-
Terms of service
Dear all, I rarely post on the forums but read most days. However, I am disconcerted that a thread that is read by medical professionals has been closed down at the behest of a commercial enterprise.
-
329 Replies
-
Yes, it is concerning that a private company is attempting to censor information exchange by medical professionals. Nanox continues to impress.
-
There was nothing there that is not in the public domain already.
-
At least the thread wasn’t erased
-
Linking old thread here in case it gets buried.
[link=https://www.auntminnie.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=628676]https://www.auntminnie.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=628676[/link]
For anyone new, here are a few highlights (all of the info below is publicly available):
1. The previous thread on this company is frozen at the request of Nanox for violating the AM terms of service.
2. The company is demonstrating a device at RSNA on Thursday that is not pending FDA clearance which is an apparent violation of FDA regulations governing trade shows.
3. Nanox claims the device can be made for 10k despite using a third party detector that costs 50-70k
4. They claim or have previously claimed the device can do CR, fluoro, angio, CT, and no-squish mammography.
5. Part of their plan is to offer 1 annual whole body screening scan to the population of the planet.
6. The fist FDA submission for single source failed. The company has obtained the services of a former director, Dr. Daniel Schultz for the second attempt. In 2009 he was forced to resign from the FDA for clearing multiple useless and dangerous devices despite strong scientific objection. A senate committee investigating his conduct could find no previous instance in which the director of the center had approved a device in the face of unanimous opposition from staff scientists and administrators beneath him. Source: New York Times article below
7. In the SK Telecom deal, SKT got over 1mm shares at $16/share. What was later disclosed was 6 months prior the SKT executive personally got options for 1.2mm shares for free with a strike price of $2.21. Legal?
8. Board members of a company the CEO previously founded and led had this to say in a lawsuit: The dreadful financial situation of Israeli company Powermat… is a result of failing management at the company headed by founder and CEO Ran Poliakine, who manages the company improperly and unlawfully, in breach of his duty as an executive officer, by treating the company as his own, providing favors to his close associates, mixing together various businesses and companies he controls and the company, and taking advantage of company resources and the company’s employees and this: Poliakine in conjunction with some of the companys board members, and entities with which they are affiliated, without reporting their personal involvement to the companys board of directors before approving the deals, as they are required to do by law, and by presenting incomplete and false data to the companys board of directors. This, seems to have been in order to enable them to collect personal profits, at the expense of the company and its shareholders wellbeing, by causing significant financial losses to the company. Source below
9. Theres much, much more.
Sources:
[link=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/politics/device-won-approval-though-fda-staff-objected.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2…da-staff-objected.html[/link]
[link=https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-us-investor-sues-powermat-for-unlawful-management-1000976954]https://en.globes.co.il/e…-management-1000976954[/link]-
I actually thought the thread shutdown was a joke. In any case I was fishing for a bit of review of [link=https://www.rutmanip.com/post/taking-an-x-ray-to-nanox-imaging-part-ii?lang=he]this brief post[/link] on various nanox issues. If I’ve left anything important out (I don’t know anything about FDA and so haven’t addressed it at all) or have made any errors (e.g. as regards independence of anode current and acceleration voltage) I would appreciate the feedback.
-
Regarding the info on the CEO, you may get some comments from doubters that he is still on the board of Powermat and the suit was dropped shortly after however, this appears to have been the result of a settlement presumably to salvage the company after Poliakine brought a nuisance lawsuit in response to being forced out.
[link=https://www.cnet.com/news/wireless-charging-fans-rejoice-powermat-fends-off-legal-challenge/]https://www.cnet.com/news…s-off-legal-challenge/[/link]
[link=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/powermat-announces-settlement-of-shareholder-disputes-new-investment-revamps-management-and-governance-thorsten-heins-steps-down-as-ceo-584573301.html]https://www.prnewswire.co…-as-ceo-584573301.html[/link]
-
Brian has to be careful, I understand that. This is not the first time he shut down a thread on a commercial enterprise, in a case it was a collapsing telerad company. Same thing, nobody had posted any Insider information, the thread was based on publicly available data.
As for Nanox: Just for the record, I am not saying that they are a fraud. It is however my opinion that there are serious conflicts between what the company claims and what the laws of physics dictate.
-
From the exhibit website:
[blockquote] Spokesperson:
[/blockquote]
[blockquote] We did not request for the forum to be closed. We welcome professional debate and criticism. We requested a review of the many abusive comments towards Nanox and its employees.
[/blockquote]
I’m sorry they perceive this as abusive. They must realize that the lead-up to their presentation is full of secrecy and cloak and dagger stuff and some rather significant, unsubstantiated claims. If I personally have offended anyone there, I apologize profusely, but try reading your copy from [i]our [/i]point of view.-
My browser has cached the pages from the thread that was shut down. Would it be a violation of the Terms of Service, if I post a large portion of that content somewhere else?
-
Somewhere else? No. Have at it.
Let the Nanox lawyers play a game of information suppression whack-a-mole.-
The TOS are in place to protect the posters (nearly all who are anonymous), the companies (many who wish they were anonymous) and AuntMinnie. Brian would not have shut the thread down if it did not impact one of more of these areas. I have seen worse comments stay up so cut him and AM some slack please.
Keep in mind this particular thread had 16 PAGES worth of posts that stayed up a very long time. Many were hypercritical of the company as well, some deserved some maybe not as much. Who am I or anyone else to judge? I guess we’ll find out if its deserved or not tomorrow at 10:30 CDT when they do the demo in their booth (rescheduled from today at 5).
Some of the questions that were raised related to them violating both RSNA and FDA rules. Were this my company and I was demonstrating at the largest trade show for my products I would have concerns as well. Thankfully it is not. Up until now the thread has consisted of comments from skeptics and supporters but the tone changed and questions amped up in the past day requiring Brian to make the right decision to take it down. Understand this was not done for Nanox or for its skeptics- its to preserve the integrity of AM as well which, as the largest on line medical journal of its kind, strives to show both sides of every story.
Many people are relying on AM to report the news from RSNA and that is what is being done now. Once that is done I’m sure Brian will address Nanox. For now it would be best for all to just let things settle out and take its course.
PACSMan -
Just to be clear, I’m not criticizing Brian/AM at all.
I assumed he received a letter from Nanox’s lawyers, but whatever the reason was, I should hope there will be a clear explanation. I’m not here to argue about the take down of the last thread, but given that we should expect a lively debate about Nanox’s event tomorrow, it makes sense to lay out clear guidelines so folks here can talk about it without running afoul of AM’s terms. -
Exactly Vapor. I am sure Brian had to do what he did. It is telling that the company chose that approach rather than having a rep explain why everyone here is wrong. If they have a working product it should be easy. After all they “understand the need to establish credibility in the professional radiology community”.
-
Streisand effect yet again.
-
A preliminary dump of a cache of the thread that was removed has appeared here: [link]https://anotepad.com/notes/6g6qpqf9[/link]
Please be careful and follow the copyright laws, if you need to cite it.
-
Now it looks like people are trolling the reps on the RSNA chat. Keep asking if they will scan live humans… that or we have a bunch of people interested in the stock manipulation that are ignorant of RSNA and FDA rules. Either way not a good look for RSNA.
-
RXR and Vapor, as the investment professional contributors here, would you be willing to take the time to explain to those of us who have day jobs how the stock in this company can move so wildly despite no real news? Especially how does it rise so rapidly in the midst of more and more evidence that their product cannot do what Nanox says it can?
-
This stock price behavior is typical of frauds. The main reason is that the stock is impossible (or very costly) to borrow, which often forces shorts to cover (for risk management, or just forced from their broker), creating an upswing, but then other shorts use the opportunity to pounce down. Illiquidity + high cost to borrow = volatility.
As I mentioned already – the complete frauds are viewed by many as the best investments – because they never disappoint!!! Yes, they could be halted and delisted, eventually, but not today or tomorrow. Unless someone like Citron or Muddy Waters comes and spoils the party, that is. -
That makes sense. I wouldn’t cal it investing. More like gambling and trading. I can see how frauds and their volatility would be celebrated by traders and why places like Stock Twits exist. Goof luck to you RXR!
