นี่เคยเป็นคนที่ปวดท้องกระเพาะง่ายมาก แบบกินข้าวผิดเวลานิดเดียวปวด เครียดหน่อยปวด จนไปหาหมอ หมอจับตรวจหาเชื้อ H.pyroli ละก็เจอว่าติด ปีนั้นคือรักษาทั้งปี กินยาวันๆนึงเกือบ 10 เม็ด รักษาจนวงเงินประกันปีนั้นหมดต้องจ่ายเอง แล้วคือหมอ follow อาการเป็นปีกว่าเชื้อจะหมด แต่คือพอเชื้อหมดทุกวันนี้แทบไม่ปวดกระเพาะอีกเลย ใครที่ปวดท้องบ่อยๆ อยากให้ลองไปหาหมอเฉพาะทางทางเดินอาหารดูนะ เพราะหมอบอกว่าถ้าไม่รักษา นานไปเชื้อพวกนี้มันจะเป็นสาเหตุที่ทำให้เป็นมะเร็งกระเพาะอาหาร 🥹

📢A new study is out from Emory University that compares the performance of all available SARS-CoV-2 / Influenza combo rapid test brands against JN.1-lineage SARS2 strains The two main takeaways: 🧪Don’t waste your money on a more expensive brand or overthink your purchase. No single brand consistently performed better than all other tests - The lowest detected concentrations were achieved by different tests for each of the 4 viruses. 🧪It’s essential to wait until the END of the time window listed on the instructions to read the results. “We found that at low viral concentrations, many OTC tests were interpreted as negative at the start of the stated interpretation window but converted to a positive result by the end of the interpretation window.” They looked at the 8 SARS-CoV-2 / Influenza combo rapid tests that were available in the U.S market as of fall 2025. Unfortunately, they didn’t include the Aptitude Metrix molecular combo test, or the newer 4-in-1 rapid tests that include RSV from Flowflex and iHealth, because they were not yet available at the time. They tested the following 8 brands: • ACON Flowflex • iHealth • OSANG BinaxNOW*, QuickFinder • CorDx Tyfast • Healgen Rapid Check*, InBios, statID, Equate, INDICAID, GenaCheck, Consult, RiteAid, ACCUBIO, healthconfirm, RapidResponse, RapidGo, Walgreens, CVS • SEKISUI Osom • Watmind SpeedySwab • Wondfo WELLlife*, INDICAID, Hough, 2San *Specific test used in this study For the main portion of the study, to determine sensitivity, they examined the lowest concentration of virus at which each of the test brands would reliably (3 out of 3 tests) show a positive result. For H1N1, WELLlife and Osom performed the best. For H3N2, Healgen and SpeedySwab performed the best. For influenza B, Osom performed the best. And for SARS-CoV-2, Flowflex performed the best. As the authors point out, there isn’t really any sort of a clear pattern here, and the results are indicative of all tests having about equivalent capabilities. Next, they examined whether the readability of the results changed from the start to the end of the timed viewing window listed in the test instructions. The answer was consistently “yes”. In the 2nd image, all of the solid bars were positives that were able to be read at the end of the window, but were missed at the beginning of the window. It was a major issue across all tests - but especially with SARS-CoV-2, and especially with some brands (eg. WELLife, Osom, BinaxNOW). Analytical comparison of over-the-counter multiplex tests for influenza A, influenza B, and SARS-CoV-2: journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128…

40-60 adult who had XFG in Oct.2025 (2nd infection [1st XBB.1.5]), up-to-date on vaccines, with recent Pfizer LP.8.1. My guess therefore BA.3.2.2? FlowFlex (L) more sensitive to most SARS-2 variants than Healgen/Orientgene (R), but this anterior nasal swab contrast is striking.