Nick Hodge’s “Blue Light” Cancer Detection Device

WP Greet Box icon
Welcome! If you are new to Stock Gumshoe, grab a free membership here and join us to get our free newsletter alerts with new teaser answers and debunkings. Thanks!
Not new? Please log in at top right of this page

Looks like we’ve got another small cap company being touted by Nick Hodge for his Early Advantage service — but now, instead of the “blue blood” company that he’s been touting for a year or so as the potential enabler of a cancer cure, he’s pitching this “blue light” company as the one that will save millions of lives and make millions of bucks by helping people discover cancer sooner.

Certainly an admirable goal, the earlier you detect cancer the better your chances of defeating it… but will it make you any money? Well, for that we first have to figure out which company he’s teasing us about.

And no, we don’t want to shell out $499 just to get the top secret name. We’ll check out the clues instead — and yes, this ad was chock-full of clues and I’m sure you could figure out the stock on your own…. no need, we’re here to help and we’ve already got some answers for you.

Of course, you have to sit through a bit of blather first. Let’s sample a wee bit of Hodge’s pitch to give you a taste of the promise:

“Thanks to this future billion-dollar technology…

“Cancer is Now Visible To the Naked Eye

“This simple ‘blue light’ may not only save your life… But also turn a small investment of $5,000 into… More than $1 MILLION.

“… despite the massive technological advances over the past half-century, Western medicine still hasn’t found a cure for cancer.

Irregulars Quick Take
Paid members get a quick summary of the stocks teased and our thoughts here. Join as a Stock Gumshoe Irregular today (already a member? log in at top right)
“So the best way to fight the disease is to detect cancerous cells before they spread.

“That’s where the ‘blue light’ comes in….

“With the ‘blue light’ device, your doctor now can see cancerous cells during a regular check-up… without using any invasive, painful, or expensive procedures.

“It helps your doctor identify cancers at their earliest stages, when they’re still easily treatable and before they spread to other parts of the body.

“That’s why this device is revolutionizing the cancer diagnostics industry.

“Surprisingly, the company behind this breakthrough isn’t a large, global medical company.

“It has a market cap below $50 million. Last year, it only made $3.7 million in sales.

“But, as you’ll see in this presentation, sales are about to jump to $788 million… thanks to this ‘blue light’ technology.

“What does this kind of growth mean for investors like you?

“Well, that’s a jump of 21,200%… enough to turn each $5,000 invested into $1,065,000….

“For just five grand today, you could be a certified millionaire — with change to spare — in a matter of months… not decades.”

OK, so that’s obviously baloney. They’re not going to go from $3.7 million to $788 million in sales in a matter of months, and you’re not going to get a 20X return on this stock this year. That just doesn’t happen.

But that doesn’t mean it’s a worthless company, or that it might not be worth some speculation — we’ll keep an open mind. Just get that “$5,000 into $1,000,000″ bit out of your head first, that’ll completely poison any rational thought.

So what’s Nick Hodge talking about?

He’s teasing a company that sells a scanning device that can help detect cancer — specifically oral cancer, like that which got actor Michael Douglas.

Here are a few more clues from Hodge, if you’re playing along at home:

“Even though this is a tiny company, it’s not the typical biotech stock gamble.

“I’m not talking about a risky drug company that depends on a FDA approval for survival.

“In fact, the FDA and Health Canada have already cleared the ‘blue light’ technology.

“And I’m not talking about a technology that’s built on run-of-the-mill hype either.

“The World Health Organization has already recognized the ‘blue light’ device. And the prestigious Pride Institute has named it ‘Best of Class’ twice.

“The National Institute of Health and the BC Cancer Agency have backed it with $50 million.

“Dozens of clinical studies have shown that the “blue light” device can help doctors detect cancerous cells before they spread to other parts of the body.

“The National Institute of Health, for example, said that this device ‘has proved valuable in the detection of high-risk lesions, in the delineation of surgical margins, and in follow-up after treatment.’”

And then we get to the intriguing part — Hodge says that not only is this a medical device, but that it uses the “razor and blade” model that we investors are so attuned to … that’s what made Gillette such a behemoth, though in modern parlance we might actually refer to it as the “printer and ink” model, with companies subsidizing and heavily promoting a device … and then profiting from the ongoing sale of disposable attachments, refills or accessories that must be used in order for the device to function. It’s a great business model, obviously.

So how does it apply here?

