Well…your not really understanding my point…otherwise you...

Well…your not really understanding my point…otherwise you wouldn’t be trying to spin these as positives:

- It dramatically improves workflow as the images can be captured at an earlier stage of the doctor's workflow, and the patient doesn't have to go to the nuclear department.
Ok, but… that is not an improvement in workflow, it’s a disruption to the existing workflows.

- Everything can be done at the CT stage.- Radiologists read the images the same as a SPECT image, so there aren't challenges around learning a new way.
Ok, but…I’m not sure that the chronically overburdened radiologists and CT Dept with a high load of ED patients being shoved in sideways will appreciate the new patient load being “funneled” to them and away from the nuclear imaging dept.

- It dramatically increases accessibility as it can be performed on any CT machine so patients will no longer be funneled to their nearest nuclear medicine facility.
Ok, but…they are not really being “funneled” there so much…it’s just a system, that’s in place…that works.…
4DX is hoping to overhaul these systems…and while they may have trials to gather data, it’s not the same when it comes to telling everyone we now want to change (overhaul) the established systems and workflows.

It’s a bigger process and decision than what you’re proposing and your insistence that it’s a simpler and better option is a bit limited in perspective. You would make a good salesman though…