-
What I am reading tonight: [link]https://www.dka.global/nanox-imaging[/link]
Muddy Waters says it comes from an IR firm run by a Russian guy.
-
[link=https://twitter.com/BrianFeroldi/status/1334221547658125312?s=20]https://twitter.com/Brian…34221547658125312?s=20[/link]
This is brilliant! Make up your mind before you see the evidence.I can all but guarantee that I will be impressed by $NNOX's presentation tomorrow
That doesn't change the fact that it is EXTREMELY risky and doesn't have FDA approval yet
let alone revenue!
I'll happily buy more after FDA approval
Until then, I won't
— Brian Feroldi (@BrianFeroldi) December 2, 2020
-
How will he know if what hes seeing is good?
Back when they released the first video with that chest hologram several of these guys took to Twitter to say how good it was.
-
Exactly
-
I guess his statement is actually correct. He probably will be impressed.
-
With love from Russia:
“The use of expert opinions is a valid approach to any exposé and analytical research reports when the professional opinions of such experts can be validated by professional credentials and reputation within their domain of expertise. However, the reports by both Muddy Waters and Citron use exclusively anonymous sources. Every single expert witness included in their reports are introduced under anonymous pseudonyms like Radiologist A, Radiologist B, Radiologist C, D and E, joined by a Former Employee of Nanox itself or Nanox partners companies. The use of anonymou s experts completely invalidates the use of expert opinion in the first place by removing the actual factors that would be used to validate their opinions in the first place (i.e., professional titles, the strength of their professional affiliations, and the reputational caliber of the witnesses within their specific professional domains).” -
Love #2:
The Nanox imaging device, namely the Nanox.ARC, was designed to function as a housing mechanism for the Nanox Source and not a device that aims to compete with legacy x-ray systems in order to replace them as alleged by Citron. -
Love #3:
“As alluded to above, the companys product [ Nanox.SOURCE ] is a single, more cost effective and efficient component intended for use in existing medical imaging devices. As such, the companys device CANNOT SHOW IMAGING DATA because it is not an imaging device in and of itself.”
And I think you will have to read the rest yourselves…
-
My first advice is not to trust “investment professionals”. In general I find that most people are not very good at their day jobs, and the investment community is probably among the worst. Having said that, I’ll give you my 2c and I’ll try to explain it without using too much finance mumbo jumbo.
RXR is partly correct that the borrow is an issue here. A newly public company like NNOX has a small float (ie. 80% of its shares are locked up and only 20% are publicly traded), so when it’s hyped up like this, you don’t have many natural sellers. There actually is borrow on this stock (ie. it’s possible to short the stock), but it’s tight. We locked up some borrow a few weeks/months ago, but we are just keeping them in reserve for now, so we are not long or short the stock. The borrow is expensive (ie. we pay a LOT to the owners of the shares that we borrowed from) and probably not stable (ie. those guys can sell their stock and call their shares back, so it’s very possible that we would’ve paid for this borrow all this time and never have a chance to actually use it to short the stock again). All this adds up to a major headache, and why many funds would not want to bother shorting a stock like this. And without shorts, it’s harder to keep a lid on euphoria.
But that’s not the only reason. There are other stocks out there like this (no real business; promotional CEO; shady-to-possibly-fraudulent), but have plenty of borrow, where you see a similar pattern (stock charts going to the moon). I don’t know what it is about today’s markets. Maybe it’s Robin Hood millennials, maybe it’s the Barstool Sports readers that believe stocks only go up, maybe it’s because we’re in the 12th year of a bull cycle and by this stage “all crappy stocks rise, at the same time, across all sectors”. Who knows. But the vast majority of the buyers/sellers out there are just day traders with no real long term agenda. So while I have a view on the long-term future of this stock (zero), that’s sort of irrelevant because if a stock is no longer behaving rationally in the short term, whatever long term thesis I have is worthless. I’ve seen careers destroyed because, as a much smarter man once said, the market can stay irrational a lot longer than you can stay solvent. Look at the big Wirecard fraud. John Hempton of Bronte Capital called it a fraud 8 years ago and he was absolutely right. He also observed that a stock can go from 10 to 0 via 100 and you’ll lose a lot of money shorting that stock, even if you’re right in the end. Well that’s how Wirecard turned out for him – he stayed short the entire time (until the bankruptcy) but it was also the biggest loser of his firm’s history.
So basically, I’ve wasted a lot of your time to explain why it’s dangerous to short this stock. We shorted this stock initially, got lucky with the timing (ie. actually made good money), and have stayed on the sidelines since. We are maintaining our borrow for now (paying I don’t even know what, 60% annual rebate? Meaning 5% per month) debating whether or not we should re-short it. The bankers are useless. I spoke to 2 of them, and they’re shameless cheerleaders (or whatever word you use to describe otherwise good people who nonetheless sell themselves for money). It’s not even that they believe the company, but they know that with another 35mm shares held by insiders, they will want to dump them on to the market at some point and will need banks. Obviously tomorrow will be interesting, although of course the bankers will write glowing reports about how the technology is so wonderful.
Longer term, I’m not convinced that these guys will actually get the 510k clearance for their single-source device. Even if you have a functional tube, you can’t just take it to the FDA and get clearance. It needs to be a commercial product. A lab tech in the 8th hour of his shift needs to be able to use the device without making a mistake. You have to build an entire device around the tube, and frankly I don’t see why anyone (including these guys) would want to waste the time and money to develop a single-source device that will never see the light of day anyway. As for their multi-source product, I don’t know how they can claim they will submit their application before year end. Do they even have a design ready? First they talk about CT, and now they’re saying breast tomo or fluoroscopy. First they had a moving arc, but now they’re going to move the bench. None of the designs seem to incorporate a detector. Compare this to what Micro-X did or what Varex is doing now. Micro-X took years to go from a functional cathode to a functional tube, and years more to design an entire mobile system (branded by Carestream). Varex announced a functional nanotube-based source this year, but they’re sending samples to OEMs to design machines around. They’re telling people that normal design cycle is 2-3 years, but this (given that it’s a totally new type of source) will take much longer. So even if you accept at face value that Nanox actually has a functional tube, they’re clearly in the early stages of designing a machine, so I have no clue how they can submit an application anytime soon (if ever). -
Thanks for all this info Vapor.
-
Vapor, thank you very much. You didn’t waste my time and I hope you don’t feel like I wasted yours taking the time to write such a thorough response. It’s all so frustrating to watch but I am glad you have discouraged me from trying to make money on this stock in either direction. I understand much better the dynamics in these low float stock now.
One thing that came into my mind while reading this is the value of having short positions in hedge funds and why you guys would want to always be looking out for good opportunities. If as you say there is “irrational exuberance” among millennials, one can take advantage of the upside pretty easily. Of course that leaves one exposed to a big downside if the bubble pops so having good shorts could help decrease volatility and lessen the blow when it does. -
[link]https://www.entrepreneur.com/amphtml/360701[/link]
This is popping up on when I go to Google now. It’s going to be a long wait to see the fall here. -
OP here. Have looked at the various links you chaps have provided (thank you). Nothing to convince me that this is a viable technology.
-
It will be interesting to see just what [i]IS[/i] being offered. The tube? The minimalist gantry? The network? AI? App Store?
-
They were supposed to offer the TUBE initially, per opening slide of the featured presentation and the description in the exhibitor section. But based on their chat comments in their RSNA2020 exhibitor booth, they will offer an X-RAY SYSTEM TAKING IMAGES, which is commercialization of an unapproved device” and is UNLAWFUL in the United States (because that concept system is not cleared and has no clearance pending)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
So what exactly happened here? Has admin explained how exactly the previous thread violated the terms of service? At a minimum it should be explicitly clarified so that a new thread won’t make the same “mistakes”.
-
Quote from vaporfly
So what exactly happened here? Has admin explained how exactly the previous thread violated the terms of service? At a minimum it should be explicitly clarified so that a new thread won’t make the same “mistakes”.
It is under review to check if there are any violations
-
-
Anecdotally there is lots of buzz on social media predicting some huge move up tomorrow. Ive seen several ridiculous price targets. I dont understand any of this because its not like theyre presenting data from a clinical trial. The quality and utility of whatever images they show will be judged subjectively. Hopefully the TMF writers and other promoters discuss the presentation with a group of radiologists before they proclaim it was great presentation.
