While we await the official replay of the November 16 ARC Day magic show, Jonathan at Yahoo has requested to see the "real" images of real organs (a hand and a foot) in real healthy humans made by a real x-ray machine and the fake ARC at Shamir Medical (the device supposedly appeared there more than a year ago in a regular room, per Israeli press, and had since reappeared in a specially equipped x-ray room, per CEO). The DICOM data of the regular x-ray images appear to show those were done on November 14 in the early afternoon. According to Israeli's MOH website, the human trial had not started at that time (and had not even started recruiting). I am posting here some frame grabs without any further comment for now, to prevent biasing readers' opinion. The Nanox radiologist claims the wrist patient is 63 years old and weighting over 100 kg, and the foot image was from another patient (but she "failed to notice" a big "R" sign on the image of a LEFT hand made by the fake single-source version of the ARC two years ago).
November 17, 2022
June 29, 2022
Nanox is shipping, or not
A Korean promo (citing "a statement to the industry" made on June 22, written on June 24, embargoed until June 27, and since removed with no explanation, but cached) claims that Nanox has shipped its first x-ray units. But they are not the fake ARC tomosynthesis devices that management has been promising - they are Remedi's generic portable dental devices, that the FDA has been clearing for extremities, but not chest (see April 21 blog post):
First, it signed a supply contract with Nasdaq-listed Nanox worth 150 billion won [about $155 million] for a 'compact X-ray solution'. It is a four-year supply contract for the African region. It is known that the initial volume has already been successfully sold, and follow-up procedures are being followed. The compact X-ray solution is a product made with Remex-KA6 and Vieworks (100120:KOSDAQ) 's X-ray detector into a package. It is expected to contribute to improving the level of medical care in Africa, where equipment is poor, as it is easy to move and easy to perform radiography. [google translated]
The whole thing makes no business sense, just like everything else Nanox. But the article was written by the same author who has written all previous promo pieces about Remedi (and correctly announced the $1 million investment, weeks ahead of Nanox disclosure).
The reason it makes no sense is that portable x-ray devices of similar specs can be imported from China for $600 a piece (and used with film, or about $1 an image, if one wants to skimp on the digital detector, and just take a photo with a phone and upload it to some cloud for free). But, of course, given a choice, clinics would probably opt for a $10,000 used general x-ray system that can do all standard x-ray imaging procedures, including chest. Diagnostic imaging services in Africa are widely available and cheap, too - a regular chest x-ray can be as low as $3 in Nigeria, for example (compare to the fake 4-year,1000-unit Nigerian MSaaS agreement, signed about a year ago, supposedly stipulating a $7 payment to Nanox, with no diagnosis). Assuming a $30,000 "cost" for the Remedi/Vieworks packaged unit, this 5-year "African" contract is about 5,000 units in total! It is just never going to happen.
Nanox hinted that this was coming in the 20-F filing on May 2 (page 63):
For example, we recently invested $1.0 million for approximately 1% of the shares of Remedi co Ltd. (“Remedi”), a Korean radiation specialist company in radiography and therapy based on X-ray components. Remedi is a privately owned company, and we have an ongoing collaboration in the development of the high voltage power supply for Nanox.ARC. We are in advanced negotiation with Remedi to explore the possibility of connecting Remedi’s two-dimensional (“2D”) imaging systems to the Nanox.CLOUD and the Nanox.MARKETPLACE, creating a mobile 2D X-ray system that enables remote readings of scans with AI-powered imaging analysis and a global teleradiology solution. Subject to the completion of the negotiation and successful integration of the 2D system, we aim to distribute this system to our MSaaS customers.
One has to wonder what will "happen" with the Nigerian agreement for the fake ARC.
So, here we go - Nanox is pivoting from a developer of a novel device that would cure cancer and democratize health care to a distributor of overpriced dental machines. Not good enough even for a decent money-laundering operation.
Update July 16, 2022: The promo has been republished on July 12. It now claims "the statement to the industry" was made on July 11, thereby reconfirming Remedi as a likely hopeless scam that has been trying for years to list on KOSDAQ. The story is mainly unchanged from its June 24 version, but it no longer contains the statement by Nanox CEO and references to SK Telecom and LG. It does retain the obviously misleading claims about the "ultra-compact X-ray tube" (Remedi actually uses regular off-the-shelf dental tubes in its devices).
