Oh, Oh, one owes a ton of thanks for such a lengthy effort, and it is much appreciated. And I guess that it serves to demonstrate the lack of art with which I posed my question.
I checked, saw, and liked all those results, and I have bought all the stock I could fit on my plate, so do not think I am trying to knock the company.
I have always been told not to buy "black boxes" which one does not understand. This company obviously has an advanced testing system OF SOME KIND that is showing considerable commercial success. Nowhere do I find any suggestion of whatever scientific basis that causes this system to work. I can only assume that it must be pretty attractive, because sales are brisk.
The fact that the system exists is what first caught my eye. And no doubt that relates to the fact that I am also invested in a company called Igen, which has developed a testing system that appears to be unique and also seems to be finding success. It is not as well developed, commercially, as this company, but I think a little more time will cure that. The company is making support products and doing further research to discover more chemical markers, while Boehringer Mannheim is building and selling the machines for a 9% royalty. I am not a scientist, and my understanding is far from complete, but that Igen system seems limited only by the number of chemical markers that can be discovered which will specifically unite with substances which one might wish to test for, in a particular test sample. The system seems unique because it causes light particles to be emitted at the time of the chemical union of the marker and test particle, and the result is determined and measured by measurement of the light particles. (My understanding: if a sample is to be tested for the existence of "X", the sample is placed on a pan made of Rubium, the marker which unites with "X" is added and the pan is drawn into the test machine and into an electronic field. The marker and test sample unite chemically if "X" is present, and at the same time there is an interchange of atoms which causes the Rubium to give off photons which are measured to determine the quantity of strength of "X" present) Sales of Igen's system commenced this year, and while sales seem brisk, neither the benefit of support products nor royalties have commenced to show in the bottom line.
With that in mind, I wondered how the system MDCC employs compares with this other system. Whether they will conflict or compete with each other. And in that regard, I also wonder if this system, like that of Igen, will throughput multiple samples at the same time. Igen's system is described as fast, easy, and inexpensive. But I know that Chiron has a somewhat similar test system in some stage of development, but it differs in that Igen uses electronics in its tests, while Chiron is chemical (though both systems depend on the luminescense created at the union of substances). I am told their test has less sensitivity. Now if my description seems vague, understand that this uses science which goes further than my training and I have relied of the interpretation of one whom I consider knowledgeable for such understanding as I have gained.
Even if I am unable to acquire this information, MDCC is progressing at a rate that one shouldn't ignore, and I would expect it to rise further while I try to gain a better understanding of how it does what it does. |
