Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
My thoughts as well.
Homework is the name of the game. We have a .pk getting ready to make some serious cash. Takes lots of homework to find one.
Take the q away and add the harp. Only solution to the equation. Legal bills have stacked up and they have got to hit the ground running fast. Should be fun to watch.
Greatest come back ever on the way or else a total loss in bankruptcy court. Which way will the coin fall???? We have bets on both sides of the fence. Who will walk away rich or poor???
Greatest breakthrough in modern medical diagnostics gets put on the shelf after a business deal gone bad or do the boys work it out?????? Decisions, decisions, and decisions.
Bio material patents. Excellent reading. Using a previous life forms epidermal cells to generate a new Bio-Material to detect disease by focusing on the elecromagnetic heart beat that every living cell generates.
And Dr Lee is not the only one that has worked with this in the lab. However, he did invent it and Xtend has the patents. Other scientist are playing around with the theory and the science is solid.
It is called Bioelectromagnetics and other scientist have noticed this activity and documented the science.
In vitro study of the effects of ELF electric fields on gene expression in human epidermal cells.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bem.20608/full
An acceleration of differentiation, at the expense of proliferation, is observed after exposure of various biological models to low frequency and low amplitude electric and electromagnetic fields. Following these results showing significant modifications, we try to identify the biological mechanism involved at the cell level through microarray screening. For this study, we use epidermis cultures harvested from human abdominoplasty. Two platinum electrodes are used to apply the electric signal. The gene expressions of 38,500 well-characterized human genes are analyzed using Affymetrix® microarray U133 Plus 2.0 chips. The protocol is repeated on three different patients. After three periods of exposure, a total of 24 chips have been processed. After the application of ELF electric fields, the microarray analysis confirms a modification of the gene expression of epidermis cells. Particularly, four up-regulated genes (DKK1, TXNRD1, ATF3, and MME) and one down-regulated gene (MACF1) are involved in the regulation of proliferation and differentiation. Expression of these five genes was also confirmed by real-time rtPCR in all samples used for microarray analysis. These results corroborate an acceleration of cell differentiation at the expense of cell proliferation. Bioelectromagnetics 32:28–36, 2011. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Our laboratory observed the following biological responses on various models of growing or healing bone tissues after exposure to low frequency and low amplitude electromagnetic fields performed with Helmholtz coils, and an induced current characterized by a carrier frequency of 4?KHz (pulse train) modulated by a fundamental wave of 15?Hz.
For mice embryos in vitro: A series of right and left limb buds (control and stimulated) from the same embryos were cultivated in a semi-synthetic culture medium for 6 days. Comparison of histological techniques (Toluidine blue, Hale's colloidal iron method) shows for each staining, a statistical increase in the concentration of acid glycosaminoglycans [Hinsenkamp and Rooze, 1982; Rooze and Hinsenkamp, 1982; Hinsenkamp, 1994].
For tibia and metatarsal bones of chicken embryos in vivo: White leghorn eggs incubated for 4 days were divided into two groups, control and stimulated, and placed in the same incubator. After sampling, bulk skeletal double staining following Watson's method was used to measure the total length of bone rudiment and the length of the primary ossification point. The statistical analysis shows a significant increase in the total length and also a relative acceleration in the ossification process of the primary ossification point [Rooze and Hinsenkamp, 1985; Hinsenkamp, 1994].
For quail embryos: 178 quail embryos were placed in a specific area between Helmholtz coils and a relation was observed between the different amplitudes of the local electric field and the ossification ratio. For this protocol, we used the same staining and methods as for the chicken embryos [Hinsenkamp et al., 1985a; Hinsenkamp, 1994].
These results and clinical studies [Hinsenkamp et al., 1984, 1985b, 1993a,b; Hinsenkamp, 1994] are all in agreement with an accelerated differentiation of the cartilaginous matrix preceding the ossification.
In the present protocol, we use cultures of epidermis on deepidermized human skin. This model of epidermal growth provides a simplified and well-characterized model to study the biological effects of low-frequency electric fields. This model uses a 40?Hz pulsed asymmetric charge-balanced carrier signal modulated by a fundamental frequency of 0.125?Hz and transmitted by two platinum electrodes [Jercinovic et al., 1996; Hinsenkamp et al., 1997]. On the stimulated cultures, the results showed:
a decrease in growth area surrounding the explants;
better stratification with an increased number of cell layers;
a decreased percentage of cells marked with [H3]-thymidine.
Planimetry, histologic examination, and [H3]-thymidine labeling results published by Hinsenkamp et al. 1997 suggested that low-frequency pulsed electrical stimulation had influenced differentiation of the epidermal culture because better structured and mature epidermal layers were formed in areas around stimulated explants. This was achieved at the expense of the proliferation of the keratinocytes culture as the number of mitoses decreased in parallel with the growth area.
It is interesting to note that results obtained in the study using low-frequency pulsed electric current reproduced the same conclusion we obtained in studies on the effects of electromagnetic fields on bone tissue. Bone studies showed faster maturation of the cartilaginous matrix associated with an acceleration of the ossification in embryonic tissue models and on fracture callus when exposed to an electromagnetic field [Hinsenkamp, 1994]. These results confirm the acceleration of differentiation at the expense of proliferation observed in vivo on different organisms (human and animal) and in vitro on tissue and cell cultures with the same kind of electric signal.
Considering the very coherent response of our biological models to specific low frequencies and low-amplitude, asymmetric, charge-balanced, pulse-train modulated electric or electromagnetic fields, we try to identify the mechanism involved at the cell level through microarray screening.
Biological Model
Human epidermal explants were cultured at an air–liquid interface on decellularized human dermal supports (resulting in cell stratification similar to the in vivo physiological epidermal development). Two platinum electrodes are used to apply the electric signal. Pairs of samples from the same skin donors were prepared for the study. In each pair, one sample is exposed to electrical stimulation for 40?min per day for 11 days and the other is used as control.
The in vitro model is prepared with skin harvested from human abdominoplasty after plastic surgery. The dermal support preparation includes: removal of epidermis, 20 successive freeze-thaw cycles of the remaining dermis, gamma radiation (7?KGy), and cutting of the dermis in a 60?mm?×?30?mm rectangle. For epidermis explants, a thin layer of epidermis is removed from the skin with a Wagner's dermatome. Punch biopsy is used to remove a 3?mm circle of the epidermis layer.