Update September 15, 2022: Another paid promo by Remedi, published in July, supplied further evidence that Remedi is a scam, if not an outright fraud. The company suddenly declared there that its supposed $155 million contract with Nanox is now confidential, only days after bragging about it in all detail. Also, for the first time, the company admits that its factory is not actually utilized for production (supposedly due to nearby residents objecting to the company making x-ray products), and, hilariously, is being redesigned as a virtual-reality "Metaverse" demo site. Its listing on KOSDAQ, promised for years, has, strangely, not materialized yet.
April 21, 2022
A Remedi for fake SOURCE, TUBE, CART, and ARC?
A strange article appeared in the Korean press, supposedly written on April 18, but embargoed until 4 hours ago. It appears to claim that Nanox may have invested about a $1 million in the Korean company Remedi, based on google translate. The article mentions that Remedi makes a small hot-cathode x-ray tube and a generic handheld dental medical device that has sold about 1,000 units since it started selling in 2017. The device is similar looking and has similar specs as devices offered by other manufacturers all over the world, including sub-$600 units from China.
Remedi may have an FDA clearance, but clearly has to do a lot of work to gain a meaningful share in the world market. Its website has numerous typos, such as
Hogh[sic]-Voltage Generator, or
Remex is the best provide[sic] diagnostic imaging.
Still, the device has better performance than the fake Nanox.CART, in addition to being battery operated, and can be cleared for the same (and more) indications with an addition of a very thin filter. The existence of such low-cost portable battery-operated x-ray devices makes a device such as Nanox.ARC redundant, even if it were real (which it is not!).
So why would Nanox, which is supposed to have a superior cathode, tube and device technology, invest in Remedi, a dinosaur making hot-cathode tubes and single-source devices?
Update: According to Remedi's website, the company also makes some other x-ray components and systems, including dental detectors, micro and dental CBCT, and radiation therapy devices.
Update April 22, 2022: Remedi's small hot-cathode tube that needs no cooling mechanism or rotational mechanics, with length of about 1.6 inch, if we believe this picture.
Update April 22, 2022: A similarly-worded article by the same reporter in the same publication appeared in December, claiming the same 1,000 units, and so implying that Remedi has sold absolutely nothing in the past 4 months.
Update April 25, 2022: Remedi's small hot-cathode tube may be a fake. A 2019 manual for the T100 device shown above states (page 31) that the device is using a regular Toshiba tube.
Update April 26, 2022: Remedi's device sold for $4,800 in early 2019.Update May 5, 2022: There is a problem with Remedi's KA6 device, the dental device masquerading as a hand-held portable x-ray device. In violation of FDA rules, Remedi marketing materials claim the intended use includes chest, head, abdomen and extremities, yet the device is only cleared for extremities.
April 01, 2022
April Fool's Day
Nanox is laughing at its investors today. About an hour ago, it posted a short promo on linkedin for the upcoming re-opening of the new Korean Fab (the opening of the same Fab that was celebrated with great fanfare in October, with many Israeli and Korean dignitaries present and wide coverage by the Korean media):
March 01, 2022
A breakthrough
The Chairman of Nanox Korea, a convicted felon, decided to update his Facebook profile picture on February 25th.
In the comments about it, he clarifies that this is not an image of his head:
- 혈관조영된 skull phantom 을 90KV, 14mA, 50mS 으로 calibration 없이 실험실에서 날거로 촬영 [which Google translates as Angiographic skull phantom was taken raw in the laboratory without calibration at 90KV, 14mA, 50mS]
- Digital X ray source(spindle type electron emitter)
And then he states:
1년 반 고생한 보람이지. 이제 본격적인 시작. 자네도 바빠질거야,
which Google translates as:
One and a half years of hard work paid off. Now it starts in full swing. You will be busy too.
So, is this some kind of a breakthrough? Does Nanox finally have a working x-ray source that can be used in medical diagnostic imaging?
Based on what the Chairman wrote, the answer is simply no! How come? Isn't 90 kVp, 0.7 mAs (implied from 14 mA x 50 ms ) good enough? That's not much worse than a regular cheap and small dental tube (such as CEI's OX/90, for example) that one can get for less than $100 on eBay, no?