-
Yes. As we have seen here there is a reason the radiologists remained anonymous. Nanox has shown they would be willing to go find them and censor them.
-
On April 16, Moshe Yaalon MK, the former Likud defense minister who is now a prominent adversary of Netanyahus, scoffed in a Channel 12 interview. Its a lie and a fraud. [He was referring to a published work by my new friends at dka.global ]
-
F these guys. What a bunch of crooks.
-
-
Quote from Thread Enhancer
[link=https://www.entrepreneur.com/amphtml/360701]https://www.entrepreneur.com/amphtml/360701[/link]
This is popping up on when I go to Google now. It’s going to be a long wait to see the fall here.
Actually kinda hilarious. These radiologists sound like your version of our “sellside analysts”. Maybe with more dignity, if not integrity.
To answer your earlier question re: shorts. It’s a tough business and a difficult question. Obviously stocks go up over time so shorting stocks is a losing business. But there are reasons to do it. 1) There’s solid theory that if done properly, they can reduce your portfolio’s volatility and help you achieve a better “risk-adjusted” return. There’s a lot of mumbo jumbo behind this, but the basic idea is that the holy grail in investing is not finding the highest potential or even expected return, but the “best” risk-adjusted return. 2) Maybe you believe that you can “beat the market” because you are diligent or have insights. So having the flexibility to go long or short a stock should add to your returns.
In practice, it’s all very hard, and frankly a lot of funds just throw in the towel. Many of them focus on index-like or a “basket” of shorts, meaning that they’re resorting to the fallacy that making lots of small bets against companies they don’t know very well will hurt them less than making a few large bets against companies they know very well (ie. in case if “things go wrong”). Personally I think it’s better to stick to what you know – consider your options carefully (ie. find the best few situations) and make your bets. So long as you have some measure of risk control (ie. limit the max size of each position), random noise should cancel out and if you’re good at what you do, you’ll be fine. As for stocks like Nanox – I think it’s very hard. Eventually it will crash, but timing is everything. Maybe it’ll last a long time (especially if the market stays frothy; frauds tend to get exposed when market retreats), but maybe it won’t. We’re paying a monthly rebate because obviously we want to re-short the stock at some point, but I’d be lying if I said I knew when that would be.
But one thing for certain – I believe NNOX’s lockup expiration is happening soon (that’s when insiders are allowed to sell their shares, although they’d still have to alert the public when they do). If the insiders dump, that may put some pressure on the stock, and also alleviate the small float issue.-
Thanks. I enjoy learning about this stuff and pretty much manage my own portfolio. You have convinced me not to add short positions.
You last point is interesting. I was under the assumption that the lock out period was set and known at the IPO. That is not the case? The one for Nanox could be soon? I am now convinced Ran and his cronies are just playing the game to get them to their exit. Would be great if this happened sooner than later.-
The lock-up expiration is 180 days after the IPO. I said “soon” because I’m too lazy to figure out the exact date. NNOX’s IPO was in August, so the expiration should be mid-Feb sometime.
Keep in mind though Cantor (the lead banker) can unilaterally accelerate this date. Would be rare and would not be well received by the market.-
Yes. 180 days was the number I remembered. Thanks for clarifying. Cant come soon enough. I was going to ask you earlier if Cantor or other banks would help in orchestrating short squeezes to protect their investment in the way to the lock out ending. Would they be able to influence say a group like Blackrock that took a tiny position for them but certainly enough to help fill gaps?
-
Index funds like Blackrock don’t care whether a stock goes to zero or $1,000. They have to buy whatever is in the index. And then they lend the shares to the shorts, for a fee.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Would they be able to influence say a group like Blackrock that took a tiny position for them but certainly enough to help fill gaps?
-
That makes sense. I wouldnt have thought Nanox would be part of any undead at this point. One thing for sure. The individual investor is a huge disadvantage when it come to trading. Im happy with my buy and hold strategy of good companies.
-
If they told me ‘we have found a way to make this solid state cold cathode x-ray tube that offers x/y/z advantages, come check it out’, I would love to see what they have to offer. Show me some experimental data, give the tube to some OEMs to play with it etc. There are plenty of exhibitors at RSNA that show components from generators to refurbished drive motors for CT scanners, neither RSNA nor FDA prohibit you from doing that as long as you are not marketing a device.
-
Yes, but Nanox CEO (he was the Chief Strategy Officer then) tried that at RSNA 2015 (his blog is archived), and no one was interested in a fake cathode or tube. The Korean guy in the endorsement confirms that no one was interested.
Quote from fw
If they told me ‘we have found a way to make this solid state cold cathode x-ray tube that offers x/y/z advantages, come check it out’, I would love to see what they have to offer. Show me some experimental data, give the tube to some OEMs to play with it etc. There are plenty of exhibitors at RSNA that show components from generators to refurbished drive motors for CT scanners, neither RSNA nor FDA prohibit you from doing that as long as you are not marketing a device.
-
Quote from richard.x.roe
Yes, but Nanox CEO (he was the Chief Strategy Officer then) tried that at RSNA 2015 (his blog is archived), and no one was interested in a fake cathode or tube. The Korean guy in the endorsement confirms that no one was interested.
They are flailing with this since 2015 ? Took them a while to figure out that you can make more money by selling a stock than a x-ray tube I guess.
-
-
-
-
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Yes. 180 days was the number I remembered. Thanks for clarifying. Cant come soon enough. I was going to ask you earlier if Cantor or other banks would help in orchestrating short squeezes to protect their investment in the way to the lock out ending. Would they be able to influence say a group like Blackrock that took a tiny position for them but certainly enough to help fill gaps?
Generally speaking, no. Remember that Cantor makes money two ways – offering shares for the company (7% for IPOs, more on green shoes, which is insane but that’s a different conversation, and as high as 4-5% for follow-on offerings), or by trading shares in the company. Cantor is not in the business of gambling with its own capital, partly because of regulations, but mainly because it’s just not what they do. They can only squeeze a stock by buying shares and taking risk on that new position. Could they make money by orchestrating a squeeze and dumping the stock quickly afterwards? Possibly, but there are issues there too. 1) It would be pretty illegal for manipulate a stock like this. 2) Theoretically they could do this for any thinly traded stock, and so if they chose to do this, there’s no reason why they’d do this just for a client. Whatever favor they gain from a client is far outweighed by the risk/reward of the trade itself. 3) There’s likely zero long-term affect on the stock anyway, since they’d have to reverse the trade quickly to avoid taking on risk. 4) If I ran the equities desk at Cantor, I’d immediately fire anyone who tried to do this.
Similarly, there’s no reason why Blackrock would do this. Never mind that Blackrock is basically a massive index fund that doesn’t take discretionary positions, but why would they do this for Nanox or Cantor? For Cantor, a big institutional client like Wellington or Fidelity (that trades all the time) is worth a lot more than a corporate client like Nanox that may be gone in a few years. Plus, it’s not like the institutional funds will listen to Cantor anyway.-
I figured but thought it was worth asking about. Again, thanks for using your valuable time to answer my neophyte questions.
-
Quote from Thread Enhancer
I figured but thought it was worth asking about. Again, thanks for using your valuable time to answer my neophyte questions.
Haha, I’d hardly call it my valuable time for your neophyte questions. You’re the one doing God’s work out in the real world while I’m just clicking buttons around. I’m just happy to actually get real insight here and tag along for the ride. Thank you.
-
-
-
-
@vaporfly: Yeah, are you sure about the lock-up expiration being 180 days?
On a separate note, if you look at the LIVE presentation now, you will see how investment is done GANGNAM STYLE.
-
New NNOX article in Seeking Alpha
[link=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4393849-nano-x-vision-under-x-ray?utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha#alt1&mail_subject=nnox-nano-x-through-an-x-ray-darkly&utm_campaign=rta-stock-article&utm_content=link-0]https://seekingalpha.com/…amp;utm_content=link-0[/link]-
Yes, that’s by our contributor, Jeremy.
-
Stock hit a high in the past week of $67.14 (the day of the demo) and is currently trading at $48.65. It hit a low yesterday of $41.50. Before the demo it had been consistently trading in high 20’s to low to mid 30’s (10/2-11/10) yet had an opening low of 20.25. The stock also spiked at $64.19 for one day on 9/11- not sure what precipitated that.