Well, first we have to tell you what the stock is — Hodge gave plenty more clues in his presentation (he always gives plenty of clues in his ads … methinks he likes it that stocks often get a bit of additional surge from the fact that other folks sniff out the answers and buy the stock even if they don’t buy his newsletter), so the Thinkolator had a nice, easy Monday morning in identifying this stock as … LED Medical Diagnostics (LMD.V in Canada, LEDIF on the OTCQX in the US).

LED Medical Diagnostics is, so they themselves say, a “global leader in the development of tissue fluorescence visualization technologies.” They’re trying to develop several different types of scanners and applications that can help to visualize cancers, including skin cancer, but so far they really have one product that they sell to dentists for use in oral cancer screenings.

Oral cancer screening is a real thing — your dentist probably does it at your annual checkup, poking around your mouth for odd lumps and looking to see if anything jumps out as irregular. There are also several technologies used by a few dentists to try to do more intensive detection, but from what I’ve seen in my ten minute survey of the industry the device offered by LED Medical’s subsidiary LED Dental does seem to be one of the least intensive ones.

Their device is called the VELscope VX, here’s how they describe it:

“…the company manufactures the award-winning VELscope® Vx Enhanced Oral Assessment System, the first system in the world to apply tissue fluorescence visualization technology to the oral cavity. The VELscope® Vx is now used to conduct more screenings for oral cancer and other oral diseases than any other adjunctive device.”

The VELscope VX is not new, it’s been around for a couple years and its predecessor, the VELscope, was around for a few years before that. It’s also not the only visual imaging device that’s used to screen for mouth cancer, though the only other ones I’ve seen, like the ViziLite are a bit more intensive or uncomfortable for the patient, requiring a mouth wash or dyes, and not necessarily more effective. Of course, there seems to also be some question as to whether the VELscope is substantially different from the traditional oral exam — not that the VELscope doesn’t work, but that it may not consistently find things that the doctor or dentist wouldn’t also find in mass screenings of low-risk patients (tobacco is an especially strong risk factor for oral cancer and smokers generally get a more intensive visual exam, one assumes, though HPV transmission through oral sex is thought to be a leading cause, particularly among younger people, now that tobacco use has fallen so much).

So that’s probably worth some more research if you’re thinking about investing in this company — it makes a product that has effectively been in use for more than five years, without a dramatic breakthrough in sales. There is a newer version of the product now, the VELscope VX, though I don’t know what the difference is and that product has been out for at least a year or two.

The product is relatively inexpensive, costing the dentist something in the neighborhood of $3,000 from what I can tell, and they’ve broken off their exclusive relationship with their North American distributor so it’s now available from a bunch of the big distribution companies (it is available from a couple of the major dental distributors who I just checked, including Patterson and Henry Schein, but pricing is not particularly public or transparent in this sector — Schein lists it at $3,300, most of the others didn’t give me a price).

The disposable covers, which I assume are a hygienic cap for the end that goes in your mouth, cost less than $2 and probably net the company close to a dollar, so the goal would obviously be to get really high volume usages — if they could get most dentists to offer this to most patients at a cost of $30 or so, they do have some potential to generate revenue growth.

But they haven’t been able to yet. Last year was, in CEO-speak, “challenging.” They saw declining revenue from the prior year, partly but not entirely because they changed their revenue recognition policy and also changed their relationship with their primary distributor, but they have also simply not had big surges of orders. So something is not working.

Is it the product? The marketing? The financial case for dentists, who may or may not be able to get insurance coverage for these tests (some insurers cover it, but it looks like less than half do so far)? Reluctance to change among dentists? Or is the company screwing something up with distribution or pricing? I have no idea. They’ve sold thousands of these devices over the years, but not enough to turn it into a profitable business.

You can see the CEO’s latest letter here, and the September quarterly report here — they have been forced to sell a lot of shares to raise cash to build up their distribution, marketing and R&D, so they sold 17 million shares last Spring and another 15 million after the close of the last quarter, so the share count is now around 73 million shares… and at 50 cents a share, that means the market cap is roughly C$35 million.

Yes, that’s absurdly tiny. There are some warrants, too, but the company is so small that they’re not hugely meaningful. The business is in transition to some degree, but they have apparently had a run rate of somewhere between a million and three million in actual cash burn over the last couple years — I suspect, given the transition to a new CEO and the hiring and the distribution changes that they’re going to run through more cash this year as they try to ramp up marketing and build onto this platform with R&D for more products, but I don’t really know.

The cost of goods in their income statement has run at around 40% for the past couple years, so they can theoretically turn this into a profitable product line… but they had a heavy marketing budget in 2012 and a much lower one in 2013 and it didn’t seem to make any real difference to their bottom line, so I don’t really know what it will take to get revenue growth and profitability.

