Hi crumpets, thanks for your efforts and good intentions. I am one of those that agreed with Pharvest. Just to give you background, as some newbies may think the same way, and my way is not necessarily the right way. But just to share how I go about it.
Here are some databases with registered antigen tests that are available on the market:
Lists for Germany
https://www.bfarm.de/EN/MedicalDevices/AntigenTests/_node.html
Lists for the EU
https://covid-19-diagnostics.jrc.ec...get_type=6&search_method=AND#form_content
List for France
https://covid-19.sante.gouv.fr/tests
List from FIND (WHO related)
https://www.finddx.org/test-directory/
There are roughly about 500 of them and that excludes many that have appeared on the market recently. If I were to spend time researching each of them (read their IFUs, research the company and their manufacturing capacity etc) it would take me about 30 minutes to 1 hour for each test of interest. Considering that I have a job, family and life, but would like to devote 2 hours per day to research ADO (excluding other shares in my portfolio), that's still would take me about half to one year to research every single test that has been approved and on the market. So I do not do that. I have my criteria for which ones I am interested in to research and if I find it relevant, I might consider sharing such information with others. What is your criteria and how do you go on about it?
For me, because the EU does not really validates the tests by performing independent or in-depth validation of each test on the market, I am usually interested in the tests that the EU has already procured themselves (Abbott and SD Biosensor, and Innova for the UK) for distribution or those that they have approved for mutual recognition. ADO is targeting being added to that list so that its product can be used in the airports and for screening, so I like to compare them against ADO (you can find the links to those in one of my last comments). Another list is the ones that received the EUA from the FDA.
In terms of new technology that is not yet approved or is at the concept stage, there are many of them and sometimes I take note to see how far they go, but I don't think they warrant posting until they meet some other criterias. For example, I noted that there is now TPP in the UK for breath analyzers (which means the UK Government thinks it is a legit technology). However, I am not going to post any tests to discuss until I see one of interest that has high probability of meeting the TPP requirements.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...file/966283/Breath_TPP_Final_version_v1.0.pdf
Hope this helps.
(20min delay)