That is the only contribution I plan on making to this thread. You make your own judgements.
-
-
-
Did anyone watch that recent interview with Brian and Ran?
-
Link?
-
Its on the first page of the site. At least it was yesterday.
-
[link=https://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=sup&sub=xra&pag=dis&ItemID=132930]https://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=sup&sub=xra&pag=dis&ItemID=132930[/link]
its now page two. Not sure why one cant comment like we usually can.-
Quote from Nutty Buddha
[link=https://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=sup&sub=xra&pag=dis&ItemID=132930]https://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=sup&sub=xra&pag=dis&ItemID=132930[/link]
its now page two. Not sure why one cant comment like we usually can.
Because it’s probably a paid promotion. Also explains why AM previously shut down discussion of the product and the business practices surrounding it.-
Yep.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Heres a question:
If the current prototype is down to six sources and one detector why use a ring shape?
You would have way more flexibility in terms of views you could obtain with something similar to a standard DR setup or even a motorized C-arm.
-
Not six, five sources! But you are exactly right, the ring shape makes it look like a CT or MRI or something
Quote from n.rad
Heres a question:
If the current prototype is down to six sources and one detector why use a ring shape?
You would have way more flexibility in terms of views you could obtain with something similar to a standard DR setup or even a motorized C-arm.
Thinking of these types of questions I always come to the same conclusion. The arc was for stock promotion. Make the uninformed think it is a CT scanner by making it look like a CT scanner.
.
-
Enjoy a quick read before the show starts:
[link=https://web.archive.org/web/20151128031057/http://ran-poliakine.com/2015/11/imaging-3-0/]https://web.archive.org/w…m/2015/11/imaging-3-0/[/link] -
5 sources with one detector, even better.
-
If they show any image, it will be illegal, because this means they are demoing a 5-source x-ray system that has no clearance pending (they can demo only a single-source device).
-
Anyone watching? Ran just had his hand x-rayed. Wow.
11:43: So the gantry [i]tilts [/i]to accomplish “tomography”. “Challenge of ‘overlapping biomass’ overcome by tomogram”
VERY clearly geared to those who are not familiar with radiography, CT, etc.
The tomos do not appear to be the live acquisition.-
Good image quality, which has as much (or more) to do with the detector than the X-ray source. Is the tomo better than a CXR? Yes. Is it better than a conventional CT? No.
Addendum:
CT “work in progress” shows computer reconstruction of the plane-tomograms. Again, very detector dependent.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from DoctorDalai
Good image quality, which has as much (or more) to do with the detector than the X-ray source. Is the tomo better than a CXR? Yes. Is it better than a conventional CT? No.
Is it possible for their current setup (6 sources + 1 flat detector) to make this 3d tomo scan?
He had to conveniently leave the room, so it’s hard to know exactly when/how they actually acquired this scan.-
I believe he said something about 11 sources? I was trying to do some work at the same time. Doubt these were live acquisitions. Again, the source is not as critical as the detector. Notice that the gantry tilted to accomplish the tomogram, there was no “electronic steering” of the electron beam or the X-ray beam claimed.
-
Someone in the chat noticed that the DICOM data gave a date of 12/2….
-
How did they take 69 images of the hand, for example, if the Exprimer detector takes 7 seconds for each image?
-
This guy supposedly worked with Nanox in 2014. He had a few interesting things to say on Twitter.
[link=https://twitter.com/davidscaduto/status/1334541005845131267?s=21]https://twitter.com/david…34541005845131267?s=21[/link]
This $NNOX presentation is doing a great job selling us on tomosynthesis as a modality, but not really on their MEMS chip. I know they’re trying to please an investor audience and a radiologist audience, but I’m not super impressed... #RSNA20
— David Scaduto, PhD, DABR (@DavidScaduto) December 3, 2020
-
Why does it say R? Isn’t this guy left-handed?
[link]https://i.imgur.com/pbBg78U.png[/link] -
For the “concept device” shown that was supposedly taking the images live, where was the detector? Those phantoms and the lamb shank were spread out all along the table. Have they created a table long detector that is built in?!
-
No, the one and only Exprimer (wireless) detector by DRTECH was under the Arc (below the table). The table was moving.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
For the “concept device” shown that was supposedly taking the images live, where was the detector? Those phantoms and the lamb shank were spread out all along the table. Have they created a table long detector that is built in?!
-
Proof that the demo was faked. The doctor did not like it and wanted to go back.
[link]https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png[/link]-
Quote from richard.x.roe
Proof that the demo was faked. The doctor did not like it and wanted to go back.
[link=https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png]https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png[/link]
[image]https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png[/image]
Faked? Well…what we [i]can [/i]say is that the tomos were [i]definitely [/i]acquired before the live ‘cast. Look at the thumbnails, the small images at the bottom…this allows the selection of the study you want to see. These were pre-loaded. What machine produced them? Only those in the know, know.-
I agree.
Quote from DoctorDalai
Faked? Well…what we [i]can [/i]say is that the tomos were [i]definitely [/i]acquired before the live ‘cast. Look at the thumbnails, the small images at the bottom…this allows the selection of the study you want to see. These were pre-loaded. What machine produced them? Only those in the know, know.
-
-
-
Ah, I visualize the architecture now. I do have a question about the chest imaging. Was that a phantom? The vasculature was anatomic and the nodules were distinct. It even has regions of emphysema. That is a fancy phantom if so.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from richard.x.roe
Proof that the demo was faked. The doctor did not like it and wanted to go back.
[link=https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png]https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png[/link]
Look at the time stamp.
Darn it. That could have been taken yesterday and the tomo images today….-
The 2D study was performed yesterday, says the doctor. They work late in Israel. That’s not the fraud.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Darn it. That could have been taken yesterday and the tomo images today….
-
Quote from richard.x.roe
The 2D study was performed yesterday, says the doctor. They work late in Israel. That’s not the fraud.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Darn it. That could have been taken yesterday and the tomo images today….
Yes, that’s why I added that.-
What do WL 5554 /WW 3263 markings mean – length and width in pixels, but what is W?
edited: Sorry, I think brightness (window level – WL), or contrast (window width – WW):
-
-
-
Yes I was looking at the time stamp. It looks like the upper-right-hand code is just the time stamp as well (confirmed by this hand phantom). That means Ran’s hand was imaged at 9:47-9:48am on 12/3? I don’t remember where he was doing the demo from. If it was Israel, that’s 8 hours ahead of CST.
-
So what do our guests here from the business world think of this so far?
-
Quote from DoctorDalai
So what do our guests here from the business world think of this so far?
Nothing really different. The investing world really has nothing useful to say about the demo – none of us really understand what we’re looking at anyway, and that’s why I’m here!
I was also only half listening to the live demo. I was on another call during the first half of it and was trying to multi-task (poorly). Did he say anything about their single-source device? I saw Ran waving his tube around the entire time, but wasn’t sure if he was showing a single-source machine. There were two arcs – what were they each?-
There was something very weird with the WORKING Arc – only one of the two was shown in action. I think it DID NOT HAVE ANY SOURCE in it, just a regular camera!!!! Still looking.
-
Anyone familiar with [link]https://www.radiantviewer.com/[/link] , the DICOM viewer used in the live demo?
-
[link]https://www.radiantviewer.com/store/[/link]
This is all you need to know about that. There are any number of inexpensive (or free) DICOM viewers out there. They should have used OsiriX although they didn’t have Macs.
Is “Freddy Brick” a friend of anyone here? 😉-
Just watching a replay of this morning’s dog and pony show. Pretty hilarious. Ran puts up a big Bloomberg screen to prove that it was “live”. What non-financial business subscribes to Bloomberg anyway?
Anyway, he makes a big point of taking a real time image. Purposely leaves on a bracelet. Even jokes that “I don’t even know if they took the imagine, but I think they did, I heard a click.” Mentions repeatedly that the image capture just happened. Meanwhile, doesn’t bother covering up the timestamp on the screen, which clearly indicates his hand was imaged 9 hours earlier.
Kinda sad.-
They keep deleting messages from freddy brick …
-
What else did Freddy say? The only one I caught was his comment about Greanleaf.
