rvallee
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I don't mean generally, I mean would physicians accept this as actual evidence? This method and what they are looking at. Or just pooh-pooh it as usual? Doesn't matter if it's right and accurate but no one cares.I think if true, if it was really possible to take some cells and do this spectroscopy and identify a signature of particular molecules that was diagnostic, then it would matter. For diagnosis, and for providing clues as to what the underlying problem is.
It's the progress towards 'if true' that I think we need a bit more information around. Not definitive information of course, but some indication that what was found in the first small study has been found in a bigger sample.
Comparing to the nanoneedle, it's a unique thing, not a standard. And it's not clear what it's showing, why impedance should matter is not clear and so it was dismissed. Or what it relates to about the disease process and, apparently this is critical, unique and differentiated. Even getting patients with other diseases to compare results is very hard, healthcare systems don't cooperate with this.
Basically it's only worth going further if physicians will find it valid. It's not about what's true, it's what the profession is willing to accept as true, to their standard, and what's in the textbooks.