Member Info for Howzaty

A lot of people have lost their livelihoods altogether in this pandemic. I hope we are not going to hear endless whining about a 1% award that is actually above inflation and consider that its more than a lot of other folk will get, many of whom will be facing pay cuts. Yes they did a great job but it was their job to do, a one off bonus on the other hand so as to come into line with Wales and Scotland would be a better idea albeit a little late.

But , achievement of our accreditation may run over and that would not have been good. So, belt and braces is prudent in my opinion.

To my mind knowing what we know about Sensitivity and Specificity, the difficulty of achieving high values and the implications of not achieving high values this sounds like complete and utter nonsense. Why am I not surprised to hear folk at PD are working on it and politicians are commenting!!

Thanks Monkswood, just wondered if I missed something. I'm hoping for best LFD bar none, we will see.

Not pcr ct 25 I suppose?

So might I ask the measure you are comparing others against Avacta with, and what is the comparison?

Avacta have played a blinder in their RNS, not sure how I missed it first time around, they are essentially stating without saying it directly that unless a Competitors LFT can match the sensitivity of the Avacta device it is not fit for purpose. Dont think any other manufacturer will be able to match PCR CT 25 and if they cant , and they' ll need to prove it through Clinical Validation, I think the whole lot is Avactas if the evaluation matches the preliminary result that is. Boom.

But Avacta has detected positive cases at the pcr ct 26 limit. If others cannot match this by definition they are less good (capable). I and I should think Avacta would like others to have their sensitivity quoted against this upper limit. Not sure others, such as Abbott and Co would be quite so keen.

Must be able to sort the wheat from the chaff. Some lateral flow tests are better than others, a common baseline to evaluate against is required.

I struggle with the discussion. To detect a low viral load an LFT requires high sensitivity. The best LFT are sensitivite, and can detect, viral loads over what has been defined as the "infectious range". Comparison of LFT devices requires a common baseline. If as I believe Avacta is the most sensitive test it needs to be able to demonstrate this.

It occurred to me that the Sensitivity of the Avacta LFT has been declared in very specific terms with reference to PCR CT 26. Reading notes relating to other tests references appear more akin to voodoo. Whats needed is for the sensitivity of all tests to be measured with reference to PCR CT 26. Has anyone seen anything like the Avacta PCR CT 26 reference provided for other tests?

Lets imagine September next, all those coughs and colds everybody thinking theyve got the plague and a basket full of LFD in every doctors surgery across the land and many other lands as well. Avacta will make a mint out of these tests well into the future. More than enough cash to finance the real money maker, the oncology work.

National Insurance number is required so checks will be against that. Yes up to 20k a year and Bobs yer uncle.

Al stated recently that work on the Saliva test continued so I dont think you should conclude it has been buried, rather it is lagging and perhaps being tested by PD..

You need to read the updated piece. The first Saliva test failed, and that could have been for a number of reasons but the second Saliva test is excellent so that means Avacta has the Holly Grail Saliva test and an excellent swab test. Lets not forget that a number of companies gave up on saliva but Avacta and its Affimers pulled it off, another great advertisement for Avacta. Do keep up.

Just to mention the clarification and amendment included in the Huff Post which stated that the first Saliva Test put forward by Avacta failed and that may have been for a number of reasons but that the subsequent Saliva test performed excellently. Lets not forget a number of big companies gave up on Saliva and it looks like Affimers have handled it well. Another great advertisement.

So Han**** unequivocal, "really clamping down on contacts through testing" and much discussion of variants. Phew, looked like all discussion of testing had been banned up until that point!

Spit is the easiest to use , least invasive and undoable for others. The Holy Grail of LFT. Having both why would anyone in the world want to develop anything else. Boom, couldnt resist sorry.

Strangey, I find it hard to consider that the Moonshot implementation will not involve an App in some way, there are multiple choices out there . Just worried about the usual offenders who set out to destroy everything for the law abiding majority at every opportunity, duffers or anachists not sure .

Is it me or are there new pictures on the Avacta site, LFT production? Might be I've not noticed previously.