Doc.. I can appreciate your insight. Please keep it comm'n. As time goes on and you familiarize yourself with the board members here i'm sure questions will come at you from many sides.
Bohring, great points. We should be pursuing the scientific review side of the device and its functions but instead the company pays for another MTV spot to tell current shareholders we have no news.
Dr.Bohring... Welcome to the board. Could you please explain why you feel that after approval there will be a risk that studies do not support the number of applications touted. Also, what field of medicine are you in. thanks.
I know I am replying to my own post. I am not surprised by this decision. Please see what I wrote previously. The proof is in the pudding so to speak. It is not the processing speed, but rather the image quality and its ability to do what it says it can - safely.
Perhaps the consultants can spin the data to show performance equivalence - if not, real scientific comparisons will need to be done. I am wondering who will shell out the dollars for that research.