You seem to have misunderstood what I posted (no surprise there).
I said your detractor left in disgust when the board was controlled by the bheard aliases, the pump and dumpers, not that he/she was bheard.
I remember when that former detractor of your posts left. It was back when bheard and his dozens of aliases kept trying to implement pump and dump after pump and dump last year.
Why are you spamming your exact same post from 6/1/16?
Due to repetitive nature of your spam post, one has to wonder if you are yet another one of jtrsteel'so alaises.
Are you back to using your norsemanwam alias because Yahoo is blocking your jtrsteel80 alias for repeated TOS violations, like harassment?
No surprise there.
As ethicalanalyst2002 pointed out, NSPH issued another 14,000,000 shares during the last week and arbitrage groups are using them to buy and sell back at a penny a share to make money.
There is nothing extraordinary about that and it doesn't involve anything you alude to.
That certainly explains where the arbitragers got the shares they are trading back and forth with.
I think 0.22 is an accurate number based on the number of his posts today that are rambling, harassing, derogatory spam.
30 Second National Television Ad but not a top 20 show: An average ad on prime time costs a little over a $100,000 but don’t expect to get a top ten show for this price. A top ten show Cost three times that much.
Sentiment: Strong Sell
Absolutely no similarities.
ThinPrep was a cervical cytology PAP method that simply spread the cells on a slide slightly differently than a traditional PAP smear.
I guess that is why traditional cytology is still used more frequently worldwide than ThinPrep.
Sentiment: Strong Sell
I guess you overlooked the fact that the PR was carefully worded to avoid mentioning that SQNM is not the exclusive in-network provider of those services!
The competition are also authorized providers!
You are just too funny!
It w just a little pump and dump of less than 10,000 shares by someone trying to get out before the quarterly lack-of-earnings report.
Sentiment: Strong Sell
rt-PCR, not rat-pcr. Autocorrect makes some strange changes sometimes.
The FDA has also authorized the use of another CDC test, an rat-PCR based tested, by other labs through the EUA process, again showing that CDC has no need for working with NSPH.
"On March 17, 2016, the FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to authorize the emergency use of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Trioplex Real-time RT-PCR Assay (Trioplex rRT-PCR) for the qualitative detection and differentiation of RNA from Zika virus, dengue virus, and chikungunya virus in human sera or cerebrospinal fluid (collected alongside a patient-matched serum specimen), and for the qualitative detection of Zika virus RNA in urine and amniotic fluid (each collected alongside a patient-matched serum specimen). The assay is intended for use with specimens collected from individuals meeting CDC Zika virus clinical criteria (e.g., clinical signs and symptoms associated with Zika virus infection) and/or CDC Zika virus epidemiological criteria (e.g., history of residence in or travel to a geographic region with active Zika transmission at the time of travel, or other epidemiologic criteria for which Zika virus testing may be indicated as part of a public health investigation). Testing is performed by qualified laboratories designated by CDC and, in the United States, certified under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA), 42 U.S.C. § 263a, to perform high complexity tests, pursuant to section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) (21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3)."
It is quite evident you know nothing about Zika virus. Molecular methods are even worse at detecting it than antibody testing. In the most recent outbreak the genetic material of the virus was only detectable in the blood of 28% of symptomatic patients and in the saliva of 57% of symptomatic patients. That is TERRIBLE!
I guess that is why the FDA has already sent warning letters to at least two labs and another two hospitals that developed their own molecular diagnostic Zika tests.
March 14, 2016
"The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is taking steps to enforce its oversight of diagnostic tests used to detect the Zika virus, with three new letters to two laboratories and two Texas hospitals for marketing what it says are "high risk" unapproved diagnostics.
The letters, sent to MD Biosciences, First Diagnostic Corp. and two Texas hospitals, Texas Children's and Houston Methodist Hospital, call on the recipients to contact the agency within seven days to discuss their respective tests.
"We believe you are offering a high risk test that has not been the subject of premarket clearance, approval, or Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)," James Woods, deputy director of patient safety and product quality at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health's Office of In Vitro Diagnostics wrote in each of the letters.
In an email on Monday, FDA spokesperson Eric Pahon told Focus: "While FDA encourages laboratories to develop Zika tests, these tests should not be used for clinical diagnoses without the FDA's approval, clearance, or authorization. Because of the serious public health impact of the Zika virus in certain populations, the FDA is requesting that those with tests for the detection of Zika virus in patient samples submit a request for emergency use authorization (EUA) to the agency. EUA is a streamlined regulatory process by which medical products may enter the marketed in an expedited manner."
"response to a request from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for a diagnostic tool for Zika virus that will be distributed to qualified laboratories and, in the United States, those that are certified to perform high-complexity tests.
CDC’s Zika MAC-ELISA is the first diagnostic test authorized for use in the U.S. for the detection of Zika virus during this situation in which there has been a determination that there is a significant potential for a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad and that involves Zika virus."
So bheard, please stop trying to start up another of your many pump and dumps here because NSPH does not have a Zika test and the FDA has already authorized the use of CDC's test by labs throughout the U.S.
NSPH does not have and is not developing a Zika test.
The CDC is not working with NSPH on such a test since the CDC has already received an Emergency Use Authorization from the FDA for CDC's own Zika test. Not only that, but CDC is authorized to supply the reagents and protocol for the CDC test to state public health labs and national reference labs.
So please stop trying to start up another pump and dump with the deceptive and misleading BS you post here bheard.
Wow, in just a short half hour your story has changed from "have contacts" to "used to have contacts".
Your craziness is running full bore today.
Just what institutional and other prospective investors want...to be harasse3d by a wackadoo with no understanding of molecular diagnostics or the diagnostics industry.