[ad_1]
He said that these tests have an expiration date, so it is worrying that they are used too slowly.
“They are still valid. They are generally valid for a year, a year and a half, now I can’t say exactly. I am already a little concerned that they are being used very slowly,” the head of the lab said at a faction meeting. conservative in the Seimas.
Julius Kalinskas photo / 15min / Henrik Ulevičius
Rapid tests show if a person has been infected with coronavirus, but they do not show if a person can infect other people.
According to H. Ulevičius, rapid tests were used in Klaipėda to study people arriving by ferry, as well as in Nemenčinė, the Marijampolė Hospital and around 10,000. The Kaunas clinics used the tests for research.
After the meeting, the head of the laboratory told reporters that he thought the validity of rapid tests should be further clarified, and that these tests should now be used more in population studies.
“I think these tests have been slowed down a bit because they didn’t have a quick effect on whether a person is sick or contagious. Here, people would be more interested in the amount of immunity of the population, “H. Ulevičius told reporters.
He said that an investigation into the Financial Crime Investigation Service (FNTT) had been launched into the purchase of these rapid tests.
The investigation was reported in early June, with $ 6 million in sight. Acquisition of rapid coronavirus tests by the National Public Health Laboratory for a value of EUR 1 000 000.
As far as BNS knows, the pre-trial investigation was initiated due to the activities of the company that provides the evidence, Profarma.
According to FNTT, the pre-trial investigation began after receiving information on suspected financial transactions from a company registered in Lithuania.
The funds the company tried to eliminate were obtained after a public acquisition contract with the National Laboratory of Public Health for the sale of COVID-19 rapid tests.
According to the study, which amounts to 6 million. The company allegedly falsified the documents and provided the buyer with false information about the manufacturer of the rapid tests for COVID-19.
It is suspected that the buyer was possibly misled by failing to conduct a market test and failing to assess the price and market conditions of the purchased product before concluding the contract. After concluding the contract, the funds were transferred to the test provider.
[ad_2]
