Crow, it doesn't make much sense to me that after three years of development they have to stop and redesign Valimed for the European Union.

Why stop making the U.S. units? As far as we know they're not even marketing anything in Europe at this time.

If they were to market in Europe, they should buy the components there and they'll already meet the ROHS, PFC and other requirements.

This whole situation continues to stink stronger and stronger IMO.

"...no sane thinking person would have any idea of how long it would take to develop something that had never been developed before."

LOL! Please INET:

http://nanodrop.com

UVF instrument designed for niche market identifies targeted substances from spectral fingerprint.

Take a look how big it is.

"Notice how, just like Boone and Baker before them, Malcolm and Wade exit stage left and leave the hot potato behind with a new smiling face just before the March, 2006 statute of limitations date. The new, smiling face can divert the madding crowd while the Boone/Baker/Blair/Philips/Poteet scurry offstage and sell their remaining shares.

History repeats."

I sure did, and just Like "Dr." R.B. Baker and Dennis Harris did before Boone and Baker.

With the exit of Philips and Poteet we're going on fourth generation guardians of the revolutionary technology.

Capnmike, do you believe that Valimed can detect whether a compound is sterile or non-sterile?

Simple public question Number 3.

Where have I "lied about the science" Edge?

Still waiting....

Still waiting Edge...

Show me the claim in CDEx patent application 10/268,678 that renders the invention "revolutionary"?

Show me where I "lied about the science"?

I don't think you can, instead, you'll come back with "your little boy post" and say something less than worthless.

"It's all good. As far as I know, because nothing proves any different, and I don't listen to the word of bashers."

-artabraham

So Xeno, this company has their patented "sample retention" process down to .001 ml! And it uses UVF to detect targeted "molecules" in its spectral library like Valimed.

It is another application specific design like Valimed.

The only difference is that the company isn't claiming the technology to be "revolutionary" like Valimed.

http://www.nanodrop.com

Ontheedge,

{i}"Hey no brains, MP is remaining as a consultant and on the BOD"

That wasn't nice, and some of you wonder why your posts get removed.

Reread my post. I said that MP is remaining as the BOD Chairman.

"Not anything like what happened to Blair, Baker, and Boone."

Of course not, they had to disappear just like DH did when Boone and Baker were handed the reins.

"Dr." R. B. Baker remained as Chairmen of the BOD of Loch.

Isn't that what MP is doing?

Yes Crow, I've been observing that type of reporting going back to the Kinsmen Island Test Reports- very cleverly worded.!

The reader naturally makes a connection between the subject of the first paragraph (USP Chapt. 797) and the second (Valimed applications).

"It was designed to reduce errors in medication selection and the preparation of sterile compounds of admixtures, deter inadvertent substitutions, and prevent mislabeling of the medication."

It states that it was designed to reduce errors in selection and preparartion of meds and compounds of admixures.

It does not explicitly state that Valimed was designed to validate that a med is sterile.

If that was the point of the article I fail to understand why the author did not state it clearly in the second paragraph.

Crow, I thought the very same thing when Cisco wrote about the "next in line".

What did the previous front men, DH and Dr R.B. Baker do? They put new names on the front line- Boone and Mark Baker.

DH allegedly got caught up with some problems so he dropped out of the public eye. "Dr." R.B. Baker remained on as BOD Chairman.

When it beagn The Boyz turn, they both had to disappear and Dr. R.B Baker promptly resigned.

It appears as if MP is following the same game plan.

Why are they all running from the Billion dollar tech? LOL

"Can an unknown substance be loaded into the machine and the machine identify what it is? if so, how??"

Of course not Crow, but they never claimed the unit could do that... if I'm interpreting your question correctly.

We know that a signature is required to verify a known substance, in other words, the operator tells the machine the med to verify and the unit gives it a pass or fail.

What if you had ten different meds that looked alike and the signature for each med was in the Valimed library.

Can Valimed identify one of the unknown meds without the operator telling the machine what it's checking?

I would think so if the programming was worth it's salt, it would be a matter of searching the library for a match.

Can Valimed deduce the molecular structure of an unknown drug or compound, thereby identifying it?

Absolutely NOT IMO.

"However, Prof Hauser, a physicist at the Applied Sciences University in Salzgitter, Germany, and a former chief of aerodynamics at the European Space Agency, cautioned it was based on a highly controversial theory that would require a significant change in the current understanding of the laws of physics."

Sounds familiar doesn't it? LOL

"Lycos began as a search engine at Carnegie Mellon and paradoxically its ragingbull.com that provides message boards that censor or delete critics or defrauded investors from posting and allow known penny stock frauds to continue and insiders to the scams to promote known penny stocks frauds is itself like a dark alley of the internet where search engines don't go."

And what do the insiders call those critics and defrauded investors?

Paid bashers (spit) making from 5-7 dollars every time a reader responds to one of their posts!

