Yeserday the TGA published a new FAQ on rapid antigen testing.
It includes the following
https://www.tga.gov.au/qas-conditions-supply-rapid-antigen-testsWhat is meant by health practitioner? Is this the same as a healthcare professional?
"Health practitioner is defined in Section 3 of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989(link is external) and is not necessarily the same as a healthcare professional. The conditions of inclusion on rapid antigen tests refer specifically to a health practitioner and not "healthcare professional". Health practitioner means a person registered or licensed to practice under state or territory law. These include medical practitioners, pharmacists and nurses along with others, but not for example pharmacy assistants, dental assistants or personal care workers in aged care. "
The door is open
"The current priority is to drive greater testing in the workplace, aged and residential disability care and in other institutional settings. The Department of Health (including the TGA) will work with stakeholders over the coming months on regulatory and public health issues in anticipation of wider provision of tests, potentially to enable pharmacy based testing in the coming months and at a later stage possibly home or self testing."Some provision for infection controls have to be considered at pharmacies, but from this wording, it is likely going to happen.
It's hard to imagine Australians not being given free access to rapid tests when other Western countries have them.
BUT, America spammed these tests early and they regret it. Some were shonky. NZ is also being very cautious.
For the long-term health of AT1 and actually doing something good in the pandemic, it will be better to roll out antigen testing in a way that maximizes their strengths, weeds out poor products, and integrates with other public health policies.
A risk is allowing shonky products to operate that damage the brand.
