RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:why this stock lost 50% in last 2 months?Well said whatdoiknow, one week closer to Approval..
whatdoiknow123 wrote: zoe18,
I agree with that article in general but what needs to be clearly stressed is that it seems to be becoming clearer to many experts in the field that Analytical parameters do not always coincide with Clinical relevance.
LOD, and Sensitivity are both Analytical calculations. It may be thought ( and usually is ) that a low LOD and a high Sensitivity are to be sought and that the lower the LOD and the higher the Sensitivity the better.
That is why the various PCR tests are boasting when they can produce " superior" figures to their competitors.
The evidence is however suggesting that this Lab-based hierarchy is causing problems in the field.
These super accurate tests are actually often counter-productive picking up the wrong patients, those that are not contagious any longer, those that are no longer infected, and that is hampering the fight against Covid. They can also confuse when they are used to validate other tests eg, in Sona´s case where their Asymptomatic results were better than the Symptomatic ones.
Unfortunately we still have many here who continue to scaremonger ( wittingly or unwittingly) simply comparing these figures without making any attempt ( or being unable to understand the necessity) to put these accuracies in clinical context. They only confuse and cause fear.
What is worse is that some Companies also present their information in a biased manner obviously to protect their share of the cake.