Ken: I'm confused by your statement:
"I am not terribly surprised that you only got 20% reliability, Harry." Who is Harry, and where did you get this 20% reliability from??? That's not our tech. -Mark Iverson From: Ken Deboer [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2013 11:34 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]: ATTENTION: request for expertise... Glad to see interest stilll in the very much needed noninvasive glucose testing and wish you all much success. While I didn't work directly with methods for glucose tests or with diabetes particularly, I did work, a long time ago for sure, on related subjects and found maybe some things you might want to keep in mind as you test the reliability and variability of glucose and blood flow measurements. In a word, blood flow, on which accurate blood analysis depends, is maddeningly variable, as y'all are probably keenly aware. For that reason, I'd suggest you pay close attention to the biological sources, as wells as purely the instrumental sources.I am not terribly surprised that you only got 20% reliability, Harry. Temp, circadian rhythms, diets, sleep, various associated diseases, mental state, you name it, alll produced in our work very troublesome results, and in fact, nothing ever got published. On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:59 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]> wrote: Ol' Bab, Beg to differ: our noninvasive tech would allow you to test 100 times a day if you wanted, without ANY pain, ever, and for pennies/test. The device would cost a third of what you spend on test-strips each year, and it'll last for 3 to 5 years; do the math... -Mark -----Original Message----- From: David L Babcock [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2013 6:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]: ATTENTION: request for expertise... Beg to differ: We are having a mad desire for CHEAPER blood testing. $1.20/stab is too much at 3 to 4 per day. Medicare only covers 2. The pain? Very little, often none. Ol' Bab On 10/25/2013 1:15 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > I ran across this article which might be of interest: > > http://www.pddnet.com/news/2013/10/measuring-blood-sugar-light > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Attention all in the Vort collective: >> >> I hope you all don't mind if I take a few bytes of bandwidth to >> request some help with the R&D I've been working on... which is >> noninvasive blood glucose measurement using RF/microwaves. The >> attached pic shows the results for just one of the diabetics tested; >> for this one we could get a good calibration on 82 data points (taken >> in Feb 2010), and then the calibrated equation accurately estimated >> the remaining 120 samples which were taken thru March. Follow-up >> testing in June also gave good results with little degradation. >> Predictive accuracy over time is a major accomplishment in this work. >> >> We have a database of ~87GB, most of which was on five Type-1 >> diabetics over the course of 2 months; clinical lab-grade blood >> chemistries for most of that data. During RF scans we are also >> taking skin temperature every 100 millisecs... >> >> Our investor has given us until the end of the year to improve our >> calibration/predictive algorithms as much as possible before we >> market the technology for the next phase of development. We are >> currently at >> +-20% accuracy for ~80% of our samples (~1000 samples on the 5 test >> subjects). The technology is not optimized, so this may be all we >> can hope for with the current sensor design and algorithms. But, we >> need to use the time left to make whatever improvements we can... >> >> I am in search of some very bright individuals with expertise in >> mathematical modeling and bioelectromagnetics; perhaps statistics, >> but targeted toward medical device testing. Knowledge of RF >> Scattering Parameters (S-Params) which come out of a modern Network >> Analyzer (Agilent >> PNA-5230) would also be very helpful. We already have some very >> extensive MatLab code which builds mathematical models, one term at a >> time, and it may be better to add to this rather than creating from >> scratch. IF you're very competent and like a real challenge, and >> want a break from the E-Cat fiasco, then please contact me @: >> [email protected] >> or >> [email protected] >> >> There are now 366 million diabetics in the world, and they have been >> in need of a truly painless way to measure their blood sugar. You >> could be one of the keys to solving the challenges which make this a reality for them... >> >> Thanks for your time... >> >> Now back to your regularly scheduled E-Cat frustration! >> :-) >> -Mark Iverson >> >
