TheeRook wrote: It standard testing procedure to dtermione the LOD, that is used by the FDA also.
Just face it with all these better Antigen tests being apporved by the FDA , it is no wonder they are not wasting time on the SONA Test with 84/90 %
Analytical Sensitivity: Limit of Detection (LoD)
The LoD for direct swab was established using heat-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 isolate USAWA1/2020 (NR-52286). The strain was spiked into the pooled human nasal swab matrix obtained from multiple healthy volunteers eluted in VTM and confirmed as SARS-CoV-2 negative by RT-PCR to prepare positive samples. The estimated LoD found from the initial twofold serial dilution test was confirmed by testing 20 replicates. The confirmed LoD for direct swab was 8 x 102 TCID50/ml.
The LoD for swab in VTM (BD universal transport media) was established using heat-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 isolate USA-WA1/2020 (NR-52286). The two-fold serial diluted strain stocks were spiked into each of 3 ml human nasal swab matrix obtained from multiple healthy volunteers eluted in 3 ml VTM tube. The estimated LoD found from the initial two-fold serial dilution test was confirmed by testing 20 replicates. The confirmed LoD for swab in VTM was 6.4 x 103 TCID50/ml.
The the test is performed near the LOD that SONA specified. Which should be 100%
HC reported it was not.
CareStart™ COVID-19 Antigen (near the cut-off samples) Performance
Sample category Overall % Agreement (result count)
True negative (zero analytes) 100.0% (10/10)
Low positive (2x LoD) 100.0% (10/10
oxinos wrote: They used heat treated viral samples. The link I post will shed light on this. Please read also the comments by some on this revelation. Especially read the comments by The-Modern-Age.
https://twitter.com/Mod3rnAge/status/1333435939507539969?s=20
It's unbelievable that Canada's National Microbiology Lab heat treated the specimens and then expected Sona's lateral flow test to detect dead or mostly dead virus in the Specimens.