"You will not find any true validation of the Tech from "KNOWN" sources back in the Loch days. CDEX on the other hand, continues to line up one after another. Further more, Baxa Corp has signed up to line up many."
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Apples and Oranges.
Validating a UVF instrument (fluorimeter) that detects bulk chemicals in 30 seconds at under an inch and under pristine laboratory conditions is a far, far cry from the original claims of Loch Harris/Boone, Baker, p4316/CDEx.
OF COURSE the CDEx product can NOW be validated! LMAO again.
Shall we compare the performance claims between the two technologies once again you silly rabbit? Carrots and apples!!!!!!!!
CDEx is not now claiming to defy the laws of physics while under the "3-letter agency" microscope- good boys. They are taking the obvious course to minimize the threat of civil law suits. CDEx had to continue the Loch Harris illusion long enough to give shareholders something tangible IMO. That tangible product was a new instrument with highly downgraded performance claims operating on the well known principles of UV Fluorescence.
Can shareholders be bamboozled into thinking the technology with the revolutionary performance lives on? Definitely, without question IMO!
Is it a revolutionary technology? Absolutely 100% NO in my opinion! I challenge anyone to provide evidence to convince a person "skilled in the art" that it is revolutionary. Cite the claims in any of the patent apps which clearly distinguishes the basic operating principles of the spectrometer as being novel or revolutionary. I specifically challenge Capnmike and ontheedge. (Note: As I pointed out earlier, capnmike has a history of NOT performing this type of DD. He assumes it's revolutionary as advertised and posts all the wonderful applications. If it IS indeed revolutionary I challenge Capnmike to use his impressive DD skills and close communication with the CDEx technical staff to demonstrate it to shareholders! I can think of only one reason why that would not be a good thing to do.)
Is cooling of the sensor to improve sensitivity revolutionary? No, it's old hat. It's been used for decades in high-end optical sensing instruments such as observatory instruments, missile guidance systems and the like. In other words, very expensive equipment where the cost versus benefit curve is not an issue.
Is Valimed using this principle where other commercially available instruments may not have the need? I think so. Does it cost more to actively cool the sensor(s)? Of course it does. Can anyone do it? Yes.
What do I think? (I known INET is dying to know! LOL) I think that CDEx has designed and developed an analytical instrument for a specific niche market in the health care arena that apparently fills a need in the industry. How much of a need we will all have to wait and see. I've said years ago that CDEX appeared to be putting together an impressive and qualified staff to help them leverage their new products into the targeted niche markets. Do impressive bios guarantee success? No, we've all been there.
I guess we'll all just have to wait and see if any of the honest shareholders that have been waiting so very long will be included in that small group of insiders that are obviously doing very well with this enterprise. Just like Loch Harris if I may add (and I just did. TM- Coquille).
In my opinion, the insiders are looking after the average shareholders best interest like a rancher looks out after his herd! LOL
As a final note I would like to inform readers that I will be dramatically curtailing my posting on this board (unless onetheedge posts something real, real stupid!- LOL).
INET, if you miss me you can always send me a private email at my Lycos address. LOL
diddy
P.S. I anticipate with 100% confidence that niether Capnmike nor Ontheedge will or can come to the plate and meet my challenge. Of course, CDEX's success or failure doesn't hinge on them doing so.
We've all witnessed on these boards that sometimes the best stategy is to let sleeping dogs lie.
P.S.S. Ontheedge, STOP, don't say anything stupid buddy-boy.