The real problem is with what the Chairman writes about the "digital" x-ray source. He is not an art school dropout, like Nanox Chairman - he supposedly has an engineering degree and spent at least some of his life, while not in prison, handling chips. So he knows, or must know, that there is no such thing as a "spindle type electron emitter." He might have meant a Spindt-type electron emitter, but a US-educated "engineer," who is supposed to be responsible for manufacturing the company's core technology at a brand new Fab cannot make such a mistake (if the technology were real, and if any manufacturing were to occur in the near future). Moreover, while the electron emitter, if it were real, may have been somehow viewed as "digital," the x-ray source itself, that is, the tube, is definitely not digital, as the x-rays are supposed to be generated by indiscriminate and uncontrollable smashing of electrons onto a metal target - nothing digital about that.
February 15, 2022
Valentine's Day surprise
Nanox surprised its fans with a nice Valentine's Day gift yesterday. A red heart on a blue x-ray, together in a nice Facebook post:
When your days and nights are spent in the pursuit of developing innovative global health care solutions and working to reinvent medical imaging, days like today remind us to appreciate those who love us and give us the strength to carry on. Happy Valentine’s Day to everyone who pushes us forward. #healthcare #valentine
Could this be an image from the new Nanox.ARC, with automatic heart detection by Nanox AI? Turns out, no. The chest image is just a stock-photo montage, uploaded in February 2007 and probably taken much earlier.
The Facebook post was probably made to divert investor attention from the massive sales by Director Stone last year, revealed in a 13G/A filing a few hours later. Typical Nanox!
January 19, 2022
Now we know
Now we know why Nanox issued that misleading press release on January 11.
We also know why Nanox management held a hastily-arranged virtual briefing for its Korean audience on January 14, where the same old lies were repeated, but nothing of substance was announced. Amir Ben-Shalom, Ph.D., described as the former(?) Chief Science Officer of Nanox, and whose name pops up in all the scams concocted by the former CEO Poliakine, reportedly opined:
it will not be long before FDA approval.
Here is why:
In a pre-market 6-K submission filed yesterday, Nanox revealed that its June 510k submission to the FDA was withdrawn on January 12. With the withdrawal, Nanox effectively admits that the complaint in the class-action lawsuit had merit, that is, Nanox failed to disclose in June that
(i) Nano-X's 510(k) application for the Nanox.ARC was deficient; (ii) accordingly, it was unlikely that the FDA would approve the 510(k) application for the Nanox.ARC in its current form; (iii) as a result, Nano-X had overstated the Nanox.ARC's regulatory and commercial prospects
As a result, the stock hit a new all-time low of $10.70 yesterday.
On a side note, as an example of the nonsense that went on at the Korean briefing, let's take a look at two images:
Nanox still insists its Nanox.SOURCE chip is a FED:
But the 20-F filed by Nanox clearly states that the FED is a type of a failed display, not a chip or a cathode (page 59):Our technology has its roots in field emission display (“FED”) technology. FED technology was originally developed by Sony with other technology partners, for television screens and monitors, offering a novel way of lighting screen pixels compared to traditional cathode-ray tubes that were based on a one-source electron gun beam. The field emission display innovation used multiple nano-scale electron guns to achieve a much higher quality image with significantly reduced motion blur effects. In 2009, after having invested substantial resources in the development of this technology for over a decade including through a joint venture called Field Emission Technologies, Inc. (“FET”), Sony ceased development of the project.
Since when is Nanox in the display business?
Here is another interesting image, supposedly comparing a phantom chest image generated by "existing x-ray" (top) with that by Nanox.ARC (bottom). It exposes Nanox as a fraud.
Aiming to have 15,000 systems deployed globally by 2022.
January 11, 2022
Nanox is panicking
After the stock price hit an all-time low of $11.79 yesterday, the CEO of Nanox has decided that enough is enough and issued a misleading press release this morning.
