Re: lab-on-a-chip

[hbergeronx]

cc: diybio, biocurious, tito, indiegogo (is this a violation of indiegogo terms?)

 

Thomas:

 

The reason why this is annoying to me, personally, is that you didn't seem to do your homework, nor do you exhibit much professionalism.

 

I can't tell how much of your video or your product is directly copied from Pearl Biotech. Is Tito Jankowski aware of this? I think they (Pearl/Tito) have done presentations at BioCurious in the past, have an almost identical product selling for half the price of your own (http://www.pearlbiotech.com/c=1) and there are at least 2 instructables out there on how to make your own transilluminator ( http://www.instructables.com/id/Pearl-Gel-Illuminator/  ,  http://www.instructables.com/id/UV-Transilluminator/  ). It's considered bad form to repeat the work of others and not attempt to cite that work in the scientific community, and considering the accessibility of the instructables, the fact that you were creating this amidst the same community that originated some of the prior works, this is just uncool. SELLING that for twice the price to "greater fools" willing to give you money for the work leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. Then, there's the ethical and legal question: to what extent did you begin to offer for sale something that is open-sourced by Pearl Biotech BY-NC-SA (http://www.instructables.com/static/entry/license/BY_NC_SA.html)? Did you create it from scratch, or did you license it separately from Pearl? Why would Pearl license it to you without removing the competing product from their own website?

 

I don't know if you are sincerely apologizing, or if you think it is a joke (the "ha ha" part). But adding haha to an apology negates it and is extremely unprofessional. Failure to plan on your part does not give you the right to copy content nor use content without permission, especially since if the people involved knew about it in advance, we would have been happy to help. It abuses our good nature.

 

If you didn't do your homework with regard to a transilluminator, and aren't very serious nor particularly concerned about the ethics involved, why should you be a "believable" source for a lab on a chip? You might have a really important discovery or invention that could provide a big boost not only to patients lives but also to the DIYBio community, yet obscure that by showing flagrant disregard for the methods and ethics of science in a very public medium, behavior in which you stand to profit considerably. Things don't add up.

 

In my opinion, which you probably don't take very seriously, you should be spending your time, money, and skills on working up a scientific paper to let others reproduce your work and help to validate it. I would be happy to back such an effort. You can turn this around with a simple mea culpa and more transparency on your intent and methods.

 

But this? Does not feel right. Does not smell right. IMO: violates our code of conduct. http://diybio.org/codes/, and that of indiegogo http://www.indiegogo.com/about/terms.

 

Everyone: how do you feel about this? Are my concerns ungrounded?

 

-matt

 

On Thursday, November 21, 2013 3:43:46 PM UTC-8, Thomas Warinner wrote:

Hey guys,

Let me start off by apologizing about including you in the video. I'm so embarrassed reading this haha We thought you guys knew what we were doing that day when filming- we didn't mean to step on any toes. We had a lot of issues with the video. We had the camera for a portion of two days, with half of the footage rendered unusable. That left us with so little content that we had to use stock video! The product we have are labeled "for education use only" for legal reasons. Most biotech companies have similar disclosures on their products (ex. BioRad). The first products we released, including the blue light transilluminator, were the first I ever designed or fabricated. The reason they are priced much, in the case of the blue light, on the higher end is 1. starting up we couldn't afford bulk materials making it far more expensive and 2. sourcing materials in the US. This is something I plan to remedy when I have the funds (buying in bulk). For now, I've cut the costs as much as I can and only make a small margin of profit on that item. Lastly, we were vague on the video because 1. The content we did film that went in depth were completely out of focus and 2. We didn't think it would be very interesting to the average indiegogo user. I have talked to Raymond about doing a demo at BioCurious soon.

Many apologize for the lack of production value of the video haha. I worked with the time I had and the footage that survived. 

Cheers,

Thomas

 

Previous thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/counterculturelabs/iTyhajOQBBM

Under Discussion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQT-oQVaahg  Anyone know more about this? it's an indigogo campaign, but it seems to be a bit under the radar...http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/lab-on-a-chip-diagnostics-in-the-palm-of-your-hand

[Nathan McCorkle]

Matt, see my comments in-line below.

