advertisement


Anyone had a COVID-19 antibody test?

Wolfmancatsup

Wolfmancatsup

Empire State Human
As above. I was sent a test kit as part of a random survey by Imperial College & Ipsos MORI. Sadly, despite having a really strange cold/flu thing in March, my test came out negative, although the accompanying paperwork did say the test wasn’t 100% accurate.

Mick
 
Mrs P-T is having one on Friday. We tested positive for Covid in April, and she had a work-related antibody test a few weeks later (positive) and is now having another to see whether her antibody levels are still high enough to donate plasma for the NHS trials. It’ll be interesting to see what levels of antibodies have persisted 3 months down the line.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Mrs P-T is having one on Friday. We tested positive for Covid in April, and she had a work-related antibody test a few weeks later (positive) and is now having another to see whether her antibody levels are still high enough to donate plasma for the NHS trials. It’ll be interesting to see what levels of antibodies have persisted 3 months down the line.
Click to expand...
That will be very interesting. Would you mind reporting back here when you know, please?

Mick
 
Cheese said:
The test being therefore useless in medical terms, I guess it's just another way to make money.
Click to expand...

And there speaks someone with a poor grasp of statistics and science at best.

Can you tell me a diagnostic test that is 100% accurate?
At what percentage accuracy would you suggest that any test ceases to be useless in medical terms? Presumably only 100% is useful, given your comment and no mention of how accurate the test is in this case?
 
I know of 2 people who live together, had Covid couple of months back.
Both tested at King's recently
One positive, one negative

Not making sense and King's surely must have the best tests around ...
 
I did a test yesterday for the same study. Negative for me as well. Damn...
 
mikemusic said:
I know of 2 people who live together, had Covid couple of months back.
Both tested at King's recently
One positive, one negative

Not making sense and King's surely must have the best tests around ...
Click to expand...

The test are evolving but I doubt Kings has the "best".
No test is 100%, so there is that to contend with. Also, there is no data as yet about persistence of antibodies, and how that varies person to person. So, in a worst case, one person tested negative, correctly, because they already have no anti-bodies. Were they positive previously?

LOADS of explanations possible given that so little is known as yet. People have WAY too simplistic thinking about these things.
 
Kirk said:
Yes. Test unable to be processed (which I took as lost).
Click to expand...
The test I had, using my blood and a couple of drops of a supplied fluid, gave the the results within minutes, as they supplied the testing ‘gadget’, so it was down to me to tell the survey folk the result rather than the other way around.

Mick
 
Vinny said:
And there speaks someone with a poor grasp of statistics and science at best.

Can you tell me a diagnostic test that is 100% accurate?
At what percentage accuracy would you suggest that any test ceases to be useless in medical terms? Presumably only 100% is useful, given your comment and no mention of how accurate the test is in this case?
Click to expand...
I have been somewhat unclear maybe, such a test (or rather the statistics produced that way) may indeed be useful to the epidemiologist, but I maintain it is totally useless for us individuals and the people we come across in our daily lives.

I have had Covid at a very early stage (February), and I'd find it useful to know whether I can now go to crowded places without risking a more severe form of the same illness, or risking to contaminate others. Even if it's 99% sure, it is not 100%, and as a result I will continue to avoid gatherings like shopping on Saturday, choir singing, concerts, etc. I will change this habit on the day it can be proven without a doubt that I neither represent a danger for others nor for myself.

Being no epidemiologist, something still tells me somewhere that the test is not accurate 99%, but something below that figure. And I am pretty sure it's part part of the vast money-making machine which has only started.
 
Nick_G said:
Yes. Like you I had odd very watered-down flu symptoms in March, but the test was negative.
Click to expand...
So what is going on?
I too had a flu-like thing in February (can't be flu as I've been vaccinated) - is this some strange disease lurking under 'The' virus ?
 
zippy said:
So what is going on?
I too had a flu-like thing in February (can't be flu as I've been vaccinated) - is this some strange disease lurking under 'The' virus ?
Click to expand...

Being vaccinated for 'flu' doesn't stop you from getting 'flu.'

Flu, like Cancer is many different strains / types.

The vaccination for flu covers the most prevalent form currently doing the rounds (usually).
Even then, it is not a fail safe.
 
zippy said:
So what is going on?
I too had a flu-like thing in February (can't be flu as I've been vaccinated) - is this some strange disease lurking under 'The' virus ?
Click to expand...

I can only conclude that I must have had some sort of influenza virus that my immune system kept largely at bay, hence the very mild symptoms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top