The press release is titled:
Nanox Announces Issuance of American Medical Association New Category III CPT® Code for Its Coronary Artery Calcium Population Health Solution
It turns out, however, that the new CPT code has nothing to do with Nanox AI or detecting any coronary artery calcium. Here is the long description of the code:
Quantitative computed tomography (CT) tissue characterization, including interpretation and report, obtained with concurrent CT examination of any structure contained in the concurrently acquired diagnostic imaging dataset (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure)
It is a generic experimental code for quantitative, not necessarily AI, analysis of CT images (remember, those expensive and hard-to-get images that Nanox.ARC is supposed to replace worldwide by "democratizing imaging" and "propelling the universe").
The pdf file with the new code was created on December 17, modified on December 28 (per metadata), and finally published on AMA's website on January 1 (per official schedule).
So that was more than a week ago. Why wait until this morning to issue the press release?
All this in the middle of a formal SEC investigation for fraud.
Very brave of the new CEO! Or not.
January 01, 2022
How x-rays are generated
Here is how x-rays are generated, according to Korean-based Nanox promoters on Yahoo and Twitter:
We inform investors of Nanox who want to democratize global medical care with innovative technology. Flowchart of how to make an X-ray
1. Substance (object)
2. Apply heat, light, impact, etc. to the material (object)
3. Heat, light, impact, etc., emit electrons from the received material (object) (electron emission or field emission)
4. When the protruding electron collides with an object, x-rays are emitted. depending on what 1 is here
※Double metal (mems) such as Nanox molybdenum or gallium
※Other company's carbon nanotubes (cnt)
Note that the above algorithm is written in English - it is not a translation. Here is it with a specific object, such as a cucumber:
1. Cucumber
2. Apply heat, light, impact, etc. to said cucumber
3. Heat, light, impact, etc., emit electrons from the received cucumber
4. When the protruding electron collides with another cucumber, x-rays are emitted.
Now you know how x-rays are generated, Gangnam style.
Update: Steve @Yahoo makes a good point about the heat, and asks:
Are you finally admitting that the Nanox cold tube isn't cold after all? You're using the word "heat" when describing how to make x-rays, yet one of the values of the Nanox tube is that it's a cold tube and doesn't make any heat to make an x-ray beam. So are you admitting that the company has been lying this whole time?
Nanox investors were never told that a cold cathode can get quite hot. A cold cathode simply emits more electrons than can be supplied by thermionic emission alone.
Update: The author of the above algorithm has offered further clarification:
X-ray X-ray When electrons collide with an object, radiation with strong penetrating power (electromagnetic wave) is emitted. This radiation is called x-ray. Usually, a flow of high-speed electrons collides with a material, and at this time, short-wavelength electromagnetic waves are generated, which are called x-rays. It was first discovered by Wilhelm Roentgen in 1895 and is also called the Roentgen ship.
So, now we further learn that:
- You don't need high voltage to generate x-rays (just a few volts potential should provide enough energy for the electrons to generate x-rays when smashing into an object, such as a cucumber)
- A Roentgen ship is a thing.
Update: The author's rebuttal to my understanding of his x-ray generating algorithm is as follows, verbatim:
If you go to the RxR blog, 1. There are psychopaths in the world who compare objects (substances) to cucumbers. Is this common sense? RxR is not a citizen of a country with a public education. It cannot distinguish between conductors, insulators, and semiconductors.
저가 RxR과 대화해본 결과 결론은 RxR은전기전자의 기초를 전혀 모릅니다. 도체.부도체.반도체.전자방출.전계방출.전자.원자.핵 전기전자 기초를 모릅니다. 속지마세요 가짜냉음극도매상 이거나 무식한 공매도 하수인 입니다.
Update January 2, 2022: Jeremy @Yahoo points out, correctly, that,
if you apply enough heat and light to the cucumber you will surely get x-rays, also from protruding electrons hitting the relativistic cucumber. See xkcd's relativistic baseball.
I had foolishly failed to consider a cucumber that had been accelerated to relativistic speed prior to step 1, or the use of a small nuclear explosive device in step 2. In either case, of course, Nanox.ARC becomes a single-use disposable device, and the patient never returns for another annual diagnostic check-up.
December 25, 2021
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.
December 07, 2021
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).
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 |
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.
major investors had already verified Nanox's technology and recognized its potential,
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.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.
