WASHINGTON —  As the U.S. awaits the approval and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine, scientists are pushing for a solution they believe could help get our lives back to normal more quickly – the development of cheap, rapid at-home testing that asymptomatic Americans could use multiple times a week to help stop outbreaks. 

Scientists envision a test that could be as easy to administer as a pregnancy test, only for COVID-19. The rapid antigen test could cost only a couple of bucks and could be available to the public over the counter. It’s a reality epidemiologists say could help Americans return to some kind of normal until a vaccine becomes widely available. 

“Being able to get information in a way that is actionable is the name of the game here,” said Dr. Gigi Kwik Gronvall, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Epidemiologists like Gronvall believe developing a cheap, frequent at-home antigen test could help detect the virus when individuals are most contagious, halting chains of transmission immediately. 

“If you were to get tested, the morning of when you’re seeing some family members and you find out you have COVID and don’t go to that gathering, that would be a huge benefit,” she explained in a Zoom interview with Spectrum News.

A handful of at-home tests are for sale in some stores, but they’re pricey, take more than a day to return results or require a prescription. Instead, experts envision a cheap, paper test designed to test those without symptoms, that could deliver results in a matter of minutes.  

“We need to continue to invest in having a good testing infrastructure so we can identify these cases, isolate them, quarantine their contacts,” said Dr. Syra Madad, an epidemiologist with New York City Health + Hospital.

The technology to implement this kind of testing exists overseas. However, the biggest hurdle in development has proved to be the Food and Drug Administration. Scientists say the agency would need to evaluate such tests as public surveillance tools instead of medical devices. These types of test would be faster, less expensive, and more convenient. The downside is they sometimes don’t detect low levels of the virus. 

“It could be good enough for a lot of circumstances and to increase your level of safety when going into public spots,” Gronvall said. 

“I’m in something is better than nothing camp," she added. "The concern from some people is that you’re going to lose the data on how many positive cases you have."

Experts say the U.S. would need $15 billion to get this program up and running and likely would need to invoke the Defense Production Act.