At-home health tests are here. But they aren't always the best option
The doctor is in — the mailbox, that is.
You can now do self-administered tests for everything from thyroid function to HIV in the privacy of your own home — and that list continues to grow, as the Food and Drug Administration recently approved the
first at-home cervical cancer test
.
While the tests can make it easier for people to access health care and can be helpful for those who have extreme anxiety about sensitive or invasive medical exams, experts warn that most of the tests cannot replace an actual in-person visit.
Here's what doctors say you can test for at home, and when you should make the trek to your physician's office.
What kinds of at-home tests are available?
There are two kinds at 'at-home tests.'
In one type, the patient collects the sample and sends it off to a lab; the new cervical cancer test is like this.
The other gives an instant result — think COVID-19 and pregnancy tests.
What are the benefits of at-home tests?
HIV home-testing kits can improve rates of diagnosing sexually transmitted infections in rural communities and help people who are nervous about going to the doctor to seek a sensitive test, said Dr. Joseph Cherabie, an infectious diseases specialist in St. Louis.
'You really want to get people to care as quickly as possible, but some people could be very anxious about that results as well,' Cherabie said. 'And they have very negative reactions.'
Labs are required to report a positive HIV test, instead of putting the onus on the patient who took the test, Cherabie said, and and, often, the patient is matched up with HIV support services.
'If you are part of a sexual and gender minority community, going to a doctor's office can be full of a lot of historical trauma, and you may prefer to just do testing at home without anyone judging you or asking you invasive questions about your sex life,' Cherabie said.
The new cervical cancer test — which tests for strains of human papillomavirus, or HPV — involves a testing swab that's like a tampon, said Dr. Susan Modesitt, a gynecologic oncologist at Emory University in Atlanta.
It is not, Modesitt said, a replacement for a Pap smear, the exam in which a metal speculum is inserted in the vagina to scrape cervix cells. A doctor's visit also involves a pelvic exam, a chance to talk about abnormal bleeding — a sign of endometrial cancer — and other symptoms and issues, like menopause or STIs.
'There are so many other reasons to see your doctor and get an exam outside of a cervical cancer screening,' she said.
I live in a rural area — can I take an at-home test?
Some at-home tests can replace a trip to the doctor's office. That's especially true in rural areas, where it can be difficult to get a colonoscopy.
'The colonoscopy requires a pre-op, and you have to drive maybe 70 miles for it,' said Dr. Steven Furr, board chair of the American Academy of Family Physicians who practices in rural Alabama. 'You get anesthesia. It's actually almost like a surgical procedure in many ways.
'So, for a lot of people, that's pretty arduous. That's where an at-home test can come in handy.'
But, Furr said, if your test reveals issues, you need to go to your doctor. Plus, patients should always discuss test results with their physician instead of interpreting them on their own, he said.
Who shouldn't do at-home tests?
If you have symptoms of what you're testing for, go to the doctor.
At-home colon cancer tests aren't the right option for people with a history of colon cancer or high-risk conditions, such as inflammatory bowel disease, said Dr. Zachariah Foda, a gastroenterologist at Johns Hopkins. He added that they're also not recommended for people who are having GI symptoms.
While there are tests for many things — running anywhere from $15 to $400, depending on what is being evaluated — Furr said it's essential to make sure that your test is FDA-approved so you can better trust the results.
'Anytime we get people involved in their own health care and help them understand what's going on, I think that's a good thing and it gives us a chance to talk,' he said. 'Any kind of screening is better than no screening.'