They should be reporting the new CEO’s first quarter and the full year 2013 results sometime fairly soon, I find the product interesting and I like the business model but clearly something isn’t working — I’ll personally withhold judgement for a while, but I’ll be interested to see what they say in that next quarterly report.

And, as always, let me remind you that this company is teeny. So small that Nick Hodge shouldn’t be using it as a single-stock teaser and building up this level of excitement among his prospective customers… and so small that I shouldn’t even be writing about it to the great legion of Gumshoe readers — any attention at all can drive a nano-cap stock like this crazy, so while I do like to answer your questions about such tiny teased stocks … I feel a little guilty. Sorry. You’re adults, you can go forth, researchify, and share your opinion on LED Medical with a comment below.

And those of you who haven't retired yet, check this out as we get to the "planning and forecasting" part of the year...

Print this

Email This Email This

56 Responses to Nick Hodge’s “Blue Light” Cancer Detection Device


  1. Nice coverage, Travis. To me this is a kind of stone soup play. A situation where the company is leading people astray because no one has done the right kind of control (whether is it deliberate leading astray or accidental….always the big question with these companies!). Fluorescence visualization is quite non-specific, and in fact I would wager a dentist could accomplish precisely the same thing with a $20-buck hand-held UV light. The goal is to pick up on abundant “biologic activity,” cell thickening, protein exudates, and many non-naked eye systems will do such. The stone soup story is a great parable, of course, about the importance of doing controlled experiments. When physicians in ERs see oddball mucosal lesions, they often just whip out a UV lamp….throw some different kinds of rays on it and see if it seems different from surrounding tissue.

    Like(1)

  2. Not every patient gains from early detection of cancer either. False positives are the risk here. But since my Swedish friend Bo-Johnny got and died a mouth-based head and neck cancer I am sympathetic to trying new methods of trying to find it. The first problem is that people don’t go to the dentist regularly. The second is that dentists cannot always charge for the LED exam; without a fee they will not check for it.
    Being a superior producer of plaque (among my other talents), I go to the dentist regularly for cleanings but I see the big man rather than the hygienist once every couple of years. The Doctor is mostly after X-rays for finding cavities or gum disease and doesn’t even mention mouth cancer.
    So the problem is not only the technology and the tiny company or even the blade-razor setup. It is the whole incentive situation for the toothsaver.

    Like(0)

  3. Thanks for the extensive coverage on this one. You saved me from the investment I was planning on making. The teaser sounds entirely different from the fact presented here. Thanks again for all your hard work.
    Dave

    Like(0)

  4. I must have missed something. In the razor and blade analog, what does the dentist user of this equipment use and dispose of so he must purchase more of? What is the analog of the blade?

    Like(0)

    • The money to be made will not be a plastic cover but the solution that has to be applied to the patients mouth. IT will have to be some special mouth wash or paste. I saw a TED Talk last year about a similar situation where in surgery a patient would not have to wait for the pathologist to say the surgeon had gotten all the cancer because they could see the cancer under special lights after covering the surgical area with a special solution just invented. I can’t remember the Dr.’s name but She was Vietnamese heritage and from San Diego. It was a wonderful Talk and a true game changer in healthcare. Can one make money on it…may be!

      Like(0)

  5. Travis, i am new to share picking and your research on Nick’s “Blue Light” is great for me,
    as i was struggling to find this ticker. Being 66 now, i am at a gullible age and seriously appreciate your kind of assist……… Thanks, John.

    Like(0)

    • Struggling to find your ticker at 66 is not the sort of info you should divulge to others on the Internet, John! ;)

      Like(1)

    • Being 85, I am long past that ” gullible age”.
      I come here because Travis does all the work and I get all the benefit.
      He usually prevents me from subscribing to some useless publication that I have to cancel not long after.
      Thanks, Travis.

      Like(1)

  6. I use a light and an OptiVisor ($25. At your local hobby or fly fishing shop), and always include oral, nasal, and conjunctival exam when doing a complete skin exam. If something appears atypical, I biopsy. I doubt this device would be of benefit. I agree that it will face challenges until reimbursement is routine, but even then?
    —Skin

    Like(0)

  7. From $3.7 million to $788 million in sales in a matter of months? Really? I remember Nick Hodge pitching that uranium was going to rocket to the moon on December 21, 2013. That never happened either, though I think certain uranium stocks are outstanding long-term investments. Sounds like Nick is more concerned about what’s in your wallet. Better stay away. Thanks for posting Gumshoe.