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:53 PM, hbergeronx <hberg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> cc: diybio, biocurious, tito, indiegogo (is this a violation of indiegogo
> terms?)
>
> Thomas:
>
> The reason why this is annoying to me, personally, is that you didn't seem
> to do your homework, nor do you exhibit much professionalism.
>
> I can't tell how much of your video or your product is directly copied from
> Pearl Biotech. Is Tito Jankowski aware of this? I think they (Pearl/Tito)
> have done presentations at BioCurious in the past, have an almost identical
> product selling for half the price of your own
> (http://www.pearlbiotech.com/c=1)

I don't see any microfluidic devices on pearlbiotech's front page...
can you give a specific reason you think a transilluminator design
(what looks like all peral biotech has) is being ripped-off?

Maybe.

If he didn't ask to use the BioCurious logo, or if Patrik doesn't
consent to being in this film, then that's certainly an issue.

And it'd be hard to rip-off transillumination as a general idea, as
any qPCR type reaction (or nucleic acid quantification in general)
will have illumination /trans/ (across) the sample to a detector
(whether camera or your eyes). It definitely doesn't look like
anything Pearl Biotech has done, at least on their home page.

> -matt


--
-Nathan

[Cory Tobin]

> I don't see any microfluidic devices on pearlbiotech's front page...
> can you give a specific reason you think a transilluminator design
> (what looks like all peral biotech has) is being ripped-off?

GreneLabs' website sells illuminators and is giving away some as an
incentive for their Indiegogo campaign.
http://grenelabs.com/transilluminators/
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/lab-on-a-chip-diagnostics-in-the-palm-of-your-hand

> Everyone: how do you feel about this? Are my concerns ungrounded?

Regarding the lab-on-a-chip technology mentioned on the Indiegogo
page, there is pretty much zero details on the technology. Not even a
reference to a paper on the technology. All I can gather is they may
be doing some sort of PCR and electrophoresis on a chip. Although
it's hard to imagine how that will work considering the only picture
of the device looks like a piece of plastic with a channel cut in it.
More details would help convince potential Indiegogo-backers that it's
not snake oil.

-cory

[hbergeronx]

Nathan:

 

Grenelabs: http://grenelabs.com/transilluminators/

Pearl: http://www.pearlbiotech.com/c=1  or http://www.pearlbiotech.com/assets/docs/Pearl-Biotech-Fact-Sheet.pdf

 

The concept for the two transilluminators seems identical: blue illumination from LEDs, orange filter... I am mystified why someone would start a business with a more expensive product than an existing company founded a few years earlier by (afaik) a board member of BioCurious with more or less the same design. It doesn't seem like good advice for a startup. It calls serious question whether or not the people involved have the knowhow to produce a lab on a chip, let alone promise to donate them to "the third world" as a reqard for giving them money. It seems EPICALLY racially insensitive to start a company for a white person to start a company with a sales pitch capitalizing on the suffering of non-whites. 

 

-matt

On Thursday, November 21, 2013 5:16:40 PM UTC-8, Nathan McCorkle wrote:

Matt, see my comments in-line below.

[Patrik D'haeseleer]

Hi Thomas - thanks for stopping by! Looks like you've already been given a "warm" welcome ;-)

Personally, I have no beef with the transilluminator and other gear you're selling on your website. I don't think they're priced correctly and I definitely wouldn't recommend them to anyone at that price, but that's no skin off my nose. And it's not as if the Pearl Biotech guys invented the blue LED + amber filter approach. By the way, check out IORodeo's $100 transilluminator kit, or the $200 Gel Integrated System by Avery at BOSSlab, which includes power supply, illumination, and casting system all in a single box!

I definitely have to give you credit for putting together a nicely polished product. But yeah, your pricing (and engineering for affordability) still leaves a lot to be desired. Definitely check out the DIYbio mailing list - there's lots of people who are developing similar pieces of lab equipment and have already solved a lot of those cost concerns.

