Member Info for marik

Great points aj242.

p.s. if one bin can hold a hundred innova tests how many bins will I need for one billion tests? I'm wondering if I should invest in the recycling business instead. Perhaps if anyone on here has contacts, they could get some advice?

I have a contact at B&Q who tells me that their sale of garbage bins has gone through the roof. I'm not sure if that's insider trading? Advice welcome.

Who is this contact with insider information? I presume his name is stickystock81 and he's looking to sell his trousers to buy back his shirt?

"In a word or three....what is the actual significance of all this to to Avacta?"

Although Avacta have collaborated with Mologic, Mologic have had their CE mark for months. They are being stonewalled on the basis of kit failure. Mologic question as to how can Porton Down/PHE get masses of kit failures when no one else in the world that has validated the Mologic test has managed that.

Avacta are not being blocked due to kit failure, it would be speculation that Mologic are in an identical position.

I believe this news is positive for Avacta, it will make the UK Gov sit up and at least question the Innova review by the MHRC.

This part of the risk section follows chronologically 2019 onwards (see p55 of the annual report) and it refers to past events as well.

When Avacta state, "The first stage of the evaluation process does not use the lateral flow test in the manner that it was designed for...", they are referring back to the issues already faced by Avacta when Porton Down used frozen clinical samples. They stated in an RNS that "However, in its evaluation Porton Down used artificial samples and did not use clinical samples."

From Avacta's statement regarding "Ongoing, but slow, dialogue with DHSC/PHE", we can deduce they are not being stonewalled in the same way as Mologic. Secondly, Mologic has had a CE mark for months and have not been accepted.

I believe Mologics comments are a swipe at Innova as I've pointed out in a previous comment:

Mologic CEO, Mark Davis, takes a swipe at Innova when he says the Mologic test "...costs a fourth of the price of the Innova test."

We can see what Mologic feel the UK Government slant is. I believe many of the companies in the UK after seeing the damning report by the FDA will now heavily question the UK Gov-Innova relationship.

Mologic CEO, Mark Davis, takes a swipe at Innova when he says the Mologic test "...costs a fourth of the price of the Innova test."

We can see what Mologic feel the UK Government slant is. I believe many of the companies in the UK after seeing the damning report by the FDA will now heavily question the UK Gov-Innova relationship.

I don't think Avacta are in the same boat as Mologic. On page 20 of the Avacta Preliminary Results (2021) slides, Avacta states that they are in "Ongoing, but slow, dialogue with DHSC/PHE". Mologic are not in discussions as stated they've been stonewalled.

Mologic have done the right thing, it will make the UK Gov pay attention.

It goes to show that the Porton Down test approval process is being heavily questioned. Innova are about to be further scrutinised. i) FDA bin comments, ii) MHRC already unhappy with the use of Innova and now iii) PD questioned as to why they've selected some tests (Innova) and not others. This is playing well for Avacta for now.

Here is a world expert tweeting on the subject:

https://twitter.com/deeksj/status/1404493264129081345

Mologic have had CE mark for a while, they've been stone walled. Avacta have only recently had their CE mark and they are still in "ongoing, but slow, dialogue with DHSC/PHE" - this implies that Avacta are not stonewalled and are not in the same position as Mologic.

However, I think Mologic should definitely go ahead and sue. It's better for Mologic and also for Avacta.

Avacta are in in "ongoing, but slow, dialogue with DHSC/PHE". It seems like Mologic has been stonewalled and Innova have had extremely bad press. With Mologic threatening to sue, the UK market is opening up for Avacta. Could we see UK sales RNS shortly?

Experts have asked for data used by PHE and PD to be made available and for more transparency, however this seems to have fallen on deaf ears. Seems like they are about to be sued.

"He is advocating accurate tests based on statistical analysis. This can only be a good thing and work in Avacta's favour."

I have to agree gje306. Jon Deeks is a smart guy. He isn't against lateral flow tests in general he wants lateral flow tests to undergo statistical analysis. It's not Jon Deeks fault that there have been no quality lateral flow tests until Avacta released their results. It's the best in class test.

Deeks is clearly positive about Avacta and Mologic.

Jon Deeks says on twitter, note how he is referring to the poor sensitivity test like Innova:

"No because the sensitivity of LFTs is too low. You could loose half the real cases that you were lucky enough to find the first time (well prob not quite that many - but a lot). You need a high sens high spec test as a confirmatory test. Just like PCR!" - 10 March 2021.

Sensitivity of LFTs is not too low anymore since the Avacta results were released.

Innova Ct between 25-30 has a sensitivity of 14%

Deeks goes on to say "Good 1st results @avacta but make sure all studies are reported and peer reviewed so the evidence is clear to the world."

I agree gje306. The Innova test is very poor, the results are appalling. 14% sensitivity between Ct 25-30. Compare that to Avacta where the sensitivity where clinical sensitivity of 98.0% for samples with Ct values up to 31. Avacta is hugely superior.

Innova: Ct 25-30 - sensitivity 14%
Avacta: Ct<31 - sensitivity 98%

The FDA and Jon Deeks have given their verdict on Innova - it should be binned.

Innova test is "very poor":

ct 20-25 missed 7 of 15 cases - sensitivity 47%
ct 25-30 missed 6 of 7 cases - sensitivity 14%

The comment made by an expert is that the Innova test is "very poor at detecting covid in asymptomatic cases, even those with a higher viral load"

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4848

Topped up!

"...there is zero evidence for using the NHS test at all as all studies have been done using Innova branded tests".

Not a great look for Innova.

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1514