Experts have discredited the insulin assay test ‘evidence’ against Lucy Letby. But it was obvious from the start that the test was unsuitable (and hence unreliable) as it said so, in red, on its label. The police interviewing Ms Letby ought to have told her this. But did they?

Lucy Letby's 'admission' of the insulin assay 'evidence' was taken as definitive by the Appeal Court. How absurd! She did not know what the results meant when the police claimed to her that this unsuitable and unreliable test 'proved' poisoning (Sun 20.8.23).

@peternhayes This is misleading. It wasn't just the immunoassay evidence, it was all the blood glucose tests showing severe hypoglycemia and the lack of response to hypoglycemia treatment in combination with the immunoassays and the lack of any other condition that proved poisoning

@apsamuelson @peternhayes The blood tested at COCH on the sample for 1 of the babies showed extremely high blood glucose despite the very low cotside tests???? I believe that same baby also had his long line tissue, so he wasn't getting the dextrose into his vein.

@apsamuelson @peternhayes So, does that exclusively point to Letby poisoning the infants with synthetic insulin? A quick peek at Google Scholar could explain glucose disturbances in neonates. One that Prof Lee adequately explained in the press conference! Here's a 'scholar' screen shot.