> but whether they are infectious or not. We don't have a labor and cost effective test for this, and we require the test to be done in a BSL-3 facility. So w

> but whether they are infectious or not. We don't have a labor and cost effective test for this, and we require the test to be done in a BSL-3 facility. So what remains is that we need to solve public health problems with tests that produce only correlates of infectiousness. Those correlates will be necessarily imperfect, but they're all that we have to craft policy around. The perfect home test which only detects infectious virus doesn't exist. And I'd just like to see more published studies which actually cultured virus rather than using PCR as a proxy for infectious virus, but even that is hard to get. So many lazy scientific studies out there conflating PCR positive with virus, but there's a lot more researchers who can do PCR than researchers than have access+funding to a BSL-3 lab.