Slashdot Mirror

Even on the limited number of tests designed to work with this new method, they stopped using that prototype a while ago.

And just when would that be? Because the FDA reports that they were using Edison devices in June 2015, and those limited number of tests were the ones whos results were invalidated for all of 2014 and 2015.

So please, provide a source for when they "stopped using that prototype." Because I'm thinking they stopped when CMS told them to in 2016, and Theranos went into deperate survival mode.

But that's not what is being disputed! Are you unaware that Theranos is a private lab that does all kinds of tests, and this whole finger prick thing is taken out of context and spinned as if that's actual core business?

Oh, but it is what is being disputed. Nobody valued Theranos at $9 billion dollars because they were copying Labcorp's business model. Walgreens did not enter into a partnership with Theranos because Theranos would provide a phebotomist on site to draw multiple 5mL samples and ship them to Theranos.

They are researching ways to get more tests per blood sample, and they invented procedures and equipment for that.

Yes. Researching using commerical samples resulting in the invalidation of two years of sample results in one fell swoop.

But the WSJ made it look like they claim to do all their tests with that experimental technology, then ridicule them when they try to explain why they do tests with "normal" equipment.

Yet again, nobody is interested in a startup that performs tests with "normal" equipment. Theranos touted this very capability in 2014 as something the could already do, not as a multi-year research project.

"And we're able to do all the testing using just a single microsample, rather than having to draw a dedicated tube for each type of test."

So if I got a blood test and my doctor saw the results and wanted other tests done, I wouldn't have to have more blood drawn?

"Exactly. And on their lab form, the physician can write, "If a given result is out of range, run this follow-up test." And it can all be done immediately, using that same sample."

Keep 'em coming. Theranos provided lots of PR material that contradicts you... you just have to specify what they supposedly didn't claim and I can search for more documentation saying otherwise.

Polls like this one are somewhat misleading, since having a population of women whose desires can be represented in unison is not what we see in nature. Rather, a population of women will want a significant amount of genetic variance (manifested in personality and physicality).

There are probably much better ways to gather information about what a population of women want(s), though I can't think of any good ideas atm.

[Disclaimer: poster is transgendered]
For genes that are linked to a psychologically unsettling and difficult condition like male-to-female transsexualism to propagate throughout and remain as a small but characteristic subspace of a population, genetic variance is clearly at least one of the more important "traits" sought. (Note, that has to be interpreted carefully, with regard to the distribution of identifiable variances under consideration.)

[I do have to note that SRS is a modern invention for my above assertion to have any substance. There are cruder ways for a transsexual to adapt that were found in the past (and, just to contrast, more holistic and arguably healthier approaches [not that I rule out two-spirit as a separate possibility from male or female, mind you]), but I would imagine a good portion of men born with such a gene would not be wont to self-evirate, thus leaving the potential for procreation and proliferation.]

-os

They're monopolies because big companies bribed politicians into giving them monopolies.

Don't be absurd. They've been monopolies since the beginning of time because no one wants multiple sets of wires runnings through their neighborhood, or multiple sets of water pipes, or multiple sets of gas pipes, etc.

The pharmaceutical industry. Virtually no newcomers due to interlocking patent issues.

That's so absurd as to be parody. Exactly which patent stops someone from opening a lab and doing research? Here are two that I found in about five seconds of searching:

New pharma 1
New pharma 2

It is simply not possible to make a "clean room" clone of, say, Windows 2000. [snip ridiculous nonsense] It is far too complicated to make EXACTLY the same systems from scratch.

*cough*ReactOS*cough*

and if anyone who has access to the source code tries to re-implement part of Windows Microsoft will sue them and win easily.

As I pointed out to someone else in this thread, say what you want about Microsoft, but they have rarely, if ever, used lawsuits as weapons (unlike, say, Apple). The ReactOS project has been around over 10 years. I assure you that Microsoft knows about it. If they were going to try and crush the life out of them, they would've done it before now, when they have an XP-level beta release possibly coming out this year.

Also note that the WINE project has also not been crushed out of existence, despite the fact that you typically need to use real Windows DLLs to make it truly functional. See also: CodeWeavers, which makes *MS Office* run under Linux.

Of course, your own example of Samba also kills your argument. Last I checked, Microsoft hasn't sued them out of existence.

At least try and do a little research before posting rants like this.

ok, heres the facts:

the vaccine I was talking about was a different one: tgAAC09 http://www.biospace.com/ccis/news_story.cfm?StoryI D=14596820&full=1

Another vaccine (technology) candidate discussed was MVA-BN from Bavarian Nordic. They are currently working on 3 different approaches:

MVA nef a vaccine that expresses the HIV Nef antigen (clade B)

MVA-BN expressing "a large number of highly conserved epitopes of various HIV antigens from several clades in one construct (MVA-BN polytope vaccine)"

and

MVA-BN vaccine "expressing multiple HIV clade B antigens (NVA-BN multiantigen vaccine)"

(details are avaiable at http://www.bavarian-nordic.com/

Finally, I was wrong about Prof. Dr. Harrer - he chaired the "satellite symposium "HIV Vaccines - Perspectives in Germany" of which the tgAAC09 talk was a part, and held a presentation on MVA-BN nef - J.v. Lunzen presented the tgAAC09 presentation

and the "nothing new" comment took fuzeon into consideration - an acquaintance has been recieving fuzeon for around 9 months (I also wasn't aware of this). We hadn't heard anything yet about the Merck drug yet - do you have a name for it? Basically, the consensus was that there's nothing in the pipeline - I guess that they didn't consider the integrase inhibitors as promising enough, or far enough along to count (don't really know.)