-
-
Do you have a link to the replay in high resolution (not zoom)? I am missing some segments…
Quote from vaporfly
Just watching a replay of this morning’s dog and pony show.
-
Anything of value in the afternoon session?
-
He repeats the 6 number of tubes.
Quote from Nibbler
Anything of value in the afternoon session?
-
Count number of holes, please! (by the way, I think this was the second Arc that they did not attempt to move during the demo – still checking)
[link]https://i.imgur.com/q2wZnUm.png[/link]
[link]https://i.imgur.com/Lnqdi8I.png[/link]
-
Did they show the beating heart fluoroscopy that Dr. Yuz said he saw on Zoom a year ago?
-
What is this behind his back and can you fake tomo with it, assuming you have a lot of time? Or was the tomo resolution on Dr. Yuz screen just too high for such a trick?
[link=https://i.imgur.com/WBRdhV0.png]https://i.imgur.com/WBRdhV0.png[/link]
edit: Siemens dual-energy CT? -
First of all, what is the meaning of window width on a 2D radiograph? Second of all, how can the window width show 9492? This is supposed to be a normal hand done with a CR detector by Nanox (with their tube). What am I missing?
-
-
-
Got to love Freddy Brick!
-
There was some info here on the 3rd party that was doing FDA submissions for nanox that I can’t seem to locate on search – I recall that on this thread there was a post on the first page of posts with a numbered list of woes that seems to have been deleted – does anyone have the 3rd party submitter’s name / other info?
-
Daniel Schultz. Search his name plus any of the companies below:
Cyberonics
TMJI implants
ReGen BiologicsHeres one example:
[link=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/politics/device-won-approval-though-fda-staff-objected.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2…da-staff-objected.html[/link]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The demo was done in Israel in real time, as confirmed by the Bloomberg screen next to him. The tomo was done offline and just SHOWN in real time. It was a fraud.
-
I would like to remind everyone of the Terms of Service that all of you have agreed to as a condition for using these Forums. If you would like to review the TOS, please go to [link=https://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=abt&sub=faq&pag=dis&itemid=50589.]https://www.auntminnie.co…=dis&itemid=50589.[/link]
Brian Casey
Editor in Chief
AuntMinnie.com-
Brian: Sorry, I am new here, but maybe you should ask Nanox and their attorneys to give you a list of the specific posts (messages) they have a problem with, and then post the list of messageIDs here, so we know what they are REALLY afraid of.
Thank you for the excellent forum! -
Quote from Brian Casey
I would like to remind everyone of the Terms of Service that all of you have agreed to as a condition for using these Forums. If you would like to review the TOS, please go to [link=https://www.auntminnie.com/index.aspx?sec=abt&sub=faq&pag=dis&itemid=50589.]https://www.auntminnie.co…=dis&itemid=50589.[/link]
Brian Casey
Editor in Chief
AuntMinnie.com
I am unclear how the discussion about this company and their product violates the TOS. We are not harming children and I dont think anyone here has impersonated an employee of the publisher.
[i][size=”2″]2. You agree that you will not use the Service to:[/size][/i][i][size=”2″]a. upload, post, email, transmit, submit or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another’s privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]b. harm minors in any way;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]c. post personal identifying information about someone else;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]d. advocate illegal conduct or participate in illegal or fraudulent schemes to distribute unauthorized copies of copyrighted material (including photos, artwork, text, recordings, designs, or computer programs);[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]e. post, exchange, trade or swap content that is sexually explicit, obscene or vulgar;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]f. upload, post, email, transmit, submit or otherwise make available any material that contains destructive features, such as viruses, worms, Trojan horses, etc.[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]g. post or use any bots or scripts on the server, whether they are benign or destructive in intent;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]h. invite others to visit websites that offer materials or content that does not comply with the Standards;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]i. engage in any commercial activity, including but not limited to posting or transmitting of unauthorized or unsolicited advertising, promotional materials or any other forms of solicitation to other users;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]j. upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of any party;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]k. state, indicate, suggest or otherwise imply that you are an employee or representative of IMV Publishing, its subsidiaries or affiliates;[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]l. intentionally or unintentionally violate any applicable local, state, national or international law, including but not limited to, regulations promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any rules of any national or other securities exchange, including without limitation, the New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ, and any regulations having the force of law; or[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]m. collect or store personal data about other users.[/size][/i]
[i][size=”2″]n. adopt the identity of another person or company through the use of a user name that is not your own.[/size][/i]
-
-
-
-
-
I believe the 2D hand picture was taken with a CR detector. Anyone disagrees?
-
You have a snapshot with that timestamp?
Quote from vaporfly
Meanwhile, doesn’t bother covering up the timestamp on the screen, which clearly indicates his hand was imaged 9 hours earlier.
-
Quote from richard.x.roe
You have a snapshot with that timestamp?
Quote from vaporfly
Meanwhile, doesn’t bother covering up the timestamp on the screen, which clearly indicates his hand was imaged 9 hours earlier.
I was using the image you posted earlier:
[link=https://i.imgur.com/pbBg78U.png]https://i.imgur.com/pbBg78U.png[/link]
The upper right hand says 201203094759. If you look at the phantom (different picture, with both the upper right hand code, and bottom right hand time stamp), the methodology of that code appears to translate into: 2020, Dec-03, 09:47:59am.
EDIT:
Actually, taking a look at the other picture some more
[link]https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png[/link]
Look at the phantom hand (supposedly taken on 12/2 at the hospital) vs Ran’s hand (supposedly taken on 12/3 6:30pm in the room next door). The software labels around both images, you have to wonder if Ran’s hand was actually also taken on a conventional X-ray machine at the hospital that morning. Either that, or their software uses the same labeling convention as the hospital’s.
-
-
They are using [link]https://www.radiantviewer.com/[/link] DICOM viewer. We need to understand more how the software works. My first guess as someone who has never used and played with DICOM is that the time you see in the lower right corner is the time when the image was taken, while the stuff in the top right corner is when the STUDY started.
So I am not sure about the 9:47am (I guess, for now, that this is the time they started the study). Ran’s hand has a stamp in the lower right corner of 18:37:13 which is about right (the demo went from 18:30, or 6:30pm, to about 19:00, or 7pm, local Israeli time). I cannot confirm the right times, because my screenshots are still messed up a bit (but should eventually be able to synchronize with Bloomberg).
Quote from vaporfly
I was using the image you posted earlier:
[link=https://i.imgur.com/pbBg78U.png]https://i.imgur.com/pbBg78U.png[/link]The upper right hand says 201203094759. If you look at the phantom (different picture, with both the upper right hand code, and bottom right hand time stamp), the methodology of that code appears to translate into: 2020, Dec-03, 09:47:59am.
Actually, taking a look at the other picture some more
[link=https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png]https://i.imgur.com/Iw55SVq.png[/link]Look at the phantom hand (supposedly taken on 12/2 at the hospital) vs Ran’s hand (supposedly taken on 12/3 6:30pm in the room next door). The software labels around both images, you have to wonder if Ran’s hand was actually also taken on a conventional X-ray machine at the hospital that morning. Either that, or their software uses the same labeling convention as the hospital’s.
-
To the knowledgeable people here: Is it ok to operate a Siemens CT scanner on the warehouse floor, with no shielding and say 15 meter distance to humans in cubicles? In a foreign country, of course, not in the United States or European Union.
-
We stand in rooms with CTs to do procedures using CT fluoro but everyone in the room wears lead and we try to minimize imaging as much as possible. Obviously, the further away you stand the lower the dose.
-
I am very bothered by WW 8688 (just as I was bothered by S-value of 17063 on Fuji’s station with the image taken with CR). Anyone has a clue?
-
What am I missing here? If doing this type of tomo of the body was useful why dont we do it? Its not like this couldnt have been done for decades if it was needed. Is there a need for something between CR and CT with this architecture? I dont see it. What problem does it solve? If the device was equivalent to CT that would be different but its not so what do they have to sell? How can they already be taking orders and putting targets on delivery dates etc?
-
It is illegal to take orders or promise delivery next year in the United States at this stage, even with all the disclaimers about pending regulatory approval, etc. That is why they have a Collaborative Agreement with USARAD hoping that the FDA is too busy with COVID. It is also illegal to demo an x-ray system that has no pending clearance (regardless of what they write on the screen or post on he walls), but they did it today.
