Nanox is hiring

Nanox is looking for someone to develop the first generation of its fake x-ray tube using the fake Nanox.SOURCE chip.

The job description is the clearest admission so far that all the tubes Nanox has shown over the years have been fake (I can count at least 8 different "generations" of designs so far).  And, of course, any submissions to the FDA claiming use of any of said Nanox tubes must have been fraudulent.

Update April 20, 2022:  Job opening is still showing in the Career section of Nanox website.  I just noticed that Nanox seems to be confused about its own chip.  It calls it MEMS in the job description, but MEMs in the responsibilities. Of course, Nanox.SOURCE chip is just fake, but even if it were not, it is not MEMS, as there is nothing mechanical about it.  And there is no such thing as MEMs (even though Nanox 20-F filing insists on it).  Another thing I noticed is that it mentions that the job will require trips to Europe, however, Nanox European partner in the cold-cathode x-ray tube development scheme seems to have developed cold feet instead, as CEI salespeople now tell prospective customers that CEI is not making any cold-cathode tubes.  Finally, it is no longer true that Nanox is manufacturing "the x-ray tube" - the new fake Nanox Fab in Korea that was supposed to finally start making tubes suddenly can't make them, even though it is "operational."  I guess Nanox really needed to fill that job opening...

Chest protocol, the transformation

Nanox has been diligent in blurring all protocol-related data from its infomercial and the six accompanying "procedures" videos.  It missed just one bit (8m:54s into the infomercial).

That looks like 90 kVp, 5.8 (or 5.6?) mAs, and 3? tubes for the chest protocol.

During the Business Update in August, the chest protocol looked like 60 kVp, 50 mAs, and 5 tubes (7m:27s into the webcast).

Nanox.Arc was submitted for FDA clearance in June.  

Presumably the device had established protocols and was working at the time, unless Nanox committed fraud.  

But Nanox.Arc was not working last week, as evidenced by the infomercial.

Update:  To be fair, Nanox admitted Nanox.Arc was a "concept device" last week, and a "future product" not yet "regulatory approved" in August.  So, it can't have been a working product in June, with its protocols in hand, when it was submitted for FDA clearance, right?

Update:  A chest scan has to be quick, to avoid blurring from heart movement or breathing.  Movement-related blurring is especially damaging in tomosynthesis reconstruction, unlike in CT.  The faster, the better.  A live human is not a phantom, and can't stay completely still for the duration of the seconds- or minutes-long Arc scan, even if the Arc were real.  A nationwide survey revealed that the exposure time for a chest x-ray is typically about 20 milliseconds, and lower than 10 milliseconds when a digital detector is used.  If the exposure time were 10 milliseconds, then 5.8 mAs translates into about 200 mA tube current (3 tubes) and 50 mAs translates into 1,000 mA tube current (5 tubes).   The Nanox.CART dental tube, that supposedly validated the Nanox technology, could do just 2 mA (per 510K summary) and only at significantly-lower 40 kVp, according to Nanox, and it still required "liquid" cooling.  Just another way of showing that Nanox.Arc is still a fake.

A departure

A 6-K is filed after hours.  Stock not moving.  That could change.

On December 3, 2021, Jung Ho Park, a member of the board of directors of NANO-X IMAGING LTD (the “Company”), informed the Company of his intent to resign effective December 6, 2021, and the Company accepted his resignation. Mr. Park informed the Company that he decided to resign to fully devote his time to his role for the SK Group following recent reorganization in the Group.  His decision to resign did not arise or result from any disagreement with the Company on any matter relating to the Company’s operations, policies or practices. 

Under the Investor Rights Agreement between the Company and SK Telecom TMT Investment Corp (“SKT”), SKT has a right to appoint another director to the Company’s board of directors to complete Mr. Park’s term of three years and SKT intends to appoint a successor to Mr. Park

Ok, but what about disagreement not related to the company's operations, policies or practices?  And why wait for the successor appointment? 

cropped from image by Julian Brandt

Update December 8, 2021:  The so-called "recent" reorganization was announced back in August, when Mr. Park's new role was set to commence on November 1.  Why did he wait until December 3?   The departure is also suspicious for another reason:  the Korean fab, supposedly established with the "support" (per Prospectus) of SK Telecom, was supposed to receive its final equipment in November and start pilot production in its new building next month.  However, the comprehensive equipment list, complete with inventory numbers, on Nanox Korea website does not reflect any recent equipment acquisition, and just talks about making chips for household appliances (with outdated, over 20-year-old equipment that was there before November).

Update #2 December 8, 2021:  Mr. Park was given 100,000 options, in exchange for his employer investing 1,250,000 shares at $16 a share in June 2020.  The options vested on a quarterly basis, 6,250 at a time.  Mr. Park has not exercised any of them (the last batch vested on the day he resigned, December 3, I guess), at least as of the date of the annual report, and at this point, he won't make much, even if he does.  His "successor," if ever appointed, is supposed to be given 62,500 options with the same $16 strike, if I am reading the Prospectus correctly - again, not very appealing.  All this pales in comparison with what Dr. Kim, the convicted felon formerly at SK Telecom and now at the helm of Nanox Korea, received.