Patrik

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Counter Culture Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to counterculturel...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Nathan McCorkle]

I did check their site just after I sent the first reply, and also
found the earlier discussion on the counterculture board (I had email
turned off accidentally for that group).

Yeah the indiegogo was a bit low on details, and no more on the website.

Matt, looks like a different design. The concept for any
transilluminator for the last 20 or 30 years has fit into 1 of about 3
categories.. so that these two share the same concept doesn't surprise
me at all. They're sensible designs for 2013, except they both lack an
integrated web cam which would easily be reasonable commercially for a
$600 product, So the price is pretty high, I'll give you that.

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 5:44 PM, hbergeronx <hberg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> --

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

> Groups "BioCurious" group.
> To post to this group, send email to biocu...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> biocurious+...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/biocurious?hl=en
> ---

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

> "BioCurious" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> email to biocurious+...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/biocurious.

> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
-Nathan

[Tom Hodder]

On 22 November 2013 00:53, hbergeronx <hberg...@gmail.com> wrote:

cc: diybio, biocurious, tito, indiegogo

Was that necessary given the lack of grounding to your claims?

 

(is this a violation of indiegogo terms?)

Well you should probably do that research then.

 

Thomas:

The reason why this is annoying to me, personally, is that you didn't seem to do your homework

This seems a somewhat hypocritical remark.

 

...I can't tell how much of your video or your product is directly copied from Pearl Biotech.

Again, you seem to have not done your homework. You should withdraw until your have informed yourself.

...Is Tito Jankowski aware of this?

Again, you should do that research before speculating publicly.

 

SELLING that for twice the price to "greater fools" willing to give you money for the work leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

Again, your opinion is undermined by your hypocrisy.

 

...Things don't add up.

Mostly because you are idly speculating.

 

 

In my opinion, which you probably don't take very seriously

 

But this? Does not feel right. Does not smell right. IMO: violates our code of conduct. http://diybio.org/codes/, and that of indiegogo http://www.indiegogo.com/about/terms.

 

Everyone: how do you feel about this? Are my concerns ungrounded?

Given your follow up email, I think you have said enough that I can be safe that your concerns are untethered.

Regards,

Tom

[Matthew Harbowy]

Thomas:

In your video, you claim to use a chip that requires no power. Typically, such devices such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_flow_test are one shot and specific to a particular biomarker in the blood, and as Louis points out, biomarkers are typically in the blood or urine, not the chip. You don't make any effort to describe which disease or health conditions you plan to treat. You don't describe nor reference any published scientific papers or results of studies performed. You don't describe how results are read from the chip. You don't describe any statistical significance tests nor indicate the rate of false negative or false positive results. You are no scientist, you are a hack.

All of these things should be done before you even begin to perform testing on humans. 

If you plan to make a business, you either need to understand your competitive landscape, or have something so brilliant or new that it has no competition. If you haven't done the due diligence to realize $600+ for a transilluminator is two or three times the nearest comparable! and still went ahead and are attempting to sell them, you are not a very wise business operator, and on those grounds alone,  you don't have the chops to be entering the very crowded lab on a chip market. The space for lateral flow health tests is thick with competition and patents/ip. If you haven't done the basic business work on a transilluminator, what qualifies you to do serious medical device development? Perhaps you should talk to Eri, who can describe the difficulties of medical device business development.

The purpose of pointing out Pearl biotech is that IF you are relying on Raymond's advice on how to fund and promote your business, you need to know that he didn't point you at one or two very local resources, people who SIT ON THE BIOCURIOUS BOARD WITH HIM that he knew of that could have helped cut your costs in half, and perhaps also helped in other ways. You led with an indiegogo campaign that is underpromoted and flew your flag without reaching out to people who could have actually helped you.

And, quite frankly, you need to follow this advice: https://twitter.com/indiefundit/status/400324705443258368

Quit trying to sell overpriced, useless trash and beef up your website with real info.

