Vivos Inc (RDGL)

[CatfishHunter]

Nothing you’ve said is “verifiable” in the way you’re implying — it’s interpretation layered on assumption.

In early first-in-human work, “useful” is a precise, cautious medical term, not a euphemism. Physicians do not declare devices “revolutionary” after a single early case — that language comes years later, after durability, safety, and reproducibility are established. Anything else would be irresponsible and non-compliant.

As for the “80%” fixation:
Partial response is a defined oncology endpoint. Chemo, immunotherapy, and radiation routinely report partial responses well below 100% and still advance. Expecting complete eradication from a first-in-human localized therapy reflects a misunderstanding of oncology practice, not a defect in the device.

Remission rate after one patient?
That question doesn’t even make sense at this stage. Remission is a population-level, longitudinal endpoint, not something responsibly claimed from a single early case — especially at 8 months.

You’re criticizing the team for not doing what would actually get them in trouble:
over-claiming, extrapolating prematurely, or marketing before data maturity.

Cautious language in early human use isn’t a red flag — it’s exactly what competent clinicians and regulators expect.

If this were “junk,” the language would be louder, not quieter.

Another whiff!