Gold Seeker, I am not arguing with you about the future prospect of this company. I couldn't care less what your opinion is.
I am only here to point out that your statements regarding the science of the RECAF test are blatantly false and factually wrong. You clearly lack any knowledge in biology.
It's actually incredible how absurdly incorrect and nonsensical your posts are:
"To put it simply, there is no match for the specificity and sensitivity of molecular assays."
Seriously? What does this even mean? There are sooo many things wrong with this statement, and it's just ONE example.
1) A molecular assay doesn't refer to any one particular test. It is a generic term used for ANY scientific procedure carried out in a laboratory related to genes or proteins...NO ONE knows what you're trying to say when you mention "molecular assays"...
2) Molecular assays don't have specificity or sensitivity. They give you information about the composition of an unknown substance. When you use the results to screen for a disease, THEN you start to use specificity/sensitivity.
3) Specificity/sensitivity are not inherent characteristics of the type of test. An immunoassay for prostate cancer can have higher spec/sens than a biopsy, but that doesn't mean ALL immunoassays are more spec/sens than biopsies. A biopsy for breast cancer can just as easily be more spec/sens than a corresponding immunoassay.
PLEASE just stop.
AI