The model is completed by the culture medium and foam on which the dermal support lies. Six epidermal explants, 3?mm in diameter, are placed on the dermal support. After 3 days, when the explants are attached to the dermal support, two platinum electrodes are placed on each side and are used to apply the electric signal (Fig. 1).
Culture medium is composed of Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium and Ham's F12 nutrient mixture (3:1?v/v), 10% fetal calf serum, 6?µg/ml gentamicin, 50?U/50?µg penicillin/streptomycin, 0.25?µg/ml fungizon, and 0.45?µg/ml hydrocortisone. The culture medium is changed in each dish every 48?h. Eighty-four explants of the same patient are distributed on 14 dermal supports.
The control and stimulated groups are placed inside the incubator without stimulation for 3 days to allow rest and explant attachment to dermal support. We realized a control sample before this 3-day period at J-3, and after at J1. We collected three other control samples at J4, J7, and J12 and three stimulated samples at J4, J7, and J12, at days 4, 7, and 12, respectively (Fig. 2). To obtain enough total RNA for microarray and real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (real-time rtPCR) experimentation, 12 explants are sampled and pooled for RNA extraction under each sample condition. To make a link with the previous results [Jercinovic et al., 1996; Hinsenkamp et al., 1997] and validate the success of the biological and electrical stimulation protocols, the same procedure was followed including the culture duration of 15 days.
Figure 2. Study design. First control sample (J-3) and second control sample (J1) are made before and after the 3-day attachment period. We analyzed three other control samples at J4, J7, and J12 and three stimulated samples at J4, J7, and J12, at days 4, 7, and 12, respectively.
All Petri dishes (control and stimulated) are placed in the same incubator (37?±?0.3?°C, 5% CO2). Temperature of culture medium was checked before and after stimulation with a digital thermocouple thermometer, Fluke 52 dual input (Fluke, Everett, WA). Two T-type hypodermic probes were used, one for the control Petri dish culture medium and the other for stimulated box culture medium. The incubator had not been opened between the pre- and post-stimulation measurements. No modification of the culture medium temperature (36.0?±?0.32?°C) had been observed in the control and stimulated Petri dishes before and after stimulation.
Electrical Stimulation Pattern
The output of the generator consists of a biphasic, asymmetric, charge-balanced current stimuli, with a repetition frequency of 40?Hz modulated by a fundamental frequency of 0.125?Hz. The stimulus is repeated during 4?s followed by a 4?s break, for 40?min/day for 11 days. Electrical stimulation is applied through two platinum (Pt) electrodes (50?mm?×?2?mm?×?0.5?mm) in contact with the dermal support.
The generator output current amplitude is 20?mA peak and consists of a current generator and a 2.1?µF capacitor connected in series. By measuring the time constant of the potential (V) at the output of the generator, we may assimilate the dermal support to a pure resistance. The time constant measured is 430?µs, and Tau?=?RC gives us directly the resistor value (200?Ohms), which is the same result obtained with an electronic multimeter. Also, by adding a 200?Ohms electronic resistor in series, the time constant has been doubled.
Figure 3 shows the value of the electric field at the peak current amplitude of 20?mA (including the culture medium, foam, and dermis). The electric field at any point is measured using needles. These measurements are analyzed using COMSOL simulation software (Stockholm, Sweden), which provides maps of an electric field, the current distribution, and the voltage at any point. The COMSOL simulation validation is made by comparing electrical potential measurements at any point. The maximum electric field value around the electrode is 400?V/m. From the position of the six explants of epidermis (Fig. 1), the explants receive an electric field close to 275?V/m. The simulation also shows the current distribution between the dermis and the environment. Variation of electric current is uniform and 20% of current density goes through the dermis, and 80% through the culture medium.
Electrical pattern (wave form, intensity, frequency of stimulation) shown in Figure 4 is the same as in the in vitro study published by Hinsenkamp et al. 1997 and the clinical study on chronic wound healing [Jercinovic et al., 1994]. The choice of daily stimulation is based on a review of the literature on the human application of electric and electromagnetic fields for chronic wound treatment [Vodovnik and Karba, 1992].
Level 3 Cellular metabolic process (GO:0044237) 63
Primary metabolic process (GO:0044238) 58
Regulation of biological process (GO:0050789) 54
Cell communication (GO:0007154) 48
Macromolecule metabolic process (GO:0043170) 43
Level 4 Signal transduction (GO:0007165) 43
Regulation of cellular process (GO:0050794) 39
System development (GO:0048731) 32
Anatomical structure morphogenesis (GO:0009653) 30
Biopolymer metabolic process (GO:0043283) 29
Level 5 Organ development (GO:0048513) 28
Cell-surface receptor linked signal transduction (GO:0007166) 24
Cellular protein metabolic process (GO:0044267) 22
Cell development (GO:0048468) 19
Negative regulation of cellular process (GO:0048523) 17
Level 6 Tissue development (GO:0009888) 13
Regulation of nucleobase, nucleoside, nucleotide, and nucleic acid metabolic process (GO:0019219) 13
Organ morphogenesis (GO:0009887) 12
RNA biosynthetic process (GO:0032774) 12
Cell death (GO:0008219) 12
Level 7 Ectoderm development (GO:0007398) 12
Regulation of transcription (GO:0045449) 12
Transcription, DNA-dependent (GO:0006351) 12
Programmed cell death (GO:0012501) 9
Cyclic-nucleotide-mediated signaling (GO:0019935) 7
Level 8 Epidermis development (GO:0008544) 12
Regulation of transcription, DNA-dependent (GO:0006355) 12
Apoptosis (GO:0006915) 9
Transcription from RNA polymerase II promoter (GO:0006366) 9
Regulation of programmed cell death (GO:0043067) 8
Level 9 Regulation of apoptosis (GO:0042981) 8
Regulation of transcription from RNA polymerase II promoter (GO:0006357) 7
Angiogenesis (GO:0001525) 6
Positive regulation of programmed cell death (GO:0043068) 6
G-protein signaling, coupled to cAMP nucleotide second messenger (GO:0007188) 6
For the stimulated group, the expression profiles of two clusters containing 11 and 41 genes indicated a general up-regulation of genes over time. Two other clusters containing 6 and 24 genes indicated a general down-regulation of genes over time, and 51 of these 82 genes are annotated in the gene ontology biological process at level 3 (Table 2).