You don't come off like a person genuinely interested in helping advance science or developing nations. You come off like an entitled white male spoiled child, who wants us to give you $125 so that you give a hunk of plastic to a developing country, with no clear description of it beyond making it sound like an overpriced home pregnancy test. You copy but don't cite the many people whose shoulders you stand on, and then get huffy when people point out your white male privilege. You need to be less offended, and take a good hard look at how you appear to others. You need to seek out some people from "developing nations" who know something about the diagnostics market and can help you craft your message in something other than breathless woo woo about saving the world and curing all disease.

You are not a charity. If you want to make a difference, come over to Oakland and help improve the health and welfare of a struggling community mere miles away. Counter Culture Labs is open to all who want to make a difference, but it's not going to come from a get rich scheme on a crowd funding site. If you make more profit than those you attempt to help, ur doin it wrong. Plastic trinkets and piss strips aren't going to save lives or change the world. You might have good intentions: I can't know your mind. But opening the way you are leading reflects very poorly on those intentions.

Matt

On Thursday, November 21, 2013, Thomas Warinner wrote:

Hey Nathan and Patrick,

Thank you for that "warm" welcome haha. I have been working on ways to reduce the price of the transilluminator without buying overseas or in bulk (which I can't yet afford). This will be fixed when sales start coming in. I've been wanting to design a gel imager for awhile now, but the project took a back seat the the microfluidic chips. I'm updating the info on the chips tonight for you guys! I thought it a little confusing for the userbase of indiegogo, but I have no problem sprucing it up for people who are interested. 

Cheers,

Thomas

On Monday, November 11, 2013 3:22:10 PM UTC-8, hbergeronx wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQT-oQVaahg featuring the back of Patrik's head, and biocurious. Anyone know more about this? it's an indigogo campaign, but it seems to be a bit under the radar...http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/lab-on-a-chip-diagnostics-in-the-palm-of-your-hand

 

I have to admit i'm a bit skeptible when the video doesn't have any of the prototypes on it...

 

-matt

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Counter Culture Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to counterculturel...@googlegroups.com.

[Matthew Harbowy]

One more point.

http://www.mddionline.com/article/developing-medical-devices-consumer-driven-market

It takes 2-3 years to develop a medical device and gather all the necessary testing and approvals. There's no way in hell you can get devices out and usable to developing nations in less than a year, so your claim on the $125 reward and its delivery schedule is completely unrealistic. Testing unapproved devices on poor nations is unethical at best, abusive and immoral and yes, racist and classist at worst. 

Raymond should be concerned that the FDA doesn't order a cease and desist for such a suggestion that you might market an unapproved medical device with the help of BioCurious.

Matt

[Raymond McCauley]

Wow, this got really interesting while I was out of Internet reach...

Thomas and Grene Labs received permission to film in the lab and use the BioCurious logo incidentally in the video, showing that's where the demo was filmed. BioCurious is not currently an official sponsor or promoter. Thomas graciously offered to teach a class or make other arrangements (provide equipment at a discount, help us standardize our current setup, etc.) to say thanks to the lab for having a place to film.

(And thanks for the good catch, Cathal - we try to protect use of our logo and brand, without ruthlessly policing it. I appreciate the whole community looking out for us.)

BioCurious is considered a public venue, and we allow people to film with prior arrangement. Reporters need permission. Surreptitious filming is not allowed. It's customary to get permission, either verbal or formal, when filming people for any commercial use. If I'm in the lab, and there are cameras out, and I don't want to be filmed, I ask them to stop or I leave. Or I speak to the staff on duty.

If anyone has serious concerns about being misrepresented in a video that Grene Labs did, please continue to pursue it with Grene Labs directly, but also please let me know.

And, as a matter of course, BioCurious encourages both open and commercial projects, and we encourage proper attribution. We don't have formal policies on any of this - it's more of a Golden Rule / social contract.

I encourage a good, open discussion here, but, hey - keep it civil, folks. That's also a BioCurious community value. And the Internet is like amber for damned foolishness.

