Crow,
"Valimed MIGHT have a version that will test a pill.. but it will have to be built different from the one they are trying to sell now. And the dang pill has to be crushed and probably liquified if they are gonna use UV..
The DEMO you saw was faked.. if you know the name of the demo operator.. call him up and cuss him out.."
"Fake" as in being a trade show curiosity, but never becoming a viable product? As you said earlier, trade show demos are always well rehearsed. Even if the demo was real, I'm sure CDEX chose a pill that tests readily (i.e., no UV opaque coating/ strong fluorescence) to wow the audience or at least Capnmike.
Unfortunately, the majority of pills and capsules cannot be tested using UV IMO. At lease not a high enough percentage to make a UVF-based counterfeit drug detector worthwhile, especially when there is already something out there which does the job better.
That's exactly why ASD choose Vis/NIR. I was told by ASD's Brian Curtiss, VP- Technology/Co-founder that they investigated UVF but chose Vis/NIR due to the advantages for testing solid dosage form medications.
Vis/NIR is superior for solids. UVF is superior for liquids. It's that simple to understand.
Valimed uses UVF and is specifically designed for liquids. Despite all the buzz about counterfeit drugs (90% being solids) CDEx focused their efforts on a very narrow market segment for high-risk, compounded, IV medications.
If they had any intention whatsoever to use Valimed to test solids I don't think they would have given exclusive marketing rights to a company that specializes in devices used for the administering of liquid medications.
The pill demo was only a carrot IMO, nothing more. I don't expect to see CDEx develop a UVF-based instrument for testing solid dosage form drugs any time soon despite WMFT claiming to have seen a "pill demo".