Table 2. Results Obtained Through the FatiGO Tool Using the Gene Ontology Biological Process for 82 Genes of the Stimulated Group Level GO biological process Number of genes
Level 3 Cellular metabolic process (GO:0044237) 30
Primary metabolic process (GO:0044238) 28
Cell communication (GO:0007154) 18
Macromolecule metabolic process (GO:0043170) 17
Regulation of biological process (GO:0050789) 16
Level 4 Signal transduction (GO:0007165) 15
Regulation of cellular process (GO:0050794) 13
System development (GO:0048731) 11
Protein metabolic process (GO:0019538) 10
Biopolymer metabolic process (GO:0043283) 9
Level 5 Cell-surface receptor linked signal transduction (GO:0007166) 9
Cellular protein metabolic process (GO:0044267) 8
Organ development (GO:0048513) 8
Cellular lipid metabolic process (GO:0044255) 8
Pregnancy (GO:0007565) 7
Level 6 Tissue development (GO:0009888) 7
Proteolysis (GO:0006508) 5
G-protein coupled receptor protein signaling pathway (GO:00071 86) 4
Protein modification (GO:0006464) 4
RNA biosynthetic process (GO:0032774) 4
Level 7 Ectoderm development (GO:0007398) 7
Fatty acid metabolic process (GO:0006631) 4
Transcription, DNA-dependent (GO:0006351) 4
Regulation of transcription (GO:0045449) 3
Post-translational protein modification (GO:0043687) 3
Level 8 Epidermis development (GO:0008544) 7
G-protein signaling, coupled to cyclic nucleotide second messenger (GO:0007187) 3
Icosanoid metabolic process (GO:0006690) 3
Regulation of transcription, DNA-dependent (GO:0006355) 3
Transforming growth factor beta receptor signaling pathway (GO:0007179) 3
Level 9 Prostanoid metabolic process (GO:0006692) 3
G-protein signaling, coupled to cAMP nucleotide second messenger (GO:0007188) 3
Osteoblast differentiation (GO:0001649) 2
Positive regulation of programmed cell death (GO:0043068) 1
Sphingoid catabolic process (GO:0046521) 1
The gene expression is compared at different sampling times within the two groups (Table 3) and in the same period between the stimulated and control groups (Table 4).
Table 3. Number of Genes With an Expression That Is Modified in Control Samples at Days 4, 7, and 12 Compared to J1control, and the Number of Regulated Genes With an Expression That Is Modified in Stimulated Samples at Days 4, 7, and 12 Compared to J1control (2?=?FC?=?-2 With P?=?0.05) J(4, 7, or 12)control/J1control J(4, 7, or 12)stim/J1control
Up-regulated Down-regulated Up-regulated Down-regulated
J4 93 203 315 626
J7 389 313 228 397
J12 397 609 441 505
Table 4. Number of Regulated Genes When Comparing Stimulated and Control Groups at Days 4, 7, and 12 (2?=?FC?=?-2 With P?=?0.05) J(4, 7, or 12)stim/J(4, 7, or 12)control J4 J7 J12
Up-regulated 39 30 237
Down-regulated 265 190 259
The comparison of the list of significantly up- and down-regulated genes (2?=?FC?=?-2 with P?=?0.05) at the three stimulated times with their respective controls showed the following three up-regulated genes present during all experimental procedures at any sampling time:
Thioredoxin reductase 1 (TXNRD1), FC: J4?=?2.02, J7?=?3.22, J12?=?2.34; P: J?=?0.05, J7?=?0.05, J12?=?0.02.
Activating transcription factor 3 (ATF3), FC: J4?=?2.49, J7?=?13.41, J12?=?9.28; P: J4?=?0.03, J7?=?0.05, J12?=?0.03.
Membrane metallo-endopeptidase (MME), FC: J4?=?3.02, J7?=?5.53, J12?=?20.28; P: J4?=?0.005, J7?=?0.005, J12?=?0.04.
A further comparison of the gene list of J4 stimulated with J4 control shows that one gene on the up-regulated list is Dickkopf Homolog 1 (DKK1), FC?=?4.42 and P?=?0.01, and one gene on the down-regulated list is microtubule-actin cross-linking factor 1 (MACF1), FC?=?-2.66 and P?=?0.008.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Top of page
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Acknowledgements
REFERENCES
The results obtained with microarrays and confirmed by real-time rtPCR corroborate the results obtained previously on the same model using histology, thymidine labeling, and planimetry.
The robustness and quality of the results obtained by microarray technology were assessed by several papers. It was demonstrated that data from the two different technologies, microarray and real-time rtPCR, yield comparable results [Canales et al., 2006; Morey et al., 2006]. In the present study, regulation of all tested up-regulated genes was confirmed. The regulation of MACF1, the down-regulated gene in the microarray results, was also confirmed by real-time rtPCR but to a lesser extent.
Because our current results on cell cultures are totally consistent with previous in vitro and in vivo results mentioned in the Introduction Section, the cell mechanism studied by microarray and confirmed by real-time rtPCR seems to reflect in vivo situations with no significant interference from other physiological regulations.
The microarray analysis performed on epidermis skin cells exposed to ELF shows a significant up- or down-regulation in gene expression. The biological functions of genes concerned by a variation of their expression confirmed the macroscopic observation: an acceleration of differentiation at the expense of proliferation.
An analysis of gene expression at the three stimulated times compared with their three respective controls shows three genes (TXNRD1, ATF3, MME) up-regulated during the entire stimulation time. All play a part in cell proliferation and differentiation:
TXNRD1, plays a role in the diminution of the proliferation in the embryo.
ATF3, increases concentration in the process of differentiation of chondrocytes.
MME, stops mitosis in G1 phase and plays a role in diminution of the proliferation.
