Hays County Judge Ruben Becerra announced COVI9-19 testing kits had been secured for the county during a March 31 court meeting and at a press conference on March 30. During the press conference, it was stated 2,000 in-home test kits would be provided to the county through MDBox, a telemedicine provider based in Austin owned by Reliant Immune Diagnostics.
There are concerns about the legitimacy of in-home testing as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved any in-home testing for COVID-19, according to the FDA website.
During the April 14 Commissioners Court meeting, Becerra said there had been miscommunication about the test kits, as he had not stated there would be in-home test kits but rather in-home monitoring through MDBox.
“In-home testing is nothing that I was in communication [or] supporting in any way. ... I remember clearly saying this is not in-home testing, and I think people have made that leap erroneously,” Becerra said.
Commissioner Walt Smith said court members did not know of the agreement between the county and MDBox prior to the press conference on March 30 and rebutted Becerra’s claim regarding in-home testing.
“It was stated in the press conference that there would be in-home testing, it was very clearly stated that these would be available for public purchase and through some very specific retailers,” Smith said.
At the court meeting, MDBox representatives said the telemedicine provider was not offering in-home testing and had not previously offered it to the county, claiming the reference to in-home testing had been taken out of context.
“I know that there were some things that were misstated or taken out of context or got a little bit too far ahead, and you know frankly some mistakes on that regard were made in trying to find solutions and move quickly,” Shane Stevens founder of AnyPlaceMD and partner of MDBox said. “If they’ve made missteps on trying to jump out and help, it’s not intentional to try and mislead the public.”
Stevens said MDBox is offering drive-thru serological testing and telehealth for the county and no in-home testing.
Smith continued to ask Stevens why MDBox stated it would provide in-home testing even though the FDA has not approved it and why the company announced during the March 30 press conference that it would offer in-home testing.
“They shouldn’t have done it, and they didn’t to my knowledge,” Stevens said.
Though the Public Information Act, email chains between Becerra, Chief of Staff Alex Villalobos, and members of Reliant Immune Diagnostics and MRG Medical were analyzed.
Among those emails, a final draft of the press release for the March 30 press conference sent by Kyle Hayungs—founder of MRG Medical partner of MDBox, according to the emails—read, “MDBox will provide in-home tests for COVID19, Strep, Flu and UTI with the intention of allowing everyone in Hays County to test for COVID19 and other, more common ailments without having to leave home.”
The final draft of the release was sent March 28—two days prior to the press conference—to Becerra, Villalobos, members of Reliant Immune Diagnostics and MRG Medical.
In response to the emails, Becerra said, “Those are a lot of conversations [of] brainstorming, to read them in court, it’s important that folks understand that those are snippets of conversations to clarify and to synchronize your messaging, half of those I don’t even know why I was copied, some of them I didn’t even open.”
The 2,000 serological tests secured by Becerra through MDBox would be performed by a medical professional and would measure antibodies, for which the FDA requires additional molecular testing for accuracy of a COVID-19 diagnosis. No additional testing is required with a molecular test.
Eric Schneider, an epidemiologist for the Hays County Local Health Department, said serology testing would be “useless” to try to detect new cases of the virus in the county, though they were helpful for studies.
Commissioner Lon Shell raised concerns about purchasing serology tests as they are inaccurate and need to be followed by additional testing. He also recommended drafting a plan on how the county intends to test with guidance of local health professionals before making any purchases.
Court members were to discuss allocating funds for COVID-19 testing, court members decided to revisit that topic in a week to better discuss a plan and have guidance from local health professionals on what test would better serve the community.
