For reference, this is one specific type of test available in the US, there are other more common tests which are electronics-free.

There are some valid reasons for tests like this to exist. To quote later on in the linked Tweet thread [1]:

  BTW it's easy to say this is wasteful, and it probably is, but just like with the pregnancy test, you should consider that there's three main problems that can affect the accuracy of lateral flow tests like this:
  1. inconsistent lighting
  2. incorrect timing
  3. human error
  
  having a 2$ computer chip and 50 cents worth of plastic  & lenses removes all those sources of error. 
  And making it bluetooth removes a source of e-waste! it means it doesn't need to have a screen, it can just talk to your phone.
  
  for example, consider that a bit more than 1 in 12 people have some kind of colorblindness.
  Having a computer say "POSITIVE" or "NEGATIVE" is going to be easier to see then the uncertainty of "is that stripe red? can I just not see it?"

[1] https://twitter.com/Foone/status/1475254812816019456

Except the first 2 are examples of human error. You are supposed to follow the instructions, and the instructions tell you to carefully read the instructions which I have done with multiple 'manual' antigen tests. They're crystal clear. With regards to these 2 examples you can ensure decent lighting with a smartphone (torch) these days. Incorrect timing, can also be solved with a smartphone by setting an alarm (or just focusing on say letting 15 minutes pass as a matter of respect to the outcome and those possibly affected by it). We already got a swiss army knife in the form of a smartphone, we don't need another disposable technology (nevermind insecure technology).

While I was doing my test I read instructions carefully but then after few minutes of gathering courage to stab myself (surprisingly hard to do) in the finger I managed to mess the rest of the procedure up by putting buffer fluid, or blood, I don't remember, in the wrong hole.

There's no path for reusing the electronics, is the big issue here.

> And making it bluetooth removes a source of e-waste!

wait, so bluetooth is cheaper than paper?

Cheaper than paper? IDK.

But I have A product that I just did the math on. I was making a “dumb version“ that removed BLE and added two buttons. The BLE version would end up being cheaper. Of course this assumes that the Bluetooth software firmware is already completed, which for me it is.

Think how small they can produce chips now.

Personal data collection, probably. I cant imagine it is for the user's benefit that it uses bluetooth and requires an app, but it does let them hoover up your contact details and infection status. This probably sells > cost of the electronics.

There's probably a mindset of having to use IoT (or close enough) no matter how inappropriate the use-case is. Like how people try to find reasons to use a blockchain, or rewrite something in Rust, or host a kubernetes cluster.

A low-tech solution would be too boring or easy.

There are legitimate reasons for a test like this to exist, the linked author talks about this more a bit further into the same Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/Foone/status/1475254812816019456

It’s for the Bluetooth piece. The optical sensor reads the result and the turns on the light and/or lets the phone know over Bluetooth.

Seems unnecessary, but if people want to buy it…

> Seems unnecessary, but if people want to buy it…

Considering that this is an article used once for a few minutes the environmental cost for production and deposition is high and society shouldn't tolerate ...

Once for this specific test. If you planned on buying a lot of tests and using them regularly, maybe you could find value in a BLE connection? IDK. That crosses into a different new normal line for me that I am uninterested in I think.

Otherwise, I agree, seems wasteful when you look at what had to happen to ship that product.

If you do mass testing the Bluetooth might be useful in theory, but you babe to make sure to protect the data well ...

The environmental cost of getting more people sick with covid is also high.

People decompose. Electronics don’t.

Yes, but one can test without full set of electronics in each test thingy ...

I'm wondering if they're subsidized, but the price in Germany at the supermarket hovers around 1€ each. I was really surprised to hear that these are not a thing in the US, any idea why?

Here in the NL they're about €2,50 each, so there may be some subsidizing going on in Germany (or we're getting ripped off for €1,50 per test).

Schools and food banks can hand out free self tests so there is definitely some kind of subsidizing going on here, but in a different way.

Surely someone would import them and sell for €2 and then someone else would sell them for €1.5 and then someone else would sell them for €1.2 if you were just being ripped off. Is that really the only reason you could think of?

lol here in brazil you can only find these in drug stores, and is arround R$100 (which would be arround 15 euro/17usd).

Keep in mind that R$100 means 10% of monthly minimum wage.......

The FDA has approved 13 test kits for at-home use with a self-collected sample, according to https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and...

Germany has approved a much larger number of test kits for use, per https://antigentest.bfarm.de/ords/f?p=110:100:4793921863454:::::. It was >50 as of August 2021 according to https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/08/te..., including from American companies that the FDA has not approved.

I suspect that the supply-restriction effects of the approval situation go a long way toward explaining the pricing differences...

these are available in the US. they retail for $20-30 for a pair. they were easy to get from October-ish through mid December and now they’re sold out everywhere because of people testing for holiday gatherings.

Because FDA does not allow companies to sell them.

They are a thing in the US as well.

Because the ones you get in Europe are made in China.

It's to hide the fact that inside, the test is just a piece of chemically treated paper that costs less than 1 EUR to produce. That way people don't get as mad when they have to pay $200 for them.

Nope. We just get overcharged.

Most likely because FDA required it.