FDA? In response to some of the recent posts, regarding FDA dark forces etc.I would like to share this with you. First of all I am very confident in my investment of Verisante for several reasons. A few being that I feel fortunate in the fact that I live in Canada, BC, and close to the city of Vancouver. Living in this area which is the home of Verisante, it allows me to have an advantage to the point that I am familiar with the culture of this area. But most importantly I have familiarity with the University of British Columbia as well as the BC Cancer Agency. To be able to understand the fine reputations and contributions these organizations have exhibited throughout the years makes the investment decision for me, somewhat more acceptable. I also realize it is now up to Verisante to deliver and successfully roll out this invention to the industry.
Regarding the FDA, I feel that some may be missing the point, in stating that they may be an agency that works under the guise of some corruption or similar political influence by other groups within the USA. Perhaps this may be true to some extent. I don't know for sure.
I am not a doctor, scientist, politician or involved in the medical profession, but have spent many years in the corporate world and try to approach investing and just plain day to day living from a practical and common sense perspective. So I offer you this. The negatives and dark forces portrayed here about the FDA I believe are far more prevalent toward drug and medicine discoveries. Anything that can be administered to the body as a cure or assistance to better health. I see a total difference here with the AURA as it is simply a device which will be used to detect the disease, not to cure it. Curing is the next step after discovery and is in no way associated with the medical device for detection. At least not a direct correlation, but a step toward treatment.
I believe the FDA will embrace this technology as it is in no way invasive to the body, but serves as a far more efficient way to screen patients than human eye observation. The large pharma will embrace this as well, particularly in the USA as they will recognize the huge cash generation that this will generate throughout every state, and most certainly in the lower states where there is continuous exposure to the sun. Folks who live in states such as Florida, Texas, Arizona, Nevada and California still have plenty of capital, enough to invest in a $200[est.] screening exam to have peace of mind.
Bottom line for me this a detection device not a cure or a drug to be administered to the body. The risks to accepting this technology are very limited and it has huge potential to create cash flow to the entire medical industry. America loves that and desperately needs the monetary benefit as well. IMHO.