⁍ Research shows many coronavirus antibody tests don’t offer consistently reliable results.

---

⁍ Some antibody tests had 100% sensitivity, meaning all positive results should be accurate.

---

⁍ Others had average sensitivity rates as low as 17%.

---

⁍ A handful of individual tests showed 0% specificity, meaning any positive was false.

---

– Just a few months ago, coronavirus antibody tests were so coveted that the FDA allowed some to go straight to market, Business Insider reports. The tests, which target three types of antibodies found in blood, could tell whether a person has ever been infected with the virus, even if they weren’t able to get tested initially. But more than three months later, research shows many antibody tests don’t offer consistently reliable results, and some are far more accurate than others. A new, independent review published in the journal Diagnostics evaluated more than 60 serological (blood) antibody tests on the market. “Unfortunately, the results were not good,” Ali Ardakani, the founder of life-science advisory group Novateur Ventures and a co-author of the review, tells Business Insider. “We’re six months in. There are hundreds of tests out there dispersing all sorts of information. Most of these tests are not even meeting their own specs when they’re independently validated.” One of the most popular antibody tests on the market, Abbott’s Architect, had 97.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity when administered at least two weeks after a person’s symptoms started, the review found. But the results from the manufacturer indicate the opposite: that the test is 100% sensitive and