I will study your info later and respond but not sure why you keep referring to a hospital as the only frame of reference. I have been in the medical field as a nurse for over 30 years. That gives one a broad frame of reference.
OK I have read all of your lengthy post with interest. Could you kindly tell me the exact difference between the newer product by Pall with NAD status compared to the product on the FDA website from Utah Medical Services called Umbilicap? As I'm sure everyone knows the problem with umbilical cord blood collection is the harvesting and processing of the specimens once collected. How specifically is the product produced by Pall superior to the one used since 1997 by Utah Medical? Not that the one by 1997 was particularly good. I would like to understand better how is it an improvement that will overcome the general problem associated with umbilical cord blood processing. I agree that if there is a concrete reason that the filter produced by Pall is superior, there is yet another postive reason to be optimistic about the future of umbilical cord blood services. I am assuming that CBAI already or will employ those processes but don't have that information as well.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