Dickkopf Homolog 1 (DKK1) plays a role in the negative regulation of Wnt receptor signaling pathway [Gene Ontology Consortium, 2000; van der Horst et al., 2005]. The effect of the Wnt down-regulation was a reduction of cell proliferation [Pasca di Magliano et al., 2007] and an induction of terminal cell differentiation [Boyden et al., 2002; van der Horst et al., 2005]. Many Wnt effects are mediated through ß-catenin, which accumulates in the cytoplasm and translocates to the nucleus if the Wnt pathway is activated. In the absence of Wnt signaling, ß-catenin is phosphorylated by the serine/threonine kinases, casein kinase, and GSK-3 [Nusse, 2005].
DKK1 is regulated by the protein kinases, (SAPK)/c-Jun amino-terminal kinases (JNK) signaling cascades [Colla et al., 2007]. SAPK/JNK is activated by a variety of environmental stresses, such as UV or ?-radiation, inflammatory cytokines, and growth factors [Johnson and Nakamura, 2007; Weston and Davis, 2007]. Some environmental stresses are wave type and an ELF receiver is likely to complete the list of JNK pathway receptors or activators.
Microtubule-actin cross-linking factor 1 (MACF1) plays the role of a positive downstream regulator in the Wnt/ß-catenin signaling pathway [Chen et al., 2006]. An active Wnt signaling pathway requires a translocation to the cell membrane of Axin and its associated proteins [Chen et al., 2006]. This translocation is impossible without the presence of MACF1. Down-regulation of MACF1 has the same purpose as the action of DKK1 on the Wnt molecule: an inactivation of the Wnt pathway and a decrease in ß-catenin concentration.
None of our factual observations are involved in pathological manifestation but, through the activation of a normal physiological process, they may have potential therapeutic applications [Hinsenkamp et al., 1984, 1985b, 1993a,b]. Those applications are possible when an acceleration of cell differentiation is useful; for example, in the hypertrophic nonunion with pre-existing fibrocartilage, to accelerate the maturation of cartilage before ossification. This type of therapeutic application is probably responsible for the good prognosis observed in the treatment of tibia hypertrophic nonunions [Hinsenkamp et al., 1985b]. Other examples are pathologies where inhibition of the Wnt signaling pathway could be an interesting therapeutic target.
In the literature, some papers analyzed a possible effect of EMF on infantile leukemia. The most frequent leukemia in the child is acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Several papers concerning this subject indicate an activation of the Wnt signaling pathway in ALL [Khan et al., 2007] and an increase in the concentration of ß-catenin [Chung et al., 2002]. Other articles showed inhibition of the Wnt signaling pathway as “an attractive target for the use of more specific therapies…” [Román-Gómez, 2007]. In our results, the ß-catenin (present in the Wnt signaling pathway) and the Wnt signaling pathway are inhibited by the increased expression of the gene responsible for the synthesis of DKK1. A protocol is being established to investigate this hypothesis on blood cells.
Jump to…Top of pageAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSAcknowledgementsREFERENCES
Acknowledgements
Top of page
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Acknowledgements
REFERENCES
The authors are grateful to C. Maenhaut and G. Dom of the Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Biologie Humaine et Moléculaire (IRIBHM) for their technical support in real-time rtPCR validation. We also thank P. Soularue and S. Baulande from PartnerChip, CEA Genopole, Evry, France, for their collaboration in the microarray analysis.
Jump to…Top of pageAbstractINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSAcknowledgementsREFERENCES
REFERENCES
Top of page
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Acknowledgements
REFERENCES
Allen D, Winters E, Kenna PF, Humphries P, Farrar GJ. 2008. Reference gene selection for real-time rtPCR in human epidermal keratinocytes. J Dermsci 49: 217–225.
PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 6Boyden LM, Mao J, Belsky J, Mitzner L, Farhi A, Mitnick MA, Wu D, Insogna K, Lifton RP. 2002. High bone density due to a mutation in LDL-receptor-related protein 5. N Engl J Med 346(20): 1513–1521.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 521Canales RD, Luo Y, Willey JC, Austermiller B, Barbacioru CC, Boysen C, Hunkapiller K, Jensen RV, Knight CR, Lee KY, Ma Y, Maqsodi B, Papallo A, Peters EH, Poulter K, Ruppel PL, Samaha RR, Shi L, Yang W, Zhang L, Goodsaid FM. 2006. Evaluation of DNA microarray results with quantitative gene expression platforms. Nat Biotechnol 24(9): 1115–1122.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 199Chen H-J, Lin C-M, Lin C-S, Perez-Olle R, Leung CL, Liem RKH. 2006. The role of microtubule actin cross-linking factor 1 (MACF1) in the Wnt signaling pathway. Genes Dev 20: 1933–1945.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 30Chung EJ, Hwang SG, Nguyen P, Lee S, Kim JS, Kim JW, Henkart PA, Bottaro DP, Soon L, Bonvini P, Lee SJ, Karp JE, Oh HJ, Rubin JS, Trepel JB. 2002. Regulation of leukemic cell adhesion, proliferation, and survival by beta-catenin. Blood 100(3): 982–990.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 51Colla S, Zhan F, Xiong W, Wu X, Xu H, Stephens O, Yaccoby S, Epstein J, Barlogie B, Shaughnessy JD, Jr. 2007. The oxidative stress response regulates DKK1 expression through the JNK signaling cascade in multiple myeloma plasma cells. Blood 109(10): 4470–4477.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 25Gene Ontology Consortium. 2000. Gene ontology: Tool for the unification of biology. Nat Genet 25: 25–29.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 5158Hinsenkamp M. 1994. Electromagnetic stimulation of osteogenesis and fractures consolidation. Brussels: Royal Academy of Belgium, Science Classes. 336 pp.
Hinsenkamp MG, Rooze MA. 1982. Morphological effect of electromagnetic stimulation on the skeleton of fetal or newborn mice. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 196: 39–50.
PubMed,ChemPortHinsenkamp M, Burny F, Donkerwolcke M, Coussaert E. 1984. Electromagnetic stimulation of fresh fractures treated with Hoffmann external fixation. Orthopedics 7: 411–416.
Hinsenkamp M, Rooze M, Noorbergen M, Tuerlinckx B. 1985a. Topography of EM exposure and its relationship to biological effects on tissues. In: ChiabreraA, NicoliniC, SchwanH, editors. Interactions Between Electromagnetic Fields and Cells. New York: Plenum Press. pp. 557–567.