That sounds officious. But I wanted to do the transparent disclosure stuff on BioC's involvement.

Now personal opinion:

I'm a funder of the project. I don't know if they can do what they say - microfluidics is harder than it first looks, and this sounds ambitious.

But I see a crowd-funded biotech project, I'm supporting it. Hell, I'm a funder of Glowing Plant, and my personal reservations about the approach there are pretty well known.

I'm concerned because some neat projects with potential to move the needle are going unfunded. Note the Yovivo! project (disclosure: I'm an advisor).

I haven't had a good chance to vet the Grene Labs lab-on-a-chip approach. I'm hoping to. I'd like it even better if we do something as a community to (politely) ask probing questions, and to challenge technical and legal assumptions. Maybe we can get Thomas to do an open meeting on that, in addition to a class, if we haven't welcomed him too warmly already.

Final personal thought - listing the device as educational is not a dodge, but standard guidance and legal practice to help keep it from being used for diagnostics or medical use. Marketing a crowd-funded project as having potential in this area, without over-promising , is just trying to do some good world - saving.

And, see, I almost got through this entire thing without saying anything about white male privilege.

Yours,
Raymond

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Groups "BioCurious" group.
To post to this group, send email to biocu...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
biocurious+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/biocurious?hl=en
---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BioCurious" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to biocurious+...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/biocurious.

[Cathal Garvey]

> (And thanks for the good catch, Cathal - we try to protect use of our
> logo and brand, without ruthlessly policing it. I appreciate the
> whole community looking out for us.)

That wasn't me! I'm staying well out of this flame-off. :)
best,
Cathal

[Matthew Harbowy]

http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm253307.htm

Listing the device as "for educational purposes only" is not the same as a part 812 exception. There are very clear guidelines from the FDA on how medical devices must be labeled and marketed. Learning said regulations is an important part of developing medical devices, at least here in the US. 

Offering to send a chip to developing countries for (apparent) diagnostic purposes is incompatible with a declaration of investigational or educational use. 

-matt

Device Investigations Exempt from IDE Regulation
Investigations of diagnostic devices that meet the criteria at section 812.2(c)(3) are exempt from the regulations at 21 CFR 812, with the exception of section 812.119. The criteria at section 812.2(c)(3) include specifying that testing:

• be non-invasive,
• not require an invasive sampling procedure that presents a significant risk,
• not by design or intention introduce energy into a subject, and
• not be used as a diagnostic procedure without confirmation of the diagnosis by another, medically established diagnostic product or procedure.

The criteria in section 812.2(c)(3) also include compliance with labeling requirements section CFR 809.10(c), which exempts shipments and other deliveries of IVDs from certain labeling requirements if either (1) the device complies with part 812, or (2) the investigation is not subject to part 812 and one of the following conditions is met:

(i) For a product in the laboratory research phase of development, and not represented as an effective in vitro diagnostic product, all labeling bears the statement, prominently placed: "For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.''

(ii) For a product being shipped or delivered for product testing prior to full commercial marketing (for example, for use on specimens derived from humans to compare the usefulness of the product with other products or procedures which are in current use or recognized as useful), all labeling bears the statement, prominently placed: "For Investigational Use Only. The performance characteristics of this product have not been established.''

For purposes of this guidance document, "labeled RUO" refers to IVD products labeled in accordance with section 809.10(c)(2)(i); "labeled IUO" refers to IVD products labeled in accordance with section 809.10(c)(2)(ii) unless otherwise specified. Examples of products that meet the criteria for these designations are provided in Section III.

Because these products are exempt from most regulatory controls, it is important that they are not distributed for clinical diagnostic uses.

Mere placement of an RUO or IUO label on an IVD product does not render the device exempt from otherwise applicable clearance, approval, or other requirements. FDA may determine that the device is intended for use in clinical diagnosis based on other evidence, including how the device is marketed.