Blurring timestamps to conceal time travel
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) |
November 24, 2021
Cold turkey
The price of a turkey in East Hampton, NY must be very high this year, so Mr. Richard Stone is selling (and probably already sold on November 19 to his broker) 200,000 shares of Nanox, cold turkey, at a value of $17.38 a share (according the the 144 form he emailed to the SEC).
Since the form was filed on November 19, a Friday, the stock lending/borrow fee has increased from about 7% to the current 57% (at Interactive Brokers). It is not necessarily evidence of front running - when a large holder, who has lent his shares, sells, it typically takes a bit of time for the shares to become available to borrow from the new buyers. The form was made public by the SEC on November 22, based on what I see in the webserver header.
Or just maybe Mr. Stone does not want to wait and see what will happen at the RSNA 2021 radiology conference next week. See, Nanox started with a tweet like this in late October,
November 22, 2021
Inflating the hedge
How does one know whether the market is approaching peak insanity? Maybe it is the publication of an article like this. The author argues that Nanox is a
buy now and hold for the long haul
stock because it is
a way to hedge against runaway inflation.
That is completely nonsensical, of course, as Nanox has been telling investors that it plans to charge a FIXED fee per scan with its magical device, while its costs of manufacturing and other operating expenses will be subject to whatever inflation or deflation there is. In other words, if Nanox were not a complete fraud, it would be the worst hedge against inflation.
Image by Marina Velmozhko at Pixabay |
The author gets the rest of the Nanox story completely wrong, too.
With an efficient way to produce x-rays,
But Nanox has never proposed an efficient way to produce x-rays. Its proposed x-ray tubes, it they weren't completely fake, will be just as inefficient as regular x-ray tubes, as the inefficiency happens at the anode, not the cathode.
The author claims that
Nanox.ARC produces x-rays with silicon chips that use modest amounts of electricity.
That is quite interesting, because no functional Nanox.ARC device exists, at least none was demonstrated at the August Business Update and the recent AI webcast (Nanox has changed the design of the ARC supposedly demonstrated about a year ago at RSNA 2020). Moreover, even if it existed, it would use the same "amounts of electricity" as a regular tomosynthesis device for the same (actually, worse) image quality, as the proposed Nanox x-ray source would use the same amount of electricity as the current regular dental x-ray tubes. And, of course, x-rays cannot be produced with silicon chips, at least not commercially (Nanox claims to use molybdenum in its proposed chip, which happens to be fake).
Finally, the author confuses Nanox.CART with Nanox.ARC and FDA approval with FDA clearance. Nanox has never shown a picture or photo of Nanox.CART, the only Nanox device that has been cleared by the FDA (and even that clearance appears a result of fraud by Nanox, based on what can be glimpsed from the published 510k Summary). Also, FDA approval is completely different from FDA clearance under United States law, and claiming FDA approval when a device has been cleared is illegal. Nanox has never submitted Nanox.ARC for FDA approval (or at least it never told the public about it) - it claimed in a June press release that it had submitted it for clearance only.
The single source Nanox.ARC has already been approved by the FDA, but the company's first attempt to earn approval for a multi-source device didn't work out.
I also have an issue with the archaic term used for CT,
Computer-aided tomography,
but that's probably a topic for another post (simplistically, the key difference between the old tomography, now called tomosynthesis, and CT is that the former can't do axial slices). Needless to say, the proposed Nanox.ARC is not a CT device but a tomosynthesis device, according to Nanox. What is the difference? CT has something like 10%-20%, and growing, share of the medical imaging market using x-rays, and is considered the gold standard in many if not most x-ray diagnostics scenarios, while tomosynthesis (other than specialized breast tomosynthesis, which the proposed Nanox.ARC cannot do) is never "usually appropriate," according to ACR, and has less than 1%, and declining, market share. It gets worse - the "tomosynthesis" images that Nanox has shown so far have no diagnostics usefulness whatsoever.
To be fair, the author hedges at the end of the article:
A fuzzy timeline for resubmitting an application to the FDA for a multi-source device combined with a lack of revenue makes this an ultra-high-risk stock at the moment. Cornering the market for x-ray equipment could be so lucrative, though, that it's probably worth the risk.
