Jump to content

Special Technique Adopted to Detect Omicron


webfact

Recommended Posts

South African doctor who raised alarm about omicron variant says symptoms are ‘unusual but mild’

Dr Angelique Coetzee noticed otherwise healthy patients showing unusual symptoms and worries how the new variant might hurt the elderly

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/south-african-doctor-raised-alarm-omicron-variant-says-symptoms/

 

 

Edited by Sheryl
reduced font size
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, webfact said:

Dr. Supakit Sirilak, director-general of the department, said that as there had not been a particular kind of solution for tests for the Omicron variant of COVID-19, the department would develop special solution for Omicron testing in particular. He expected the development to be successful in about two weeks.

Amazing Thailand... If only they could develop their own vaccine.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So do they have samples of Omicron , that they can develop 

the tests from..... if so I hope they are careful with them....????

regards worgeordie

Not really necessary to have samples of Omicron to develop the special technique to detect Omicron although the headline is misleading. 

 

RT-PCR tests look for specific identifiers in the genetic material (not the entire gene sequence) of the virus in humans. Usually, the test looks for two or more identifiers to increase the probability of finding a match. If one identifier has mutated, the other can still return a positive result.

Many RT-PCR tests look for an identifier in the virus’ spike protein, the protruded area that enables its entry into the human body. If the spike protein mutates, as it has with the Omicron variant, then it is possible that such RT-PCR tests looking for identifiers in this region would not recognise the mutation as an identifier and would return a negative result.

Since RT-PCR tests look for more than one identifier, if it finds the identifier in the other region (meaning the person has the infection) but cannot find the identifier in the spike protein, it could indicate infection caused by the Omicron variant.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2021 at 2:38 AM, worgeordie said:

So do they have samples of Omicron , that they can develop 

the tests from..... if so I hope they are careful with them....????

regards worgeordie

What they are counting on is that only O appears to have both the Alpha and Beta mutations, by mixing the 2 solutions (Ab solutions?), you will detect O. Don't see how that would help. Seeing both show up simultaneously in SEPARATE tests might accomplish what they want, but it would make an assumption that no other variant contains BOTH Alpha and Beta mutations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2021 at 10:12 PM, Eric Loh said:

Not really necessary to have samples of Omicron to develop the special technique to detect Omicron although the headline is misleading. 

 

RT-PCR tests look for specific identifiers in the genetic material (not the entire gene sequence) of the virus in humans. Usually, the test looks for two or more identifiers to increase the probability of finding a match. If one identifier has mutated, the other can still return a positive result.

Many RT-PCR tests look for an identifier in the virus’ spike protein, the protruded area that enables its entry into the human body. If the spike protein mutates, as it has with the Omicron variant, then it is possible that such RT-PCR tests looking for identifiers in this region would not recognise the mutation as an identifier and would return a negative result.

Since RT-PCR tests look for more than one identifier, if it finds the identifier in the other region (meaning the person has the infection) but cannot find the identifier in the spike protein, it could indicate infection caused by the Omicron variant.

As long as they use primers in the non-mutated RNA bases they will be fine. Doesn't matter what is in between the primers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2021 at 7:15 AM, Enoon said:

It will become relatively harmless.

 

It is becoming so now.

 

Because the less threatening it is the more chance it has of survival.

 

Because humans will see no purpose in spending time and money to destroy it.

 

It will take it's place alongside the myriad, similarly harmless ailments that currently do no more than make us feel "a bit poorly".

 

Biggest threat from "OMICRON!" is that the teacup, in which the  media storm about it is raging, will crack.

 

 

No, the biggest threat is that the spike protein mutations will no longer be recognized by current vaccines and that the virus has similar devastating effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever happened to the sniffer dogs that could detect covid - no money in it...? Brushed under the rug....

 

Or the people keeling over in casinos (video)/on street (photos) dying from covid at start of pandemic in China...anyone remember that ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, freedomnow said:

Or the people keeling over in casinos (video)/on street (photos) dying from covid at start of pandemic in China...anyone remember that ?

There was a story on here just the other day about a woman dying in an alleyway

so they are still at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gottfrid said:

Just another try to make what they aim for here very small and tiny. Why always so negative about things they aim to do?

Always? Again with this, you refused to explain how this was the case yesterday and came up with your usual backtracking excuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Always? Again with this, you refused to explain how this was the case yesterday and came up with your usual backtracking excuses.

Exactly, and this was one of the ways of explaining just that. Sorry to see you did not get that.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Nonsense again.

 

Always means always...I do not spend all my time on this site so always is impossible.

See, when you lost and understood, you went in to word specifics. ???? for confirming!

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gottfrid said:

See, when you lost and understood, you went in to word specifics. ???? for confirming!

Lost...oh dear are you one of those posters.

 

And I always asked for specifics, as yesterdays exchange proved. In both quotes I mentioned the word always.

 

Keep digging.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...