It all comes down to one thing -- if this "proof of concept" only works with symptomatic subjects, then is this method of detection really better than the existing medical observation and measurement methods? If so, to what degree? I can see this as a possible way to augment the screening, but taking someone's armpit sweat for sniff-tests is more time-consuming and invasive than simply using a no-contact thermometer or infrared sensor.
I'd say that bottom line is really: "Follow the money".
Re "testing":
Prices for COVID-19 diagnostic tests vary across the largest hospitals in each state
Confirmation of an active SARS-CoV-2 infection (the virus that causes COVID-19) is done via tests that use molecular “PCR” amplification and antigen-based lab technology. Data from 78 hospitals with listed prices yielded 134 distinct prices for diagnostic tests. The prices ranged between $20 – $850 per diagnostic test, with
a median of $127. About half of test charges (51%) were priced between $100-$199, and nearly one in five (19%) were priced above $200.
For the past two weeks the
DAILY number of tests averages just under 2 MILLION per day. Do the math.
The dog strategy of the Safety Cult would be mere millions of dollars, so likely not a high priority except to the niche group that would benefit, far smaller than the overall Pharma group benefiting from testing, treating, blah blah blah.
The really big bucks are in the patents. The CDC holds the patents on SARS Coronavirus (note: "natural" things cannot be patented). A guy named Fauci is on those patents.
Here's a very brief (7 minute) discussion re the patents, and the financial implications, by the founder of Linguistics Genomics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uZzoznjjKg&feature=youtu.be