Hinsenkamp M, Ryaby J, Burny F. 1985b. Treatment of non-union by pulsing electromagnetic field: European Multicenter Study of 308 cases. Reconstr Surg Traumat 19: 147–151.
PubMed,ChemPortHinsenkamp M, Hauzeur JP, Sintzoff S. 1993a. Preliminary results in electromagnetic field treatment of osteonecrosis. Bioelectrochem Bioener 30: 229–235.
CrossRef,Web of Science® Times Cited: 1Hinsenkamp M, Hauzeur JP, Sintzoff S. 1993b. Results in electromagnetic fields (EMF) treatment of osteonecrosis. In: SchoutensA, ArletJ, GardeniersJ, HughesS, editors. Bone Circulation and Vascularization in Normal and Pathological Conditions. New York: Plenum Press. pp. 331–336.
Hinsenkamp M, Jercinovic A, de Graef C, Wilaert F, Heenen M. 1997. Effects of low frequency pulsed electrical current on keratinocytes in vitro. Bioelectromagnetics 18(3): 250–254.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(253K)References
Jercinovic A, Karba R, Vodovnik L, Stefanovska A, Kroselj P, Turk R, Dzidic I, Benko H, Savrin R. 1994. Low frequency pulsed current and pressure ulcer healing. IEEE Trans Rehab Eng 2(4): 225–233.
CrossRefJercinovic A, Hinsenkamp M, Scarceriaux B, Willaert F, De Graef C, Heenen M, Goldshmidt D. 1996. Effects of direct constant current (DC) on keratinocytes in vitro. Bioelectrochem Bioener 39: 209–214.
CrossRef,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 2Johnson GL, Nakamura K. 2007. The c-jun kinase/stress-activated pathway: Regulation, function and role in human disease. Biochim Biophys Acta 1773(8): 1341–1348.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 60Khan NI, Bradstock KF, Bendall LJ. 2007. Activation of Wnt/beta-catenin pathway mediates growth and survival in B-cell progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Br J Haematol 138(3): 338–348.
Direct Link:AbstractFull Article (HTML)PDF(814K)References
Morey J, Ryan J, Van Dolah F. 2006. Microarray validation: Factors influencing correlation between oligonucleotide microarrays and real-time PCR. Biol Proceed Online 8(1): 175–193.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 2Nusse R. 2005. Wnt signalling in disease and in development. Cell Res 15(1): 28–32.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 229Pasca di Magliano M, Biankin AV, Heiser PW, Cano DA, Gutierrez PJ, Deramaudt T, Segara D, Dawson AC, Kench JG, Henshall SM, Sutherland RL, Dlugosz A, Rustgi AK, Hebrok M. 2007. Common activation of canonical Wnt signaling in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PLoS ONE 2(11): e1155.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 33Román-Gómez J. 2007. Epigenetic regulation of Wnt-signaling pathway in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 109(8): 3462–3469.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 51Rooze M, Hinsenkamp M. 1982. Histochemical modifications induced in vitro by electromagnetic stimulation of growing bone tissues. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 196: 51–62.
PubMed,ChemPortRooze M, Hinsenkamp M. 1985. In vivo modifications induced by electromagnetic stimulation of chicken embryos. Reconstr Surg Traumat 19: 87–92.
PubMed,ChemPortvan der Horst G, van der Werf SM, Farih-Sips H, van Bezooijen RL, Löwik CW, Karperien M. 2005. Downregulation of Wnt signaling by increased expression of Dickkopf-1 and -2 is a prerequisite for late-stage osteoblast differentiation of KS483 cells. J Bone Miner Res 20(10): 1867–1877.
Direct Link:AbstractFull Article (HTML)PDF(2203K)References
Vodovnik L, Karba R. 1992. Treatment of chronic wounds by means of electric and electromagnetic fields. Part 1. Literature review. Med Biol Eng Comput 30: 257–266.
CrossRef,PubMed,ChemPort,Web of Science® Times Cited: 43Weston CR, Davis RJ. 2007. The JNK signal transduction pathway. Curr Opin Cell Biol 19(2): 142–149.
Do not pay attention to the crazy talk about this being the same company it was years ago. New magaanment, new owners, cleaned up shell, new business plan, and it is going to do well. Any new investors should see filings, news, company website, ibox, or just call them.
That would only be the first step. Xtend needs more than just a working harp. We need a solid foundation for this company.
#1 - We need solid financial backing. Forget about a 504. We need to pay attorney fees that no one is happy about. Plus, funds for manufacturing and clinical trials that need to start yesterday. And many other financial hurdles due to the delay.
#2 - We need Dr. Lee supervising the manufacturing and that end of the business.
#3 - We need the corporate structure established so that Paul and Sam can make this deal happen and move forward. Possibly a middle man to supervise the operation and keep things in check.
#4 - They need the top 3 in place fast to generate immediate revenue to save the company from BK. At this point BK is protection and has bought the boys just a little time.
Or they just need a new agreement AKA business plan for the marketing of the Bio Harp. One way or the other, we need a lot and we need it fast. Full speed ahead to save the Bio Harp and in turn save lives with the technology. IMO
I agree. They have missed the ball in the past but if they do score, it will be HUGE. The Bio Harp Technology has the pontential for unlimited revenue and profits.
I think the BK had to be a wake up call to both parties. Now, I am not saying that things will be different in the future. But with the potential of the Bio Harp technology, one would think they could find a way to make it work as far as the business plan. I would suggest they just elect a new ceo and both have limited control if trust is the issue. But that is just my opinion of one way to fix the company. But if they do come up with a fix, it needs to be a much better one than the original APA. Like you said, it did not work at all. ESA was just evidence of another fast breakdown. We need some concrete poured into the foundation of the corporation and then we can move forward. Avoid ch7 and get the Bio Harp to market. As shareholders, we look at things from a market cap stand point more than anything. But not to forget, the Bio Harp Technology has the potenitial to save lives.
If the court date was backed up for negotiations between the two parties, then the bk may not be an issue if all goes well. We held around a penny without the "q" in the past. So, it is possible that we could rise back to that level on speculation of a positive outcome for the company actually moving forward. The only thing that I can say is "show me the Bio Harp". I am ready to see it. Dr. Lee needs to get this device manufactured and approved for human use asap. We have lost valuable time and revenue. Time for the boys to get it in gear. IMO. There are a number of catalyst that can cause XMDC to explode. Tick tock.
