Medical epidemiologist here. This has such a Theranos ring to it. No response to the questions about the evidence base for claims of new predictive insights - only references to studies that provide prediction and guidance based on currently available routine blood workups and common dietary interventions. Everything "new" appears to be speculative and to come (perhaps) from insights based on longitudinal data collection.
As I read this it is hoped that the technology will provide new predictive disease insights but these are not established yet. So many metabolic/biochemical screens have poor prediction at the individual level.
If I have misunderstood can you cite one NEW predictive insight your technology provides with some kind of performance parameter - predictive value positive, 10 year incidence, or receiver operating curve performance?
Couple of years ago I was part of a pre-accelerator group assessing the product market fit for independent assessment of new medical technologies. The consultation revealed that most investors in new medical technologies had no idea how to evaluate the technology, didn't know they they didn't know how to assess the technology, and didn't want to pay someone else to do it.
As I read this it is hoped that the technology will provide new predictive disease insights but these are not established yet. So many metabolic/biochemical screens have poor prediction at the individual level.
If I have misunderstood can you cite one NEW predictive insight your technology provides with some kind of performance parameter - predictive value positive, 10 year incidence, or receiver operating curve performance?
Couple of years ago I was part of a pre-accelerator group assessing the product market fit for independent assessment of new medical technologies. The consultation revealed that most investors in new medical technologies had no idea how to evaluate the technology, didn't know they they didn't know how to assess the technology, and didn't want to pay someone else to do it.