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's former surgeon general rips RFK Jr.'s purge of vaccine board
President Trump's former surgeon general blasted Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s decision to fire the entirety of a federal advisory committee on vaccine guidance, saying the move jeopardizes public health and threatens public trust in health institutions. In an op-ed published by Time, former Surgeon General Jerome Adams wrote that Kennedy's recent actions cast doubt over his pledge that, 'We won't take away anyone's vaccines.' He pointed to the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) new framework limiting access to COVID-19 vaccines; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) no longer recommending the shot for children and pregnant women; and the removal of members on the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). 'These actions collectively restrict access to a vital tool for saving lives and undermine confidence in our health systems,' said Adams, who served in the Trump administration from 2017 to 2021. 'The major flaw in the new vaccine framework is its narrow assessment of risk. Although the immediate dangers of COVID-19 have lessened, it remains a leading cause of death and hospitalization, claiming nearly 50,000 lives in the U.S. in 2024 — more than breast cancer or car accidents,' he added. Kennedy announced Wednesday eight new members of the ACIP to replace the 17 that he had fired. Among the new members were noted spreaders of COVID-19 misinformation. As Endpoints News reported, two of the new picks were previously paid expert witnesses for plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Merck over its HPV and MMR vaccines. Kennedy had financial interests in the HPV vaccine lawsuit before divesting upon being confirmed. In his Thursday op-ed, Adams lamented that seniors and pregnant mothers are at a higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, and the dismissal of the ACIP members only 'amplifies these concerns.' 'ACIP has been a trusted, science-driven body that ensures vaccines are safe and effective, saving countless lives through its transparent recommendations. Its members, rigorously vetted for expertise and conflicts of interest, provide independent guidance critical to public health,' he wrote. 'Removing them without clear evidence of misconduct risks replacing qualified scientists with less experienced voices.' In social media posts following his op-ed, Adams insinuated perjury had taken place, reposting epidemiologist and health economist Eric Feigl-Ding who said Kennedy's promises of not taking away vaccines were 'lies, damn lies.' 'No matter your stance on vaccines, or FDA, or CDC, reasonable and patriotic people should be able to agree that perjury (or even the appearance of intent to deceive Congress) is not an appropriate means to justify a desired end,' Adams said in the post on social platform X. Adams has shared criticisms, some veiled, of the Trump administration's actions and picks for key health positions in recent weeks. After Trump announced Casey Means as his new nominee for surgeon general, Adams took to social media to highlight Means's lack of credentials in comparison to prior surgeon generals such as himself. Writing on X earlier this month, Adams said, 'I do not know and have nothing against Dr. Means – but I feel strongly that the person who is leading America's Public Health Service should be held to the same standard as the people he or she is leading.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Confused over the conflicting COVID vaccine guidance? Here's what to know
Federal health officials have in recent weeks given conflicting — and at times confusing — guidance around who should get vaccinated against COVID-19. These changes mark a significant departure from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's previous recommendations, which advised everyone 6 months and older to get the vaccine. On May 20, Dr. Marty Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine saying the FDA will make the vaccine available only to adults 65 and older and people with at least one underlying medical condition — meaning vaccines will no longer be recommended for healthy adults under 65. On May 27, Health Secretary and longtime vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. unilaterally announced that the federal government no longer recommends the vaccine for children and pregnant women, and that the vaccine was removed from the immunization schedule recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But days later, the CDC partly contradicted this pronouncement, saying the vaccine will remain on the childhood immunization schedule — but added a new clarification that parents should consult with their children's doctor when deciding whether to get their child immunized. The CDC offered no formal guidance on whether pregnant women should get the vaccine, though its website lists pregnancy as an underlying condition that puts someone at higher risk of severe COVID and thus makes them eligible for vaccination going forward. What should you do? One practical thing to keep in mind, according to some experts, is you may just want to wait and see how things shake out. The next updated COVID vaccine, for 2025-26, won't be rolled out until the fall. And before then, we may get more clarity on who it will be recommended for — and thus whom health insurers will cover it for. Insurers typically pay for vaccines only if they're recommended by the federal government. We may get clarification this month: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, an outside panel of scientific experts that advises the CDC on vaccine recommendations, is scheduled to meet June 25-27 to vote on 2025-26 COVID vaccine recommendations. Historically, this panel has advised the CDC director on vaccine recommendations, and the CDC then communicates its recommendations with the public. Kennedy bypassed this long-held protocol by going ahead and changing vaccine recommendations without input from the CDC's advisory panel. As it stands: Adults 65 and over The recommendation for this group is not changing. Adults 65 and older should get the COVID vaccine every six months. This group can expect to get the same access to vaccination as they've had since the pandemic began, meaning their insurer should continue covering it since the federal government