Letters | Being zealous about Covid-19 testing won’t make Hong Kong safer

Readers discuss why focusing on the quality of overseas tests is impractical, and declare Hong Kong unfit for travel until 2024

Reading Time:3 minutes

A mobile specimen collection station in Victoria Park on July 4. How and where a specimen for PCR testing is taken affects the test result. Photo: Dickson Lee

Published: 11:30am, 3 Aug 2022Updated: 11:36am, 3 Aug 2022

Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at letters@scmp.com or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification.

Prompted by the number of imported cases, one of your correspondents calls for vetting to be tightened before reducing hotel quarantine and cites the need for policy based on scientific evidence. Likely, the views expressed may be shared by some members of the public, and perhaps even healthcare professionals and policymakers.

The following are some facts about the current practices.

How and where a specimen for PCR testing is taken (e.g. nasopharyngeal swabbing versus bronchial washing) affects the test result. This variability is difficult to regulate when both local and overseas test sites are involved.

The test result takes on average 24 hours, and when overseas, one needs to travel to specific labs for the test. At airports, the test can be done within a few hours, but for an exorbitant fee. Thus there are many opportunities to get infected – on public transport, at the airport, at an eating place – after the test.

One could reduce this risk by taking an RAT test before boarding, as this takes only about 20 minutes. However, this option was ruled out on the basis that the test is less accurate, without taking into account the inaccuracy of PCR testing, given the time lag.