Thanks bluedevil. The pr missed to highlight the
Post# of 9144
(Total Views: 589)
Posted On: 12/03/2020 8:40:40 AM
Thanks bluedevil. The pr missed to highlight the most important aspects as you noted.
Time from insertion of sample 20 minutes.
Sensitivity 96%
Specificity 98%
Without an in depth reading of the patent who would know this.
I read the patent and didn't pick this up, did you? Most wouldn't except the most astute reader.
Read the pr and see how many time it mentions potential or projected.
It missed the mark and by not mentioning these important percentages.
I like most of us read the pr and found it nothing more than a repeat of what we knew since May. The exception being the patent issued that we knew from an update.
Why wouldn't sensitivity and specificity be mentioned? Was that thought not to be important?
Until proven results are stated we live with potential and projections. That doesn't cut it.
Sorry for the rant. Holding.
Time from insertion of sample 20 minutes.
Sensitivity 96%
Specificity 98%
Without an in depth reading of the patent who would know this.
I read the patent and didn't pick this up, did you? Most wouldn't except the most astute reader.
Read the pr and see how many time it mentions potential or projected.
It missed the mark and by not mentioning these important percentages.
I like most of us read the pr and found it nothing more than a repeat of what we knew since May. The exception being the patent issued that we knew from an update.
Why wouldn't sensitivity and specificity be mentioned? Was that thought not to be important?
Until proven results are stated we live with potential and projections. That doesn't cut it.
Sorry for the rant. Holding.
(2)
(0)