Tweet
We've all heard about it, and most of us saw the video and AP article. At first I was like, hey, what do you know, maybe there is something there. But then I started thinking... something sounds unusual about this release. So I started digging a little bit. That said, I'd love to be proven wrong with regards to anything that turns out to work against SARS COV2, or any other disease for that matter. Anyway, here's what I noticed.
- The AP article that has been cited is not actually an AP article. Its an article written by AYTU, who paid the AP to publish it on their site.
- John Roberts, who holds the title of White House Correspondent, released a tweet implying that Cedars Sinai is developing a UV treatment for "critically ill, intubated patients." (Note that Roberts works for Fox News, and does not represent the White House). Technically, none of the tweet is untrue - but it does stretch the meaning of some words a bit. I listened to AYTU's conference call webcas. Basically, Mark Pimentel (MD), is a gastroenterologist who runs a research lab at Cedars Sinai whos purpose is to develop "drugs, diagnostic tests and devices related to conditions of the microbiome" (presumably, the digestive tract microbiome). AYTU paid money to Cedars-Sinai to license Pimentel's UV light research, and plans to market it as the "Healight". We do not know what exactly the licensed research was, what it was intended for, or whether it works - we just know that AYTU licensed UV light research from CS-MAST. That appears to be full extent of CS's partnership.
- As to the "Healight" itself, I see some potential problems with it. In the Youtube video that was released, it showed a UV lamp being inserted down an already intubated patient's airway, down into the lungs. The light illuminates the airway, and then expands into the lungs, illustrated as two large yellow lung shaped sacs. When I did dissections of lung tissue, it did not resemble sacs at all. Instead, they were more like sponges. Bovine and sheep lungs, which I've seen before, also resembled sponges. How, then, might any light be able to illuminate a pair of lungs? Wouldn't the light just stop after about 1 inch? Secondly, intubation is a highly invasive and dangerous process. In addition to injury from the process itself, and introduction of microbes into the already compromised lungs, intubation immobilizes the patient and creates vulnerabilities associated with that (can't cough, spit, bed sores, etc). Less than 20% of ventilated patients survive. I've confirmed this with my family and friends who are doctors actively working on COVID19 patients. Inserting another object into an intubated patient would inevitably introduce another significant risk factor into already bad odds. Aside from introducing more microbes, the device may cause more physical damage, interfere with breathing, and the UV light itself (regardless of what kind of UV light used) would cause damage to cells alongside any viruses it might kill. Finally, any UV light would only kill viruses on the surface - there can't be any way where UV light would be able to get to viruses in the blood, tissue, bones, fat, digestive tract, and so on. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see how this could work. 23 hours ago, AYTU released the following image. Note the prominent use of words here that reflect Trump's words on Thursday, sarcasm ("I was asking a question sarcastically to reporters like you just to see what would happen.") or not. Indeed, it's being marketed as an "injectable disinfectant".
- Finally, I looked up the financials of AYTU. The last 24 hours have been fantastic for the company - it's up more than 30% in after-hours trading. But the financials over the life of the company from 2012 sure look really weird. That's a graph of the price of a single share of stock lurching way up and way down for years, as high as $60,000 and as low as under $10,000. Then pretty flat for many years, and a steady decline in the last year - until March 10 2020 which is when the company starts getting into buying and selling COVID19 related technologies.
Does this "Healight" device sound legit? Is it a remarkable technology that just might save the lives critically ill patients? Or is it an attempt to repackage a piece of purchased research into more than it really is, boosting the stock price for the benefit of its owners and shareholders? In the words of one of my favorite YouTube publishers, Paul Harrell - "You be the judge."
- The AP article that has been cited is not actually an AP article. Its an article written by AYTU, who paid the AP to publish it on their site.
- John Roberts, who holds the title of White House Correspondent, released a tweet implying that Cedars Sinai is developing a UV treatment for "critically ill, intubated patients." (Note that Roberts works for Fox News, and does not represent the White House). Technically, none of the tweet is untrue - but it does stretch the meaning of some words a bit. I listened to AYTU's conference call webcas. Basically, Mark Pimentel (MD), is a gastroenterologist who runs a research lab at Cedars Sinai whos purpose is to develop "drugs, diagnostic tests and devices related to conditions of the microbiome" (presumably, the digestive tract microbiome). AYTU paid money to Cedars-Sinai to license Pimentel's UV light research, and plans to market it as the "Healight". We do not know what exactly the licensed research was, what it was intended for, or whether it works - we just know that AYTU licensed UV light research from CS-MAST. That appears to be full extent of CS's partnership.
- As to the "Healight" itself, I see some potential problems with it. In the Youtube video that was released, it showed a UV lamp being inserted down an already intubated patient's airway, down into the lungs. The light illuminates the airway, and then expands into the lungs, illustrated as two large yellow lung shaped sacs. When I did dissections of lung tissue, it did not resemble sacs at all. Instead, they were more like sponges. Bovine and sheep lungs, which I've seen before, also resembled sponges. How, then, might any light be able to illuminate a pair of lungs? Wouldn't the light just stop after about 1 inch? Secondly, intubation is a highly invasive and dangerous process. In addition to injury from the process itself, and introduction of microbes into the already compromised lungs, intubation immobilizes the patient and creates vulnerabilities associated with that (can't cough, spit, bed sores, etc). Less than 20% of ventilated patients survive. I've confirmed this with my family and friends who are doctors actively working on COVID19 patients. Inserting another object into an intubated patient would inevitably introduce another significant risk factor into already bad odds. Aside from introducing more microbes, the device may cause more physical damage, interfere with breathing, and the UV light itself (regardless of what kind of UV light used) would cause damage to cells alongside any viruses it might kill. Finally, any UV light would only kill viruses on the surface - there can't be any way where UV light would be able to get to viruses in the blood, tissue, bones, fat, digestive tract, and so on. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see how this could work. 23 hours ago, AYTU released the following image. Note the prominent use of words here that reflect Trump's words on Thursday, sarcasm ("I was asking a question sarcastically to reporters like you just to see what would happen.") or not. Indeed, it's being marketed as an "injectable disinfectant".
- Finally, I looked up the financials of AYTU. The last 24 hours have been fantastic for the company - it's up more than 30% in after-hours trading. But the financials over the life of the company from 2012 sure look really weird. That's a graph of the price of a single share of stock lurching way up and way down for years, as high as $60,000 and as low as under $10,000. Then pretty flat for many years, and a steady decline in the last year - until March 10 2020 which is when the company starts getting into buying and selling COVID19 related technologies.
Does this "Healight" device sound legit? Is it a remarkable technology that just might save the lives critically ill patients? Or is it an attempt to repackage a piece of purchased research into more than it really is, boosting the stock price for the benefit of its owners and shareholders? In the words of one of my favorite YouTube publishers, Paul Harrell - "You be the judge."
Comment