RE: Trade Volume7 Dec 2021 07:15
The technology needs to be properly understood.
LFT's: Quick but lack accuracy and reliability and do people really use them properly when doing them themselves? Highly unlikely as you really have to stick the swabs in deep and I doubt many go the whole nine yards. Innova - the free ones we used to get were repackaged for home use and distribution by the NHS. A rubbish Chinese brand that was NEVER intended for use outside of a lab, let alone by a non-technician. 74% accuracy when in a lab, 54% accuracy when done at home. Near pointless. The government used them because there was a huge supply available and it allowed for consistency, albeit unreliable useless consistency.
PCR: much more accurate but the examination takes longer to get results, are generally sent away, use expensive chemicals, are processed in laboratories by highly trained staff, all of which present risk for cross contamination.
POC (This test) is Isothermal nucleic acid amplification and can deliver results on the spot (at the point of care) in 7.5 minutes allowing for real-time diagnosis. Isothermal Amplification = no need for the expensive thermocyclers which Traditional PCR’s use so absolutely perfect for all applications including lower-income countries. So basically you get the speed of LFT, combined with better accuracy than molecular PCR, IMMEDIATELY there and then. This is why Covid-19 POC diagnostics are becoming a more attractive test due to the fast delivery time of results. Unlike PCR and LFT, the POC market is NOT SATURATED.
Quote:
'The Company has resulted in designing and delivering a product with excellent performance specifications and a speed to result that is a new benchmark'. And that's why we have entities actively approaching GDR. The only other kit that comes close is the Abbot one, and that is currently the best seller.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
