on this scale. Happy to be proven wrong but please share your sources
@jv: And the variable you have quoted of 5%, is this factual? Seems like an arbitrary number to me. Also does not take into account the age profile or the underlying health status of the individual.
And the variable you have quoted of 5%, is this factual?
You can plug in whatever the real number is in there and do the maths. If it is closer to 4%, then the 56,000 hospital beds will be needed in VIC.
@jv: Hi JV Gollum gets high on vaccines so they ran out.not sure about SA but.possibly Gollum again.
@Trance N Dance: It’s not really so much about stringency, it’s mostly about giving the public health department power.
Which I don’t say to sound political. But they do have power over laboratory testing that they don’t get over a home kit. They get immediately told all the positive results. They track you down and put public health orders on you to isolate. They interview you. They monitor your health.
If on the other hand, you test yourself… you could basically tell nobody you were positive. You could run around town and nobody would know. You could spread it to a community which at the moment has ZERO cases.
Some countries/states take that risk because they already have covid or high vaccination, or both, so if a few cases slip through the cracks it’s hardly a big deal.
WA and SA do not have cases and the vaccination rates are low. A single slip up spells doom.
@meowsers: Urgency drives action. Unfortunately (fortunately?) covid feels very far away here, so people aren't in a rush.
SA do not have cases and the vaccination rates are low. A single slip up spells doom.
SA had the Modbury cluster earlier this year. Was squashed pretty quickly thanks to early action. Life has been normal, could have easily been the next vic/nsw.
@Trance N Dance: It is probably because when there is a lower prevalence the false positives far outstrip true positives and they are of dubious predictive value. They make more sense in places with higher prevalence, like NSW, Vic, USA and the UK.
@Trance N Dance: I’m in America now, I was feeling unwell one morning was able to get rapid antigen test and a PCR at no cost (they ask if you're insured and I just answered no) at a local clinic plus a 3rd antibody test is available. Anyway, the rapid test came back negative but the next day the PCR test came back positive so just wanted to point out that rapid tests have a higher rate of both false negative & positives. Plus, monoclonal antibody treatment is available. BTW I was single jabbed before getting COVID got my 2nd after recovering.
Most countries allow it, however they do not allow it for any sort of official results. Too easy to get wrong unintentionally or more importantly intentionally.
Why pay for them when you can get a covid test done for free at a nearby drive through?…
It's pretty good to have covid on medical record.
For treatment etc.
Also for gov reg
What are they?
Read the papers … look at how they were outing people and chastising them for being "irresponsible".
So you're saying that the rapid antigen tests are good if you test positive but still want to be out and about?
Read the papers … look at how they were outing people and chastising them for being "irresponsible".
But how can you be chastised for being irresponsible if you're not being irresponsible?
But how can you be chastised for being irresponsible if you're not being irresponsible?
It's a good question - probably why neither of us are in politics.
Google "BBQ Man" or "Nebulizer Man" or "SA Pizza worker" or "Woolworths Balmain worker " or "Limousine driver" for some examples. They're just a few examples, I can name more than I care to remember. Probably only need another 30seconds to find their names and address and the colour of their underwear.
There's no reason any of these people should have been publicly outed. We have medical privacy laws for a reason, but they've gone completely out the window with covid.
@salmon123: Drawing a long bow salmon123 - fear and a hyper sensitivity towards being ostracised (which is incredibly unlikely) has lead you to this point.
I don't blame you, especially if you're tuned into the covid news media barrage. Taking the test is important, especially for others who could be hospitalized or dead from you passing it on.
I now know someone that has died from covid and think any commentary about avoidance or encouragement not to be tested out of fear of an incredibly unlikely scenario says more about you as a person and selfishness exhibited than anything else could. Might need to reevaluate things here.
@Save Medicare: Rapid antigen tests are less sensitive than your drive through covid test (RT-PCR). Benefit is that a positive is a positive.
@salmon123: sooo in effect you are saying they are bad for irresponsible idiots that don't follow the rules as they may out themselves?
Could you give some examples of the downsides? I’m interested to find out what they are.
In case you are unable to wait for the normal one?
Dunno tbh.
Ive been lucky enough to not have had to need a single test, and I work full time retail, in a store thats been open as normal pretty much the whole time, except the C & C lockdown (NSW).
They're fast and easier to access (as in you don't have to go to a testing site to get one and just do it at home from a stored reserve). These are handy for preliminary screening and surveillance testing in low risk situations.
Out of curiosity Are the teeth people doing it before all appointments? On site? And who pays for the test?
You are meant to isolate until your results come back. This could be 24+ hours. If you use this test first then 24 hour isolation becomes 30 minutes instead.
Yeah no. I don't think these will let you flee your legally mandated isolation at all.
Nothing about what I said suggests that you can use these to avoid a legally mandated isolation. I'm not sure where you drew that conclusion. This is about convenience where we are opening up like joelmuzz says below.
These don't count for the "test and isolate until a negative result".
Not yet at least. People BYO tests will save a fortune so at some point they probably will allow it prior to totally scraping the rules.
So let me understand from your perspective here, you have a mild runny nose/cough, you use a rapid test to check if you have COVID. It comes back negative. What do you do now?
Really good point @boretentsu. I think a lot of us avoid getting tested when sick because it's technically illegal to go to work before your results come back. These kits give us another option for peace of mind without risking fines for not isolating
But if you have the flu is one of these really going to convince you that it’s not Covid? Surely there’s still plenty of chance that you test negative and you keep going to work and you infect others with Covid and everyone hates you for not getting properly tested
@ChadHominem: As opposed to precovid having no test at all and still going out and infecting everyone anyway. I don't think this pandemic has changed many behaviours about spreading germs.
The clinic tests take up to 3 days.
These have a result while you enjoy a coffee.
The main use is for testing people before access to a facility, as they become more readily available more businesses will require any visitor does a test. The $10 is a small price to pay vs the costs of a Covid clean and staff lockdown.
People might also use them for home visitors, eg test the kids so they don't kill granny when hugging.
NSW was going to make them mandatory for all Sydney work, until they worked out they were unattainable at the time.
The clinics also aren't going to keep offering it forever, especially to construction workers and stuff who's worksite can be forced to buy their own rapid tests.
Whilst you might not be paying anything on the spot, private pathology companies are getting paid somewhere around $90 per test by the tax payer.
So is it any surprise they've lobbied Government to not relax the use of PCR testing.
If the Govt was smart, they'd issue rapid antigen testing kits for free to people when there was surveillance testing requirements placed on them and save a tonne of money on PCR.
If they can't trust people to isolate properly when required, can they really trust people to acknowledge positive home tests.
Despite what the Government and media would have you believe, the majority of people will do the right thing.
The ones that won't do rapid antigen tests properly, probably didn't go in for PCR testing anyway.
Moving forward though with such high vaccination rates there is a good argument for significantly reducing PCR testing and relying moreso on rapid antigen testing.
@stewy: Whilst I agree, another option is to gradually decrease the Medicare rebate for the test. PCR is expensive, but $90 is Highway robbery especially at these economies of scale.
I am sure some ppl would prefer doing a test at home. Then, if positive, deal with it at home monitoring their symptoms. And if they get really sick call an ambulance. I am pretty sure they would tell the operator they think they have covid.
Absolutely agree! Tax payers have paid hundreds of millions already to those private pathology companies
What's the expiry date like on kits like this?