Comprehensive Antibody Test COVID-19

[Ricky C]

NIH is conducting an antibody test of up to 10,000 volunteers. Participants must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

 

[Ricky C]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 2:05:50 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:

NIH is conducting an antibody test of up to 10,000 volunteers. Participants must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

Damn Google Groups.

Healthy volunteers over the age of 18 from anywhere in the United States can participate and will be asked to consent to enrollment over the telephone.. Individuals with a confirmed history of COVID-19 or current symptoms consistent with COVID-19 are not eligible to participate.

There, cut and paste, no messy typing.

I'm signing up. I'm wondering if what I had at the end of February might have been COVID-19. They don't say if they report your results to you.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Ricky C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:951e6876-23dc-
4c6a-9fee-ade230980bae@googlegroups.com:

Participa
nts must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

Now that is the stupid part. There should be at least 100 tests done
on zero symtom suspected cases, and another 100 on zero sysmptom non-
suspect participants.

And it should be that way for every 10k tests, and we should move
toward AMY walk-in testing. And eventually multiple tests for at risk
individuals.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-04-28 14:08, Ricky C wrote:

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 2:05:50 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
NIH is conducting an antibody test of up to 10,000 volunteers. Participants must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

Damn Google Groups.

Healthy volunteers over the age of 18 from anywhere in the United States can participate and will be asked to consent to enrollment over the telephone. Individuals with a confirmed history of COVID-19 or current symptoms consistent with COVID-19 are not eligible to participate.

There, cut and paste, no messy typing.

I'm signing up. I'm wondering if what I had at the end of February might have been COVID-19. They don't say if they report your results to you.

Thanks, I emailed them as well. The announcement was almost 3 weeks
ago, so they're probably full, but it's worth a try.

They say that after the study is done you can ask them for your results.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Ricky C]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 3:29:25 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Ricky C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:951e6876-23dc-
4c6a-9fee-ade230980bae@googlegroups.com:

Participa
nts must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

Now that is the stupid part. There should be at least 100 tests done
on zero symtom suspected cases, and another 100 on zero sysmptom non-
suspect participants.

And it should be that way for every 10k tests, and we should move
toward AMY walk-in testing. And eventually multiple tests for at risk
individuals.

Don't follow what you are talking about. What is a zero-symptom suspected case? If they have no symptoms what would make them a suspected case??? Are you talking about people who are known to be exposed to someone infected, like living in the same house?

They are excluding people who are likely to have the disease, i.e. those with symptoms or known to have had the virus. It seems likely they are checking the remainder of the population to see how many have had exposure without having symptoms. That will include both classes of people you mention above.

If their questions are detailed enough they will be able to distinguish whatever different groups may exist.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 1:27:41 PM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 3:29:25 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Ricky C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:951e6876-23dc-
4c6a-9fee-ade230980bae@googlegroups.com:

Participa
nts must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

Now that is the stupid part. There should be at least 100 tests done
on zero symtom suspected cases

Don't follow what you are talking about. What is a zero-symptom suspected case? If they have no symptoms what would make them a suspected case???

Yeah, that's a distinction without a difference.

Everyone will find fault with some kind of selection. I'm concerned that under-18 age
group is not represented; that could be a major asymptomatic carrier population in
schools.

Even with 10,000 in the group, this is a statistics-sensitive kind of study, so... expect it
to give equivocal results, and there will have to be a follow-up or three.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 7:45:45 AM UTC+10, whit3rd wrote:

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 1:27:41 PM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 3:29:25 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Ricky C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:951e6876-23dc-
4c6a-9fee-ade230980bae@googlegroups.com:

Participants must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

Now that is the stupid part. There should be at least 100 tests done
on zero sypmtom suspected cases

Don't follow what you are talking about. What is a zero-symptom suspected case? If they have no symptoms what would make them a suspected case???

Yeah, that's a distinction without a difference.

Everyone will find fault with some kind of selection. I'm concerned that under-18 age group is not represented; that could be a major asymptomatic carrier population in schools.

Seems unlikely. In Australia - where they are doing a lot of testing - very few children have been infected, and almost all of them have been infected by adults. This was unexpected - schools are frequently hotbeds of infection for other viral and bacterial diseases

> Even with 10,000 in the group, this is a statistics-sensitive kind of study, so... expect it to give equivocal results, and there will have to be a follow-up or three.

And somebody will be willing to pay for them. They aren't cheap.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[David Brown]

On 28/04/2020 21:29, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Ricky C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:951e6876-23dc-
4c6a-9fee-ade230980bae@googlegroups.com:

Participa
nts must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

Now that is the stupid part. There should be at least 100 tests done
on zero symtom suspected cases, and another 100 on zero sysmptom non-
suspect participants.

And it should be that way for every 10k tests, and we should move
toward AMY walk-in testing. And eventually multiple tests for at risk
individuals.

If they want test subjects in various categories, they will get them.
If they want 100 people with current serious Covid-19 symptoms, they
will wander down to the nearest hospital and pick up volunteers there.
They only need to advertise for people in categories where they want a
lot of test subjects - but that does not mean they are /only/ testing on
people without the virus.

For a lot of antibody tests, it's easy to get good results from anyone
with the antibodies. The challenge is avoiding false positives for
people who have not had the disease, but perhaps have antibodies for a
related virus. So that is the category of people you need most for
testing the test.

 

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote in news:r8bc5l$an6$1@dont-
email.me:

- but that does not mean they are /only/ testing on
people without the virus.

Nobody said anything about 'only'. I said AND.

Every 10,000 tests they do, they are doing on patients they already
suspect.

Unless they also outside that 10k or within it, but ALSO test random
zero symptom non-suspected cases to zero in on the onset of incubation
and early symptoms, because if those tests have positive results, those
patients can be monitored before known symptoms crop up and can be more
attentive to other we may not be noticing.

 

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote in
news:r8bc5l$an6$1@dont-email.me:

For a lot of antibody tests, it's easy to get good results from
anyone with the antibodies. The challenge is avoiding false
positives for people who have not had the disease, but perhaps
have antibodies for a related virus. So that is the category of
people you need most for testing the test.

Yes, The efficacy of the hardware we are using will improve that
way. I think they use MEMS devices. Not sure.

But we need a quick blood drop sniffer, as it were. Not hours or
days, but minutes at most.

We need a good fast RNA level virus detector too.

 

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 2:05:50 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:

NIH is conducting an antibody test of up to 10,000 volunteers. Participants must be over 18 and not have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-begins-study-quantify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

Neither of those news releases uses the word, comprehensive, which means you're just making stuff up. What in your mind makes this little study so comprehensive?