The focus of the MAT 2004 was "Status and Start - What progess is being made in HIV-medicine" - major topics were drug resistence and compensation therapies, HIV in southern Africa, and alternative ways to administer/manage existing therapy regimes. There were several symposia on dealing with side-effects of existing drugs, and on incremental improvements in existing treatments including better management of opportunistic infections.

All of the usual Pharmacorps were there: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Abbott, Pfizer, Hoffmann-LaRoche, GlaxoSmithKline.

Info in german at http://www.aids-tage.de/mic/veranstaltungen/873401 .php

In the U.S. alone there are tens, if not hundreds, of drugs in trials for HIV-1. Here's a list of 67 of them. Many other compounds are being investigated in pre-clinical research.

Took me forever to find the damn thing. Dr. Faro works for Drexel, not Temple, and this was presented at the 2003 meeting of the American Society for Neuroradiology, so it's actually old news Wired is picking up. The official press release is here. The abstract is as follows:

Functional MR Imaging of Truth and Deception

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the regions of brain activation during truth-telling or deception by functional MR imaging using blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) contrast while simultaneously recording the physiologic signals using a standard polygraph machine and control question technique (CQT) inside the MR scanner.

Materials & Methods

The experiments were performed on 4 normal healthy volunteers using a standard 1.5 T Siemens Vision scanner. The physiologic responses from the normal subjects were measured by using a four-channel polygraph machine. Three different types of physiologic responses were measured: The rate and the depth of respiration; blood pressure; and galvanic skin response. An event-related functional MR design was used for collecting the functional MR images. A standard quadrature head coil was used. The stimulus presentation was controlled from outside the scanner using a neuropsychologicsoftware (NeuroBehavioral Systems) and displayed through the MR compatible goggle. The subjects' responses were measured using a response box. Contiguous oblique axial images were positioned and aligned parallel to the AC-PC line covering the entire brain. Functional images then were acquired with echo planar (EPI FID) pulse sequence. The imaging parameters were: matrix size = 128*128; FoV = 22 cm; slice thickness = 5 mm; TR = 4000 ms; TE = 54 ms, and NEX = 1. The functional imaging was performed using an even-related functional MR imaging (e-functional MR imaging) design and the questions presented were set by the rules of the classically used CQT polygraph technique. The subjects were presented with 13 relevant and control questions. A relevant situation was created prior to the functional MR scanning and the subjects were asked to either lie or tell the truth pertaining to the relevant questions. Of the two subjects analyzed in this study, one of the subjects was asked to tell the truth and the second subject was asked to deliberately lie to the relevant questions. Event-related functional MR imaging was performed with a rest period of 30 seconds during which a blank screen is presented, followed by 20 seconds period for presentation and collection of the responses. Continuous scanning was performed until all the 13 questions are completed. The volunteers were cued with a brief fixation period before presentation of each question. These questions were randomized and repeated four times and separate e-functional MR data was collected. The data then was analyzed using SPM software and statistical parametric maps [SPM(t)] were generated to show visual representation of the areas in the brain wherein statistically significant differences between BOLD contrast during truth-telling and deception conditions are present.

Results

The results show areas of frontal lobe (BA 9), (BA 47), temporal lobe, sublobar, extra nuclear, and inferior frontal gyrus to be active during the deception process. However during truth telling, activation regions were predominantly seen in the temporal lobe (BA 41) as well as in superior temporal gyrus.

Conclusion

These results suggest that there may be unique area(s) in the brain involved in truth-telling or deception process that can be measured using functional MR imaging. The results also show that we can measure simultaneously the physiologic signals using the polygraph machine inside the MR scanner while acquiring echo-planar images without noticeable artifacts on the MR images. The polygraph results correlated well in the truth telling subject, however, was inconclusive in the deception subject due to insufficient GSR data. These results are preliminary and warrant further investigation.

OASIS - Online Abstract Submission and Invitation System(TM) ©1996-2004, Coe-Truman Technologies, Inc.

These guys (IGEN, now Bioveris) even licensed the name from Paramount.

http://www.biospace.com/news_story.cfm?StoryID=379 5304&full=1

"IGEN's TRICORDER is a self-contained diagnostic detection module ideally suited for hospital POC testing. It is based on IGEN's proprietary ORIGEN(R) technology, which enables high-value clinical testing, including immunodiagnostic and nucleic acid probe-based measurements."