    Like(0)

  8. Some dentists are using this during the routine exams and are charging accordingly. From some of my patients that have been to dentists that use this, they seemed quite unhappy to be charged $30-50 for something that takes about two minutes. The oral surgeons are also tired of being referred these patients only to be told it is a false positive as commented on above. The also have competing cheaper devices.

    Like(1)

  9. I lost money on Zila (they owned vizilite production and Esther-C until forced to sell out, I believe to Henry Schein.) The pitch then was the government would soon mandate its routine use by all dentists. Never happened.

    Like(0)

  10. Travis; I learned long ago that just because you can do something does not mean it is a good idea.Years ago people hung Asafoetida around their neck as a flu prevention. I t may have had some success thru making people keep their distance from you. { Odor of rotten onions} increasing with heat.

    Like(0)

  11. A few things to keep in mind is first off, that cancer has been cured multiple times over. This has been supressed by our government, or the string pullers of our government that are the true faces behind the masks. So Cancer being the money generator that it is will continue to be milked from evey angle. From the thousands of bogus pink “support finding a cure for cancer” ribbons being worn that cover up the truth with a feel good icing over the black hardened cake interior of the cancer truth, to the billions made by our ever so trustworthy and ethical FDA off of the numerous clinical trials which are needed to bring any new cancer treatment /medicine to the market, there is no initiative to support a real cure for cancer. This cash cow funds the big pharma co’s with the necesary finances they use to place these bogus medicines sales pages all over the TV as well as the means by which they are able to bribe and control doctors at every level from entry to med school up to the age of retirement when they are sitting at their desks scribbling down “dont forget” notes on their Viagra sticky pads while pondering over the thought of which restaurant to take their wife to later that evening as they cash in their free dinner and a movie voucher incentive. (Hows that for a run on sentence? lol). Cancer treatments and screenings will continue to grow and more and more doctors/dentists will use these types of products to boost sales with little to no care whether the results are false positives or not. Either way, they are able to make the next BMW payment. I think the main issue is the insurance companies decision on whether or not they will cover the fees or not. The sales team could also be a factor. This product, while not as amazing as being described by the writer, could be a monster in the hands of the propper sales reps. Ive seen salesman that could make you buy your own shoes off your feet. Fear is the driving emotion in this industry. So I dont see this company growing with the current structure but if they are shaking up the internal structure with new heads and bringing on new sales methods, then with the notoriety gained from this tease campaign combined with that, this could have a short run but I would get in get out especially with Obamacare having such an unforseeable future impact on insurance companies spending. I actually haven’t invested in anything since The Big Hub fiasco which lost me over 50k when their shell got hijacked and shares frozen. That crushed me. I just read now and wish I had the resources to invest. If anyone has heard any updates on the legal outcomes of the BHUB case I would appreciate any feedback. Thanks guys.

    Like(0)

    • American medical practice is ALL about the treatment not the cure. I stopped donating to all these causes because not one of them is actually planning on a cure- Cancer-Heart Association – JDRF – you name it. Do your own homework and learn how the Rockefeller controlled medical schools destroy any doctor wishing to practice alternative medicines. The FDA is owned lock, stock and barrel by the big pharma companies. It’s a revolving door as many FDA executives retire to extremely lucrative positions in the drug companies that they approved drugs for. Read a few books like “Our Daily Meds” ‘Pharmocracy” or Ben Goldacre’s books. Dr. Sherry Rogers books are a phenomenal compilation of perhaps some of the best nutritional information on how the body is totally capable of healing itself if given the proper nutrition. I have yet heard of anyone going to an AMA approved doctor who wanted to find the cause of high blood pressure, diabetes, etc; They just whip out the prescription pad and start selling whatever the cute pharma rep was pushing lately or the latest drug advertised on tv that the patient reuests, whatever the condition one has- drugs are the answer to these Rockefeller trained legally authorized drug pushers. Did you know that to get approval all a drug has to show is a small benefit over a placebo ? Many of the newer drugs are not even as good as the older ones for the same condition. Read about how Astra Zeneca “repatented” what is now OTC Prilsosec to have a new patent on prescription required Nexium. How did they do that ? By simply making one clever change- complex molecules like drugs can exist in right and left handed forms – called “enantiomers”. The only difference is that that a particular twist in a chain goes one way in one and another in the other. Voila- a “new” drug now eleigible for a new patent. The problem is that because it is not truly an identical drug it may not act the same as cells “key receptors” may not accept the different mirror image now. Thomas Scully, the head of Medicaire and Medicaid from 2001-2003 actually came out an stated that any doctor who prescribed Nexium should be ashamed of himself. The result – big pharma pressured the White House to strongly suggest to him that he shut up. Once a drug is approved it is extremely difficult to have it removed. How many people died from Vioxx before action was taken ?
      Don’t misunderstand me, there are some very effective, life saving drugs, but for the most part the purpose of these companies is not to help anyone but simply increase profits.
      Ben Goldacre’s books- “Bad Pharma – How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patienst” and “Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks” are two very educational books on the industry. Read about Mododrine and how they kept it on the market for years even though no benefit was proven and they just kept delaying the studies to make money on it for fourteen !! years.
      The studies showing vitamin E does no good ? They use just one component of the synthetic form while true vitamin E actually consists of 8 different components. The studies are designed to fail, it is as simple as that.
      Statins – one of the biggest scams perpetrated on the American public. Read
      “The Heart Revolution: The Extraordinary Discovery That Finally Laid the Cholesterol Myth to Rest” by Kilmer McCully.
      Personally, if I want to knwo how good an alternative works I put a lot of stock in Quackwatch.com – the more they try to downplay it is very likely in my opinion the stronger it just may probably work. I believ the site is run, written and maintained by big pharma interests who only see us as customers and the more drugs per month they can get us on, why all the better ( for them ). Not a single one of them can have any idea what the side effects may be when on takes two different drugs, never mind the 4-5-6 or more that many are on. My father, still alive, was told several times – “it’s the drugs keeping you alive”. Well guess what ? He’s been off them for several years and is doing better than ever.

