The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Blind trust is never a good thing. An in depth understanding of the science however is what will get you through. Like I said before I'm here for the preCision story. If you are just here because of the potential of the covid test then I would that has a higher risk of failure than the cancer treatment. The only problem with the preCision platform is how much more time and money it will take to develop so hopefully the diagnostics side of the company can contribute there in the mean time.
Although there is currently no evidence for that. The successful use of plasma transfer treatments would suggest that there is some form of immunity. However it might mutate and therefore you could get it again. The roche test is based on identification of the nucleocapsif proteins so identify antibodies which detect that. You would think that antibodies which are neutralising are more likely to target antigens of the spike protein. However we dont know that yet either. We also dont know how long any immunity might last so again yes possible you could get it again. So the answer is we just dont know yet. Previous reports of second infections have been the result of false positives in testing.
That was directed at Morgan.
Sorry you lost me there. What do you mean?
I'll just quickly add that I hate autocorrect
Its great that we now have a very accurate antibody test out there but the fact remains that we do not know enough about this virus yet and won't do for some time. Even if this test is done on a massive scale and shows that we have 20% of the population with antibodies against cover-19 we don't know if they are neutralising antibodies (will protect against further infection) how long they might remain or if they will protect against mutations in the virus. The virus may die down in a similar fashion to others it may not as outlined by the WHO today.
I think people are also getting a bit too focused on this stock as a covid stock. Yes it could be a great money maker for the company, but the company remains an immuno oncology company and that is why I am invested. The preCision aspect of this company far outweighs the covis story. So let the price drop I will continue to buy more until the story plays out on cancer treatment side of things and as I'm not a wealthy person the lower the price the more I can pick up for that time.
sorry that's the same link. on twitter as this morning interview
that was 16th April
I agree with this. If you look into the case of the Pandemrix vaccine that was used for H1N1 in sme cases it caused narcolepsy. Best hypothesis I have seen for why it did this is because it was given to people who currently had the virus causing an overreaction of the immune system. So testing could also become an important safety consideration for administration of the vaccine
nice little 100k buy
so the company state they can make 46,000 tests per day. Now I work with ELISA's and the process to make them is relatively simple but if thats on a 96 well format thats 480 plates a day or 480 kits a day (seems like a low number). Standard price for a 96 well plate ELISA ranges between 180 and 450 quid depending on the test target.
Thats an interesting paper. Thanks Degsy.
It indicates that median copies/ml is 5610 copies/ml and that saliva testing is less variable. Good to know we have the right testing procedure and we know what sensitivity level we need.
interesting that the native antigen company are part of the collaboration. Avacta worked with them previously to produce the zika affirmers
My take on it is that they have already generated a number of reagents that bind to covid-19. However they will need to undergo testing to make sure they only bind to covid-19 and that will be the work that is ongoing now. First step is generating potential candidate affirmers, second is testing them against target, third will be be specificity.
exactly, they have to be able to prove that they are specific for Covid-19 and that's what these last couple of weeks will be about.
To be honest I'm not sure about this. I think they are only doing test for antigen.
designing an Affimer that recognises antibodies which recognise a particular antigen seems unlikely. Also as everyones antibody response is slightly different then I'm not sure how this would work
they are indeed Ghia. I'm a fan of GDR as well but what sold it for me here is that this is a test that can be used without any additional equipment. In remote areas or poorer countries this type of test will be the only feasible one. Very difficult to recreate and expensive to do the same thing with an antibody that recognises the antigen in the same way as an Affimer. test for antibodies in the blood of patients have their role but not the same thing and by the time antibodies are produced by the body you could already be infectious.
Actually, just realised. Any antibody test will also need to be accompanied by an antigen test. How do we know people positive for the antibody don't currently have the virus (and are therefore contagious? - they would need to be tested for the antigen
no it's not. affirmers recognise antigen,
you can watch it live online for free