Replies to post #86349 on Decision Diagnostics Corp (DECN)

[Winsor1]

I agree with your analysis and remain watching for some de- risk at this time. Want to be long, but neutral at current valuation with current information.

[Hopefull17]

CV, very thorough yet concise and pragmatic post ..... I hope you did not get caught up in that Shareholder Letter drama!

[IPwatcher]

A few things I no longer like about the current situation, but for which it is impossible to have a firm conclusion:

The fog is deliberately contrived. The PRs are deliberately misleading. The jargon is there to confuse, not to enlightedn. Keith Berman is a master gaslighter.

Lysis just means bursting open cells so that their contents can be accessed for analysis.
When detecting glucose - which is dissolved in the plasma - you don't need to lyse the red blood cells. In fact you want to avoid lysing the red blood cells as doing so releases haemalgobin into the plasma which causes an artifically high reading in many electrochemical blood tests as it can react with electrochemical mediators used in smbg test systems.

But in many other analyses e.g. HbA1c testing or hemaglobin testing, what you want to measure is found INSIDE the red blood cell (or other cells) . So you need to lyse the blood cells (or other cells) to release their contents so they become accessible to your test system.

So to lyse or what to lyse is a matter of what you are trying to detect. If its in the plasma (like glucose) you don't need to lyse and may not want to, to prevent other interfering materials being released.

If its in the cells, specifically the red blood cells, then you need to lyse to get it out so that it can be detected.

Lysis can be done pretty easily. You can use surfactants or even just a single freeze thaw cycle. This will burst the red blood cells. Once you have burst the red blood cells, Hematocrit becomes moot, because is the volume of red blood cells in the sample. And if you've burst them all open, its zero.

So the key question is:
Is the SARS COV2 virus that DECN claims to be detecting in (a) the plasma (no lysis need) or (b) the cells (you need to lyse).

Unfortunately for DECN, the answer in ~99% of infected cases is - when it comes to blood (c) NEITHER! The virus is in the mucosa. Something which DECN overlooked. A fact that should tell you alot about the strength and depth of their virology credentials, I feel. (They don't have any!)

This is not all that complicated. Which is why I am sure the confusion being created by DECNs PRs is entirely deliberate. A deliberate attempt to try and bamboozle those with legitimate questions into silence by pretending it is more complicated than it really is. I am sure that you and the vast majorityof DECN shareholders are more than capable of understanding the Science underpinning most virus detection methodologies, if explained honestly and in a technically competent manner.

You should not have to trust the word of those who have taken your money that their science is good. They should be able to explain to your satisfaction why this is the case, and also answer the challenges from people like me, who have analysed what misleading information they have put out, and found some of the more glaring flaws in it.

I am not asking you to take my word for the information I have provided - especially the assertion that you can't find virus antigen in the vast majority of infected blood samples.
I have provided links in my earlier post that you can review for yourself and make up your own mind.

But it is an established fact and a scientific consensus that SARS COV2 virus particles are not usually present in the blood of infected patients. So how DECN can claim to detect them there in order to diagnose the illness is extremely questionable. To the extent of being fraudulently so imo.