We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
They're setting it up so that they have stated sensitivity comes secondary to accessibility and roll out but...................................with the new Avacta Antigen testing kit you can have both. With the worlds more sensitive and accurate Covid19 test right in your very hands, take the test and in minutes you know whether you're infected with the worlds most recent deadliest pandemic.
Need to isolate......or you can carry on with life you need 'Accurate testing, Accessible Testing.....Avacta Testing. (insert cheesy Picture of a grinning Al)
Absolutely correct MAJWandCo. However it does appear that some people will jump to such conclusions. Nowt strange as folk. I would not be surprised to get an RNS at close of play or first thing tomorrow morning and I'll sure as hell be holding onto all my shares until then....and possibly beyond.
I think the tweet has been completely misconstrued.
The text in the tweet is not Avacta’s wording, it is simply the title of the research note.
See this tweet for clarification
https://twitter.com/buy_buy_bye/status/1283031595746766849?s=20
So all of this concern that Avacta is trying ‘prepare the market’ is wide of the mark!
I really do believe that everyone is reading far too much into the 2nd Tweet.
The last line of the introductory paragraph says it all for me: "We therefore conclude that surveillance should prioritize accessibility, frequency, and sample-to-answer time; analytical limits of detection should be secondary."
Avacta are merely pointing out that their upcoming Rapid Antigen Test will tick what a panel of experts deem to be the number one priority. I think that anyone then deducing that high sensitivity is in doubt, is making a huge and hopefully incorrect assumption.
Not sure what the tweet was ....
But the information seems to be about the Harvard Report I posted earlier
https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.22.20136309
A critical point is that the requirements for surveillance testing are distinct from clinical testing.
This is not new information.
Professor Peto has been going on about more testing from the start
https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/368/bmj.m1163.full.pdf
Prof Peto calling for 10M tests per day.
What the political establishment want is mass testing. A PoC test that meets the minimum MHRA Guidelines (see my previous posts) gives then this for screening purposes.
If Avacra supply a Rolls Royce solution and meet the upper MHRA guidelines its win win for everyone. Test good for mass screening and clinical testing.
If Avacta supply a Ferrari solution and meet the lower MHRA Guidelines its still win win. The test is still good for mass screening. Clinical testing would additionally need to be backed by a PCR test.
The important concept is to address covid 19 pandemic, not to be fixated on numbers.
What does the scientific community want and what does the political establishment require?
The paper at https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.22.20136309
highlights opinion from the scientific community.
I did raise this in my previous posts and said a Ferrari solution is acceptable for me.
Its miles better than what we have at the moment.
Remember Sona and BD do not meet the upper MHRA Guidelines.
Test, test, test
Are people seriously quoting Matt "Give me a break I'm doing my best" Wancuck now.
Well delivering on promises and delivering a test that is up to the standard being touted prior to the mega placing would be a good way to deliver on both. Not sure you can do one without the other to be honest. Again, it's the SP and profits that count above everything else.
investors buy and hold. Traders comment every time the SP moves. Pathetic.
alwayswinning - "it's how investors are treated is what counts". Really ? It's the quality of the test that counts for me. I will be happy to be abused by the company if they can produce a good quality test.
I don't care about the science, I care about the SP and how the market will react. If I cared about the science I'd be a scientist and not an investor.
That being said. I understand the science perfectly.
All you rampers are essentially saying that if the test comes in with a lower than anticipated sensitivity, the market won't be bothered and this stock will go up regardless. We'll see, but no doubt if it does go down you'll all be saying people are stupid and can't read an RNS properly. Whine as much as you like, it's the SP that matters and how investors are treated is what counts, everything else is secondary to that. FULL STOP.
They've lowered the bid, scaring holders to sell now
Maen has put it perfectly.
Agree but it does seem an odd tweet so close to announcing our test results. Having said that quite confident our test will be a best seller, just need to get it out there.
Definitely not trying to twist anything. All-round test accuracy is important full stop. Most people on Twitter appear to agree with me anyway.
Agreed but for me PCR testing will highly likely also be employed to double check the positives that are generated from tests such as AVCTs.
That's where the sensitivity really kicks in as a higher performing tests will widen the circle of customers and include more and more of those that are themselves sensitive to customer complaint/litigation.
That said, most companies that are running at reduced capacity or not at all, such as cruise ships, should be happy to invest in localised PCR testing facilities, to reduce these outcomes because it is a far better position than they have without it.
It'll take time for tests such as AVCTs to bed in and agree regulatory approvals in sufficient number of jurisdictions but the demand and willingness, for me, will clearly be there.
Its a golden ticket to doing things better but for far less cost.
It’s great research, it shows that regular LFT testing of at least every 3 days pretty much reduces community transmission to nil. Best revisit your calcs for demand... if Trump agrees, and he desperately needs to do something as it’s rampant in the US, that’s a lorra lorra tests. Add in the rest of the globe. Mass screening of populations every three days. That’s well over 1.4Bn tests a month ;-)
Be in no doubt, the only constraint to Awacta’s ability to bring in huge sums of money is manufacturing constraints.
As said in the other thread this is just the title of the paper. It's auto tweeted. Avacta are not trying to tell us their test has bad sensitivity...
Who's twisting that Tweet? They posted a Tweet stating sensitivity was secondary. Why did they feel the need to post it?
Judging by the comments beneath the tweet, most agree with me, that it was a strange thing to post.
What is better t slow down the virus?
10000 tests with high sensitivity that identify 1000 positive patients
or
1000000 tests with good sensitivity that identify 90000 positive patients
The research says the latter if you want to mass screen, stop infections and enable effective track and trace. Simple as that
@Canute40 I don't ever like saying troll but I appreciate your point and I am as much to blame as anyone.
Really interesting update from AVCT, be it that it merely confirmed the suspicion. Tests such as AVCT will be in high demand as countries seek to reduce their PCR test costs and lower the burden on their health care systems.
Back logs in other procedures being the key focus.
underpromise over achieve.......
@alwayswinning You can attempt to twist that tweet as much as you like but if investors read the piece properly, then they will see that it is a very big positive for AVCT and the size of the market that is to come for their LFT.
As suspected, the PCR market will be toned down and tests such as AVCT will take over.
We all know lower sensitivity means more testing to get an accurate result (Not an attractive or economic prospect to potential buyers IMO), but why did AVCT tweet that headline is the question. You can't tell me that wasn't a weird thing to post. Lower sensitivity doesn't make a test more attractive whichever way you spin it.
FREQUENCY.
This means people need testing multiple times = more tests required.
If you don't get the tweet you are missing something.