RE: This article is ....5 Nov 2020 06:09
Isthisawinner, could post from the Independent.
Interesting comment from Professor Dweeks.
“These tests are known not to have a very good sensitivity,” says Deeks. “They miss people … And one of the big problems is they miss people who have lower levels of virus. So people who have just become infected and are becoming more contagious — it may miss those and tell them they’re fine — and they go off with a false sense of security while actually spreading the infection.”
Carl's test (as I have pointed out) is fast and sensitive. It is COMPLEMENTARY to the LFT test assays on trial in Liverpool. A fast secondary test is needed to address the lack of sensitivity from the LFT!!!
Carl's test must be specific.
He has demonstrated the specificity with his Tweet showing spikes and not showing spikes. The level of specificity needs to be assessed. Hopefully, the aptamer chimeric protein makes it very specific!
Now imagine, if I am correct and Carl's test is the ONLY antigen test that meets MHRA Guidelines Desired Criterion! Are two tests still needed??
Carl's test can also be used with the 'pooled testing' approach ( mathematical algorithmic methodology) to deliver mass testing!!
Time will tell, time will tell!
Its all about lab validation and clinical validation!
We really could be onto a winner here along with RMS (which we have increased our stake in from today)!!
DYOR!!
Hold for gold!
Carl's test - fast (tick), sensitive (tick), specific (tick)
Test, test, test
Hands, FACE, Space