simonmayes

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@Tim_Patmore @CowleyLtn Shame I didn’t know this yesterday.

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@CowleyLtn @OxfordshireCC @SCAS999 it is not clear who to vote for in the Churchill and Lye Valley division, to vote against the LTNs. anyone know?

[Matt Loose @mattloose]

Here comes the Nanopore IPO.... https://t.co/kvjDxkz6HW

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@bonnaud_dowell @AnnieEaves @MNaturallife @kateferguson4 @POLITICOEurope I think this is a fake news bot

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@bonnaud_dowell @kateferguson4 This is fake news . AZ weren’t involved when that error was made, and I don’t think had any involvement in the trial.

[Jillian Hammond @jil_hammond]

Excited to have finally reached a > 100 kb N50! And this is matched with an impressive 88 Gb output. Great job by the wizards at @circulomics and @nanopore to combine ultra long reads with high throughput in the new UL kit

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@julieanngirly @wombatsareok @DebbeeHutchins1 @will29803 Really 😂

[Oxford Nanopore @nanopore]

We're partnering with @SourceBio, who will offer our high-accuracy LamPORE #COVID19 test as a service in the UK, from their accredited labs. Read more:https://t.co/qyN8jNVcNv

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@minouye271 @Andbagbiker @williamnhutton I think the PHE chart is based on Pillar 1 testing only. The other data is from all Pillars (1, 2 and 4). Presumably a way of normalising data as testing volume increases.

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@williamnhutton This data is consistent with data on John Hopkins and worldometer. The chart on the governments PHE website seems to be inconsistent with this? Is the gov using an incorrect analysis?

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@statesdj Agree, centralised qPCR is slow, logistically complex and difficult to scale.

There are modern equivalents that use isothermal PCR but for some reason not adopted.

https://t.co/dvlTXnpGSX

https://t.co/DpKTS6qqpR

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@pmdfoster @ChrisGiles_ @jburnmurdoch @FT @pmdfoster what do you think about this? Which journalists are scrutinising the governments choices on testing technology? In 3-6 months time, when other countries adopt this technology it will be obvious, but all too late by then.

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@pmdfoster @ChrisGiles_ @jburnmurdoch @FT Why is the government’s strategy to ‘swab’ testing using outdated qPCR not being questioned? There is modern tech that can provide 15min, point of care, accurate results.

Similar principle to the Abbott test. Nothing challenging about scaling this up

https://t.co/grdsuX0Bvo

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@uksciencechief Why use centralised qPCR to conduct ‘swab’ testing, which is slow, logistically complex and difficult to scale?

There are equivalent, modern technologies that provide the same result in 20min, with little equipment and can be conducted at point of care
eg
https://t.co/dvlTXnpGSX

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@AdamJKucharski centralised testing using qPCR - too slow, logistically complex and not easily scalable. Need develop home use point of care assay using isothermal
https://t.co/grdsuWJ06O
Seen this work on gDNA with very high sensitivity. trivial challenges to integrate into home use kit IMO

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@bramstynen @AMWHMe @AdamJKucharski i wouldn't assume it requires a very narrow temperature window unless you know. In any case, POC assay could be coupled with +/- control samples to control for that. And as suggested - positive samples could be sent off for qPCR validation.

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@bramstynen @AMWHMe @AdamJKucharski why do you think it is not realistic?
https://t.co/eTaxliddYy
I've seen this work on gDNA, and the paper states it can work from swabs. 15min point of care assay, just a heat block at 65oC required. Should be looking to new tech, not centralised qPCR assays.

[simonmayes @simonmayes2000]

@DHSCgovuk @CMO_England @CMOWales @CathCalderwood1 @PHE_uk @publichealthni @PublicHealthW @scotgovhealth @NHSEngland @healthdpt Why do government choose a qPCR based method for testing (slow, expensive, not easily scalable). Latest tech can detect RNA from the virus in ~30min at point of care, no significant equipment required. Clinical validation should be trivial. https://t.co/eTaxlhVD70

[Spike Willcocks @Spikew3]

@Wollenbergus @Clive_G_Brown Ongoing motivation