      Like(3)

      • William Harner, what is scary about your post is that you actually believe the nonsense and complete and utter cognitive distortion in your screed. And since you clearly believe in belief and not data, and are very much a follower of false prophets and the false gods they worship, I am sure that this reply will only lead to you becoming more fervent and pseudo-apostolic in your bashing of everything. But many of your rant’s tenets do not withstand even the merest ray of sunlight.

        Nexium is a marvelous drug, not a patent scam. it is a racemically pure diastereomeric version that has the property because of its stereochemistry, of being metabolized by liver cytochrome p450′s at a rate that is 69 per cent slower than the mirror image version. So it IS more effective, longer acting, and better for patients.

        Your negligent claims about what is required to get a drug FDA approved (a small benefit over placebo, you waggingly assert) show that no one can EVER accuse you of having read any trial protocols or having done any research, participated in a study or having been at any FDA meeting.

        Midodrine, which you cannot spell, is in fact a marvelous medicine that in combination with iv octreotide, genuinely saves the lives of cirrhotic patients who have dipped into acute hepatorenal syndrome. But having no formal education on this, having no training, never having treated a patient, you’d not know that I guess. But thank God for midodrine.

        Your claims about vitamin E are quite familiar and show you are channeling nonsense that you have read. None of them are true. Vitamin E use in ANY form is associated with dramatically higher all-cause mortality. Tocotrienol rich fractions, as I suspect you take, juice up telomerase activity so much that cells can no longer undergo normal apoptosis when they age and acquire oxidative damage. Telomeres and their shortening, William, are there for a reason….to make cells die when they get old so that they do not get immortalized by a subversive malignant mechanism. That’ll not happen to you which is why you may well die from cancer as most heavy vitamin E users do in fact.

        So since one clearly cannot believe much of what you say, why should one put any stock in anything you say? I suspect your ultimate grievance is that you think pharma is out to make money, which I admit they are. What, William Harner, do you think the false gods you worship are out to do with their wild-eyed books and their potions and vitamins and decoctions? Those aren’t free are they? Accusing others of being enslaved you divulge that it is you yourself who is enslaved, quite deeply, to a belief system not to data. Professing yourself to be unscammable, you reveal how horribly scammed you are.

        Like(3)

  12. Travis ,
    As usual your analysis of this absurd tease designed to separate people from their money is excellent. Surprisingly it appears that some of your readers need it badly when they state Cancer is merely a plot by the Pharmaceutical companies and Doctors and the cure rate is suppressed by the Government. In addition to being paranoid they must be young. I am a healthy 80 and have lost 4 close friends to the Phantom” that they claim does’nt exist. Perhaps they should consult with a Witch doctor!!

    Like(0)

  13. Folks forget the Nick Hodges LEDIF OTC B.S. ! If you want a stock that will really deliver the goods in the days ahead go with POZN , and you can thank me later …..dinners at Ruth Chris Steak House graciously accepted LOL!

