Member Info for beinthelead

Marik - that’s just patronising. Funny how everyone is an expert with hindsight.

Again, to put it more simply; If I’d known that our test relied on an Ab whilst targetting the Spike, I’d have been a lot less confident in its performance. AS has stated that the Affimer was responsible for offsetting the disadvantages of the Ab. AS ramped this point. Absolutely zero mention of Ab’s being involved.

Bella - let’s not put words in my mouth, or change my feelings on the matter. I was misled.

Let’s not refer to years old saliva videos. Not worth going there.

Secrets? You’ve just pointed to where Avcata tell us how an LFT works to support where you state this secret was declared?

Again; Targetting the spike was underpinned by the selective nature/size etc of the Affimer. This is what we know from presentations and RNS. Relying on an Ab reduces confidence.

Yep

Marik - the point I made was that I feel misled.

It’s OK in hindsight knowing that the antibodies are there, and guessing what they do. That’s what we’re doing here.

S detection superiority was underpinned by Affimer utilisation. This is fact. If the mutations on the spike are reducing sensitivity because of an Ab, I’ve been misled.

Agreed. They are now a fully fledged QMS’d manufacturer with a proven detector. Value is not huge, but certainly not zero.

It’s a kick in the teeth, whichever way you look at it. The previous RNS, where performance has been superb, has extolled the ‘powered by Affimer’ message. Now it’s the antibodies fault, not the Affimer.

I said on Monday; we’ve likely modified an existing Mologic antibody test (visitect?) to include an S targeting Affimer. Could be this simple. The rush to get it to market due to zero product design experience, has now came home to roost.

My guess is that we’ll release the N/S test, based on referring to it as ‘the next generation’ test and the line about ‘what we have learned’ about the virus. No chance he’ll come out and declare it was wrong to target the S over N.

My confidence is targeting the Spike was based on using Affimers. Now knowing Ab’s are involved, I feel misled.

Let’s hope the water under the bridge a has been educational, and we can look forward to a fruitful collaboration with ABDX is developing this new test. Communication needs to be $h1t hot going forward.

You are correct. It’s a sustained slip. I’m looking forward to a climb on the back of expected news.

Will the be any arrest to the slippage?

Monkshood - AS called referred to it as THE next generation test, as if we know what that is. This implies to me that it’s the N-S combo. This was always know as ‘the next generation’.

But as always, implication loses you money in this game. Time will tell.

Thanks Ophidian.

There’s a clear issue for me; why was the antibody used in the first place. You’ve touched on it here - if the reason is for cost and expediency, I’d be disappointed. 18 months have passed - we have had the time to develop the test with an Affimer carrier. I’d suggest it was too difficult. Having the Ab does not feel right, given the product is Affimer driven. That said, I do believe the Affimer is more selective at the binding site as discussed many times. This remains a differentiator.

My guess, which is based on the logic of the less romantic; We needed to act quickly so modified a an ‘existing’ Mologic test, building in the Affimer where it could improve and optimise performance.

Avacta have effectively parked the LFT now. I’m hoping there’s no more bad news on this front. The next news I’m awaiting is feedback on the Vatic test, re Omicron, as this targets the S protein.

Awful day, but one that had to happen given the issue. A mentor once told me to air bad news and fail fast. Ego’s take a bashing - move on and improve. Hugely disappointed by today, for more ways than one. Let’s hope there is some positive AVA news in the coming sessions.

You’ve summarised it well, Monkshood. Q&A required.

Nail on the head Ben. Why hide the antibody? This is hugely damaging to the brand. I’m pretty sickens by this RNS today. We can suffer bumps along the road, but this is pretty fundamental. The tech gave me interest.

The throat swab makes no difference. Flowflex performs better than Innova (my experience) yet uses AN.

Whatever is wrong - AS isn’t going to change his philosophy and tell us anything. Mushrooms.

I’m not fussed about the lack of sales in the interim, I expected so. Hiding the antibody use has done it for me.

I didn’t want to ‘hope’ on the cancer side, but that’s where we are.

https://twitter.com/SlasherMcGurk/status/1480533801575108613?s=20

This might have had value to shareholders before today.

My belief is yes, unfortunately. The architecture is unlikely to change, so classed as an ‘improvement’ revision under CE. Design intent remains the same.

But, as you say, validation is the killer here I’m afraid. I’m still struggling with the timing of this news. It couldn’t be any worse.

You are gloating with hindsight based on the information RNSd today. Again, you still haven’t answered, what value did you post add??

Give up sweetcorn, they’re clearly on the wind up. I got caught trying to discuss. It’s just trolling.

No. They shouldn’t.

But what the point in posting what you did today? I’ll call things how I see them, based on RNS. Today has been a disaster for the LFT. One nobody knew before today.

Once again Mumbai, why bother posting after so long? What value does it add?

Totally. The hindsight investors are enjoying it today.

It’s a sad world. More odd that they enjoy being correct over losing money. This exposes a personality controlled by jealousy.