LOL!!!

"itsbiggerthanabreadbasket" (TM- bad chirp)

Crow, maybe someone should email that to MP for comment.

Something that Edge appears to have never grasped or perhaps purposely ignored:

"I cannot mention who is still involved in the settlements of these many penny scams because it is a part of the settlement, but I can mention who was at one time but left to distance themselves from their names becoming public when some settlements are published."

Can anyone deny that there was a closely knit group of penny stock scams during the dot.com bubble?

Ontheedge,

You posted:

"But if you want the exchange to be directed to the lies that diddy has posted about the science, you will get exactly what doyourdd is saying."

Another challege for YOU. Please post the lies which I have posted about the science?

Simple question.

Scared,


"I think you over simplify the answer to a dispute. The end results will be the answer"

doyourdd (nice try ole bean) almost had the "pudding" thing right:

The proof of the pie is in the eating.

"There was never any plural anything with Loch Harris and I.

Good sentence structure! LOL

"...confront the person he slanders..."

"... went to Tucson and sat down with the very men that diddy bashes..."

Get one thing straight Edge, I do not know Poteet at all and do NOT slander or bash his character. I've stated that before.

What I question is his documented involvement with a public company, Loch Harris which I was heavily invested in. I question his actions, as well as the actions of all the officers, directors and insiders of the company.

I question the numerous PR's in which his name was used to promote a stock scam.

I question why he did not take immediate action once those false PR's were disseminated.

I question why there is no record of how Poteet was paid while working for Loch Harris.

I question who is the RB poster "wpoteet" and what happen to the XRF technology that can detect and discriminate TRACE explosives at 34 inches in 5 seconds (which wpoteet discussed)? Do we still have that?

I question why is patent application 10/268678 so revolutionary? I question why almost every claim was rejected as obvious and anticipated. I question why the addition of the phrase "at least about one meter" suddenly makes the claims revolutionary?

But most of all Edge, I question YOU and the stories that YOU tell about Poteet. Shall I repeat some of them like the Tucson Daily Star, "Absence of Malice" story?

How about the "Poteet was too busy in the lab" story? Cauthen was too busy to tell Poteet what was going on? I got it, they were both too busy. THAT'S YOUR STORY.

Niether Poteet or Cauthen had internet access in the lab. They never looked at the Loch website and read a single PR? They never monitored their investments online during the '99-'00 stock market (dot.com) bubble?

No Edge, it's YOUR ABSURD STORIES ABOUT POTEET THAT HAVE TO BE QUESTIONED!!!!

And that's just Poteet, YOU have a story on every player in the game!!!

May I suggest that you save your stories for campfire tales of the one-armed man with a hook that attacks little children at night? LOL

Gentleman Edge,

"No, I never reeled in one person to Loch Harris, never was paid one finders fee or received one penny of commission for reeling in anyone to invest in Loch Harris."

The question is: Who is "I"? Is "I" Robert Stewart?


"Could you copy the SEC filing where the SEC cleared Blair and dismissed his case. tia"

Sorry, no can do. It's one of those files that doesn't copy in the regular way. If lmorovan can tell me how to do it I will.

Here's the dope:

United States District Court
For The Northern District of Texas
Fort Worth Division

Misc. No. 4:01-MC-0005-A

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Joint Motion to Dismiss claims against Respondent Henry H. Blair ("Respondent") made by Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") and the Respondent, and upon consideration that the Respondent has fully complied with the subpoena duces tecum issued and served by the Commission on the Respondent.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that all claims against the Respondent are dismissed with each party to bear its own costs.

August 25, 2001

John H. McBryde
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Yes Sir Scared, I remember you making that comment some time ago- the large lad observation.

Whitemanfromtown,

"As I remember you had the opportunity to see the tech in action and question the scientists right in your back yard in southern Cal, but on the day of the event you "got a cold" and couldn't go."

I "got a cold"? Boone and Baker are my heros? You and Edge are quite the joksters today! LOL

I'm sorry that I disappointed you and I'm flattered that you value my opinion so highly.

I've hoped that you'd have gotten over that by now. I feel terrible. What can the 'lil didster' do to make it up to you?

"Now, chiken little, why are you afraid to meet me at the lab in Tucson."

Because I'm afarid you might beat me up, I hear you're a real big guy!

Mr. Onetheedge,

"But your hero'sBlair and Boone and Baker are all gone bye bye."

LOL!!! Are trying to insult me? My heros? I never worked for them by reeling in suckers for their hand-outs. Did you?

"You do know the SEC knows that Blair did not invent the tech, nor were Blair's degree's for real."

Is that a fact (rhetorical). So once again, where can that information be found. Why did the SEC clear Blair and dismiss his case?

Also, if the SEC knew what you claim, then they also knew that Loch Harris' management was responsible for FALSE and MISLEASDING press releases. Why no charges there either?

