Other things that stood out for me.
- CEO continues to insist that Roentgen invented x-ray devices. The truth is he discovered x-rays using equipment invented by others - he did not invent anything. CEO also continues to claim that nothing changed since x-rays were discovered, contradicting Nanox own technical paper that states (on page 1) that it was the invention of the hot-cathode tube by GE in 1913 that changed the world of radiology (Roentgen, of course, was using a cold-cathode tube, just like the proposed Nanox tube)
- The CEO continued to imply that its x-ray source needs only 40V at the emitter and is cool - but hot-cathode tubes need only 4V at the emitter and are just as cool (in both cases, 99%+ of the energy used by the tube is wasted as heat, nearly all heating the anode)
- The CEO claims that each of the x-ray sources in the Arc have been cleared by the FDA through the clearance of the Cart. That is a lie. The FDA does not clear technologies or x-ray sources.
- The CEO claims that its 40 kVp, 2mA tube is better than regular general-radiography tubes. In fact, per 510k summary, the Nanox tube barely performs as a HEAVILY ABUSED cheap dental tube bought on eBay (and is likely a hot-cathode one). For example, even Siemens dental stationary anode tube SR 120/15/60 is much better: 120 kVp, 26 mA. Siemens general-radiography stationary anode tube SR 125/40/80 is 125 kVp, 32mA (all mA ratings for 0.1s, per standard).
- The CEO confirmed that comparable $250,000 x-ray tubes from a month ago have dropped in prices to $50,000 (first revealed at the recent Ladenburg conference). Nanox proposed tube, being a cheap dental tube, is now supposed to cost $200 (vs $100 a few months ago, and vs $80 on eBay).
- The CEO did not deny making deals in the United States. It is illegal to make deals in the United States for device that has not been cleared yet (that's the whole purpose of the pre-market notification, aka 510K, aka submission for clearance)
- (The) Guy next to the CEO insisted the Arc is very different from existing tomosynthesis machines. I wonder whether the FDA will agree that the device is as safe and effective as a legally marketed tomosynthesis device.
- The Arc has obtained regulatory clearance in Nigeria of all places? On my blog, I explain a bit about the Nigerian Nanox scam - the "distributor" claims to be located in a sanctuary for HIV-infected women (the area is very poor, with sporadic access to water and electricity, and the Arc has no batteries), and everything about it is fake. In combination with the pay-per-scan of dead women, it would be perfect for a money-laundering operation - very dangerous (and nearly impossible) for ordinary auditors to catch. On a side note, diagnostic chest X-ray and all the bloodwork etc for an annual or preliminary checkup there is $24, all included.
- It was useful for me to hear that the predicate chosen by Nanox is a tomosynthesis device.
Update October 30, 2021: An AI bot known as Narl (which reads as Little Ran, from left to right) is complaining on Yahoo that I have missed an important statement in the video. Specifically, about 15:15, Ran says:
We are starting to ship
He does not say what they are shipping, but it is definitely not Nanox.Arc, as that one is still not working, as of October 27.
