Spartan Bioscience says Health Canada approves rapid COVID-19 test - CBC.ca | Canada News Media
Connect with us

News

Spartan Bioscience says Health Canada approves rapid COVID-19 test – CBC.ca

Published

 on


Ottawa-based company Spartan Bioscience has received Health Canada approval for its made-in-Canada rapid COVID-19 test, authorizing the sale of the device. 

“Spartan’s test is the first truly mobile, rapid PCR test for COVID-19 for the Canadian market,” a news release from the company states. “The Spartan COVID-19 system offers the speed and ease of use of a rapid test, while using the technology of lab-based COVID-19 testing solutions.”

Health Canada originally provided regulatory approval for the company’s device in April 2020 — with the federal government ordering 40,000 tests monthly. At the time, the portable test was being called a “game changer” by health officials because it could deliver on-location results within 60 minutes.

The federal agency restricted the device to research use in May, however, after finding problems with the test that made it unreliable. Approval was granted on Friday after the company conducted clinical trials based on a new device design, Health Canada spokesperson Natalie Mohamed told CBC News in an email.

“The Spartan Bioscience test is a point-of-care molecular test,”  Mohamed wrote. “This new device meets Health Canada’s requirements for safety and effectiveness.”

WATCH | Health Canada approves Canadian-made rapid COVID-19 testing system:

Canada’s health authority approved Spartan Bioscience’s rapid COVID-19 testing system. 3:12

New swab, upgrades to chemistry kit

Dr. James Spiegelman, a co-founder of the company who also practises internal medicine at Humber River Regional Hospital in Toronto, said the problems stemmed from the efficacy of the swabs used to collect tissue samples, not the machine itself.

Spartan originally used a proprietary cheek swab that it developed for other DNA diagnostics, he said, but it became clear that the swab wasn’t collecting enough genetic material to produce consistent, reliable results.

The company now uses standard nasopharyngeal swabs to collect tissue from the nose.

“We found that that provides the best sample for increased sensitivity of the test,” Spiegelman said.

Spiegelman said the company also made improvements to the sample processing kit so that it no longer needs to be shipped and stored at frozen temperatures but can be stored at room temperature. 

With the Spartan test, a trained health-care professional swabs the nose of the person being tested, places the swab into a processing kit that generates a chain reaction and then puts that kit into the cube-shaped device, which takes about 50 minutes to analyze and produce results. 

Spiegelman said the test could be used to provide quick and accurate COVID-19 diagnostics everywhere from hospitals and workplaces to pharmacies and remote communities. 

“I think [Spartan’s rapid test] will really help alleviate and give us a tool in our toolbox to reduce the spread of COVID-19,” he said.

Rapid tests already in use across Canada 

Rapid diagnostic tests are already in use in many settings across Canada to test for COVID-19, including in homeless shelters, long-term care homes and remote communities. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Tuesday that the federal government had distributed more than 14 million to the provinces and territories. 

“Hopefully we see these integrated into work environments, especially work environments where we know they’re at greater risk for outbreaks,” said infectious disease specialist Dr. Isaac Bogoch, who is also a member of the Ontario COVID-19 vaccine task force.

“I think you could think about certainly integrating them into certain schools or certain school settings, rural, remote, underserviced locations. There’s a lot of places where rapid tests would be extremely helpful.”

Spartan Bioscience CEO Roger Eacock said the company currently has the manufacturing capacity to produce 60,000 of the tests per week, but the company plans to ramp that up to 200,000 per week in the future. 

Eacock said the company already has deals with the federal government and several provinces, as well as some airlines and resource companies, and that shipments are expected to begin in the coming week.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

News

‘I still feel remorseful’: UWaterloo stabber apologizes at his sentencing hearing

Published

 on

KITCHENER, Ont. – The man who stabbed three people in a University of Waterloo gender studies class last year says he is remorseful and wants to apologize to anyone who was affected by his violent act.

Geovanny Villalba-Aleman addressed the court at the conclusion of his sentencing hearing today, saying his intention was not to promote violence and that he doesn’t know “what’s going on” in his head.

The 25-year-old has pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated assault, one count of assault with a weapon and one count of assault causing bodily harm in the June 2023 attack that left a professor and two students with stab wounds.

Federal prosecutors have argued the offences amount to terrorism in this case because they were motivated by ideology and meant to intimidate the public, while provincial prosecutors argued that the crimes were hate-motivated.

The provincial Crown cited Villalba-Aleman’s hateful remarks about feminists and members of the LGBTQ+ community in a manifesto written before the attack among the aggravating factors the court must consider in the sentencing.

But the defence is arguing that Villalba-Aleman’s motivation was his belief that “left-wing thinking” stifled his freedom of speech, and that the court should consider his statements to police a more accurate reflection of his thoughts than what he wrote.

Defence lawyers have rejected the notion that the attack was driven by ideology and also said the federal Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that terrorist activity took place in this case.

As the weeklong sentencing hearing drew to a close Friday afternoon, Ontario Court Justice Frances Brennan asked Villalba-Aleman if there was anything he wanted to say to the court.

He replied that he wanted to apologize “to anybody who might be affected by this” and said he believes that violence is “not good” for any reason.

“Even though I committed a violent attack, I still … don’t know what happened,” he said. “Right now, I don’t know what’s going with my head. I still feel remorseful for what happened.”

Villalba-Aleman said that some people may not believe his apology since “the act is done,” but he asked the judge to consider his remorse.

