Member Info for Dibs61

Ethio - 100% agree re AIM. We all learn the hard way don't we? :D

This is a fine company, even without Covid. That said, I am savvy enough to realise that even though there is plenty of other value in their other products its the antibody test that is sustaining this at these levels. At least for now, that will change but not yet.

So the risk is this - IF we get a successful design freeze and start making millions of these tests this goes way way beyond £1. If we don't and it fails the SP goes back to the teens.

Elon - no worries I'm not a great fan of diversification anymore. I hold no more than three or four stocks at a time max.

Diversification is overrated IMHO.

ATB with your other stock.

Elon - it's actually quite simple. Which stock, in your opinion has the best prospects esp short term and whats your level of risk?

Cheers dubz! Looking decent here atm I will stick around I think.

I have to confess to spending WAY too much time on the computer screen these past few days. That said it does mean you pick up the trends in trading patterns and things definitely changed from Wednesday lunchtime. We had that big surge on Wed afternoon and wondered what was going on. Then the next Roche instalment on Wed eve which killed off a potential rise yesterday am. A dull day yesterday. Then first the excitement of the possible links to our consortium via interviews and comments etc. Then the Abbott news last night.

In amongst all this noise the thing I have noticed is the distinct change in the daily trading pattern of the shares - since Wed lunchtime. No longer do the MM's seem to have quite such an iron grip over the SP. You can tell because they are marking it up and down much more regularly. There is more volatility. I think the liquidity supply they had has dryed up to an extent. I sense they (MM's) are a bit more cautious and jumpy. They know whats coming too.

So: conclusion is that if we had a background seller thats all finished now and you have a 'true'market in the shares. That also means that if demand on the order book suddenly jumps the MM's have to respond, quick.

I'm going to repeat that last sentence from the Professor because it is vital we understand it.

"We effectively need an Elisa on a membrane, with the same sensitivity and specificity that can be used at home. That should be achievable, and the government will be working with suppliers both new and old to try and deliver this result so we can scale up antibody testing for the British public. This will take at least a month."

"That should be achievable" - his words. Now that is confidence. And all ODX have ever displayed is confidence they will do it.

Sit tight folks.

Interestingly the good professor wrote this article just before the RTC was formed over a month ago. I've copied the link and posted some particularly relevant excerpts from it below:

https://www.research.ox.ac.uk/Article/2020-05-13-covid-19-drugs-trial-rolled-out-across-uk-homes-and-communities

"To validate these tests you need to obtain a range of tools. You need a gold standard test so you know the correct answer and you need sera from patients who have recovered from the virus infection they had approximately 28 days before. You also need blood from people who donated before the epidemic so you know whether you falsely see positive tests when there is no Covid-19 in the sample. For example, there are a number of other coronaviruses circulating that might stimulate antibodies that cross react to Covid-19 proteins. It has taken some time to gather these tools for validation but the UK is now uniquely positioned to evaluate and find the optimal test for this disease. We clearly want to avoid telling people they are immune when they are not, and we want all people who are immune to know accurately so they can get back to work.

Multiple tests have been provided for evaluation, and a range of convalescent sera has been used to determine whether the tests can identify both low and high levels of antibodies. We have been very careful to test using gold standards checked against a sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Elisa) of the spike protein and other viral proteins. Sadly, the tests we have looked at to date have not performed well. We see many false negatives (tests where no antibody is detected despite the fact we know it is there) and we also see false positives. None of the tests we have validated would meet the criteria for a good test as agreed with the MHRA. This is not a good result for test suppliers or for us.

Interestingly we are not the only ones who having difficulty identifying commercial tests that work in a home test kit format. The Spanish apparently returned test kits that were not working, and the Germans who are developing their own sensitive kits believe they are three months away from getting these available and validated. Not test has been acclaimed by health authorities as having the necessary characteristics for screening people accurately for protective immunity.

What next? We will of course continue to look for a test that meets the criteria of an acceptable test. There is a point in evaluating these first-generation tests where we need to stop and consider our options. We effectively need an Elisa on a membrane, with the same sensitivity and specificity that can be used at home. That should be achievable, and the government will be working with suppliers both new and old to try and deliver this result so we can scale up antibody testing for the British public. This will take at least a month."

Professor Sir John Bell, GBE, FRS
Regis Professor of Medicine Oxford University

It was always on the cards that Roche and Abbott, as arguably two of the worlds biggest diagnostics companies would come up with something but they are just lab tests. Thats not going to work for the governments mass testing solution. Period.

Apparently my research has revealed that just 26 patient samples were used to establish Roches '100%" accuracy in the PHE testing at Porton Down. Thats hardly a representative sample! How did it get through on so few?? So questions there.
Abbotts test is coming in for criticism stateside.

