Member Info for RorkesDrift

Don't seem to be able to do it on android phone?

Technosaurus.

Agree 100%. I think a product X failed regulatory because it was a synthetic "natural" product but they had no idea of how it was eliminated from the body.

Article in print.

Viral loads in saliva are comparable to those in NPS and ranged from 9.9 × 10 2 to 1.2 × 10 8 copies/mL during the first week of symptoms and decrease over time.

My take is that at peak and presymptomatic the viral load is high enough to be detected by a LFD. Affirmers have a binding dynamic that is proportional to concentration - they are reliable at nanomolar rather than picomolar concentrations. I'm guessing that this means they have a higher LoD than the current PCR. The downside of this is that someone with low viral presence may therefore be less infectious (I don't know). Suspect we will hear more soon but I was surprised that saliva seems more reliable than nasal but people keep sticking cotton buds up their noses. I'm hoping its just trumps doctors havent told him.

Premier Miton Group – 8.13%

Baillie Gifford & Co Limited – 7.12%

Lombard Odier Asset Management – 4.80%

Directors hold about 0.5%

More competitors than I realised. Doesnt mention Avacta.

A different articke mentions affimer binding at nanomolar sensitivity so about to Google virus concentrations in saliva. Reiterate that PCR is current gold standard but is not easy to scale up - requires labs and humans. On the whole is background but the market place will be competitive - seems others may get there before us with poorer test.

Biggest takeaway but might be confirmation bias is the States would focus testing 900k per day - lower than predictions on here. Oh and other tests will cost $1.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/coronavirus-antigen-tests-quick-and-cheap-too-often-wrong

That may have been me - need to know whether the kids can open the burger van up

This is going to sound nieive. Given they know whether the test works or not but we don't would they have to wait until info out there. They do mention acquisitions in their blurb but my own feeling is they overstretched themselves with cytiva purchase and revenue has dropped off. Wonder why they didn't borrow it - not an accountant.

There phase 3 study showed issues with tolerability plus not against gold standard. They can make a case for better use of resources and pricing will be key but I'm not blown away. The covid thing is a bit too nearly doors for me (as is avactas). Will watch to see what their next set of data looks like - preclinical. If it makes it I'm guessing at least a year. And by then vaccines may be here.

Thank you Yorkshire. Really interesting company and lots of parallels with Avacta. I'm going to do some more research - their MKT cap is similar to Avacta now - they are much closer to market and are partnering with Allergan in a competitive space. Might start to build - will let you know but if you can point me at info that wd be great.

Inovio seem to be inserting a DNA plasmid for the spike protein into patients own cells. The cells then go to produce the spike protein thus provoking an immune response. The response is specifically to the spike protein and thus the resulting AB bind to it (neutralise). From third year biochem i think these ABs are made by B-lympocytes which multiply during active infection. The T-cells and memory cells produced are then on stand by - like a normal vaccine. My biggest doubts are time scales - I don't think they have completed any phase 3 work on any vaccine of this type. Getting DNA plasmids into human cells is notoriously difficult but I guess it only needs to prime immune system. They seem unbelievable bullish about time scales. The Oxford group are using adenovirus in a similar way. Truth is lots of vaccine work out there but it seems to me they will take a long time and the neutralising is mediated through the normal production of ABs - that's how vaccines work in part.

I admit to being skeptical about Avacta approach as well. Great in theory - parallel is using donated serum but a long way to go. Unproven - we don't know doses required, tolerability etc. The size of such a project would probably exceed vaccines cause approach is novel - I guess if we look we will see something out there for mAB. Hence my belief current pricing is based on test not the covid therapeutic.

Again - not a doctor and possibly the living embodiment of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Got me thinking though.

I'll have a look - seen the plant based stuff plus invested in protalix - similar technology. Thanks for heads up

Thanks - bumping

What Abraham just said x a lot.

You said "I read that there are other pharmaceuticals out there that have managed to neutralise the covi -s spike and some of these companies, in their clinical trials have also gone further...."

Point me in right direction...

So your immune systems is complicated and takes time to respond. Hence talk about donated serum from previous patients. A neutralising could both reduce the circulating amount of virus and act as a decoy. Thatsva bit of 2+2 on my behalf. Not a doctor.

Doing some research. CEO states they are covered by patents but its a bit vague. The company has been around for 15 years. Do we have any strong IP and for how long?

What older and wiser just said - not a static market - indeed the aim is to not have a market

They are protein like. But proteins can be enzymes, blood products, structural, hormones, chemical signals - hence lots of avenues to explore for biotech.

The difference with these "proteins" is they bind very specifically to other molecules. Try googling "antibody market'. So lots of uses from labs to therapeutics. The later is likely to be worth $100B next couple of years. Affirmers have numerous advantages over AB - 30 minutes on avacta website would help. However, short term rise is due to simple proposition of a test that is specific to covid19, quick result, easy to apply and has the ability to detect virus in saliva. The last bit remains unproven.

Hey CO you lost me at "RD - you’re welcome, and it’s just an Excel model, using the Rand() function to randomise".

To be honest I've heard front a friends brother there is a global shortage of excel spreadsheets. The government are telling anyone in case they set off a panic but I'm going to dig out my copy of lotus 1-2-3.

PK75.

SNAP.

I'm writing to AZ and GSK as we speak and asking whether they would mind being taken over.