I like the study. I have been critical of the company on this...

I like the study. I have been critical of the company on this forum for primarily having only published animal studies. So have to acknowledge it is good to see they are doing this work. Worth noting this is a study in normals (who aren't breathless). Assume this is why they evaluated with bilevel ventilation also - perhaps to mimic bigger breaths to equate more with disease states? "To our knowledge, this is the first study examining the utility of XV in humans to assess dynamic parameters of ventilation." Good agreement with resp rate is not a surprise. The tidal volume was OK but less good with bilevel. I don't know what the implications are for regional ventilation accuracy vs tidal volume.

No issue with optimistic holders who criticise my expertise or knowledge of the company (or current lack of shares) - all potentially valid criticisms.