November 17, 2021
Great visionary
I think the company's outgoing CEO should be revered as a great visionary. According to today's press release, the company spent $665K in the September quarter on "Class-actions litigation and SEC matter." That was months ahead of the "SEC matter" subpoena received on November 8 (per results call today). That is what I call a foresight!
Image by nvodicka on Pixabay |
The Division of Enforcement of the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) has notified the Company that it is conducting an investigation to determine whether there had been any violations of the federal securities laws. The Company has been providing documents and information and has now received a subpoena from the SEC requesting that the Company provide documents and other information relating to the development cost of the Company’s Nanox.ARC prototypes, as well as the Company’s estimate for the cost of assembling the final Nanox.ARC product at scale.
But somehow the company forgot to tell us about all that in its November 11 press release. The stock has been dropping on "no news" since that November 8 date, of course.
November 09, 2021
Nanox celebrates the International day of radiology
Nanox celebrates.
That is, Nanox CEO lies again on his blog.
First, he admits that Roentgen used a Crookes-type tube, which is a cold-cathode tube, when he discovered x-rays 126 years ago. not a thermionic or hot-cathode tube, as he has repeatedly lied in the past. Then he correctly states:
Not many people know this, but for over 100 years the technology for generating X-rays has not changed.
Exactly right. In fact, no one knows that for over 100 years the technology for generating x-rays has not changed, because it has. With the invention of the hot-cathode tubes, or thermionic-emission tubes, by GE in 1913, the market share of cold-cathode tubes declined to basically nothing. Other sources of x-rays were discovered and invented as well, such as the radioisotopes and the synchrotron.
So it is not completely true that
In any X-Ray machine, the rays are still produced by thermionic emission technology...
but it is completely false that
... that requires massive heating to develop the X-rays.
because the tiny Christmas tree lights, say 0.4W each, are hotter than the "hot" filament in a typical x-ray tube.
image based on Petr Kratochvil's work |
The real heat comes from the inefficient way of generating x-rays in any x-ray tube, be it cold-cathode or hot-cathode. Electrons smash into the target/anode and only less than 1% of the energy is converted into usable x-rays, while the rest gets wasted as heat. Yet, it is not a bigger problem than using, say, a 200W incandescent light bulb.
The outgoing CEO continues to lie:
Nanox developed the Cold Cathode X-ray tubes that are much smaller, and as per their name emit X-Rays at room temperature, which leads to considerable energy and cost savings.
Nanox has not developed any functional cold-cathode tubes - they are all fake and bigger than the regular dental tubes they are supposed to replace. Even if they were real, they would not emit x-rays at room temperature, because the anode temperature can reach 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit. And, of course, cold cathode does not mean cold or room temperature, it just means electron emission above the emission by the thermionic effect alone. The proposed Nanox tube, if ever made functional, will not bring any energy and cost savings - just the opposite, as evidenced by all cold-cathode tubes in the past characterized by poor and unreliable performance and short life.
Mr. Poliakine then contradicts himself:
But even before Coronavirus, most of the people in the world did not have access to medical screening because they couldn't afford it or are too far away from a machine and a doctor. Nanox aims to change this.
That is a complete lie, of course, but you should forgive him, as a con-artist has often other things to worry about than remember what he wrote in his own blog more than a year ago:
In Israel, as in practically every country in the world, we have a real shortage of 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.
Lung scans, in practically every country in the world, are accessible, cheap, and the results are immediate, wrote Mr. Poliakine. Lung scans are some kind of medical imaging, no? Typically, using x-rays, no? Even CT (as shown in his March 2020 blog post)?
Join us in our journey.
Sure.
November 03, 2021
For educational purposes only
The latest tweet by Nanox shows that its device can teach first graders the concept of an analog clock. It has no x-ray tubes, and is for educational purposes only.
Too bad first graders are not allowed to attend RSNA 2021.
Concerns about the outgoing Nanox CEO
October 30, 2021
Remember, remember
Remember that Bloomberg piece that Nanox tweeted in early March?
A forward-looking statement is typically a safe-harbor statement, but what if the CEO of Nanox, Mr. Poliakine, did know at the time that ALL the 25 ARC systems were fake and non-functional (the photo obviously shows fewer than 25 systems anyway) and that Nanox was not on pace to make and ship 1,000 units by the end of the first quarter of 2022 at the latest?