Ann: Trading Halt, page-362

It's un AUSTRALIAN investing in a company like CDY making China potentially lots of money from a virus that originated from its country for which it even denies and its citizens proudly say how strong they are against other countries who have more deaths and are unable to control it. I for one if needing such a Rapid test will be asking its origin and going elsewhere if its from China.

Im sure i will find one not from China if needed or won't have the test at all. It will not be compulsory to do such a test to regain employment or keep employment imo. No such law exists and it would be discriminatory , a statutory declaration of you making it clear you no have no symptoms of COVID 19 and are fit for work should be good enough. Are we going to be dividing society into those who have had the virus and immune against those who have not had the virus and should stay home until a vaccine arrives. Yellow armband for those immune and can freely go anywhere and get jobs against the rest working and staying home. Since the spread rate is continually going down its unlikely Rapid testing will be needed at all imo.

“Mr Dutton said the only approved tests for COVID-19in Australia are laboratory based tests or tests that can be used by healthprofessionals at the point of care such as in hospitals or clinics.”

Myanalogy is that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the biggest threats tohuman health, there have been regulations enacted, and these medication cannot bebought without a legitimate prescription. yet these antibiotics can save lives and cure diseaseswhen used correctly, and for the right patient.

My pointis that enacting heavy regulations on COVID-19 rapid tests might not necessarily makethem “incompetent” or “serve no real function to the society” (as some have argued).Regulations on the COVID-19 rapid tests are to prevent misuse and overuse imo,which could potentially result in inaccurate results and threat to the society if not administered correctly.

However,does it work? Is there a demand? Yes, I think so.

One counter argument couldbe then, “why are POC pregnancy and HIV POCand self-tests not prohibited”?

Imo for the prior test - thatis because the mere fact of knowing that oneself has fallen pregnant (or not)does not negatively affect the society, because pregnancy is not an infectious diseaseand if anything, it is a natural state of a woman’s body.

And for the later test - decadessince the first reported case of HIV/Aids, and after massive research fundspoured into HIV testing due to its high mortality rate, the “ban on the supply of HIV self-tests inAustralia was [finally] lifted in July 2014.”* They WERE prohibited. Butwould you say these tests, when they were first produced, served no real valueat all?

*Source: https://www.tga.gov.au/hiv-testing-australia