    Like(0)

  14. With all due respect to Travis and the people that have posted, I believe the growth potential the company offers has been completely overlooked….as has the new management team and their credentials.
    First things first, I’m biased. I own shares, bought more this week and have been buying since the .35 cent level.
    With that out of the way, the new management team has made significant advances to expanding the scale of their business model and the best proof of that is the recent partnership with a Samsung subsidiary. A partnership that doesn’t have anything to do with the Velscope product mentioned here.
    It seems like no one bothered to read—or assign much value to—the latest release that announced a new division called LED Imaging, or the infrastructure buildout in Atlanta, or the multiple distribution agreements inked since the new Management team came on board.
    As for Nick Hodge, I will admit that every now and then he tends to get overly enthusiastic about the companies he features but in fairness, Stellar Biotechnologies—which was referenced here— has seen their price per share run up from $.35 cents or so to just under $2.00 and frankly, the person that sold may look back at the end of April wishing they may have kept a little… Just in case the company keeps executing.
    The common denominator is excellent management and high-growth potential. I own both—to be clear—and time will show if that’s wise but I did feel there was some value in highlighting what I feel is the most important part to the LED story.

    Like(0)

  15. Great analysis, in my opinion very fair. As others have I will put my bias up front, I too hold shares of this company, I bought in last summer @ 0.32 (Canada) and I too have added. OTC (U.S. listed) and TSXVenture (Canada) stocks are extremely risky, obviously, and your analysis does a good job of pointing out the lack of performance that has caused this stock to be trading in the 40-50 cent range. Of course, everyone knows investing is more about looking forward than looking back, past performance is no assurance of future results. A company that has struggled may turn around, it happens.

    What future prospects lead me to put some $$$ at risk?

    The new management has been mentioned, along with the deal with the Samsung subsid, but I didn’t see mention of the fact that the Seattle Mariners used the Velscope as part of their spring training check ups….Will other MLB teams follow suit? What about other major league sports….nba/nfl/nhl/mls?

    When I first invested the new management hadn’t taken hold, I bought in after looking for dental plays. The previous CEO as I understand it created the Velscope, and he has since gone back to what is apparently his forté, product development.

    My own opinion on the risk reward here is that….the potential reward (forget the 2000% or whatever return being touted, agreed…it is crap) if they’re able to generate decent revenue, decent hype, or both….then top side I could see this being a 10 bagger from current levels. If it doesn’t pan out I think I’ll be able to exit before the bottom falls out.

    Whatever the case, great site…I will be back.

    Like(0)

  16. Nice job Travis,
    Light to detect cancer seems to be the new tech. Spectra Science is using laser light
    have applied for use in Germany but can not figure why not in the U.S. they are
    based in SanDiego Ca.

    Like(0)

  17. Well after many articles and comments in GS land I finally feel the urge to add my 2 cents. Being a Dental Surgeon for the last 28 years has opened my eyes and ears to a large cross section of people/ patients. Most patients only visit when a problem arises – specifically we don’t see them for routine maintenance 2x per year. A complete head, neck and oral exam is done at initial visit as well as semi annually when they do come. Specifically we are looking for changes in the head, neck and oral cavity. Any changes that are detected are referred to the oral surgeon for evaluation and possible biopsy. For me this VELscope vx would not replace a thorough exam. Many dentists I know like toys, oops instruments ,which have the potential to earn an extra $- for me this falls into that category. For lack of a better analogy, it is like saying a virtual colonoscopy is as good or better than an actual one. Sales are slow because the dental fraternity has not readily accepted this entity into their practice. I wish them all the best with their LED Imaging division !

    Like(0)

  18. dear Dr Bradshaw, where do you practice dentistry? how can I join your patient rolls? my dentist summons me 2x a year for the vicious Russian blond to scrape my teeth of accumulated crud. every couple of years someone wants to take an X-ray to look for
    cavities and I normally refuse because I don’t think I have any. The great panumjon, Dr
    Bob, almost never appears and avoids looking into my mouth. if you are anywhere near
    57th Street in Manhattan you can have a great impact on standards

    Like(0)

  19. I attended a dental school that has an oral diagnosis department that sees patients from a wide multistate area. While in school I worked summers in the Oral Pathology Research Department and got to know the caliber of these pathologists and diagnosticians, and have kept in touch with them until recently, when I’m guessing their liability situation stopped them from communicating about cases electronically. I attended an oral pathology presentation by one of their lead oral pathologists and afterwards went up and asked him about the Velscope and other such heavily marketed techniques to detect specifically oral cancer. His feeling – and this is what he does for a living – was that a detailed and critical patient history, visual and palpation examination was still the gold standard. Unusual findings are then either observed or referred for biopsy, taking into account patient factors, habits and dentist expertise and experience. To make a special light your main screening tool could foster both a false sense of security and likely false positives. For these devices,I feel the price point is very high for what you get, probably because there is no economy of scale. Having investigated these devices at trade shows, there is also an inconvenience factor for the doctor, patient or both. In my experience the average oral cancer, though real, is not very common, even though tobacco and alcohol are serious risk factors. A much more frequent problem I’ve seen is young men who carry a wad of chewing tobacco in their cheeks for most of the day. This is very serious and dangerous. So even though I suspect the technology pipeline may be nurturing some new and better cancer detection devices, I do not yet own any.