recommends it for them. People 6 months and older with at least one underlying medical condition The vaccinations are also still recommended for those in this age group with one or more underlying conditions putting them at higher risk for severe COVID. Pregnant women The federal government's position on whether pregnant women should get immunized is unclear. While Kennedy said the vaccine for pregnant women was no longer recommended by the CDC, the FDA's Makary said a day later that the decision to vaccinate should be made by the pregnant person and their doctor. Infectious disease experts and obstetricians urge pregnant women to get the vaccine. This is because pregnant people who get COVID are more likely to develop severe disease, need hospitalization and ICU care, and experience pregnancy complications including preeclampsia, miscarriage, preterm birth and higher likelihood of developing blood clots, said Nadia Roan, a UCSF professor and senior investigator at Gladstone Institutes who studies immunology. 'There's a ton of data that's been generated over recent years suggesting that boosting or vaccination during pregnancy is beneficial,' said Roan, who is researching COVID boosters in pregnant people. Also, getting immunized during pregnancy is the only way to pass protection on to the fetus, and have the infant protected in early life. 'If you vaccinate and you're in the third trimester, you're essentially vaccinating your fetus,' said Dr. George Rutherford, a professor emeritus of epidemiology and biostatistics at UCSF. 'That's a good thing because it's not approved for people under 6 months yet. So this is how we get to that population.' If you're pregnant and wondering whether you should get the current 2024-25 vaccine now — in case you can't get the updated 2025-26 vaccine later due to new federal recommendations that have yet to be determined — 'I'd say yes because I'm not sure it'll be covered in the fall,' said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious-disease specialist at UCSF. 'It's not harmful, particularly if you haven't had one in the last year,' he said. The vaccine is safe to get at all stages of pregnancy, he said. Healthy adults under 65 For this group, whether to get vaccinated is a little more open to interpretation, experts said, and can factor in things like each person's risk tolerance, job and living situation. 'I'd talk to their health care provider at the end of the day to help guide them more,' Chin-Hong said. 'Everyone has different situations and circumstances.' You may want to lean toward vaccination if, for instance, you plan to travel this summer (when abroad, you don't have access to your usual health care providers) or if you live with immunocompromised or older adults and want to lower the chances of spreading COVID to them. 'In general, (healthy adults) are going to do fine, so to me it's really about protecting the people who are most vulnerable,' Chin-Hong said. Children About 2,000 children in the U.S. have died from COVID since 2020, and more than 200,000 have been hospitalized. Those numbers are much lower compared with people in higher-risk groups, especially those over 65, and most healthy children likely experience mild or moderate symptoms. Still, many infectious diseases experts say the benefits of vaccination do still outweigh the risks — though that calculus is much closer than it is for pregnant people and adults over 65. 'It's a small number compared to deaths in many other age ranges, but that's deaths, many of which could've been prevented if they were vaccinated,' said Dr. John Swartzberg, a clinical professor emeritus of infectious diseases at UC Berkeley School of Public Health. The vaccines have proved safe and effective in children, lower the likelihood of severe disease, and help reduce long COVID risk, Roan said. 'The risks (of vaccination) are very low, and these vaccines have been shown to be safe,' Roan said. 'So I think the benefits definitely outweigh the risks. But it's up to each individual to make that decision.'
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
After firing entire CDC vaccine committee, RFK Jr. appoints 8 new members including vaccine skeptics: Who they are and what to know
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who heads the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has announced eight new members to the CDC's independent vaccine advisory committee—some who are critical of vaccines—after firing the entire group, prompting questions and concerns. Kennedy said the new members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) will be at ACIP's upcoming meeting on June 25 to June 27, which is slated to discuss vaccine recommendations for the HPV vaccine (which the CDC has deemed safe, and prevents cervical cancer and 90% of cancers caused by HPV in females), and of course the COVID-19 vaccine. Those new members are: Joseph R. Hibbeln, Martin Kulldorff, Retsef Levi, Robert W. Malone, Cody Meissner, James Pagano, Vicky Pebsworth, and Michael A. Ross—some of whom are either close allies of RFK Jr. or vaccine skeptics, according to the BBC. Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and biostatistician, helped write the Great Barrington Declaration, which questioned lockdowns and other public health measures early in the COVID-19 pandemic, per National Public Radio; while Malone worked on mRNA technology for the COVID-19 vaccine early on, then became a critic and made false claims about the shot, also per NPR. Wednesday's move comes just days after Kennedy fired all 17 sitting members of the ACIP, which makes recommendations on the safety, efficacy, and clinical need for the shots, advising the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the vaccine schedule and required coverage of immunizations. While Kennedy justified the firings, saying in a Wall Street Journal op-ed the panel of esteemed pediatricians, epidemiologists, immunologists, and other physicians was 'plagued with conflicts of interest,' that's questionable. As Fast Company has previously reported, Kennedy has a long history of repeatedly making false claims that have been debunked, and railing against or ranting about vaccines, medical drugs, the health system, and our nation's food. RFK Jr. also has no medical degree, breaking with long-standing tradition for the health secretary post, and his nomination came in a string of controversial picks by Trump for his second term.
