I still think a quick, cheap, antigen test using spit needs to be pursued.
Medcram and
Time have done a summaries based on Michael Mina's work. The sensitivity is only around 50% however this is not a random 50%. The majority of the false negatives are when the viral load is low so either before or after the subject is infectious. The ideal is them being produced for a few quid as a daily test that people can use at home. If it is positive they stay home as they could be infectious. If not they goto work as they probably are not and if they are the test will most likely pick it up the next day limiting the number they infect. It would be very useful for opening up and reduce the reliance on contract tracing as anyone you infect should be using the daily test as well. A test would likely cost a few quid and give a result in about ten minutes. It is obviously less sensitive than PCR but this would be more than made up for by its widespread use and speed. The vast majority of people using these tests would not have a PCR test anyway. In clinical, research and other situations obviously the more sensitive and specific tests are going to be essential and provide different useful information. As a should I get out of bed and go to School, work or the pub test they seem a very effective option. This does mean distancing, masks and other measures should be abandoned.