Spike proteins, ant...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Spike proteins, antigens and LFT tests

13 Posts
8 Users
0 Likes
4,175 Views
MikeAustin
Posts: 1191
Topic starter
(@mikeaustin)
Joined: 4 years ago

Can anyone advise me on the following? Please correct me where I am wrong.

The LFT test picks up the presence of a particular pathogen by recognising antigens on its surface. This should indicate an infection. The covid-19 antigen used for the LFT test is the spike protein.

A jab gives the body an instruction to create this spike protein so the antibodies have a target to practice on. Reports show that this spike protein gets distributed round the body, although that may not have been the original intention.

When an LFT test is taken, the mucous or saliva could contain this spike protein. The LFT test will return a positive result based on the spike protein. As the full virus is not present, this is not a true infection.

The apparent increase in so-called 'cases' at the moment could be largely due to increased LFT testing on greater proportions of jabbed people.

The PCR test is different. In the rare event that it is performed correctly, it picks up virus fragments dead or alive. As far as I understand, spike protein alone will not produce a positive result.

12 Replies
Posts: 262
(@stpioscafe)
Joined: 3 years ago

The apparent increase in so-called 'cases' at the moment could be largely due to increased LFT testing on greater proportions of jabbed people.

It's a good question, I'll guess. A typical vaccine side effect (a slight fever) is generally a short lived event, it lasts 1 or two days. If it lasted longer there would be good grounds for vaccine hesitancy. While it is on going, the immune system is busy killing the cells that look suspcious, since the cells have no way to replicate, this is soon done. The amount of vaccine is titrated to ensure most people's bodies have disposed of the suspcious cells within a day or two. hence as long as the LFT is taken before or a long time after a jab, the problem you allude to should not happen. I imagine the sensitivity of the LFT is calibrated to minimise the possibility. Of course such calibration must be done properly or else the LFT would not find a real case.

Anyway, that's my guess.

Reply
Posts: 615
 jmc
(@jmc)
Joined: 4 years ago

Can anyone advise me on the following? Please correct me where I am wrong.

The LFT test picks up the presence of a particular pathogen by recognising antigens on its surface. This should indicate an infection. The covid-19 antigen used for the LFT test is the spike protein.

A jab gives the body an instruction to create this spike protein so the antibodies have a target to practice on. Reports show that this spike protein gets distributed round the body, although that may not have been the original intention.

When an LFT test is taken, the mucous or saliva could contain this spike protein. The LFT test will return a positive result based on the spike protein. As the full virus is not present, this is not a true infection.

The apparent increase in so-called 'cases' at the moment could be largely due to increased LFT testing on greater proportions of jabbed people.

The PCR test is different. In the rare event that it is performed correctly, it picks up virus fragments dead or alive. As far as I understand, spike protein alone will not produce a positive result.

According to this paper the commercial LTF antigen tests seem to use N proteins from SARs CoV 2 as the marker but the antibody tests use the ACE/ACE2 as the marker. So a body swimming in vaccine related spike proteins should not effect the antigen test but for the antibody tests it definitely looks like a real problem.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8054491/

While looking for a relevant subject paper I found a pretty typical "bloody stupid" paper showing how the RT/PCR tests were "more accurate" than LFT antigen tests. The authors had made a typical bio-science paper basic mathematical error which I would have marked F if they had handed it in as course work. They were comparing the specificity / sensitivity of a molecular test which has a low true positive for active infections with the specificity / sensitivity of an actual antigen test for active infections. We are not even talking comparing apples with oranges, mathematically speaking. We are talking comparing apples with a crate of cider.

Reply
Posts: 1539
(@miahoneybee)
Joined: 4 years ago

Thanks jmc..I knew you would be able to answer the question mike posed..
😊👍

Reply
MikeAustin
Posts: 1191
Topic starter
(@mikeaustin)
Joined: 4 years ago

According to this paper the commercial LTF antigen tests seem to use N proteins from SARs CoV 2 as the marker but the antibody tests use the ACE/ACE2 as the marker. So a body swimming in vaccine related spike proteins should not effect the antigen test but for the antibody tests it definitely looks like a real problem.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8054491/

Thanks jmc. You were one of the people I had in mind when posing the question!

I will scour that report carefully. As you say, it seems to suggest that LFT tests use a different marker. It does not say that is always the case, rather that it is 'often' the case. Now 'often' needs to be referred to the net number of tests rather than, say, the various makes of test.

I had already found that the antibody test was a problem but that is not used to determine so-called 'cases'. The antigen test is what needs clarification.

Reply
Page 1 / 3
Share:
March 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
Free Speech Union

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Create New Account!

Please note: To be able to comment on our articles you'll need to be a registered donor

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.