RLFANS.COM - The World's Most Popular Rugby League Website

Quote: DHM "I don't believe they test everyone who dies for covid. It might seem that this would be a logical thing to do but that's not always what actually happens. For example, we were looking for covid positive samples to test in our serology assays and at the height of the outbreak it became obvious that blood samples from people in hospital from covid were not being stored. We, and everyone else trying to work on the virus, had to scrabble around for positive samples even though thousands were dying globally each day. We ended up collaborating (and still are) with multiple institutions world wide, each with a set of samples to test. These sample sets ranged from 30 to around 150 in size. The biggest sample set I saw was from the team at Great Ormond Street I worked with who had around 160 - all NHS confirmed positives. That data is published. The Roche diagnostic assay that the govt bought 3.5 million of only showed data for around 40 positive samples in their FDA submission.

We are working with various organisations, and I believe that larger population monitoring and data gathering is definitely the objective. For example we may see sampling done in a different way - what we call "oral fluid", which is not actually saliva. It has the same antibody profile as serum but is obviously easier to collect - you just rub a big cotton bud around your gums for a minute or two then run in a serology assay. Our tests are highly sensitive and simultaneously measure antibodies to multiple viral proteins, you can even check what subclass of immunoglobulin is being generated (antibodies have several classes, IgG, IgM, IgA and IgE, plus several IgG subclasses). For vaccine development for example it's critical to fully understand the antibody response.
What I do know is that everyone is working flat out, it's quite inspiring sometimes.'"

Cheers for the detailed reply, appreciated.