No wonder the government are not jumping in head first.

Meanwhile the RTC are beavering away quietly not shouting from the rooftops. They are establishing the same accuracy from their test as you'd get from an ELISA thats the aim. That will be a groundbreaking earth shattering seismic result when it comes off. Worth waiting for.

SMISHMAN - yes I just noticed that? Bizarre. What does that mean, is it just a technicality, there is no MM against it?

The Avacta announcement this morning re their Affimers is rather interesting from a BRH viewpoint wouldn’t we say?

Well said Simon. I’ll just make one final point before bed beckons.

The government have committed to as part of their 5 pillar strategy to beat the virus to build a UK Diagnostics industry at scale. Do we think allowing both Roche and Abbott to make most of the tests they would achieve that objective. No. Neither are UK companies.

We await what happens later. Whether the price goes up or down today I am more confident than ever.

Thanks guys. I know it’s easy to be misled by cheap uninformed throw away comments because this wait IS hard. But keep a focus on what is being said by the people that matter NOT the people that DON’T matter on here.

Remember what J Van Tam said earlier in the press briefing? He said there was a second test. People are assuming now that because Abbott have announced their test that VT meant them. I am not so sure. If that’s the case why was he so cagey about saying who it was, talking about it being ‘commercially sensitive’? Surely if it was Abbott he could’ve said. After all their news came out in the press a couple of hours later! Very commercially sensitive obviously. It’s a different test folks it’s not the one VT was referring to. That’s my call anyway fwiw.

I’m afraid I’m reading a load of hogwash here tonight, people casually posting the government are favouring Roche and Abbott. Rubbish! The government haven’t agreed anything with either company yet.

The Guardian commented that the DHSC appeared in ‘no hurry’ to take up either companies offer. I wonder why? Go figure. I’ve already explained why. Anyone who thinks ODX are out of the picture are badly miscalculating. I will be adding tomorrow on any further weakness - no question.

I see the title “Oh Dear” appearing numerous times tonight. Oh dear indeed.

Ask yourselves a question. Did that Sky News interview earlier really happen? Well yes it did. And what did the chap say? He said that the good people from Oxford University have got an antibody Test that works and they are scaling up. Was he talking about Abbott? No. Abbott have not been in partnership with Oxford University to build a Lab Test. Where does it say that?

Abbott is another Lab Test. It is not what the government wants or NEEDS. Just like Roche it is not the solution they require. Look Abbott can say they can provide 5 zillion tests a month if they like. Fat lot of good. We couldn’t use them! Keep your heads screwed on people.

I’ll say it again, it’s another Lab Test it’s not the solution the government requires. Don’t believe me? Read this excerpt from an article in The Guardian tonight:

“Abbott said it had capacity to provide 5m tests each month to the UK “with immediate effect”. It said in a statement that it was “working closely with the NHS and has commenced shipping to NHS laboratories to enable them to receive samples based on government direction.”

But the Department of Health and Social Care appeared in no rush to take up the offer or that from Roche, which also says it can provide millions of tests to the UK.

“Antibody testing is an important part of our strategy to counter the spread of Covid-19 and to help us understand who has had the disease. In addition to the recent huge expansion of the UK’s swab-based coronavirus testing capacity, we are exploring the use of antibody testing across the NHS and ultimately the wider public,” said a spokesman.

“We are delighted that devices are progressing through validation, and are actively working on our plans for rolling out antibody testing and will make announcements in due course.”

Underlying the cautious approach will be anxiety that individuals will seek antibody tests on the assumption that if they have had Covid-19, they will be immune and can freely mix with other people.”

If it does go down tomorrow we all get the opportunity to get some more stock on board. I certainly will be. Luvly Jubbly

playingtheodds- I can categorically state 100% certainty it is NOT AZN. They are a pharma company they make drugs they don’t do diagnostics. They have a collaboration with Cambridge for antibody treatment. That’s it. Certain.

But what I would also ask is why would Oxford University be throwing resources into a lab test when it’s stated by govts pillar 4 strategy we need mass testing. It is practically and logistically impossible for a lab test to deliver mass testing

Yes stocks it can. That is why I am asking the question are Oxford University also developing a lab test separate from the consortium- either partnered or on their own? That for me is the only doubt left. If they’re not, then it has to be our test.

Prythee you’re very kind but actually LB has totally misunderstood what was being said so no he wasn’t making a good point.

Anyway let’s not get too distracted by the fact a few can’t keep up.

The ONLY question left now that could exclude the RTC from being the mystery SECOND antibody test explicitly stated by Van Tam is whether the Oxford University are collaborating with any other LISTED company to develop an antibody test. Why listed? Because he was very careful in stating it was commercially sensitive information. Such information cannot be disclosed before the company involved has announced to the market, surely?