Member Info for doze

I think it is a fact the ramp up in affimer research has been almost exponential worldwide in the last twelve months and many capable staff added to the payroll at Avacta. What has not changed is the other phalanx of scientists that seem to control the regulatory and treasury dispensation of governments and accepted science to support it. I look forward to wiping the floor clean with affimers as a best in class diagnostic and therapeutic tech which can be confidently used as the weight of good science and scientists emerge from the shadows.

I think it is a fact the ramp up in affimer research has been almost exponential worldwide in the last twelve months and many capable staff added to the payroll at Avacta. What has not changed is the other phalanx of scientists that seem to control the regulatory and treasury dispensation of governments and accepted science to support it. I look forward to wiping the floor clean with affimers as a best in class diagnostic and therapeutic tech which can be confidently used as the weight of good science and scientists emerge from the shadows.

Probability and Risk
Improving public understanding of probability and risk with special emphasis on its application to the law. Why Bayes theorem and Bayesian networks are needed

Sunday, 14 November 2021
Is vaccine efficacy a statistical illusion?
https://probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com/2021/11/is-vaccine-efficacy-statistical-illusion.html?m=1

I am sorry AVCT didn't come out with catchy slogans ahead of Vatic- I think they will sell a test better than sensitivity data etc and it was really our entitlement to claim the spike protein benefit first

Medusa turning up the publicity as the partner with the most money and most to gain with their 50% return plus manufacturing costs brfore profit is worked out. Doubt they would rile the notified body divulging date of submission details and AS would certainly not tread on his partner's toes when Medusa are the driving force with the regulatory paperwork.

MoneGalor is saying the infection rate (via some nebulous methodology of governments) is 2 per 100 for example but the test detects 4 of which 50% or 2 are false positives. The current infection rate according to UK Gov is 0.35 per 100

Nothing has stopped the spread- time to try a test that detects earlier to save on outbreaks. Gain two days less spreading at the most infectious time. Jabs are top of the billing because as yet all the money thrown at testing has been a waste so worst effect of catching it is addressed. So what if you can free 2 out of 4 when you have missed isolating the infected for two days and they could have been superspreaders infecting 20 a day so you have an outbreak. The perception is covid requires action but to be effective better tests need to be used.

AVCT has had to morph into a test manufacturer as none of the 'consortium' had the deep pockets to take things forward and BBI was bought out and Cytiva went shy for, I suspect, regulatory hold up reasons. Medusa 19 could have also been a reason for mainstream pharma LFT cold shoulder. Medusa 19 are progressing permissions as best they can despite having to duplicate paperwork for a notified body.
AS is not about to sell out the IP to big pharma, you can bet your bottom dollar if Roche had got their hands on it their Cobas tech would have been magically updated to include spike proteins.

Good governance at government level and control can be enemies especially when control stifles the progress of a company in an industry where revenue from shoddy products breeds greed and application of poor procedure. It can drive an investor paranoid which is especially ironic for a health industry regulators.

Incidentally whoever used that CE font second has to be devious.

https://support.ce-check.eu/hc/en-us/articles/360008642600-How-To-Distinguish-A-Real-CE-Mark-From-A-Fake-Chinese-Export-Mark

Sorry to get the facts wrong Icecool so thanks for the correction. It is standard practice in the EU to have the LFTs lab tested by the scientists with standardised spiked in vitro samples (equivalent of PD) eg at the Paul Ehrlich Institute, so would have been duplication. I hope PD have adopted this practice. A comparative performance table of tests on the market would give users a way of choosing

It was OK for the the pandemic to be allowed continue unabated while the NHS worked their socks off but the pen pushers don't up their game? It is only a test and the best by comparative study could quickly have been put to use with normal regulatory paperwork to follow. Stodge's link proves how it is central to DHSC thinking now https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/validation-of-covid-19-tests-laboratory-validation/validation-of-covid-19-tests-laboratory-validation

It's OK Stodge
If a product has already been through validation
We recognise some laboratory validation may have already taken place for some test products on the UK market. Where our scientific advisers are satisfied the evidence presented in support of the test is of sufficiently high quality, we will rely on it to avoid any duplication and overly burdensome bureaucracy.
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/validation-of-covid-19-tests-laboratory-validation/validation-of-covid-19-tests-laboratory-validation

....or a shame MMs can still take from PIs in a downtrend to maximise turnover and fill orders from opportunists at the same time.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.28.21265544v1.full.pdf

He didn't mention Avacta or desktop review/testing. Mainly an explanation of rising deaths so elderly-get your booster. He gave his personal view on face coverings; not in schools but use in cinema/theatre but he doesn't at football or restaurant but would use going in and out of venues. Many factors of society now considered by government and implied back to business holding sway over science.

Didn't we have an rns yesterday to offset this one ?

The longer Boris & Co and the country's regulators take to approve AffiDX the more stupid they are going to look. Especially applies if they let US and EU approve first. AVCT should have been a world beater with its tech by now. Pity they don't put in more focussed research on where to drive the GDP up without trashing the planet.

Noone else except Avacta brains can evaluate the science as it is new tech and only they can prove it, albeit in unpaid capacity for the work outside their job description. Collaborators will gain a stellar reputation for passing best in class products and breaking the nucleocapsid monopoly.