At the same time the investment was made, Nanox and SK Telecom agreed to 

explore and engage in good faith to develop a definitive agreement within six months of the date of the agreement for the deployment of 2,500 Nanox Systems in South Korea and Vietnam.

which is quite bizarre, really, since SK Telecom is no distributor of medical devices or a healthcare provider.  The agreement was supposed to be in effect until the end of this month, but "may be extended."  Sure enough, now the definite agreement is not likely to be signed, with Mr. Park gone.  Interestingly, neither South Korea nor Vietnam require FDA clearance, so the current "delay" with the FDA is no reason for not signing the agreement.  Nanox CEO did promise that Nanox had all the stuff needed to complete at least 1,000 Nanox.Arc units earlier this year.  But, for some reason, Nanox does not want to make them or ship them yet.

Finally, the official stance by SK Telecom in September, 2020 that 

major investors had already verified Nanox's technology and recognized its potential, 

and that 

We [that is, SK Telecom] have thoroughly reviewed our technology and investment value internally, 

now seems quite ridiculous given the ongoing SEC investigation, the RSNA 2021 infomercial, the chips for household appliances, and the new all time low of $13.90 the stock hit on December 6, the effective resignation date.

Pivot, or the evolution of fraud

Nanox.Arc circa March 2020:

Sort of like Star Trek’s fictitious “biobed,” the Nanox.Arc could provide a full-body digital X-ray scan down to the cellular level. 

“Because it’s digital, it’s multispectral. You don’t need different machines to do different kinds of imaging,” says Poliakine. That includes mammography, CT, fluoroscopy and angiography, for instance.

Nanox.Arc circa January 2021:

Angiography is out.  Still hope for CT (aka axial imaging), fluoroscopy, and maybe, just maybe, mammograpy (aka breast tomosynthesis)?

Nanox.Arc circa December 2021:

Fluoroscopy and mammography are out.

What is it that remains?  Axial imaging?  But Nanox.Arc can't do that either because it supposedly has just 5 tubes, not the 11 in that slide.

On the shapeshifting ability of skeletons

So, Nanox is showing a pelvis scan in its infomercial.   Things go well, until this happens at 13m:02s into the video.  

The pelvis phantom, with real human bones, has shapeshifted into an artificial skull.  But just for a fraction of a second.  Within a couple of frames, the skull transforms back into a pelvis phantom.

This is not an isolated phenomenon.  At about 13m:33s into the video, the pelvis shapeshifts into a hand.  The feet of the creature, alleged to be carrying a camera, move next to the patient table.  It is also revealed that the scout scan was never shown (a low-dose scout scan is often performed in real equipment making real scans to adjust the protocol for best image).

Conclusion:  Nanox.ARC is fake and did not make even the poor-quality tomosynthesis images shown by Nanox.  It is a mystery how those images were generated (and whether they were done manually or involved a robotic hand).  However, evidence suggests that it is possible that Nanox has discovered shapeshifters in our midst (luckily, no longer living).

Blurring timestamps to conceal time travel

There is interesting blurring in the Nanox infomercial.

For some reason, Nanox decided that it should hide the date/time the image was taken (October 10, 2021, 5:31:15pm, per DICOM data), but forgot to blur the same timestamp in the upper left corner.  Here is the unblurred timestamp from the hand scan video:

Why are timestamps important?  Because they reveal that the Nanox.Arc scan that supposedly generated that image never happened.  The timestamp was fake to begin with.  

Here is the supposed tomosynthesis stack generated by a pelvic scan.  The DICOM timestamp is again October 10, 2021, 5:31:15pm, to the second.  How come these two completely different scans finished at the exact same second?

What about the head scan?  That one is dated January 1, 2021 (no time shown).

But what about the Nanox.Arc scan that generated that hand image?  Did the scan actually happen?

According to the hand scan video, the scan took about 64 seconds (patient data is entered 00m:16s and scan finished 01m:20s into the video).

The problem is that the control pad (or the "operation console") shows something completely different - the scan took over 10 minutes, not just a bit over a minute, if it was done at all.  And it supposedly happened on November 22, 2021, more than a month after that blurred October 10, 2021 date, while involving an additional short jump back in time.

Here is the timeline of the hand scan, according to the control pad: 

4:44pm	Patient data is scanned (battery is at 37%, not charging)
	travel back in time 1 hour and 37 minutes, which drains the battery charge about 1/3
3:07pm	Select body region, protocol, prepare to start scan (battery is at 10%, charging)
3:13pm	Scan in progress, scan finishes, please wait for reconstruction to finish (battery is at 12%, charging)
3:17pm	DICOM preview, approved and finished (battery is still at 12%, charging)

Conclusion:  Nanox.ARC is fake and did not make even the poor-quality tomosynthesis images shown by Nanox.  It is a mystery how those images were generated (and whether they were done manually or involved a robotic hand).  However, evidence suggests that it is possible that Nanox has invented a time travel machine.

Update:  We were given a heads-up about the time machine in November: