MCD,
This field is funny that way.
They can sell a medication for anxiety that can cause anxiety.
They can sell a medication for pain that causes ulcers that can kill you.
They can sell a drug that gives one an errection but may cause a heart attack.
They can market a test for colon cancer that also picks up other cancers. It is all on the label. It is all about what it is "approved" for.
It goes on and on.
So: "If the Recaf came back positive, wouldn't the Dr. have liability to let the patient know and then try to find cancer somewhere?"
Is that what the FDA is going to approve it for or will it only be approved to check that no false positives are returned? My guess is that while I believe that Recaf's ability to pick up on all cancers is a Blessing! The medical field "in this case " can and will approve it for only avoiding false positives with the other markers.
Half, you are not answering my question.
HOW IS THE LATEST PR DIFFERENT FROM NEWS FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO?
This PR is just repackaged information, IMO.
mcd
No MCD, Dr. Moro has been advancing the technology. Remember, the medical community does not look at the big picture sometimes. Dr. Moro is taking away the excusses one at a time." the barrier to entry into clinical practice is extremely high for any new device / product. I think a lot of people under-estimate how costly and difficult this is, and why it is largely the domain of huge multinational companies."
The FDA will eventually pick and choose one or more of these advancements. One can have a cure for cancer and yet still have to stand in line. Doesn't seem right does it...
