Member Info for RNmyS

@PL75 haha, exactly. My filter list is getting so long now though..

I like Awacta, it always makes me optimistic for Monday morning

Just topped up myself, either way news on the horizon

Also please let us not forget that Sona validated their test using only 30 human samples.

Hi all,

I use iWeb to trade shares but have been having a lot of issues with them as of late and am looking for alternative services. What do you guys use?

Thanks!

"eyes in your own boat" depends on the type of racing you're doing. As with most things in life, it's circumstantial :)

It's definitely going to be an exciting couple of weeks, lets see what happens!

GLA

No one can predict where this will go, so throwing out arbitrary numbers is pointless.. unless you know something we all don't?

I wish I had a thread dedicated to me every time I tweeted :(

On a more serious note, Myles is confirming what we all should know, we're now entering a very rich news period so all we can hope for is blue sky ahead.

GLA

To clarify the point I made on "Antigen Accuracy" thread regarding Sona's test accuracy:

From their press release:
"Validation studies were also conducted in-house to assess potential clinical performance of the test using 30 nasopharyngeal samples from healthy individuals who were presumed negative for COVID-19."
(https://sonanano.com/sona-nanotech-announces-validation-results-for-its-covid-19-antigen-test/)

This sample size (30 samples) is very small considering the significance of their accuracy claim and therefore the 96% specificity /sensitivity should not be taken as fact. Larger test samples will likely demonstrate this. Provided Avacta delivers, and based on the information we've received (from the critical design presentation etc), there are strong indications that the Avacta test will demonstrate more accurate results.

There is no denying that the Sona test is / looks incredibly promising, however, as Alastair has stated several, we're aiming for a "best in class" test and we're still on schedule to deliver. I hope and believe we will deliver a more convenient and more accurate test very soon.

GLA

Hi all,

One point very few people have mentioned here is that the Sona test has been given the 96% accuracy rating based on trials with with 30 participants. There is therefore the possibility the test is less accurate on a larger scale.

I brought a snorkel

Very exciting news, makes sense now that we saw those large trades land yesterday PM (as corrupt as that potentially is).

Let's see what happens

I've had a sweet spot for Mars for a while now, having taken a large position at 32p and an optimistic view of the future. All being well, we should see a good recovery over the coming weeks and I wish you all the best with this (especially the long holders, who are currently down!).
Good luck all!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-53144440

Summary:
-Care home sees 36 new cases in an outbreak reported this evening.
-They had been testing, however, "The hospital said it "used the best tests possible" but only 75% of tests carried out were accurate".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-53135626

More confirmation of what we already know.

https://twitter.com/avacta/status/1273868557743464448

Nice spot Wiggly.

Unless I'm very much mistaken, FDA approval will not be an issue.

“At least 12 more months of testing” - David Wilson (Avacta)