Posted On: 11/03/2014 10:02:48 PM
Post# of 9144
I appreciated:
1) the clarification of the shortcomings of the current way of testing for Ebola, which is based on PCR.
2) the acknowledgement by users that multiple tests are needed based on situational circumstances -- tests that do not suffer from the PCR's limitations.
Just google the article and it comes up on all the major newspapers in the San Francisco Bay Area/Silicon Valley. Didn't that Washington Post blog write about how Silicon Valley needs to become involved in the fight against Ebola?
The bashers are wrong. Ebola helped launch Nanologix into the mainstream and instead of falling back into obscurity with the waning of Ebola, Nanologix will continue to attract the attention of bog pharma and investors as they realize how critical its IP and products are to bringing innovation to the world of IVD.
1) the clarification of the shortcomings of the current way of testing for Ebola, which is based on PCR.
2) the acknowledgement by users that multiple tests are needed based on situational circumstances -- tests that do not suffer from the PCR's limitations.
Just google the article and it comes up on all the major newspapers in the San Francisco Bay Area/Silicon Valley. Didn't that Washington Post blog write about how Silicon Valley needs to become involved in the fight against Ebola?
The bashers are wrong. Ebola helped launch Nanologix into the mainstream and instead of falling back into obscurity with the waning of Ebola, Nanologix will continue to attract the attention of bog pharma and investors as they realize how critical its IP and products are to bringing innovation to the world of IVD.
(0)
(0)