    Like(0)

  20. I’ve tryed the black light at my Dentists office about 3 yrs ago the first time.
    You swish a solution within your mouth and then the Doc puts a wand inside your
    Mouth. It made fell better after the test.
    Recently had done it again, I didn’t know of anything different in procedure,
    Unless it was in the solution. The wand seemed to be the same. And no cancer!

    Like(0)

  21. I had already invested in LMD (LEDIF on the otcbb) before I’d even heard of this outsider club outfit…since the promo on LMD came out I signed up, and every day I’m getting an email directing me to their promo piece about turning 5K into $1 million. Wiki says they have hundreds of thousands of subscribers, but despite all the hype the PPS is flat on heavy volume which lead me to suspect dumping on the hype.

    Like(0)

  22. Thank you very much for this detailed report. It has saved struggling investors lots of money. Clearly this device could make investors some money when it becomes more wildly used etc, But the hype to extort money from people is not right And you are really appreciated for your detailed report. Investors should have the freedom to make an intelligent/ knowledgeable decision. Thanks again.

    Like(0)

  23. Hi Travis, I was curious about Nick Hodge’s “Blue Light” tech stock. You save me just in time. You are doing a great charitable thing here. Keep on the great wrk

    Like(1)

  24. LED is speculation, not really investment at this point. Breakthroughous have to start somewhere, this one could be a continuation of a breakthrough. Light frequencies have a place in medical advancements, we humans are in the early stages of understanding the value of light therapies and detection properties, I am certain Dr KSS will agree with that. Big Pharma has its place too, it has just gotten too big for its britches. So let the ranters rant, the gumshoes investigate, and the medical sector state clinical data, it is all good stuff for me to have access to. I am a speculator and live in joyful hope so I grabbed some LEDIF, at $.41 a share there is not much to risk. I also like Nick Hodge just fine, I am a buy and hold type, he has opened a couple nice doors to me and he talks my language.

    Like(0)

  25. PRINTING FOUL.
    For awhile, you had a print now button at the end of your personal writeup.
    using it, i would get a clear print.
    The button is no longer there. Printing out a commentary now causes overprint from the right hand margin stuff. Is there a cure for THIS cancer? phil

    Like(0)

  26. Unsure how I stumbled across this site many months ago but I love it…. I trade US stocks from the UK and get so much junk mail, I used to challenge myself to find the company they are touting but reading your assessment is so much more fun

    Thanks from rainy England

    Like(1)

  27. After reading this set of replies I can guess how Bo O., my Swedish friend who developed head and neck cancer, probably increased his risk: snuff, snuss, something Swedes like to pack into their cheeks while they go about their lives in worse weather than even England has.
    It might have helped him had he gotten an LED light played on his mouth when he went to the dentist in Portugal, where he lived (he was, like many smart Swedes, a tax exile but only late in life.) I now am worried about other forms of non-smoked nicotine delivery systems. If the risk goes up with e-cigarettes maybe this stock is worth looking at.
    As I am a firm believer in medical opinion I wait for KSS to take this question on. Is there an increased risk of oral or head and mouth cancer if you stop smoking tobacco and switch to e-ciggies? thanks in advance.

    Like(0)

    • Vivian: if e-cigarettes are only what the manufacturers say they are, and not spiked with anything else, yes, they are enormously safer. They are supposedly just mechanisms for delivering water vapor with nicotine,

      Cigarettes and snuff and snus are two things, two variables: tobacco, which is highly carcinogenic, and nicotine, a substance found in tobacco that is not cancer-causing but is highly habit forming (more so than cocaine). Smoking addiction is not tobacco addiction but nicotine addiction. E cigs disentangle these and provide the nicotine without the cancer-triggers. I encourage patients, if they must smoke, to switchover. Snuff and snus are highly causative of oral cancer, Tobacco is an extreme witch’s brew of carcinogens. and not just when it is burned.

