Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video 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.
Covid UK: BA reveals trial of test that gives results in 25 SECONDS
https://www.canarydetect.com/#block-60378fc5fd6fcd50750c0728
This is a different type of Test less accurate ..
BRH can be changed it can test for sepsis and dementia and more ...
Asymptomatic...
It can be adjusted for new variants...
Carl knows that !!
The problem is here every one now thinks there a scientist :-0
Horses for causes.....
The hardware and software developed by Paraytec will be different again ...
It's a complete different set up..
TB knows this this is why we are looking for a partner...
We are a Investement company ...
Happy Days
Great news on the 25 second ce marked test!! That should really help the airlines and large scale events get back to normal..! But why's the sp dropping is it not the paraytec test?
This test and that test doesn't affect our test our test is not ready when it comes to market later this year it will be market leading sold across the globe gla dyor
"Great news on the 25 second ce marked test!! That should really help the airlines and large scale events get back to normal..! But why's the sp dropping is it not the paraytec test?"
Have you heard yourself?
Are you 5 years old?
No Antigen test can EVER beat a test looking for Virus particles that cause antibodies to be created giving Antigen tests something to look for which can take from 5-12 days for the body to produce. It is impossible!
Paraytec’s device will beat this 25 second test by a number of DAYS... we are not quibbling over seconds or minutes here.
Notluckynob
Are you 5 years old ..
There are some clowns dropping in :-0
There is nothing wrong with improving the existing set of 1st generation tests so I hope the BA testing regime works!
However Paraytec is a 2nd generation test. Far more accurate. More adaptable. BA nor anyone else will stick to the 1st generation of tests when better solutions are available.
Obvious I think.
No, Antigens are molecules capable of stimulating an immune response (the anti bodies) This immune response can take anything from 5-12 days before antigen tests are capable of reading them. This is why they are cr@p for early detection of the virus and geared to find ‘infectious’ people, not all that are ‘infected’
In a nutshell Rocquet, marmited just owned you so pipe down
I'm not sure that the current available tests are 'cr@p' but they are not going to be as good as the next generation of tests. They are what we have now and it's better than no tests.
All of the test companies will be trying to develop new technology. Paraytec could well be a serious contender.
"Notluckynob
Are you 5 years old ..
There are some clowns dropping in :-0"
Why are you having a pop at me Paul?
The guy I was responding to is a troll.
Skippy ‘could well be’ you mean is a serious contender with commercial partners wanting the results and now in possession and discussion. A partner to take us to manufacturing is not an if but when. It’s happening. Cannot wait for the big name drop of commercial partners to take us global! News on this could be issued to market very soon.
IMHO DYOR GLA
Marmited,
You are talking rubbish:
"No Antigen test can EVER beat a test looking for Virus particles that cause antibodies to be created giving Antigen tests something to look for which can take from 5-12 days for the body to produce."
ALL antigen tests are connecting to the VIRUS.
LFT tests are antigen tests which give a result in around 20 mins . The AVCT test gets affimers to bind to the spike protein in the VIRUS and give a result
Baffyman, argue with those at the British Medical Journal.
‘Although controls within assays minimise errors, technical problems during sample collection, processing, or reporting can give false results. Lateral flow tests produce very few false positive results, and in a low prevalence setting these can be detected by confirmatory PCR testing. False negative results are more concerning. Besides technical errors, they can arise in people tested during the 5-7 day incubation period before the viral antigen shed in the nose and throat is sufficient to be detected, usually 1-2 days before symptom onset. Taking swabs requires skill, and swabs taken by untrained individuals are more likely to give false negative results. False negatives might create a false sense of security, paradoxically increasing transmission risk.
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n208
Marmited,
Where on BMJ piece does it say that antigen testing does not use the VIRUS to work??
You stated that antigen tests do not use the virus to get an indication.
That statement is wrong:
On avct test affimers stick to spike protein on the virus,
on Paraytec test, adapted aptamers (similar to affimers but not as specific) stick to the virus, causing it to glow,
PCR testing is only any good once antibodies are produced.
Baffyman - My understanding of Antigen tests.
Antigen tests are immunoassays that detect the presence of a specific viral antigen, which implies current viral infection.
If AVCT are doing something similar as Paraytec using Affimers rather than Aptamers than great! I wasn’t aiming shots at AVCT. It is at Antigen testing in general. Perhaps because great minds think alike, it is why both tests appear to stand out above others in the areas they are targeting? (Infectious v infected) One gets praise, the other gets ridicule.
Sorry luckyboy...
Got confused with the post ...
Regards paul
And to add, by default, targeting ‘infected’ catches all the ‘infectious’ extremely well too. It doesn’t work the other way round very well though.
Marmited,
"Antigen tests are immunoassays that detect the presence of a specific viral antigen, which implies current viral infection."
YES agree, sorted.
Read the article in Sky News about this...suffice to say if it works as they think it does then it will be hard to wrestle it away and replace with a 2min test that isn't currently endorsed by the airline industry....it may be the market size for the BRH test is being reduced to more medical establishments and less commercial. It still has a long life ahead of it but perhaps in a smaller arena....we will see but this looks like it could genuine competition.