In general, if evidence shows that an IVD product is inappropriately labeled RUO or IUO, and that the product does not qualify for an investigational device exemption under 520(g) of the Act, and is not cleared, approved, or 510(k)-exempt, the device would be misbranded under sections 502(a) and 502(o) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. 352(a), 352(o), and adulterated under section 501(f) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. 351(f).

[Ryan Bethencourt]

Hi Thomas,

I thought I'd weigh on this discussion as I have worked with a lot of FDA regulated therapeutics from pre-clinical development through to approval and a few medical devices (not so much in the diagnostic space though).

I am fascinated by and support lab on a chip initiatives and I applaud you for trying to create a new technology that makes a difference to the billions who have either no or very limited access to healthcare diagnostics, the need is vast! I would love to hear more about the underlying technology on your lab in a chip project, as I'm sure many of the other scientists on these lists would too as there is understandably some skepticism around any claims made on an all encompassing diagnostic tool without supporting evidence.

Matt does make one very important point around FDA regulations, the diagnostic market and any claims arising from your product promotion. The FDA do and have prosecuted people for unapproved promotions of therapies, diagnostics and medical devices, my old boss at Pfizer faced prison time (which I believe she served) as a result of off label promotion. The medical space is a very exciting space but for your own protection my suggestion would be that you consult with someone who can advise of the detailed intricacies of FDA regulations. Here's an article with an overview that I hope you find useful.

http://www.mddionline.com/article/how-avoid-label-device-promotion

All the best,

Ryan

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Thomas Warinner <gren...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hey guys,

I'm bulking up the indiegogo for you guys to make this more clear. That should be done by the end of the day. I only tried to keep it simple for Indiegogo users. As for the "education purposes only" on my electrophoresis products, I understood that "for educational use only" worked also for the FDA (biorad does as well). I talked to them before I put up that disclaimer- but I can also change that to make it more of the standard disclaimer. We have a really small team here. We work to the best of our abilities to do marketing and provide the appropriate information- but it's obviously lacking. I appreciate the critical feedback, truly. We've never engaged in marketing or business before this, we just wanted to take on projects that pushed our design capabilities.

The Indiegogo will be updated for all the questions here, and also handed out my personal cell phone to many people on the board.

Cheers,

Thomas

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Counter Culture Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to counterculturel...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--

Ryan Bethencourt

Tel: (415) 825 2705

Conf Call: (650) 741 5013
ryan.bet...@gmail.com

http://www.litmususa.com/

http://berkeleybiolabs.com/

www.bamh1.com
www.linkedin.com/in/bethencourt
www.logos-press.com/books/biotechnology_business_development.php

[Patrik D'haeseleer]

Looking forward to hearing more details about your idea!

At the moment, the IndieGogo video looks more like one of those frustrating Hollywood movie trailers: maximized for hype while trying to give away as little of the plot as possible. All it needs is a gravely voice-over going "In a world, where 90% of the population lacks access to diagnostics tests, one man..."

More content please!

Especially in an area like rapid diagnostics using microfluidics, where there are dozens of well-funded efforts that have years of head start trying to achieve the same thing, it's important to point out how what you're doing is so significantly different.

Also, since your Indiegogo page states that 'The mantra is "open-source diagnostics."' - I would expect to see more than just a few hints about what your innovation in microfluidics technology is based on. Do you have an openly accessible repository where you keep all your design files, for example?

Thanks!

Patrik

PS: The best way to resolve the "send a chip to developing countries" reward would be to say that you will donate chips to a specific named research organization working in a developing country on the diseases you're targeting. Building that kind of collaboration "on the ground" will likely be essential if you hope to make an actual difference in a place where even a $5 assay may be more than people can afford...

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Thomas Warinner <gren...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hey guys,

I'm bulking up the indiegogo for you guys to make this more clear. That should be done by the end of the day. I only tried to keep it simple for Indiegogo users. As for the "education purposes only" on my electrophoresis products, I understood that "for educational use only" worked also for the FDA (biorad does as well). I talked to them before I put up that disclaimer- but I can also change that to make it more of the standard disclaimer. We have a really small team here. We work to the best of our abilities to do marketing and provide the appropriate information- but it's obviously lacking. I appreciate the critical feedback, truly. We've never engaged in marketing or business before this, we just wanted to take on projects that pushed our design capabilities.

