I believe that some of the people on the other board are missing the point completely. Valimed has been targeted for high-risk, IV admixtures, i.e., only solutions, only high-risk solutions, and only high-risk solutions compounded by the pharmacist.
ValiMed is not intended to validate every IV administered, nor does it have the capability to do so. The 28% KCL solution is a perfect example.
Statistically, out of the reported 44,000 medical errors (or whatever the number is) in the US each year, less than about .05% (22) of the errors are associated with the type of high-risk, compounded IV's targeted by Valimed*.
Bear in mind that Valimed is not solving an existing problem that has no solution. There is not an urgent need. It is providing an "additional" safety protocol to the pharmacy's QA program for high-risk meds.
I believe it is for these reasons that sales are slow (have they even sold one unit at retail price?) and insurance companies have not been quick to endorse the product. It has NOT turned out to be a "Valimed in every Mom-N-Pop, corner drug store" or "22 ValiMeds per hospital" like Raiderman, Butterfly and a few others hyped. That should now be clear to everyone. They were wrong.
On the positive side, the more signatures the better and CDEX is moving in the right direction, but even with hundreds of useful signatures will it ever be used for an off-the-shelf IV bag that requires no compounding?
Will it ever be used for low-risk IV's?
I've waited a reasonable amount of time to see if CDEX had something which would attract investors. So far, it is not performing like advertised by the promoters (it has "wowed" only Capnmike- a CDEX stock promoter).
Currently, it's been targeted for such a niche market that even if it sales within that market it will not be a one product wonder IMO. In order to bring in major revenue that will build shareholder equity, it needs to bust loose and sell for a wider range of applications other than high-risk, compounded IV's.
So what am I saying High C? Crow was right! LOL
* I pulled that number out of my hat to make my point, and the point is that the number is very, very low when you think that a medical error includes a myriad of possibilities such as an adverse effect from the wrong pill, wrong dosage, surgical errors...etc. High-risk, compounded IV solutions is a small source of total error.
