Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

jcm.asm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 275 posts

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#71

Post by tnorthcutt »

chime wrote: post #50
cerebral_oasis wrote: post #38

I took this antibody test through LabCorp on Friday and tested positive. I have been in strict (see: paranoid) isolation with one other person since March 7 and haven't felt sick or anything close to it since then. I did have what I thought was a strange flu/cold early February with a sore throat, post-nasal drip, wildly varying body temperature, and lower back pains. In hindsight those are COVID-19 symptoms. the per…

Did your doctor have to refer you to LabCorp? I read that LabCorp doesn't want any walk-ins.

From that page:

The test can also be conveniently requested through LabCorp.com using an independent physician service, PWNHealth, to determine if the test is right for you.

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#72

Post by conanbatt »

colechristensen wrote: post #63
jedberg wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been waiting for a decent serum test because both my wife and I had "the flu" with symptoms consistent with COVID-19, me in mid-January and her in late February. How did you get the test?

I had the same test through Circle Medical, was able make the appointment and get the test in the same day.

We have lots of availability still!

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#73

Post by bb88 »

As someone who lives in Boise, I'm angry:

1. People had to buy this test. It wasn't free.

That means

2. whoever bought the test were guinea pigs in this study.

And

3. That fact wasn't being made clear in Crush the Curve.

LabCorp should refund all the tests in Boise immediately.

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#74

Post by projektfu »

lbeltrame wrote: post #57
projektfu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want neutralizing antibodies you can do serum virus neutralization assay. It's more complicated and takes longer. Testing doesn't need to be 100% to be effective, but it does need to be better than random chance. A mixture of contact tracing, PCR testing, antibody testing and effective quarantines could be used to make the virus go away, but would require a coordinated strategy that the US has not attempted to…

The people from the Duke-NUS Medical School have designed a "surrogate virus neutralization test"[1] which might be used to perform neutralization tests without the security requirements of using live virus. [1] https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-24574/v1

Cool info.

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#75

Post by y-c-o-m-b »

jrockway wrote: post #68
cerebral_oasis wrote: post #38

I took this antibody test through LabCorp on Friday and tested positive. I have been in strict (see: paranoid) isolation with one other person since March 7 and haven't felt sick or anything close to it since then. I did have what I thought was a strange flu/cold early February with a sore throat, post-nasal drip, wildly varying body temperature, and lower back pains. In hindsight those are COVID-19 symptoms. the per…

Good anecdote. I also had a "weird cold" in February with symptoms that are unusual for me but typical of COVID-19, and have been waiting to get the antibody test. I kind of expect it to turn out the same way. (Otherwise, I would really like to figure out what the "weird cold" that everyone had in February was. Because it sure was weird, and everyone I know had it.)

"Weird cold" in February checking in. I did not have any temperature variations or fevers, but I got struck with a fatigue like no other. For the first time since I was 3 years old, I took afternoon naps three days in a row because I was just completely wiped out. It's rare for me to take a nap at all (happens maybe once a year)! It took two weeks to get out of this fatigued state. My other symptoms were "chills-like" sensations throughout the day, post-nasal drip and burning feeling in my chest/lungs but very minimal cough. My child did have COVID-19 symptoms back around Feb/March (can't remember exact time-frame) and I even wrote about that here on HN. Maybe I should take this test.

I still think there's a possibility this virus was already in the US before 2020. I don't think they ever found a cause to the "mystery respiratory virus" in Virginia from July 2019:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/health-officials-to...

> Three people have also died, but Dr. Benjamin Schwartz of the Fairfax County Health Department said Wednesday afternoon that those who died were "older" and had complex health problems. Officials don't yet know the extent to which the respiratory illness contributed to their deaths, he said.

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#76

Post by jrockway »

tmh88j wrote: post #70
jrockway wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good anecdote. I also had a "weird cold" in February with symptoms that are unusual for me but typical of COVID-19, and have been waiting to get the antibody test. I kind of expect it to turn out the same way. (Otherwise, I would really like to figure out what the "weird cold" that everyone had in February was. Because it sure was weird, and everyone I know had it.)

Same here, had a lingering cough for nearly a month. The other weird part is I had flu-like symptoms for 3-4 days before I had any congestion and a runny nose. I can't recall any other time I've had a cold that didn't result in congestion within 24 hours of the first sign symptoms like a cough or sore throat. Just an anecdote, won't know until I'm able to get tested.

Yeah, I know exactly what you're talking about. I get a lot of colds, and they are all the same. The day before, I have a ton of unexplained energy. Then my body hurts. Then my throat hurts. Then it's like that for a week. It is always the same.

Whatever I had in February was completely different. The cough is all I really remember. It is so rare for me to get a cough that even though I was around people that were coughing, I didn't really expect to get sick. But get sick I did. (Oddly the thought of COVID-19 never crossed my mind even once during the whole thing. I knew about it but I didn't make the connection at all. It seems so strange to me in retrospect.)

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#77

Post by renewiltord »

ghshephard wrote: post #47
barbegal wrote: post #22

> We tested 1,020 serum specimens collected prior to SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the United States and found one false positive This gives 95% confidence intervals of between 0.0% and 0.5% false positive rate.

Okay - I'm going to reveal my statistics ignorance here - but if they did get a false positive, how does 0.0% fall within the range of possibilities (or is that allowing for it might be 0.0499..% or lower?)

What is the smallest number greater than 0?

For the things considered here, the point 0 is measure zero so open starting at 0 and closed at 0 are the same. L

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#78

Post by rconti »

cerebral_oasis wrote: post #38

I took this antibody test through LabCorp on Friday and tested positive. I have been in strict (see: paranoid) isolation with one other person since March 7 and haven't felt sick or anything close to it since then. I did have what I thought was a strange flu/cold early February with a sore throat, post-nasal drip, wildly varying body temperature, and lower back pains. In hindsight those are COVID-19 symptoms. the per…

Interesting. I've long been of the opinion that I was definitely NOT exposed to it, although I had a persistent lingering cold in late feb/early march. (Symptoms took way longer than usual to clear -- but no flu symptoms).

That said, if it was in California before folks thought it was, it's theoretically possible.

My wife works in a hospital and will be tested for COVID-19 and antibodies, FINALLY, sometime this week (we think). If, for some reason, she happens to have antibodies, I'm going right out to get tested myself-- and, actually, I'd like us BOTH to get tested for antibodies (second time for her) because otherwise we'd be left guessing if one of us had antibodies and the other did not.

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#79

Post by rconti »

danans wrote: post #53

It seems like a voluntary test for someone without symptoms is of limited value to the individual (beyond their individual curiosity) since we don't know enough either way about reinfection risk at this point, and the result is not terribly actionable - you can't just walk into stores without a mask because you have a positive antibody test - nobody is going to trust your lab result printout as a reason to avoid publ…

Agreed, but even on the individual level it could be helpful. Visit family members, while still taking precautions, for example.

Re: New Abbott SARS-CoV-2 antibody test has 99.90% specificity and 100% sensitivity

#80

Post by barbegal »

ghshephard wrote: post #47
barbegal wrote: post #22

> We tested 1,020 serum specimens collected prior to SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the United States and found one false positive This gives 95% confidence intervals of between 0.0% and 0.5% false positive rate.

Okay - I'm going to reveal my statistics ignorance here - but if they did get a false positive, how does 0.0% fall within the range of possibilities (or is that allowing for it might be 0.0499..% or lower?)

Correct, I rounded to the appropriate number of significant figures. I hate extra significant figures which suggest that the data is more precise than it really is
Post reply on HN