Nice to see the pps break the 200dma.
That is a great report and thanks for taking the time to check them out. I imagine we should have some updates soon.
I agree with you on that.
I have heard that naked short selling is a problem in the pinks. At least we have should have some good news coming soon and the market makers will understand that this is not a stock that they want to hold a short position. The properties should be going into escrow and some chould be closing soon. Assets on the books will help us a lot but I have often wondered is market makers try and control the price of stock. At least our accumulation line is headed back up and all it should take is some buying pressure and we should find it back about .20c and setting new highs soon. At least that is what I am thinking will happen.
Stocks are hard to understand. We have had some really good news from management and the pps is actually less than before we knew of all the MAJOR plays on the table at black castle. The ask has held well and I do not fear dillution but I have to wonder why investors do not see the writing on the wall. I can point out an unlimited number of stocks that have no income, no assets, and no future. Yet they have a higher market cap for some strange reason. Perhaps, pinkyland kind of sucks for good companies. We need to uplist and find some investors that can read a balance sheet.
I guess we should have our new property soon. Perhaps, some news next week????? I would like to see more on the other 400+ appartments. Got to love the cash flow that will be coming in soon.
Sam is the CEO of UNI Bio-Tech. They focus on animal products and some scientific solution for their health. No mention of the Bio Harp on their website. They company symbol is the same as the original marketing material in the pictures we once had with the Bio HAp in it. Looks like UNI- Bio-Tech would have had sales themself for the Bio Harp considering they focus on animals. Sam had to have his reasons for displaying the Bio Harp at the trade show in Florida. He must have needed financial backing and needed a tap into the market in the USA. Must have been how the entire project with Paul started. Also, Sam would have needed help on the software side as well. At any rate, none of those facts change the mess that the corporation is in but it does highlight the fact that Sam does have another sucessfull business. I did catch in the court docs that Sam has 20 years of work in the Bio Harp. That is a lot of time in a project to watch a judge sell off in a chapter 7 bankruptcy filing for sure. Seems like with resources like UNI Bio-Tech that Sam could put together something to save his patents from a complete loss. Not even talking about potential shareholder lawsuits that will hit both Sam and Paul if this thing ends ugly. If Sam loses the hearing on the 7th then this baby is going down the toilet. If I were Sam and my patents got flushed down the toilet because of the legal work Anderson did for me, then I would not pay the lawfirm a dime. Time to take some smart pills and settle this crap once and for all. Let, UNI- Bio Tech run the corporation. I do not care. Save the patents.
Agreed. I have not seen fraud and I have read every document multiple times. We had the patents for the Bio Harp. Before that we had the legal APA promising us that it would be our property. Paul's plans for reverse engineering it should have never had to happen. We needed Sam Lee on the technical side of this thing and we needed him to manage the manufacturing of the Bio Harp. Deal went bad and our CEO stepped up to the plate and actually started work on reverse engineering as what was hopefully a back up plan. Lots of time, energy and hard work has been poured into Xtend Medical. Sad part is that we have gotten nowhere from the postive efforts and are being bashed up and down due to some really bad luck with a business deal gone bad.
We are stuck in gridlock at the moment and chapter 7 will kill us all. I would advise any new investor to understand Chapter 7 will be the end of their investement. I am not here to encourage people to buy the stock. However, the board is infested with mis-information about the events that have actually occured and crazy accusations have been made. We are simply hoping for a resolution without the trainwrech. XMDC - the wild ride.
Notice in the court docs that Sam signed as the CEO of UNI Bio-Tech. There was a day when planataion warned us that there was no such company. Now that Sam's Korean company has an english version of their website it looks like they have done well for themselves. We were originally suppose to merge with this company before it turned into an asset purchase agreement that basically put Sam Lee in the driver seat of Xtend Medical. Looks like he did well in the driver seat at UNI Bio-Tech.
http://www.ubtech.co.kr/en/Sub_Module/Company/About_Us.asp
History Of UNI Bio Tech.
2010. - present In the process of exportation to China, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Egypt etc.
In the process of agreement with Philippines, Nigeria, Vietnam etc.
2009. 09 In the process of performing the industrial-educational cooperation subject with Korea University and Dankook University and Hankyong University and Konyang University
2008. 07 Contract about technology transfer of natural composite from National Institute of Animal Science (NIAS)
04 President Cho Jae Hee Inauguration
03 Obtain license of ISO 140012004
2007. 05 Approval establishment of an Annex Laboratory of company
2006. 08 Obtain Patent of UBT-MO2
2004. 12 license of KVGMP of ointment type manufacture facilities
08 Obtain license of ISO 90012008
Patent acquisition of newly Enterococcus faecium UBT-Mo1 which contains multifunctional Probiotic function and Patent Pending of UBT-MO2 and Complex Probiotics yeast culture material which contain Probiotics function and Composite(10-2004-0028294) which contains complex enzyme as significant component
01 Obtain license of KVGMP of Feed Additives and Oral Powder and Granule and Tablet manufacture facilities
2002. 07 Obtain license of KVGMP of Liquid and Injection type manufacture facilities
2001. 04 Change company name from ¡°Yoonee Chemical Co., Ltd. ¡° to ¡° UNI BIOTECH CO., LTD. ¡°
2000. 11 Capital increase 1.8 billion
08 Opening the 14th Annual Biotechnology Seminar (Renaissance Hotel)
1997. 06 Newly-built of Manufacture facilities of Choline Chloride
1994. 12 Acquisition the permission of manufacture of Vitamin E Animal Medicine Ingredients
1987. 08 Opening the first Annual Biotechnology Seminar (Palace Hotel)
Invitation of specialist for the development of Bio Products and for the spreading of sales ,this is developed to regular symposium
1986. 11 Technical cooperation agreement with Alltech(USA)
07 Technical cooperation agreement with Denka Pharmaceutical company(Japan)
1985. 02 Technical cooperation agreement with Smith Kline AH. P(USA)
1984. 12 Registration of import and export permission
07 President Cho Sung Yong Inauguration
The head office/Factory are relocated to Cheonan City, Sungjung-dong
1983. 06 Designation of promising small and medium enterprises (Cheonan branch of Industrial Bank of Korea)
04 Switchover to YOONEE Chemical Co., Ltd.
02 Completion and relocation to newly built Yeasan Factory(the ground 8,500m©÷, Building area 4,600m©÷)
Choongnam ,Yeasan-gun, Shinam-myen, Dugok-ri, Agricultural Industrial Complex (Injection type manufacture 1 building, Powder and additive manufacture 1 building, Dormitory 1 building )
1974. 04 Permission of the animal medicine manufacturing industry (Acquisition of total 17 items¡¯ manufacturing permission of Animal medicine ingredients like Choline Chloride etc.)