I have no idea about what’s legal in other countries.-
Supposedly Foxconn is already building 100 units.
-
Has anyone used chest tomo for lung nodules like GE VolumeRad? We use it for for high risk patients. I cant recall a case where I thought it helped.
-
Quote from n.rad
Supposedly Foxconn is already building 100 units.
Of the Arc? I don’t understand this plan. If the tube works well for 2D work and it can function in a stand alone unit that took the film of Ran’s hand, why not start there? It should be simple to get 510 clearance for this and actually could be deployed quickly and cheaply. The Arc is as they say a “concept device” that is nowhere near ready for deployment and yet they are promising that next year.
-
The company has always stated in its prospectus (and its drafts) that the first commercial device will be the multi-source Arc. The single-source “device” is just a clearance strategy and they never had (nor do they have now) any intention of selling/leasing that.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Quote from n.rad
Supposedly Foxconn is already building 100 units.
Of the Arc? I don’t understand this plan. If the tube works well for 2D work and it can function in a stand alone unit that took the film of Ran’s hand, why not start there? It should be simple to get 510 clearance for this and actually could be deployed quickly and cheaply. The Arc is as they say a “concept device” that is nowhere near ready for deployment and yet they are promising that next year.
-
I believe the earnings call and investor presentations mentioned orders for units and production etc. Im not sure where exactly this guy got the 100 number though
[link=https://twitter.com/terrapharma1/status/1334596637470064641?s=21]https://twitter.com/terra…34596637470064641?s=21[/link]
Model demo'd today is commercial version. 110 being constructed now, 100 in conjunction with Foxconn. Will be used for training, etc. $NNOX
— TerraPharma (@TerraPharma1) December 3, 2020
-
The CEO gave the 100+10 number during the afternoon investor Zoom session today (which included a low-res replay of the RSNA 2020 presentation earlier in the morning).
Quote from n.rad
I believe the earnings call and investor presentations mentioned orders for units and production etc. Im not sure where exactly this guy got the 100 number though
[link=https://twitter.com/terrapharma1/status/1334596637470064641?s=21]https://twitter.com/terra…34596637470064641?s=21[/link]
Model demo'd today is commercial version. 110 being constructed now, 100 in conjunction with Foxconn. Will be used for training, etc. $NNOX
— TerraPharma (@TerraPharma1) December 3, 2020
-
-
Quote from richard.x.roe
The company has always stated in its prospectus (and its drafts) that the first commercial device will be the multi-source Arc. The single-source “device” is just a clearance strategy and they never had (nor do they have now) any intention of selling/leasing that.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Quote from n.rad
Supposedly Foxconn is already building 100 units.
Of the Arc? I don’t understand this plan. If the tube works well for 2D work and it can function in a stand alone unit that took the film of Ran’s hand, why not start there? It should be simple to get 510 clearance for this and actually could be deployed quickly and cheaply. The Arc is as they say a “concept device” that is nowhere near ready for deployment and yet they are promising that next year.
I know that. It just sounds like a strange plan, unless of course someone in charge thought it would sell well in stock promotion and knew investors would eat up a futuristic “concept device”-
Here is what’s going on, I think:
If the single-source device DOES NOT HAVE A DETECTOR, then it can cost $10,000 (the cheap Chinese tube, unsuitable for human imaging, is just $50 in volume). Promise satisfied! You just need to buy an extra cheap Korean DR detector that sells for $50,000 or so, and you are in business. Or, if you want, you buy the $1,000 CR Plate (that was used for one of the hand images today done at the hospital) and ship to the city where you have a $10,000 reader serving the whole region.
But the multi-source needs a built-in detector , because no one is selling rapid detectors off-the-shelf that can do anything resembling tomo, be it with 5 sources or 6 sources or 8 sources (CEO mentioned 8 in a Korean interview earlier this year) or 11 sources (all cheap Chinese ones, of course), or whatever number they invent. The price tag suddenly goes to $200,000+ or more just for the detector (I still need to confirm), and the CPUs/GPUs add another $10,000+. But the promise was already satisfied.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
I know that. It just sounds like a strange plan, unless of course someone in charge thought it would sell well in stock promotion and knew investors would eat up a futuristic “concept device”
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The DICOM viewer itself is just a program that displays a DICOM image…like a photo viewer if you will. Nothing unusual.
Back to the TOS. I’m not sure just what part of the Terms of Service were violated by those expressing their OPINIONS about a piece of radiologic equipment, and something touted as revolutionary, no less.
So I’ll ask a little favor from NanoX. Clearly, you guys are monitoring Aunt Minnie. Good. Dialogue is good. It would be nice if you would participate in it. Anyway. Here’s the favor. I want it IN WRITING that NANOX is NOT going to file [i]any[/i] sort of litigation against ANYONE discussing their product here. ANYONE from Mr. Casey on down to the lowly users like me. You CANNOT throttle discussion amongst the people who actually have some idea of what it is you are trying to do and expect to have credibility with us. Period. I don’t care WHAT you have invented. If I can’t discuss it with others in my field and pick it apart and decide that it might just be everything you guys say it is, well, then, maybe it ISN’T.
So, Ran, Bruce, et. al., what do you say? I am asking you to, IN WRITING, signed by [i]all[/i] your principals, indemnify those discussing your product here on Aunt Minnie. Yes or no?-
Dear Doctor Dalai, you are legend. I also await an explanation of how this system will work.
-
Quote from Helen Moss
Dear Doctor Dalai, you are legend. I also await an explanation of how this system will work.
In my own mind, anyway!
I am very disturbed about not being able to discuss this product freely. I have, on these very pages, had words with GE and Agfa and others. Not that I dislike the companies or anyone associated with them, but as a physician, it is my job, my duty, to decide what works and what doesn’t, and to, shall we say, [i]inspire[/i] the vendors to better help me help my patients. And having dabbled in global health here and there, I can see the draw of an inexpensive device, but it has to work. What a concept.
So, NanoX, what say you?-
Oh we did Tomo alright. When I was in medschool one of the x-ray techs showed the ‘hypcycloidal tomography unit’ that was still taking up space in a back-room. This was hot stuff in 1975 !
-
Swindle with propaganda – raise insane amount of speculative capital – sell high company based on unrealistic multiplier/market cap – laugh all the way to bank as company fails
-
Yes, but at least they didnt say they will do whole body tomo screening on every human on the planet once a year…wait.
-
-
-
-
Are you saying that what we see on the screen (except toolbars, etc) will always the same, regardless of the DICOM viewer – including the same exact relative font size and the same exact relative position of the labels (such as Patient name or date the image was taken)?
-
Quote from richard.x.roe
Are you saying that what we see on the screen (except toolbars, etc) will always the same, regardless of the DICOM viewer – including the same exact relative font size and the same exact relative position of the labels (such as Patient name or date the image was taken)?
The whole idea of DICOM is sorta like JPEG…a world-wide standard that dictates what a viewer will do with an image file. Of course, when you stamp MEDICAL on it, it gets more complicated. There are many here who could give you a far better education in DICOM and PACS…I’ve concentrated mainly on making PACS easier and more intuitive. Perhaps you’ve read my blog (linked below)…-
I read a little bit about the format, but did not get into the details. Here is what I mean – in JPEG you can have textual or binary EXIF info embedded (like what was the camera, ISO, aperture, when was the photo taken, etc), but the JPEG format does not specify HOW the viewer should display it (that is, what font and what size and where on the screen). And, I know, you can have JPEG in DICOM. I will dig in more…
Quote from DoctorDalai
The whole idea of DICOM is sorta like JPEG…a world-wide standard that dictates what a viewer will do with an image file. Of course, when you stamp MEDICAL on it, it gets more complicated. There are many here who could give you a far better education in DICOM and PACS…I’ve concentrated mainly on making PACS easier and more intuitive. Perhaps you’ve read my blog (linked below)…
-
-
-
Quote from DoctorDalai
So I’ll ask a little favor from NanoX. Clearly, you guys are monitoring Aunt Minnie. Good. Dialogue is good. It would be nice if you would participate in it. Anyway. Here’s the favor. I want it IN WRITING that NANOX is NOT going to file [i]any[/i] sort of litigation against ANYONE discussing their product here. ANYONE from Mr. Casey on down to the lowly users like me. You CANNOT throttle discussion amongst the people who actually have some idea of what it is you are trying to do and expect to have credibility with us. Period. I don’t care WHAT you have invented. If I can’t discuss it with others in my field and pick it apart and decide that it might just be everything you guys say it is, well, then, maybe it ISN’T.
