Free Covid Home Tests - Now paid by Insurance

[FrostyJoe]

6 minutes ago, billslowsky said:

More likely to be covered as part of the Rx coverage, assuming you have that.  It can be added to the formulary.

Eh doubtful. Otc by definition isn’t an RX drug so…

[billslowsky]

On 1/21/2022 at 4:20 PM, FrostyJoe said:

Eh doubtful. Otc by definition isn’t an RX drug so…

 

Thanks, Optum!  Quick processing once they had my Rx BIN.

[topnole]

On 1/20/2022 at 10:25 AM, RedIguana said:

Just splitting hairs, but by definition to have covid-19 requires symptoms. The D in covid stands for Disease. Being exposed to the virus that causes Covid-19 and successfully neutralizing the virus before it causes any disease is not the same as having covid-19.

So how does this explain asymptomatic children who have no prior immunity and test positive?

[jerseygirl3]

On 1/15/2022 at 1:56 PM, firefly333 said:

Great let's put the cost of more free test on private business. What a great idea. Insurers have already come bac, and said this may cause your premiums to go up. .. nothing is free. Someone has to pay. 

 

 

I'm sure the cost of treating and hospitalizing all those Covid patients who refused to get vaccinated is going to cause a rise in our

 

On 1/15/2022 at 1:56 PM, firefly333 said:

Great let's put the cost of more free test on private business. What a great idea. Insurers have already come bac, and said this may cause your premiums to go up. .. nothing is free. Someone has to pay. 

 

 

I'm sure the costs incurred in treating and hospitalizing patients who refused to get the Covid vaccine will cause a rise in insurance premiums a lot more than the insurance companies covering the cost of some home tests.  

[RedIguana]

1 hour ago, topnole said:

So how does this explain asymptomatic children who have no prior immunity and test positive?

The tests, especially PCR test, do not test for live, replicating virus. That is a very different and expensive bioassay. So you can be exposed to the virus that causes Covid, neutralize it, and still have the proteins and RNA from the virus caught in the hairs and folds of your nostrils/sinus's for some time after which can cause a positive test  (my wife was popping positive on PCR for 7 weeks post symptoms, kid not even a week). So the test will tell you that you have been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but you do not have Covid-19 (coronavirus Disease 2019) without symptoms, as symptoms are required to fit the definition of disease. My wife and I can go out to the beach for an hour, we will both be exposed to the sun, she will get sunburn  and I will not. Best analogy I can think of.

[topnole]

39 minutes ago, RedIguana said:

The tests, especially PCR test, do not test for live, replicating virus. That is a very different and expensive bioassay. So you can be exposed to the virus that causes Covid, neutralize it, and still have the proteins and RNA from the virus caught in the hairs and folds of your nostrils/sinus's for some time after which can cause a positive test  (my wife was popping positive on PCR for 7 weeks post symptoms, kid not even a week). So the test will tell you that you have been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but you do not have Covid-19 (coronavirus Disease 2019) without symptoms, as symptoms are required to fit the definition of disease. My wife and I can go out to the beach for an hour, we will both be exposed to the sun, she will get sunburn  and I will not. Best analogy I can think of.

So you are saying that if I had Covid with symptoms and my child tested positive (at the same time) via pcr test and didn’t really have much of any symptoms, he didn’t have Covid?   If we assume the test did in fact detect what it is supposed to detect (ie. Not a false positive), how exactly did he test positive on a

pcr test?  Since this is a real example, I’m very curious.  

[RedIguana]

37 minutes ago, topnole said:

So you are saying that if I had Covid with symptoms and my child tested positive (at the same time) via pcr test and didn’t really have much of any symptoms, he didn’t have Covid?   If we assume the test did in fact detect what it is supposed to detect (ie. Not a false positive), how exactly did he test positive on a

pcr test?  Since this is a real example, I’m very curious.

Child tested positive on PCR, was exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Symptoms=Covid-19 (Coronavirus-DISEASE-19). No symptoms, technically no disease, as disease is defined as having symptoms (very simplified definition). As I said in the first post, I was kinda splitting hairs due to the actual definition of Covid-19 vs SARS-CoV-19 exposure. 

[topnole]

32 minutes ago, RedIguana said:

Child tested positive on PCR, was exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Symptoms=Covid-19 (Coronavirus-DISEASE-19). No symptoms, technically no disease, as disease is defined as having symptoms (very simplified definition). As I said in the first post, I was kinda splitting hairs due to the actual definition of Covid-19 vs SARS-CoV-19 exposure. 

Lol.  Symptoms for Covid vary a great deal in type and severity.  Almost anything could be a symptom for Covid.  And I do mean almost anything.  Zero immunity as a child and PCR tested positive, I’m gonna call that having Covid no matter how light the symptoms.  And as I’m sure you know, there are many symptoms that we don’t detect with many diseases as we fight them off.