Join in Korea Animal Health Products Association
Join in Korea Importers Association
01 Established Yoonee Chemical trading company
Established head offic factory in Chungnam, Chunwon-gun, Sunghwan-eup
According to the ESA, Lee was to elect three people to the BOD and he would have had a majority control plus he was getting a majority of the stock. However, Knobbes had to send Lee a leter requesting him to deliver the things agreed upon. And from there it just went south. I am a long and I do not like the endless bashing that has been going on. But I will admit that these two guys can simply not work together on the same BOD. Therefore, they need a new business plan that will allow the corporation to move forward. A permanent solution to prevent the future trainwreck.
My suggestion is simple. They agree to hire a new CEO or management team to come into the picture and run the show. Give the boys their shares and let the corporation live. Lee can handle the technical end of the Harp and Paul can just work on sales. Keep these two boys an ocean apart. But neither one needs to be making corporate decisions with both on the BOD because that is a road straight back to court.
The court document from the past tell us that Sam Lee claimed to submit the Bio harp to the KFDA. It is documented. So, since everyoone wants to be technical here is the proper statement.
Xtend Medical was told by Sang Moon Lee that the device was submitted for KFDA approval according to the court documents.
There is no way to know for sure if it has been submitted or approved by the kfda. However, I am confident that it will pass the approval processs when that time comes or possibly already has. Look at the inventor, Sang Moon Lee. He has invented a long list of things that seem to work well. I had provided extensive dd on that and the scientist around the world that he asscoiates with. Brilliant inventor and my money says it will pass the KFDA. At the moment that is the least of our problems. We need resolution at the board of directors for Xtend Medical. Sam needs to protect his investment in the Bio Harp by not letting the judge sell the Patents for the Bio Harp on the steps to the highest bidder. The corporation must move fast to avoid the trainwreck. What the KFDA thinks at this point is not a pressing concern.
Have you looked at Chemco??? Checked out what they and who they do work for???? It means everything. It is called third party verification and one of the most important parts of dd. Sorry it does not mean anything to you. That is your call but it means a lot to me and others.
A lot of time the approval process takes place in the final stages just before manufacturing starts or sometimes even after. If it were a drug that we were talking about it would be a serious issue as far as apporival goes. However, non invasive diagnostic deviced that do not use internal chemicals or emit radiation are generally an easy approval process. The results from the clinical trials at check co tells me that approval would be easy. Even if for some strange reason, every country decided not to approve the device for human use, it could still be sold to vets and that is one HUGE market. So, worst case scenaio is our pets will outlive us and have better health care. They about have that anyway. LOL
Do not care if it has been submitted for KFDA yet. It was a clinical research facility that is certiefied by the KFDA to do the testing that actually did the clinical trials on the Bio Harp. The test results given are positive indicators that it will be approved by the KFDA when it is submitted. Has it or has it not does not matter. What is important is that the Bio harp works because it is an asset of Xtend Medical.
Not true at all. You said "No FDA approval, no sale for human use"
100% incorrect. Could not be more wrong.
The truth of the matter is:
No FDA approval, no sale for human use in the United States.
We are one country on a very large globe. There are third world countries that would welcome this technology at once and do not require approval of a diagnostic device. Advantages of the Bio Harp in such examples is that it is small and portable. Just requires a lap top.
Yes the sales were started but they did not have the manufacturing in place. Generally, one will start promoting a product and talking sales even before production. This will help create a stronger sales base when the units come off the line. I have no doubts that Paul had already presold some harps to vets and then had to turn around and cancel the contracts. Remember that Paul has traveled oversees before the APA to se the manufacturing facility and make sure this thing was a "go". He had to do his part of the "dd" on a 30,000,000 asset purchase and it is possible that Paul even had a third party check out the device. I know I would have. Just common due dilligence on a large transaction. It is a shame that it never got off the ground due to the friction between Lee and Paul. Hopefully, we can move past this struggle of ownership and really move forward. Lee should find a partner and get Xtend Medical Corporation moving. It is well documented in the court documents that Paul has offered Lee several settlement offers. Some may feel that Paul wants this ch7 bk just to sweep it all under the rug. But in my opinion that is far from the truth for one simple reason. CH7 will hurt Paul as far as his being able to operate new companies in the future. One's reputation does not survive this kind of blow. CH7 must be avoided for both parties future. Sam was once offered the position as CEO when the original APA was signed. All Paul seemed to want was the APA enforced and move forward with the marketing of the Bio Harp. The ball has got to be in Sam's court now. If he does not want to play ball then bye bye Xtend Medical and bye bye Bio Harp. The judge will sell the patents on the courthouse steps to the highest bidder. Knobbes will be paid and Lee nor the shareholders will see a dime. I doubt paul will see much cash himself in the event of ch7.
Yes we are a peach and someone needs to be buying peaches on the ask.
Clinical trials prove it works and we have them. Next argument on why xmdc is the devil??????
Clinical trials at Chemco are not free. I estimate that Sam Lee has over 10,000,000 invested in the Bio Harp development and that would include the patents. That is based on conservative numbers. Years or reserach is expensive and so is patents work. Why are you so determined to call everyone a liar. Rain had provided us solid dd on what it cost to patents the Bio harp as well. It is just simple math. I have read that a us patent on a medical device can cost between 15,000 to 30,000.00 That would be for one country. Now, I guess you need me to do some currecncy conversions and calculations ofr the 70 some other contries?????