“If there is a way to reconsider the situation because I admit that violence is not good … my intention was not to promote more violence here,” he said.

Villalba-Aleman, an international student who came to Canada from Ecuador in 2018, initially faced 11 charges in the case.

Court has heard that he will eventually be subject to a deportation order.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 25, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

New regulations allow Canada Post to ship prohibited firearms returned in gun buyback

Published

 on

OTTAWA – The federal government is giving Canada Post the ability to store and transport prohibited firearms in new regulations that bring the retail gun buyback program one step closer to beginning.

An order-in-council dated Oct. 16 allows for prohibited assault-style firearms to be removed from safes at firearms retailers, transported and ultimately destroyed.

More than 1,500 models of firearms were banned in May 2020 after a mass shooting in Nova Scotia left 23 people dead, including the gunman.

Since then, retailers that have the weapons have been required to securely keep them in their inventory.

“Once the program launches, the updated shipping regulations will make the affected firearms and devices mailable matter and will temporarily permit businesses taking part in the program to ship firearms or devices via post,” said Gabriel Brunet, spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, in a statement on Friday.

LeBlanc previously said that the long-promised gun buyback would begin this fall.

First, the government will buy banned firearms from retail stores and have them destroyed. An individual buyback program for people who own prohibited weapons begins next year.

In a statement, Canada Post said it is prepared to take part in the first phase of the buyback program, because retailers are already familiar with the strict rules required to safely mail firearms.

The Crown corporation maintains it will not take part in the second phase of the program, involving individual firearm owners, because of concerns with employee safety.

Gun control advocacy group PolySeSouvient, which represents survivors and families of the 1989 École Polytechnique massacre, said it’s good news to see progress made on the buyback but it has doubts about the program’s overall effectiveness.

“Unless the list of prohibited assault weapons is completed, current owners of weapons prohibited in 2020 can simply take the money from the buyback to purchase new ones,” massacre survivor Nathalie Provost said in a statement.

The group is calling on LeBlanc to expand the ban to more than 450 firearms it says should have been included in the May 2020 ban, and similar weapons that have come on the market since then.

“These new models that entered the market remain legal, available and mostly non-restricted from what we can see,” Provost said.

The Criminal Code amnesty for owning prohibited assault-style firearms has been extended twice so far, and is now set to expire on Oct. 30, 2025. The regulations allowing these firearms to be mailed expires on the same date.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 25, 2024

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. A previous version stated that the gun buyback program applied to restricted firearms.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

County judge strikes down Ohio abortion ban, citing voter-approved reproductive rights amendment

Published

 on

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The most far-reaching of Ohio’s laws restricting abortion was struck down on Thursday by a county judge who said last year’s voter-approved amendment enshrining reproductive rights renders the so-called heartbeat law unconstitutional.

Enforcement of the 2019 law banning most abortions once cardiac activity is detected — as early as six weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they’re pregnant — had been paused pending the challenge before Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Christian Jenkins.

Jenkins said that when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and returned power over the abortion issue to the states, “Ohio’s Attorney General evidently didn’t get the memo.”

The judge said Republican Attorney General Dave Yost’s request to leave all but one provision of the law untouched even after a majority of Ohio’s voters passed an amendment protecting the right to pre-viability abortion “dispels the myth” that the high court’s decision simply gives states power over the issue.

“Despite the adoption of a broad and strongly worded constitutional amendment, in this case and others, the State of Ohio seeks not to uphold the constituional protection of abortion rights, but to diminish and limit it,” he wrote. Jenkins said his ruling upholds voters’ wishes.

Yost’s office said it was reviewing the order and would decide within 30 days whether to appeal.

“This is a very long, complicated decision covering many issues, many of which are issues of first impression,” the office said in a statement, meaning they have not been decided by a court before.

Jenkins’ decision comes in a lawsuit that the ACLU of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the law firm WilmerHale brought on behalf of a group of abortion providers in the state, the second round of litigation filed to challenge the law.

“This is a momentous ruling, showing the power of Ohio’s new Reproductive Freedom Amendment in practice,” Jessie Hill, cooperating attorney for the ACLU of Ohio, said in a statement. “The six-week ban is blatantly unconstitutional and has no place in our law.”

An initial lawsuit was brought in federal court in 2019, where the law was first blocked under the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. It was briefly allowed to go into effect in 2022 after Roe was overturned. Opponents of the law then turned to the state court system, where the ban was again put on hold. They argued the law violated protections in Ohio’s constitution that guarantee individual liberty and equal protection, and that it was unconstitutionally vague.

After his predecessor twice vetoed the measure citing Roe, Republican Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed the 2019 law once appointments by then-President Donald Trump had solidified the Supreme Court’s conservative majority and raised hopes among abortion opponents.

The Ohio litigation has unfolded alongside a national upheaval over abortion rights that followed the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe, including constitutional amendment pushes in Ohio and a host of other states. Issue 1, the amendment Ohio voters passed last year, gives every person in Ohio “the right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions.”

Yost acknowledged in court filings this spring that the amendment rendered the Ohio ban unconstitutional, but sought to maintain other elements of the 2019 law, including certain notification and reporting provisions.

Jenkins said retaining those elements would have meant subjecting doctors who perform abortions to felony criminal charges, fines, license suspensions or revocations, and civil claims of wrongful death — and requiring patients to make two in-person visits to their provider, wait 24 hours for the procedure and have their abortion recorded and reported.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version