No need to worry, good doctor. Nanox is trying to scare people through lawyer tactics but they don’t have a case here. First of all, Brian/Aunt Minnie is protected by the good old Section 230. There is almost no moderation here, so Aunt Minnie isn’t liable for the content unless there’s something crazy like copyright violations or child porn or something like that. Could Nanox try to go after individuals discussing their product and company? Ha, good luck with that. Nothing in any of these threads is defamatory or even misleading. That’s a super high bar anyway. If a company could sue someone for talking trash about their stock, Yahoo message boards (or SA, TMF, etc) would’ve been shut down a long time ago.
Instead of trying to silence the critics, maybe they should actually go work on their product and let some real experts examine it. I love Ran’s comment that “we are not going to let anyone else near our source, it’s ours and we will use it.” Riiiiight. That’s one interpretation. One can have a very different interpretation of why they won’t let anyone else look at their source.-
Well, I guess you have not been sued by a fraud, then. Nor has Yahoo given your IP address to the fraud’s lawyers, pursuant to a court order.
Quote from vaporfly
No need to worry, good doctor…. That’s a super high bar anyway. If a company could sue someone for talking trash about their stock, Yahoo message boards (or SA, TMF, etc) would’ve been shut down a long time ago.
-
Did you see this guy? Apparently they were working on a detector:
[link=https://twitter.com/davidscaduto/status/1334549427822981121?s=21]https://twitter.com/david…34549427822981121?s=21[/link]
It was an early stage prototype. Promising tech, but we could only do a few tests before the samples burned out. This was for an X-ray *detector*, not a *source* that they’re demoing here, but the underlying tech was the same. Stability=? A lot may have changed in 6 years.
— David Scaduto, PhD, DABR (@DavidScaduto) December 3, 2020
-
Wouldn’t that be something? I’m sure Nanox would love this headline in the trade journals: Medical Imaging company is Suing Members of it’s Customer Base Because They are Questioning the Viability of its Product.
-
I am not sure about this guy. But read this: [link=https://research.a-star.edu.sg/articles/features/a-boost-for-medical-imaging/]https://research.a-star.e…t-for-medical-imaging/[/link]
They also proposed to solve the Fukushima disaster with a radiation-hardened “detector” that does not use CMOS tech (it is in Japanese, and I am not kidding – they really applied for the grant)
Basically, it tells you that these people are all the same – that is how the Japanese lawyer found the Israeli art major, explained to him that Roentgen used a hot-cathode tube to discover the x-rays, and the rest is history.
Quote from n.rad
Did you see this guy? Apparently they were working on a detector:
[link=https://twitter.com/davidscaduto/status/1334549427822981121?s=21]https://twitter.com/david…34549427822981121?s=21[/link]
It was an early stage prototype. Promising tech, but we could only do a few tests before the samples burned out. This was for an X-ray *detector*, not a *source* that they’re demoing here, but the underlying tech was the same. Stability=? A lot may have changed in 6 years.
— David Scaduto, PhD, DABR (@DavidScaduto) December 3, 2020
-
A quick one – my brain must be fried: If the radiograph’s title is “HAND R AP,” can the radiograph be actually of the left hand in a PA positioning?
-
[link=https://in.finance.yahoo.com/news/nanox-delivers-promise-rsna-much-165006185.html]https://in.finance.yahoo….na-much-165006185.html[/link]
Who are these “top” radiologists calling it revolutionary ? -
The ones in the endorsement video ( Key Opinion Leaders ) [link]https://www.nanox.vision/[/link]
Pelc
Dawson
Samei
Rubin
Yuz
All paid by Nanox. Each saying at least one thing that is false or nonsensical in that video.
Disgraceful.
Quote from Nibbler
[link=https://in.finance.yahoo.com/news/nanox-delivers-promise-rsna-much-165006185.html]https://in.finance.yahoo….na-much-165006185.html[/link]
Who are these “top” radiologists calling it revolutionary ?
-
I think its just mislabeled. Should be an L based on the orientation.
-
To be properly labeled, a radiograph of the left hand in PA positioning should be marked with big L on the left side of the image, correct?
Isn’t it strange to put AP instead of PA?
Isn’t mislabeling dangerous?
Quote from n.rad
I think its just mislabeled. Should be an L based on the orientation.
-
The radiographer can title it “LEFT PINKY FINGER OF THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND” if he/she so chooses.
-
But wouldn’t that be malpractice? Endangering the patient, and such?
Quote from DoctorDalai
The radiographer can title it “LEFT PINKY FINGER OF THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND” if he/she so chooses.
-
Sure. The point is that the RadiograPHER is the one who puts those labels on the image. On (fortunately VERY rare) occasions, they make a mistake. They generally place a lead marker (usually the letter R or L) in the field with the body part to be imaged.
-
So who screwed up the radiograph of the century? Was it Dr. Nogah Shabshin or the unnamed “technologist?”
Quote from DoctorDalai
Sure. The point is that the RadiograPHER is the one who puts those labels on the image. On (fortunately VERY rare) occasions, they make a mistake. They generally place a lead marker (usually the letter R or L) in the field with the body part to be imaged.
-
Luckily Ran doesnt appear to have any significant abnormalities of his hand, whether left or right. They can refund him later if they did the wrong side and apologize for the extra radiation.
-
What is this oval thing?
[image]https://i.imgur.com/bKSnqpB.png[/image]Quote from n.rad
Luckily Ran doesnt appear to have any significant abnormalities of his hand, whether left or right. They can refund him later if they did the wrong side and apologize for the extra radiation.
-
That is called a sesamoid, just an extra little bone. We’ll make you a radiologist yet!
-
RXR, no respectable tech would leave all the jewelry on either if you want to really get granular.
-
Quote from n.rad
RXR, no respectable tech would leave all the jewelry on either if you want to really get granular.
Of course not, but that’s why this whole charade is so comical. Ran casually comments that he was having his hand imaged real-time and didn’t even know if the acquisition worked. The radiologist was surprised that Ran accidentally left his bracelet on, but coincidentally that proves it was indeed Ran’s hand that was imaged, and not a stock photo from the hospital.
Hilarious.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Richard, here in the UK we have to abide by two pieces of legislation, IRR (17) and IR(ME)R(17). I am sure CQC would take a rather dim view of someone that operated a CT or X-Ray machine without clinical justification.
-
-
-
I use volume rad on occasion … mostly for ortho hardware
-
That’s weird, because screening on every human on the planet once a year has recently morphed (on their website) into
[size=”4″]1x screening for each [/size]
[size=”4″] 1x symptomatic patient, every [/size]
[size=”4″] 1x year [/size]
Strangely, the FDA defines [b]Screening[/b] as A strategy used in a population to identify. an unrecognized disease in individuals. [b]without signs or symptoms. [/b]
[link=https://www.fda.gov/media/84287/download#:~:text=Page%203-,Screening,without%20signs%20or%20symptoms]https://www.fda.gov/media…0signs%20or%20symptoms[/link]
Quote from n.rad
Yes, but at least they didnt say they will do whole body tomo screening on every human on the planet once a year…wait.
-
That’s why I posed the question to Nanox above. I am NOT going to buy any NNOX, long or short. My interest is purely as a Radiologist. Period.
That Nanox has already prompted the withdrawal of a thread does not bode well. Stifling discussion says you have something you don’t want discussed.
So…
Nanox…
Will you IN WRITING indemnify ALL of us and “allow” us to discuss your product here, or is there something you don’t want discussed? Because if you don’t, we will stop talking about it, and will make certain (negative) assumptions that may or may not be accurate. -
Quote from Nibbler
[link=https://in.finance.yahoo.com/news/nanox-delivers-promise-rsna-much-165006185.html]https://in.finance.yahoo….na-much-165006185.html[/link]
Who are these “top” radiologists calling it revolutionary ?