Patents with documented clinical trials from a well established testing facility that does work for KFDA approval. Not just some wild idea on paper. Working prototype was used in the clinical trials and the resulats were good. Patents are an asset to the company. Just because Paul could not get it reverse engineered before Sam shut him down does not mean that the Bio Harp can not be mass produced and sold by Xtend Medical. Let's get past the legal issues and move forward.
They were moving forward. Just got stalled when they were in motion. Moving forward means working to accomplish goals. I understand what you are saying about the prs not becoming reality. But if Paul wanted to lie just for the fun of selling shares then he could have really done much more. The fact is that Paul never even pumped all the facts about the Bio Harp. Hell, we had Rain pulling up more DD and facts about the Bio Harp from his research than Paul was even providing in the news releases back then. The bad part is let's say Paul had reverse engineered the Bio Harp from the patents after the ESA went into effect. And then he starts manufacturing possibly in CA. It would NOT have mattered. Sam's lawsuit shut everything down last November - December. It would still have been stalled and we would not be movoing forward. You can call it a lie, scam, voo-doo act from Paul but he could not get it moving forward. Sam would have shut it down cold. So, there was no way possible for Paul's press release to become reality for reasons outside of his control. You can blame him for it all and I will not argue and say you are wrong. But I just do not see it that way. And I am not saying that I am right and you are wrong. But there are two sides to this coin for sure.
Not a joke. Reverse engineering takes time and money. It can be done. But they should not have to go this route anyway. Sam should have been helping them by providing a working model. Paul was prepared to get it done his own without Sam's help. That is where this entire thing went south in my opinion. Sam and Paul made a comitment to the shareholders to market this technology. Now, we all know you hold Paul Lisenby personallly responsible for everything that went wrong. You have the right to your own opinion but it does not mean that you are correct.
Yes. We enjoy buying on the dips and thanks for asking. Always nice to add shares of a great company to ones account.
No. I did not forget to leave the part out. I could care less about testimony of the Ceo's knee getting scanned. That is not creditable like the clinical trials at a kfda certified facility and the scientist from one of the top Intellectual Property lawfirms examining the patents. I am sure Paul can reverse engineer it. Two problems. One Sam's lawsuit shut down Paul from doing anything. Second, money. It cost money to reverese engineer and you never know just what the final price tag will be. Someprojects are easy and have minor costs. Other projects are more difficult and can take considerably more time and money to reverse engineer. Keep in mind that the Bio Harp patents are breakthrough patents. Not a close organizer. These patents are for a new technology and basically uncharted waters. Sales were happening. I had already commited to buy one for our business. So, sales were happening. Just a small problem getting the product. My sales order is still in.
Clinical trials from Chemco proved the device works. Brilliant minds at Genocho helping develop the device also adds much credit and validity. Top notch law firm like Knobbes looked at the patents very closely and took the case on credit. That adds validity as well. Then we had the device being shown at trade shows and private demonstations like the one at Hunter Wise. Plus eye witness testimony from people not affiliated with Sam or Paul. So, we have much more evidence to support that the device works than otherwise. They can not sell the device because we never made it to manufacturing because of the business deal gone bad. I can not argue that we could have had sales and there were mention of certain foreign nations being interested in the court docs if you read them. One in particular was the letter from Knobbes demanding the list of things needed to get this thing into the market. So, sales could have been happening but I can prove that part. But it is simple. You can not sell what you do not have. They do not have Bio Harps ready to sell.
Therefore - No Sells.
But to question the validity of the device without looking at all the evidence is just silly. Lack of sales does not dictate a device that does not work or a scam. It is called a legal battle.
Actually, one must have an attorney to help with the patent work and it does get expensive. Especially, taking into account the number of countries that Sam Lee has patents for the Bio Harp. There is more to it than most think. On top of that the Bio Harp was tested in a KFDA approved testing facility. Chemco does testing all the time that is used for KRDA and they are a certified facility that would not be involved in any kind of shady test results. The test results for the Bio Harp were great. Very promising in cancer detection and other diseases that the Bio HArp detected cellular inflamation. The validity of the Bio Harp technology was also established by the fact the Knobbes took our caase and on top of that did it on credit AKA "security interest". In my opinion if Knobbes had any doubts that the Bio Harp did not work then they would have demanded cash before they represented Xtend Medical in a court of law. Period.
So we know the the technology has major potential and is valid. Therefore, Xtend Medical has an asset that is worth something. The claims of buying yachts and lawnmowers instead of marketing this device is absolutely funny. Paul, Ben, and Sam have the opportunity of a lifetime. They best do something and fast before the judge orders these patents sold and the corporation gets shut down for good. Why flush your asset down the toilet in ch7??? As the wise judge told them before "take the smart pills".
Also, I feel that the investors on ihub know more about this technology and its background than the judge does. We need a shareholder meeting in court. Anyone want to elect a new BOD??? We can help the boys get past their struggle for power. It is called the exit door. The shareholders will be happy to step it up and protect this investment. After all Xtend Medical is publicly traded company. We legally own a piece of it and many longs have shown much concern over its future.
I agree. It is going to climb higher.
Notice they just updated a few things on their website. News releases are current along with adding the corporate fact sheet. Just some good signs of life and staying current is the name of the game when it comes to investor relations. Time for the cataylst soon to set the next chain of events into motion. The next event will be the awakening of investors when they see serious and precise execution of the letters of intent. Game changer for sure. Look for it.
I agree with your post. BK7 would be the end of the Bio Harp for Sang Moon Lee and Paul Lisenby. Now it is obvious that they can not work together well as far as partners of a corporation. One must look at all the facts to see the end of this legal debate. Paul won this thing for the shareholders the day Sam signed the patents over to Xtend Medical. The security interest on the patents was in our best inerest and I am glad he did NOT pay knobbes in cash. Now, Paul made a list of things that Sam was suppose to deliver. Actually, Knobbes made the list. We never got them because of the power struggle between these two board members. But the security intersest is the key for the shareholders. Sam will not let 14 years of time and money go down the toilet next week. Just a business deal for Paul. Yes, he had time and money in it as well but nothing compared to Lee. Lee must move in the last second to save his investment in the Bio Harp along with saving his opportunity to market a very profitable medical device. The shareholders will ultimately end up fine because of the work Paul did in forcing the legally binding APA to actually happen. The only option is to resolve this and move forward. No way this corporation will dissolve in ch7.