News Focus
News Focus
icon url

LongnShortOfIt

05/20/13 8:00 AM

#35428 RE: Litchfield #35426

Really, computer expert huh? Funny, computer experts I know all use spell checking. Ok, among other things, I am a certified MSCE. I do know that Moore's law applies, and since it's been over 6 years that IMDS has done ANYTHING with their technology, that means computers have increased processing capability over 6 fold. Of course, I'm telling you something that you should know already.

Also, OS have moved to 64 bit processing and graphics programs such as those used my IMDS **SHOULD** have progressed with that technology. You don't see that anywhere in their advertising materials, do you?

And to my other point, if they did make the slightest change, NONE of their study results would be admissible with regards to the newly required studies. Remember, IMDS promised to meet with FDA officials to see what studies could be used? That meeting never happened. It doesn't cost anything to do that, so why didn't they? I'll tell you why, the FDA has no time for SCAMS, that's why. They're onto them like white on rice, so is the SEC and Mr. Mancuso. They toned it down a lot as they know they're walking the tight rope which could break any time just under the weight of STEALING the escrowed TRUST FUND money from the IRS which ultimately paid their own salaries. It's tax FRAUD to personally enrich yourself with taxpayer's money. They admitted to this in their SEC filings and letters of response to inquiries by Mr Mancuso. You should take the time to read them sometime.

>Their tecnology is fine.

What I will grant is that they have a technology that can produce an image, but the image is USELESS as a diagnostic tool. Studies I've read show it just a couple % points better than a coin toss. That's not an acceptable tool, especially when dealing with cancer and false negatives. FDA would never approve such a device, and they've FAILED THREE TIMES to get FDA approval.

So there's my facts, where's yours?

If the technology is so fine,
1) why couldn't they enough scans in a 5 year study?
2) why isn't market demand from installed CTLM base inspiring global sales since they can market in dozens of countries?
3) why isn't there a flood of success stories from the installed base?