They give opinions on the website and in the Nanox virtual booths at RSNA. These are academics that are excited about the possibilities. Hard to blame them. They are consultants with the company and I assume are paid for their commentary. Ran is a master at connecting dots that don’t really exist. They talk about the potential and theory of a “digital” tube without saying if what Nanox has works and is stable.-
Unfortunately, (and this is a GENERIC statement with no connection to the Nanox issue whatsoever), many physicians are whores. You can pay them to say pretty much anything. And I do mean ANYTHING. This is the core of the medical malpractice crisis. There are a good number of docs who will testify that the defendant kidnapped the Lindbergh baby if you pay them adequately. Which is why I follow the Dalai Doctrine when it comes to expert witnessing. I REFUSE all payment. If some lawyer wants me to testify, they must subpoena me and it will be made clear that I am there to tell the truth, period. Funny how lawyers hand up on me the second they hear that I won’t accept payment.
-
I would love someone to explain to me what is digital about the tube the CEO was holding. I don’t think it is functional, by the way.
Quote from Thread Enhancer
They talk about the potential and theory of a “digital” tube without saying if what Nanox has works and is stable.
-
Let us speculate that the tube is the X-ray equivalent to an LED. Which it isn’t, but go with it. So it takes less wattage to produce the same emission, in this case X-rays. OK, that’s a good thing, potentially quite helpful in areas with limited electricity. But the X-ray is an X-ray. The implementation in the video simply uses the x-ray tube as an…X-ray tube.
I haven’t heard anything about any obvious mechanism for steering of the X-ray beam or anything else that would differentiate them from their larger cousins.
Still speaking generically.
Nanox, I’m waiting for your WRITTEN indemnification.-
First, it cannot use less wattage, because any wattage saved on the filament will probably be wasted on electronic control for the gate (and is insignificant anyway compared to the wattage at the anode).
Second, I don’t know why it would be the same emission – test results show that they keep the beam quality too low (no filtration) because they cannot get enough power from their tubes (which I still think are the cheap Chinese ones), so basically their sources make too much radiation that is absorbed by the soft tissue but is useless for imaging.
Third, they claim their advantage is in fast switching compared to old hot-cathode, which you may need if you do real stationary tomo (but, that’s false because you can switch modern hot-cathode fast enough)
And I still have no idea what makes it digital.
Quote from DoctorDalai
Let us speculate that the tube is the X-ray equivalent to an LED. Which it isn’t, but go with it. So it takes less wattage to produce the same emission, in this case X-rays. OK, that’s a good thing, potentially quite helpful in areas with limited electricity. But the X-ray is an X-ray. The implementation in the video simply uses the x-ray tube as an…X-ray tube.I haven’t heard anything about any obvious mechanism for steering of the X-ray beam or anything else that would differentiate them from their larger cousins.
Still speaking generically.
Nanox, I’m waiting for your WRITTEN indemnification.
-
Anyone know this detector (little white cross in the center, kind of blue on the sides)? Also, I believe the head of the “single-source device” was made by some else and that the cables were covered with black fabric and its face was never shown – anyone recognize it? The head was a little tilted – while the detector and hand were straight below it – is that usual?
[image]https://i.imgur.com/5usxwfZ.png[/image]
[image]https://i.imgur.com/z4LZMZ7.png[/image]
edit: detector looks like custom-made DR by MedSingLong in China, but need to confirm-
Thinking more about using this type of tomo. It wouldnt have any neuro or body applications. There may be some added value to chest or MSK but you can already do something similar like Volume Rad packaged in a much more flexible architecture that allows for all the standard views. I dont think its widely adopted because its so rare that it adds anything to standard CR/DR. The only situations that it would are the two they showed: occult fractures and hidden nodules. Id also assume since youre acquiring a whole stack of images there will be more radiation. So the business plan is to create a whole new platform that may in rare cases add value but at the expense of increased interpretation time, significant positioning limitations, and increased radiation and youre going to build and market the device before proving any sort of benefit by doing comparison studies to standard DR/CR?
I just dont see it. I remain more skeptical than ever.
-
Quote from n.rad
So the business plan is to create a whole new platform that may in rare cases add value but at the expense of increased interpretation time,
Remember, this is all interpreted ‘in the cloud’ by cutting edge AI. Its not going to be constrained by conventions of radiology like ‘views’.-
Yes, too bad Ran didnt discuss all that AI and cloud magic. I would have loved to hear more about the no-squish mammo as well.
-
Did anyone notice the three women in lab coats walking behind Ran at the beginning? They were very fashionable for a group of scientists strolling through a warehouse. Im sure Stilettos are a great choice when sorting out medical imaging physics.
-
My attention was focused on the Siemens CT machine [8|] This warehouse (which also apparently houses his other companies) is adjacent to a major TV studio, so there is no problem finding models.
Quote from n.rad
Did anyone notice the three women in lab coats walking behind Ran at the beginning? They were very fashionable for a group of scientists strolling through a warehouse. Im sure Stilettos are a great choice when sorting out medical imaging physics.
-
Oh, boy – they were using a trial DICOM viewer – they did not even bother to buy the license!!! 18:37 into video.
-
Yes, just a stack of 2D that you scroll through. You can scroll through each image individually or make slabs that combine several or recon them into a slab that can highlight certain densities. Thats what volume rad does. The lung nodule image with VolumeRad is a single image that is supposed to highlight hidden nodules like the ones they show except much faster to interpret bec you arent scrolling.
-
Software used for assembling tomos into, well, [i]other[/i] tomos:
[link]https://www.astra-toolbox.com[/link] -
Regarding the Astra simulation thing that made Dr. Yuz cry: Even assuming they did the simulation ok (which I don’t think they did, because they ignored scatter/hardening – and I would have used maximum likelihood not SIRT), I wonder where they can find or build two 840 mm x 210 mm (2000 x 500 pixels) x-ray detectors for less than $20,000,000? Is NASA or the Department of Homeland Security selling those? Am I missing something?
-
Without some specifics about the detectors, the only thing really for sale is the tube, and we still don’t know a lot about THAT.
Um, Nanox…Waiting to hear about our indemnification. We KNOW you are watching, so be good sports and let us talk about your product without having to look over our shoulders for your lawyers.
-
-
Quote from n.rad
Yes, too bad Ran didnt discuss all that AI and cloud magic. I would have loved to hear more about the no-squish mammo as well.
I can introduce you to one of my techs, she specializes in that……-
Haha yes, I have one as well. We just celebrated her 80th birthday. Nope, no retirement plans.
-
Its funny that Nanox complained about the previous thread. They have clearly benefited from monitoring this free analysis if they are already modifying some of the more ridiculous promotional statements like annual whole body screening and they seemed to know not to discuss non-compression mammography and AI at RSNA etc. They also had that big banner disclaimer on the screen when they showed the Arc.
-
-
-
-
-
Tangential observation…the chest “tomograms” were performed on a phantom, a preserved (or simulated) section of a dead body. What’s the problem there? Live bodies MOVE. They breathe. Thus exposure must be considerably faster to avoid artifacts.
Could tomo’s be assembled into something resembling a conventional transaxial CT? Yes, the math and software are there. Would it truly be CT quality? Doubtful.-
Yes, and theres the whole issue with scan time and contrast timing.
-
-
-
-
Quote from DoctorDalai
Let us speculate that the tube is the X-ray equivalent to an LED. Which it isn’t, but go with it. So it takes less wattage to produce the same emission, in this case X-rays. OK, that’s a good thing, potentially quite helpful in areas with limited electricity. But the X-ray is an X-ray. The implementation in the video simply uses the x-ray tube as an…X-ray tube.
It wont really ‘save’ any significant amount of electricity. X-rays are still generated by accelerating electrons into a chunk of Tungsten in a process that creates 99% heat for 1% of photons in the x-ray band. The ‘hot catode’ is a minor contributor to the overall energy balance.
I haven’t heard anything about any obvious mechanism for steering of the X-ray beam or anything else that would differentiate them from their larger cousins.
There is some stuff in their patent work that hints at some potential mechanism to create a somewhat steerable beam. But that’s going to account for wiggling it back and forth a few degrees, not anywhere close to what would be needed for a full CT sweep.
-
-
-
