4 ms·

This is a pulse oximeter.

sgtmas2006 8y ago
I presume it's the logic that goes along with the pulse oximeter that is making the test important.
John_KZ 8y ago
It is. I'm afraid I'll have to side with the cynics until further info is give on it's principles of operation. The Plasmodium parasite doesn't seem to have any special characteristics (ie size, spectral response) that would make it detectable by such a device. You can skip the sample size issue by assuming the diagnostic will run for hours or days, but I don't see any theoretical foundation this device could be based on. Also the obsession of the website with the smartphone interface is kind of sketchy and makes it look (more) like a scam to me. Edit: I looked further into it, the price is given by the royal academy of engineering. Taken from their website [1]: " Gitta wins the first prize of UK £25,000 (124 million Ugandan shillings). At an awards ceremony in Nairobi, Kenya on 13 June 2018, four finalists from across sub-Saharan Africa delivered presentations, before Africa Prize judges and a live audience voted for the most promising engineering innovation." Which means that a live audience of non-technical people were involved in the choice, and, to my opinion, from the rest of the content, this is a feel-good kind of competition with soft goals like promoting innovation and training young people, not the kind of competition that awards working ideas. [1] https://www.raeng.org.uk/news/news-releases/2018/june/ugandan-innovation-wins-the-africa-prize-for-engin https://www.raeng.org.uk/news/news-releases/2018/june/uganda...
- maxerickson 8y ago
  The (short) article makes it clear enough that they aren't targeting the plasmodium directly: Its red beam can detect changes in the colour, shape and concentration of red blood cells - all of which are affected by malaria. So that particular line of cynicism is more illiterate than it is cynical.
  - jiminy_john 8y ago
    What's wrong with him expressing his skepticism?! And what makes you entitled to express harsh opinions?! Theranos was also looking at only tiny amounts of blood drawn from a finger prick. And everyone was on that bandwagon, as you are now. And telling the others to shut-up and not dare to "wrong-think".
    - Zofren 8y ago
      I think the difference here is that the person they're responding to doesn't seem to have read the article they were being cynical towards, otherwise they would have immediately realized their source of skepticism was directly addressed. I think you can forgive them for being harsh.
      - jiminy_john 8y ago
        It is a valid point. But his skepticism is still warranted. Theranos was also masquerading as very scientific and was full of laurels. No difference! The undercurrent is this: "do not dare to express doubts on this African-based invention, because otherwise you are a racist." That's why I objected to the "harsh" tone. It is an application of PC thinking.
        cornholio 8y ago
        You keep saying Theranos. Are you of the opinion that we should treat all technical startup founders as probable criminals? I think where Theranos investors failed was when they confused media hype with due diligence. I'm perfectly ok to live in a society where imprudent investors get occasionally burned, if the hype can also put the spotlight on real, non-criminal founders that would have no chance otherwise. This is far from getting funded, it's a technical concept and we have absolutely no ability or relevant information upon which to call it a fraud.
        snakeboy 8y ago
        The above poster explicitly responded to one specific line of skepticism and is not telling them to give up all skepticism. You are the only one trying to make this about "PC thinking".
- riahi 8y ago
  I wonder if it works similar to this thing described in 2015 from Rice university. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/dn27770-laser-tricorder-can-diagnose-malaria-through-the-skin/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/dn...
  - andai 8y ago
    It works by pulsing energy into a vein in a person’s wrist or earlobe. The laser’s wavelength doesn’t harm human tissue, but is absorbed by hemozoin – waste crystals that are produced by the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum when it feeds on blood.
- jlg23 8y ago
  The obsession with smartphones is understandable when one considers the situation in developing countries: Smartphones are ubiquitous, they provide phone, TV and radio to people who did not have any of this. I currently live in North Africa and if developing anything for this market I'd do "phones first, tablets second" and not even bother with a desktop version.

sgtmas2006 8y ago

I presume it's the logic that goes along with the pulse oximeter that is making the test important.

It is. I'm afraid I'll have to side with the cynics until further info is give on it's principles of operation. The Plasmodium parasite doesn't seem to have any special characteristics (ie size, spectral response) that would make it detectable by such a device. You can skip the sample size issue by assuming the diagnostic will run for hours or days, but I don't see any theoretical foundation this device could be based on. Also the obsession of the website with the smartphone interface is kind of sketchy and makes it look (more) like a scam to me. Edit: I looked further into it, the price is given by the royal academy of engineering. Taken from their website [1]: " Gitta wins the first prize of UK £25,000 (124 million Ugandan shillings). At an awards ceremony in Nairobi, Kenya on 13 June 2018, four finalists from across sub-Saharan Africa delivered presentations, before Africa Prize judges and a live audience voted for the most promising engineering innovation." Which means that a live audience of non-technical people were involved in the choice, and, to my opinion, from the rest of the content, this is a feel-good kind of competition with soft goals like promoting innovation and training young people, not the kind of competition that awards working ideas. [1] https://www.raeng.org.uk/news/news-releases/2018/june/ugandan-innovation-wins-the-africa-prize-for-engin https://www.raeng.org.uk/news/news-releases/2018/june/uganda...

maxerickson 8y ago
The (short) article makes it clear enough that they aren't targeting the plasmodium directly: Its red beam can detect changes in the colour, shape and concentration of red blood cells - all of which are affected by malaria. So that particular line of cynicism is more illiterate than it is cynical.
- jiminy_john 8y ago
  What's wrong with him expressing his skepticism?! And what makes you entitled to express harsh opinions?! Theranos was also looking at only tiny amounts of blood drawn from a finger prick. And everyone was on that bandwagon, as you are now. And telling the others to shut-up and not dare to "wrong-think".
  - Zofren 8y ago
    I think the difference here is that the person they're responding to doesn't seem to have read the article they were being cynical towards, otherwise they would have immediately realized their source of skepticism was directly addressed. I think you can forgive them for being harsh.
    - jiminy_john 8y ago
      It is a valid point. But his skepticism is still warranted. Theranos was also masquerading as very scientific and was full of laurels. No difference! The undercurrent is this: "do not dare to express doubts on this African-based invention, because otherwise you are a racist." That's why I objected to the "harsh" tone. It is an application of PC thinking.
      - cornholio 8y ago
        You keep saying Theranos. Are you of the opinion that we should treat all technical startup founders as probable criminals? I think where Theranos investors failed was when they confused media hype with due diligence. I'm perfectly ok to live in a society where imprudent investors get occasionally burned, if the hype can also put the spotlight on real, non-criminal founders that would have no chance otherwise. This is far from getting funded, it's a technical concept and we have absolutely no ability or relevant information upon which to call it a fraud.
      - snakeboy 8y ago
        The above poster explicitly responded to one specific line of skepticism and is not telling them to give up all skepticism. You are the only one trying to make this about "PC thinking".
riahi 8y ago
I wonder if it works similar to this thing described in 2015 from Rice university. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/dn27770-laser-tricorder-can-diagnose-malaria-through-the-skin/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/dn...
- andai 8y ago
  It works by pulsing energy into a vein in a person’s wrist or earlobe. The laser’s wavelength doesn’t harm human tissue, but is absorbed by hemozoin – waste crystals that are produced by the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum when it feeds on blood.
jlg23 8y ago
The obsession with smartphones is understandable when one considers the situation in developing countries: Smartphones are ubiquitous, they provide phone, TV and radio to people who did not have any of this. I currently live in North Africa and if developing anything for this market I'd do "phones first, tablets second" and not even bother with a desktop version.