RAT(ATK) Effectiveness / Money / Politics

[hamleknoi]

RAT - Rapid Antigen Test
ATK - Antigen Test Kit

Same same.

Recently found out that an Australian RAT testing company that I invested into was effectively sabotaged by the Australian PCR lobby and government. It seems as if money and politics were the driving factor behind public health decisions.

“We’re saying to companies, submit your data, show us, but we can’t formally make an approval decision until we get a signal from the government” - TGA boss John Skerritt.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/31/a-scramble-how-australian-governments-flipped-from-resisting-to-embracing-covid-rapid-antigen-tests

No w they're approving any old junk.

I wonder how this compares to Thailand. It took a long time for RATs to be accepted here. And I've been watching the FDA since. Like in Australia, they've been approving subpar tests without regard. On one hand we have to be careful about containing spread, on the other, they're approving useless tests.

Let me give you an example of how ridiculous it is. I quickly drew up a table of 3 tests to illustrate the problem, not going to bother doing the complete set.

The full lists of approved tests can be found here: https://www.fda.moph.go.th/sites/Medical/SitePages/test_kit_covid19.aspx#

 

The data that I used for test effectiveness was gathered here:  https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.44.2100441

 

That's real-world data from Germany September 2020 to April 2021.



For the uninformed, Cq is the PCR cycle equivalence. A low Cq number means that there is a high viral load. The percentage in the Cq <25 column should be 100% if the test is worth anything. 47% means that the kit will detect only half of the infections in a contagious person, the rest will be a false-negative.

The Cq >25 <30 is the important column as this is where pre-contagious infections are detected and the person can be quarantined before they spread the virus.

I know that I gave only 3 examples, but I assure you that if I were to complete the table, most of the tests would have inadequate Cq <25 values, and pathetic to non-existent Cq >25 <30 ones.

This results in many false-positives. why is this? Is it to move testing from the private, to the public sphere, where people can self-diagnose? Private and government entities report official figures. Individuals do not, and they may want to hide their positive result for various reasons. This way, official case numbers appear low. There may also be political or economical motivations behind it. Lower official case numbers make the government appear to have handled the situation more effectively. Moving testing from government-sponsored PCR to private 7-11 tests means less spending.

One test that you might find in your local 7-11 was registered by 2 entities. It's a Xiamen Boson Biotech test. Superior to the others that I'd listed earlier, but it still has a lot to be desired.





บริษัท ชอบไทย จำกัด
Shop Thai Co., Ltd. - https://www.jatujakmall.com/

บริษัท เวเกอร์อิเล็กทรอนิกส์ (ไทยแลนด์) จำกัด
Veger Electronics (Thailand) Co., Ltd. - http://www.vegerthailand.com/

what does a shopping company, an electronics one, and 7-11 have in common with the medical industry? On top of that, the kits have a 'Lotus NL BV' marking. That is a Netherlands based distributor. Did they resell EU stock back to Thailand via a local 'distributor'? Did China offload their old (expired?) stock into Thai 7-11s via the same method?

Fresh kits sold into Thailand should feature the local distributors' details. Not last year's Netherlands marks.

To me, it's not surprising that money and politics are a driving force locally, however, it appears that the same has occurred in Australia, parts of which had the longest lockdowns in the world.

You could also reason that the government/s appeased the PCR lobbies delaying RATs, they've made a ton of money, and now that they've unleashed any old RAT test upon the masses, they can go ahead and say "we told you that RATs are inaccurate, and now the virus is widespread due to their use". Deflecting blame for the rise in cases whilst ignoring the fact that they allow inadequate tests onto the market. Only a small percentage of self-tests will be reported officially. That is the key. And the more of them that test negative, the more it can be ignored.

Official figures are FAR from the reality. Since the sole purpose of lockdowns of the past was purely case numbers, they want to bring that down to appear to be competent and to not have to be criticised for past actions. That's my theory anyhow. They realise that they cannot keep it going. Vaccines or no vaccines, alcohol, or not. Nothing can stop the virus from spreading so no one wants to be responsible for ruining businesses and lives.

[Trip Hop]

Your understanding of Cq (or equivalent CT) values is somewhat incorrect. The Cq<25 is just as important if not actually more important than Cq>25<30, as it identifies higher viral load and therefore more infectious. 
 

I agree that there a lot of poor performing tests out there but there are also some very excellent ones. The UK made and CE marked Avacta AffiDX test has been independently verified to have a sensitivity of 100% at CT<27 and 98.3% at CT<28 with a specificity of 99%.  The infectious range generally being acknowledged to be CT<27-28. There are also other UK made tests that whilst not as good as the AffiDX, are not that far behind?

 

https://avacta.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Brochure-Type-00901-SC2-Product-Specification-Sheet-v3-ID-33989.pdf

[hamleknoi]

3 hours ago, Trip Hop said:

Your understanding of Cq (or equivalent CT) values is somewhat incorrect. The Cq<25 is just as important if not actually more important than Cq>25<30, as it identifies higher viral load and therefore more infectious. 
 

I agree that there a lot of poor performing tests out there but there are also some very excellent ones. The UK made and CE marked Avacta AffiDX test has been independently verified to have a sensitivity of 100% at CT<27 and 98.3% at CT<28 with a specificity of 99%.  The infectious range generally being acknowledged to be CT<27-28. There are also other UK made tests that whilst not as good as the AffiDX, are not that far behind?

 

https://avacta.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Brochure-Type-00901-SC2-Product-Specification-Sheet-v3-ID-33989.pdf

If you have a high >25 percentage, by default you're going to have a high <25 one. At the same time it means that you can pick up low viral loads before the person becomes infectious.

The test I put my money on (EuGeni) can detect >30 and is 97.3% / 99.6% and that's with viral transport medium interference as there weren't enough covid patients / fresh samples in Victoria at the time that the VIDRL were doing the trials.

The Aussie govt approved some tests that are as low as 18% at <25 according to data from Germany. And they don't monitor performance post-approval asides from requiring the manufacturer to provide them with assurance that they can detect whichever variant is dominant at any particular time. They're insane!

And they've held EuGeni back for 3.5 months now. Approved another Chinese test yesterday though. I'm convinced that they want to hide true case numbers with rubbish self tests and self-reporting as elections are coming up in 5 months. who's gonna report that they're positive to the govt that had the harshest lockdowns in the world?

[hamleknoi]

I know that no one gives a RATs (rapid antigen tests - good one dummy).

But I thought that I'd just throw this in here for reference as to how bad the situation REALY is. Just one example.

 

WHO recommended against its use.




German validation, didn't meet criteria. Only 58.8% sensitive in the best scenarios.




Recalled in France. And I didn't dig beyond Germany and France and the WHO thing. Sadly, this also got approved by Australia. Standards are tightening worldwide now, but it's too little, too late. Should've independently tested these things prior to blind approval based on paperwork from a country known for faking basically anything they're involved with.




Approved in Thailand no issue.