> It is clearly much riskier to provide individuals with their test results than to collect aggregate data. Consider for example if you gave 1 false negative, a

> It is clearly much riskier to provide individuals with their test results than to collect aggregate data. Consider for example if you gave 1 false negative, and that person then took that false negative as an excuse to return to work -- potentially infecting many more. Conversely if they are positive and you don't tell them then they are spreading disease unknowingly. That was what happened with the Tuskegee study. Either way, the solution is to get informed consent. At least that is for an experimental study. Apparently an additional issue here is that this project wants its data to be reported and used by govt agencies. Which means their protocol must also be approved as good enough for that by the FDA. And the FDA decided on May 11 that swabs taken at home requires further analysis as you say.