      Like(2)

  28. Thanks Dr KSS. I don’t smoke being just old enough to remember that there was evidence that smoking caused cancer when I was of an age to be tempted.
    If e-cigarettes work by delivering nicotine without the awfuls does a waterpipe (hookah or nargile or shisha or hubbly bubbly) achieve the same thing? or are they just a way for guys to get together without taking alcohol? you mention the risk of additives. I think waterpipe users don’t just take in tobacco juice in the steam the device creates, but also other stuff which may increase risks. But I will turn this over to people who know better. I have just been busily buying Pakistani and Indian shares in excitement over The Handshake and this would be a great idea if it pans out (or paans out.)

    Like(0)

  29. Vivian…I have to plead ignorance on how hookahs work. If they are heating up tobacco, then yes their is vileness with that. The stated way e cigs work is be providing a vapor derived from purified nicotine. I think no one knows for sure if that is all there is, of course.

    What always amazes me about tobacco smoke is not that it is as lethal as it it. But that it is not 10 x more lethal than it is. Acrolein, a chemical in tobacco smoke, literally snuffs the life out of mitochondria. That smoking does not kill all straightaway is testimonial to organismal vitality and the resourcefulness of our systems to deal with extreme toxic stresses.

    Like(0)

  30. dear doc
    There may be a good side to acrolein. My readers and I used to own a Canadian firm, Medicago, which produced vaccines using virus-like particles grown in tobacco plants under very strict controls. It was acquired by Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma of Japan.
    We currently own another company in Denmark which also grows vaccines (for DARPA, a part of the US Dept of Defense) in the evil weed against diseases. Smallpox might fall into the hands of terrorists so it is developing a vaccine able to inoculate even people with immune system problems. They will get the same vaccine as the population at large. It employs a former scientist at Medicago to help it grow the vaccines made up of virus-like particles in tobacco plants.
    This may count as an ontological proof for the existence of God (She loves us and wants us to protect ourselves against smallpox.)
    Or maybe it’s a justification for research into tobacco and the research triangle being in North Carolina.

    Like(0)

  31. Vivian: quite fascinating! You rock!

    Believe it or not, I grew up in NC, and at the time, in the area I was, the way a young kid made money in the summer was, after the 4th of July, to work “priming” tobacco. Priming means picking the lowest, ripest leaves. This was just before the advent of machines that did the work, and of course before the crop fled overseas (little tobacco is grown in NC anymore, but at the time I grew up, it was literally cultivated everywhere there was bare patch of earth).

    Young guys were gotten to do it because adults often could not—-it involved staying bent all the way forward for hours at a time, stuffing juicy leaves up under your arm. It is back-horrifying. And one who does this gets coated in tobacco gum and goes home when work is done by mid-day (too hot to continue after that) high as a kite, hovering over the ground, as it were, from the nicotine in the gum. Thus by all rights, I should be a smoker from having gotten hooked on nicotine. But I never have smoked.

    Medical schools in NC were the last places on earth to speak out against smoking and to restrict smoking by hospital employees. Why? Those hospitals mostly were built from tobacco money.

    Like(0)

  32. while on the subject of conflict of interest, how Duke and UNC and other tarheel institutions’ med schools would never criticizie tobacco companies which had endowed them in the first place, I have had an awful idea from the Nick Hodge commentary by our gum-shod leader Travis. Travis hints that Hodge may be leaving clues in his spiels for sub to figure out the stock he is pushing for Travis to find, as he doesn’t really mind if the stock goes up from non-subscribers to his service. That leads me to worrying that Hodge may not really be promoting his service–but also having an interest in the shares it is writing up. Back in the dark ages of print newsletters, when I started mine, you could get money from IR firms to promote a stock in a mass mailing seeking subscribers. You had to put in a footnote in tiny print on the bottom of a page saying this to satisfy the SEC but it was a common way to build up your numbers without having to pay the hefty costs of printing and mailing to do so. Does this now go on electronically as well?
    ie does Hodge own some shares of the stock he is promoting which will go up enough thanks to Travis’s detective skills that he can sell them profitably even if the promotion doesn’t succeed in getting sign-ups? are we part of the solution or part of the problem?
    fyi of course I never took these IR deals back then except in one case when I had written up a closed end fund I liked and then its manager reprinted the newsletter and sent it out to all its shareholders with my permission, which is not the same thing at all. If the Hodge machine were to reprint the Stock Gumshoe article above, it would count as the same thing.

    Like(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

What These Icons Mean

  • The user who posted this comment is a Stock Gumshoe Premium Member (also known as an "IRREGULAR").
  • This user regularly writes articles for Stock Gumshoe. They may or may not be the author of the current article.
  • This user's comments have been "liked” by at least a few members of the Stock Gumshoe community.
  • This user has commented widely, with input that has been liked enough to earn a two-thumbs-up rating from other readers.
  • This is the highest rating a user can get. They are among the most respected commentors of our community.