Replies to post #16720 on BioCurex, Inc.(fka BOCX)

[Kag]

Opportunity Knocking,
My first concern would be who performed the testing? Was it BioCurex? My second concern would be to notice that the cutoff units of RECAF varied considerably with the different cancer types. RECAF does not have the ability to tell what kind of cancer it is. How is a technician in a lab going to know what to set the RECAF cutoff units at if the type of cancer is unknown? kag

[opportunityknocking]

Look with your own two eyes. Open them. What do you see? I see a giant leap forward in the fight against cancer. The odds may be stacked against a small biotech company, but they are not zero. The cream always rises. Look at these numbers and tell why we don't have a chance. I am waiting!!!Results: All formats performed in a similar manner (r>0.85). The table below shows the results:

Cancer type
Nr of Cancers
Nr of Normals
Cutoff (Units)
Sensitivity
Specificity

Liver *
15
128
4,900
100%
94%

Pancreatic #
10
50
4,600
100%
95%

Stomach 1st study *
48
40
4,600
90%
98%

Stomach 2nd study *
15
128
4,550
100%
94%

Colorectal &
51
85
4,800
100%
93%

[Gold Seeker]

Look what he has done to manipulate the results. You do not know what kind of cancer RECAF is looking at because it doesn't know so you can delete any referece to a type of cancer. Next, he is varying the cutoff level to manipulate the results.
Is the real cutoff level 4900, 4600, 4550 or 4800. A doctor attempting to determine if a test is positive has to know what the value is. This is just BS to manipulate the data.

The normal cutoff he has used has been 4500. He has obviously raised the cutoff level to exclude some very high reading normals between 4500 and 4900 to increase the specificity of the results.

Who knows the number of false positives he has hidden by moving the cutoff level higher? This is total manipulation.

I guess that is why clinical trials tell the truth and studies don't.