Nanox tweets that is going to change the world, and the stock jumps 15%.
The market is oblivious to the irony that it is investors who have been waiting for months for "FDA approval," whatever that is supposed to mean. As of today, no Nanox x-ray system is legal anywhere in the world.
Expect FDA approval in early 2020 (quoted November 2019 conversation with the CEO)
Note also that all my research so far indicates that it is not true that two-thirds of the world cannot reach medical imaging and that one-third of the world waits too long to get a scan. The availability of low-cost x-ray systems (both stationary and portable/mobile) and ultrasound devices has solved this problem years ago.
Even the best artists (scam artists included) slip sometimes - they are human, after all. Let's take a listen to what the CEO has to say in the Nanox "vision" video released in late November ahead of RSNA 2020:
"Our mission is to democratize medical imaging, to make it way more available. There are simply not enough machines today - it is too expensive - expensive to buy, expensive to maintain, expensive to operate, and therefore not very practical." (starting at 47s)
So, medical imaging is not practical and accessible today?
Here is what he wrote in his March 30, 2020 blog post:
In Israel, as in practically every country in the world, we have a real shortage of [COVID-19] testing kits. Lung scans on the other hand are accessible, cheap, and the results are immediate - a critical factor in patient outcomes and in preventing the spread of the infection.
He can't have it both ways. Chest (or lung) radiographs represent the majority, about 40%, of all imaging procedures performed worldwide, according to the World Health Organization (Communicating Radiation Risks in Paediatric Imaging, page 16). The CEO states that they are accessible, cheap, and with immediate results in practically every country in the world. So, it seems there are enough medical imaging machines, they are not expensive, and they are easy to operate and quite practical, no? Poof goes Nanox vision!
In his blog post, he also states that Nanox machines
can be installed not only in medical facilities but also in offices and even retail locations, so people don’t need to drive hours to get to a scanning machine.
But Nanox now admits that is not possible - Nanox proposed machines leak radiation - and any potential deployments of those proposed machines, in the unlikely event that they ever become real, is at risk due to:
the inability or unwillingness of potential customers to invest in the required safety infrastructure, including customary X-ray shielding, to allow the Nanox.ARC to be safety[sic] operated (page 17, prospectus)
Not to be confused with Nanox vision (announced in a press release with SKT in June 2019), Nanox mission is:
“to replace all legacy sources with our digital X-ray.” (November 2019 press release)
From/To in Nanox November 2019 press release
Yes, that digital X-Ray source has a field of nano-gates (that is, holes) that emit pixie dust (because electrons are emitted by nano-cones, not nano-holes) in discrete streams instead of a Schrödinger cloud, according to the illustration above. And cathodes, anodes, and years do not matter (based on the From half).
Unfortunately, Nanox own facilitator and option holder testifies that nobody wanted that non-existent digital X-ray source. Not even when the current CEO, then the Chief Strategy Officer of Nanox predecessor, went to RSNA 2015 to show it around. Now the title of his blog is IMAGING 3.0 which is remarkably similar to Imaging3. Coincidence or Freudian slip? No way he did not know about Imaging3.
