Member Info for Yorkshirepragma

As a former University SL myself, I’d pose a couple of questions to Prof Peto.

1. Ref Lancet paper below (in which you are a contributor) ,how does Table 1 data ( illustrating reducing to nil sensitivity <30Ct ) for poor quality Innova ,lead to a Porton Down protocol ‘pass’?
2. If above (1 )passes, if you make a Cf profile of Affidix data , how does this product not pass the evaluation? Compare and contrast.
3. Several commentators have criticised PT analytical efficacy. Please comment in full defending these criticisms .
Regards .

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00204-2/fulltext

Cfds,
The rationale for ex UK sadly comes down to available supply ,and immediate ( in 2021) of the shelf availability. So it’s an unhelpful outcome for Uk industry but understandable.
More blame should reside with those ‘ managing ‘ the accreditation process. They have done a bad job in assessing new products, and it’s a case of not loosing scientific face.
It’s most disheartening that senior UK science majors ( John Bell et al) have not been able to swallow their pride and call it differently.
I’ve seen evidence of this’ in the flesh’,so quite upsetting when you consider the implications.
Shame…

Affidix…
-Stateside contracts emerge early on…
-European sales via Medusa19 develop well by sQ2
-APAC introductions ,but secondary to USA
-UK continues to buy ex UK,with political ramifications & John Bell et al defend their ineptitude to the last.

Cancer developments
- early data robust, helping a lot of folk ,and attracting ‘sig. interest .’

GLA

If this was an industrial company, a few people would be looking for work by now. Whole things a civil service mess and a singular disgrace.

Ent, my personal links indicate it’s a case of ‘we’ve made a mess of it’ but if we stand fast ( and alter the LFT validation process ,as has happened) nobody will notice.
However John Bell et al won’t be to be able to defend this flawed ‘ initial lab methodology’ on ultimate expert community scrutiny. It will be to their loss.
GLA

Ent. Thankyou for your insight.
Your comment on neglect of UKs LFT industry are spot on.The LFT ‘errors’ vis Porton Down evaluation protocol are bizarre . Moreover there is now a ‘face saving exercise here from the oversight players.
As a scientist ,I find their inability to have the courage to admit to ‘error’ unforgivable, particularly in view of the consequences for public health protection gf. Shamefull.

Apologies, jist is USA upping a few gears in response, and testing approvals imminent as we know.
…..Avacta likely in this arena.
GLA

https://www.ft.com/content/fc9dd465-c432-4264-919a-b3fdf3046fd8

USA, watch this space!
GLA

And only a few % of market equates to several £m / month.
GLA
And bwd Alastair & team!

Telegraph today carries article on former Tesco CEO appointed to GSK, to head healthcare. Interesting analogy with Avacta move to be supported by Boohoo/ Medusa ,as strategy to deploy commercial bounce.gf.
GLA

Peter Whitehurst , @ Agile et Medusa 19

& best in class v others.

Seagen, mooted for t/o….
https://investor.seagen.com/overview/default.aspx
“Avacta, compare & contrast…”
GLA

https://www.evaluate.com/vantage/articles/data-insights/other-data/bristol-and-glaxos-oncology-deals-vault-top-five

…&another drug conjugate…..sounds familiar
GLA

https://www.evaluate.com/vantage/articles/insights/ma/biopharma-takeovers-dry

Apologies article ref.

MM describes what’s feasible ref. historical moves.
Only added point is there’s a ‘smidgin ‘ of pent up demand after the Covid business effect.
No wonder AS was smiling last time I saw him….
GLA

‘Take an LFT ‘…BBCnews

One for Private Eye …follow on from Covid Profits of Doom pp26 no 1560.

Volume today speaks to this..gla

Goodish vol. Overseas buys?