I'm neither an investor nor shorter of ISRG so I really have no intention to dig deeper than what I already know or do not. That was maybe the purpose of the documentary, to teach laymens about a thing or two. The thing I walked away from it all was that it was biased because they focused on a tiny aspect of the Da Vinci and not even the Da Vinci itself.
Youre missing the point.
The entire documentary is biased. They focus almost entirely on merely one or two of many exchangable tools used by the Da Vinci. It is not the Da Vinci that is having problems being mentioned in the documentary. Its one or two tools. For me to be convinced there is a problem with the Da Vinci, you must show me there is maybe motion control problems with the robot. Error in movement. Systems malfunction. etc. None of this is shown.
Also, they follow this doctor around who is very much pro-Da Vinci, but in the end of the documentary I remember herb mentioning a line about 'even this doctor is skeptical to some degree' or something along those lines. Seriously? I bet he is taking words spoken out of context or merely an answer to a leading question. He has been interviewing the doctor the entire time and he cant put the doctor on camera to say he is disappointed himself and he has to narrate this to us? You really expect me to believe this? We are not born yesterday. We can see bias when its right in front of us.
Overall, herb has not convinced me there is anything severely problematic with the Da Vinci. It has convinced me that one or two of the electrocutter tools need to be improved, definitely. Thats it.
First I dont have and never had, and dont in the foreseeable future intend to have a position in ISRG. I just watch CNBC thats all. I am aware of bash pieces on ISRG out there e.g. citron. I also dont work for ISRG or in the medical devices field. Just an engineer giving an opinion. I'm calling out bias when I see it.
Its obvious herbs piece tries to paint ISRG devices as flawed. It focuses almost entirely on the unintended effects of the electrocutter instrument where tissue can be unintentionally burned due to unintended shorting and causing unintended damage to patient tissue. It does appear from the videos it could be a design flaw with the scissor instruments themselves, in that future iterations of such instruments should definitely have electrical insulation around the clamps or tool, where only the cutting edges are exposed electrodes. Poor designs of the instrument can be improved in future generations. Afterall the Da Vinci instrument is under development.
However, that is pretty much it, it appears. From my understanding, those are one of many tools the Da Vinci can utilize. And the surgical tools are only part of the Da Vinci, and infact not even the Da Vinci itself.
The Da Vinci is a robotic system with haptic feedback and the ability for telemetry control. I think the main benefit is the ability to allow surgeons to operate on patients far away from the site of the surgery. This allows specialists maybe even halfway around the world to perform surgery to local patients. I think this is a huge advantage.
I see no flaw with their motion control. I see no problem with their haptic interface. I dont see any problem with their telemetry. I dont see any problem with biocompatability. Overall, the documentary focuses entirely on issues with one or two tools used by the Da Vinci systems, and not the Da Vinci systems itself. Yet it tries to paint the Da Vinci system as flawed. This is biased. I am calling it like it is.