"Closer has him a game plan. Bully for him. I recommend it.LOL!!"

That doesn't suggest a long term position to me!

"...for those who don't know what a court room is, it is a place that opposing sides give facts for a Judge..."

So was the information given to the DA Judge by defendants Boone and Baker regarding finder's fees received by plaintiff Robert Stewart fact or hearsay?

Hearsay- something one has heard but does not know to be true.

Did the defendant's attorneys enter hearsay into official court documents?

"If you want to meet me in Tucson, I will gladly take you right to the lab, and we all can let you tell the team in person what is wrong with their tech, and how it is not new technology."

Stupid post.

Where can I find the "Poteet Objection Letter" to the SEC?

"Did you ever given it a thought that the objection(s) may have been what prompted the SEC investigation?"

Be careful Onetheedge, you are implying that Dr. Wade Poteet filed an objection letter to the SEC which contributed to the started the SEC investigation.

Filed.

Onetheedge, why is it so difficult to answer a question, instead, you just call people names?

"I am amazed that you are so stupid as to think the SEC would not have asked Dr. Poteet why he allowed Blair to claim the Science! LOL How stupid are you!!!!"

I asked you where can Poteet's objection letter to the SEC be found?

I asked you when did Poteet submit the letter, after the start of the SEC investigation or before?

Onetheedge,

"You are extremely limited on your knowledge of real out of court settlements!"

You are correct.

"...I guarantee you are as clueless on that as you are about the science behind CDEX."

You are incorrect. You should have guaranteed the first statement, not the second one!

One out of two is like flipping a coin, but in your case, a marked improvement compared to your average post. LOL

lmorovan, that doesn't make sense...

"If the mixture contains 8 different drugs, and Valimed can only identify 7, it will reject the mixture as invalid or wrong. Many a good mixtures would be thrown away and discarded, not because they are no good, but because ValiMed said so."

Of course, but if the signature isn't in the Valimed library, why would they try to validate the mixture in the first place?

I lost you on that one.

No Inet,

Testing "under ice" was 100% MP and included in one of his CEO statements- way after the Blair days.

"Every body else is complaining that Cap'n Mike is filling the airways with current useless BS, and you say he is continually bringing up the past BS in the wrong chronological order. You should get your complaints in order. LOL"

I only said that once in reference to capnmike's zealous attempt to discredit ATXMAN's post on the Lochlong board.

My previous reply to you made it twice, hardly "continually" INET.

INET you are 100% wrong!

"You know dam well that that, under ice crap was Lh's BS, and even if Mp went along with it ,IMO he already had plans to get the tech."

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you don't remember the chronological order of events, something both you and capnmike seem to have in common lately!

"Could Baxa's initial "investment" be a preliminary down payment for the purchase of CDEX? And after the first sales of the ValiMed units, it will consider purchasing the company?"

I don't believe that Baxa would be interested in purchasing the whole company nor CDEX interested in selling it.

Any interest would be focused on the Valimed division IMO.

"ontheedge01, I post truths supported by official Court documents. You call them lies."

DA defendants Boone and Baker both cited that Robert Stewart received finder's fees. FACT.

Is Ontheedge lying in his claim that Robert Stewart never received finder's fees, or did the defendants give false information to their attorneys to enter into an official court document?

I believe Onetheedge is claiming that both attorneys entered hearsay into an official court document.

(Hearsay- something one has heard but does not know to be true.)

Of course, the flip side is that the attorneys requested documented evidence before including the statements of fact into the documents. I can just see an astute attorney up before the judge saying, "Well, that's what my client told me your honor!"

"Read the last PR.. how many units would you say would cover that hospital. Each floor has at least 2 nurse stations, They have at least 8 floors, then add in your pharmacy depts, and ORs so where is the hype?"

Gads!! do your posts remind me of the Loch Harris hypsters of old!!! Trust me, CDEx investors that have been through the Loch Harris gauntlet don't believe that BS for a New York minute.

Valimed has been targeted for high risk medications. What percentage of these type medications are administered at each nurse station, in each department of a hospital?

What percentage %??????

"I never said he was to busy to notice. What I said was, they did notice, and the proper authorities have the filed letters to note the objection."

Kidinsight said that Poteet was too busy in the lab (or something very close to that).

Maybe it wasn't you, I don't know how many others are using your various aliases. That's why multiple people using a single alias is a TOS violation.

BTW, how do you know that Poteet filed an objection letter, I don't believe that's public information. Can you direct me to that information or is it also locked-up in the secret SEC investigation files?

Assuming Poteet did file an objection letter, approximately what date was it filed? On or before the PUMP-N-DUMP when honest investors were being ripped-off OR after the SEC investigation started?

"Did you ever see any filed payoff to Cisco?"

LMAO!!!!

Beyond stupid.