Kontrol Technologies Corp N.KNR

Good post from elsewhere

[Whydunnit]

The writer of this on ceo.ca said it was okay to share, so I'm sharing.  A well-written piece IMO.

@HoundDogs Kontrol shareholders do not have a problem with skepticism towards BioCloud. We do, however, have a problem with how Jonathan Jarry framed his article. The piece is heavily biased. Under the thinly veiled guise of ‘skepticism’ and ‘just asking questions’, this hit piece is clearly insinuating that BioCloud is unlikely to work as advertised, all the while framing Paul Ghezzi, CEO of Kontrol, as some sort of snake oil salesman. It is irresponsible and unethical to publish this.

Jarry, you reference Dr. David Heinrich’s lack of response to your queries, as well as Dr. Jimmy Dikeakos’ statement that he cannot speak on behalf of Kontrol. You make reference to a lack of twitter discussion between these two researchers about BioCloud. These facts are referenced with a clear insinuation that there is some nefarious act of omission going on. This is a theme that resonates throughout the article, culminating in a closing statement implying that the company is committing some sort of “diabolical” activity.

There is mention of how Paul will not share information on the reagent, which is proprietary. A diagram of an antibody in the reference paper is mentioned with negative connotation. Paul’s claim that the internal temperature of the device can be regulated is scoffed at. Simply because he refuses to share the specifics of these processes, which are proprietary. This has fuelled your skepticism, which is fine.

But here is the problem, Jarry: you are not a relevant stakeholder. You are not entitled to the intellectual property of the company. The withholding of intellectual property from public domain is not new to shareholders. This has been the companies’ approach and shareholders are aware of this and trust the integrity and rigour of the well-respected independent research labs that validated the technology. We trust that the National Research Council, who was privy to the research data at various points throughout the testing process, is satisfied with the testing data. And we trust Paul, Gary and the company.

“The NRC will not fund product development until it verifies research, and it agreed that BioCloud will do what Kontrol claims it can, said one NRC staff person, who declined to be identified” (https://lfpress.com/business/local-business/london-lab-develops-device-to-test-air-for-traces-of-coronavirus). Why no mention of this? Are we discrediting this source because they are anonymous? Because that would be a direct attack on the ethics of The London Free Press. In a very underhanded way you’ve already attempted to undermine the professionalism, rigour, and integrity of : Kontrol Technologies, Paul Ghezzi, Gary Saunders, Dr. Heinrichs, the National Research Council, so lets add London Free Press to the list?

It’s pretty interesting that you are a self proclaimed “Science Communicator”, yet your spurious insinuations of BioCloud snake oil are ‘supported’ by the following pieces of ‘evidence’: Kontrol will only share their research and intellectual property with key stakeholders (ie not you); Dr. Heinrichs will not respond to you; Dr. Dikeakos and Dr. Heinrichs do not talk about BioCloud on twitter; CEMSI is located in a “small building” (and you have an issue with their slogan?); there is an illustration of an antibody in the reference paper; two academics (one of whom is attempting to develop a competitive product) echo your skepticism. This should not be considered strong evidence. It reads more like a non-sensical conspiracy theory.

Your skepticism is fine and understandable. But you are not an expert in air monitoring for particulates. Gary Saunders and CEMSI are. You are not an expert in virology. Dr. Dikeakos and Dr. Heinrichs are. Their labs tested and validated the technology. This data was presented to the National Research Council who proceeded to fund the company based on BioCloud performing ‘as advertised’. You are not an expert in air viral transmission. Dr. Caroline Duchaine, who is now advising the company alongside the aforementioned professors, is. These are top academics and researchers in highly relevant fields. Your framing of this article is extremely disrespectful to the aforementioned parties. It is also highly unethical to foment uncertainty and doubt towards a publicly traded company based on the grossly biased nature of your presentation.

[Jilly17]

Just as some of us already stated but not as well put together. Now let Kontrol do what they do best! :)

[canyousayiii]

In other words, the author framed the whole article in a way to suggest that his inability to get access to sufficient and proprietary evidence most likely means that the device does not work as advertised, regardless of the support by several parties and organizations that were involved with the trials. That framing is not science based, which is purportedly author's background, nor is it

[yearninyank]

oh my god give it a rest... the argument was made and it was effective and  Kontrol has to overcome it with actions not your repetitive and insipid posts, Seriously "the outside world" is calling.