RE: Oh dear Sona29 Oct 2020 21:50
Please bear with me here...
Looking at slides from the Avacta Investor Meet Company presentation, on September 28th, slide 26, on the LFT says:
* Clear focus by authorities on frequent testing to identify infectious people
* High specificity is essential to avoid very large numbers of false positives being referred for follow up.
* Sensitivity must be high (>90%) within the infectious group.
Not really as helpful as one might like, but an intention to do better than Sona Nanotech.
So how did Cytiva have Sona S&S on the lab at 96% and 96%, but clinical trials showed a marked degradation in Sensitivity to 84.6%.
That's some variance!
We also know that the LFT is prone to accuracy variation (I assume bad sensitivity as specificity should be highly constant) due to production variations. This was reported by an ex-Avacta employee on the Avacta BB.
Did Cytiva have a sensitivity systematic measurement error in their assessment of the Sona and Avacta LFTs?
Who knows?
Dido is reportly not keen on using saliva for testing. Why? LAMP and NCYT are moving to saliva.
Are the Government having second thoughts with Moonshot and the Avacta LFT?
Heaven forbid! But I need to ask the question.
The country cannot afford anither lockdown.
It could not afford school meals!
Vaccine may be close.
Could the Government contemplate proceding with LAMP, PCR and other novel tests and dismiss the cost of the LFT (because it is to late)?
I wonder .....
What does this mean for Carl's test??
Clinical testing seems to be the relevant thing for use of the test assay not lab testing.
It would be useful to know how the two moderately different sets of figures can be reconciled.
I was circumspect about Avacta's LFT sensitivity. This circumspection has increased!
Is Avacta's sensitivity good enough for FDA approval or have Cytiva dropped the ball??
Carl's test is fast, sensitive and the aptamer synthetic chimeric protein "soup" makes it specific.
Moreover, this technology offers the possibility of quantification of the target sequences (see poster HaHa posts)
I really do wonder if Carl's test is THE Antigen test.
I really do wish the Government would throw everything at this test to validate its S&S...
Perhaps I am wrong. But if I am right. WoW!
I keep asking why has the Avacta LFT been delayed to Q1 21?? ....
Well with the Market Cap so low here, there is a lot of scope for share growth from covid killer face masks and textiles and from Carl's test.
No one supplier can supply all of the covid tests required.
What value would we now put on BRH shares with two fantastic (amongst others) Companies in the BRH portfolio?
GLA.
DYOR.
Carl's test - fast (tick), sensitive (tick), specific (tick)
Test, test, test
Sign In
Follow the stocks