The Indiegogo will be updated for all the questions here, and also handed out my personal cell phone to many people on the board.

Cheers,

Thomas

On Friday, November 22, 2013 8:13:20 AM UTC-8, hbergeronx wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Counter Culture Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to counterculturel...@googlegroups.com.

[Dieter]

In spite of their absurd branding (Microfluidics 2.0), I always appreciated the paper microfluidics crowd for their commitment to ultra low cost fluidic diagnostics. that may be more of a feasible path for DIY tests than some kind of artisan fluidic solution.

[hbergeronx]

OK, so your updates are now posted, although since your update seems to trail off at the second of "three technologies", I think you probably have a lot more updates to do. http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/lab-on-a-chip-diagnostics-in-the-palm-of-your-hand

Yet this update seems to reference not your own work, but that of others posted publicly available. You have changed your tune: you are no longer referencing "needing no power", but have gone to electrophoresis and PCR. On the applicability of electrophoresis, I'm not sure how you're planning on doing detection- laser induced fluorescence? Mass Spec? or are you planning on coupling the chip with a transilluminator and your homebrew power supply? If so, you might also need to throw in a fluorescent microscope, since the amount of fluorophore is going to be invisible to the naked eye, AFAIK. And I'm not sure how you're going to compete with Agilent, particularly since there is considerable IP including their own lab-on-a-chip http://www.genomics.agilent.com/en/Bioanalyzer-Instruments-Software/2100-Bioanalyzer/?cid=AG-PT-106&tabId=AG-PR-1001 which (for some applications) seems to be backed by patents, e.g http://www.google.com/patents/US8346486. There's still a big question in my mind what gel you are going to be loading into the chip, what electrode system, peltier, etc. 

Some pictures of the prototype performing basic test separations (e.g. with a ladder) would be welcome.

I'm also not sure why the pictured chip would be needed. You can use PEEK tubing just as easily for the CE separation and get more or less the same effect- a long narrow capillary tube. This is a big element of the design I've been working on. Loading and unloading gel becomes a heck of a lot less of a PITA when you can just swap it out with a few pennies of tubing, no chip needed.

so keep working- I think you've got quite a task ahead of you before you have a viable product. (and I'm, honestly, still not sure how much of this is original work, or stuff plagiarized off the internet. It's great that you've "come up with your own design" for a transilluminator, but as you say, there are thousands of such designs out there googleable and does not actually represent revolutionary tech.)

As far as the patentable IP vs open source is concerned, you're young: by 2023 or so, much of this will be off patent and "game on" for open source exploitation.

-matt

On Friday, November 22, 2013 9:56:10 AM UTC-8, Thomas Warinner wrote:

Hey guys,

I'm bulking up the indiegogo for you guys to make this more clear. That should be done by the end of the day. I only tried to keep it simple for Indiegogo users. As for the "education purposes only" on my electrophoresis products, I understood that "for educational use only" worked also for the FDA (biorad does as well). I talked to them before I put up that disclaimer- but I can also change that to make it more of the standard disclaimer. We have a really small team here. We work to the best of our abilities to do marketing and provide the appropriate information- but it's obviously lacking. I appreciate the critical feedback, truly. We've never engaged in marketing or business before this, we just wanted to take on projects that pushed our design capabilities.

The Indiegogo will be updated for all the questions here, and also handed out my personal cell phone to many people on the board.

Cheers,

Thomas

 

On Friday, November 22, 2013 8:13:20 AM UTC-8, hbergeronx wrote:

[Nikola Nikolov]

I think, DIYbio should follow the well known procedure for research and development:

Basic research ---> Development ---> Ramp ----> Market.

Add time limits for each stage.

We should not jump into the deep "water" without knowing how deep is the "pond". 

Cheers,
Nikola

--