Noninvasive imaging method can penetrate deeper into living tissue

When the best you can come up with are TED talks and videos on a cryptocurrency youtube channel - and the only claim to fame she has is that she co-founded a miserable failure of a project (One Laptop Per Child) there are serious credibility issues.

Is there any peer reviewed research?

Is the collaborating with any established, published, respected-in-their-field researchers?

After a decade of research, have they shown any actual pathway or mechanism of treatment?

They're not helped by the FDA politely saying "you haven't actually said how you intend for this thing to be used" and "your protocols don't actually specify why they are safe" and "no, we're not going to give you shit, because you haven't even done animal studies or clinial studies" and "no, you can't just say that your device has no risk of injury or death": https://github.com/OpenwaterHealth/opw_regulatory/blob/9e151...

She hasn't even done any animal studies, and went to the FDA seeking approval for a device...

These people are a bunch of clowns. The FDA has to explain to them that they could do thermal testing by inserting a themocouple between the device and fake skin on a testing device.

From the OpenwaterHealth/opw_neuromod_sw README: https://github.com/OpenwaterHealth/opw_neuromod_sw :

> open-LIFU uses an array to precisely steer the ultrasound focus to the target location, while its wearable small size allows transmission through the forehead into a precise spot location in the brain even while the patient is moving.

Does it use one beam of the array to waveguide another beam? For imaging or for treatment?

From "A simple technique to overcome self-focusing, filamentation, supercontinuum generation, aberrations, depth dependence and waveguide interface roughness using fs laser processing" (2017) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-00589-8 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&hl=en&as_sdt=5,4... :

> We show that all these effects can be significantly reduced if not eliminated using two coherent, ultrafast laser-beams through a single lens - which we call the Dual-Beam technique. Simulations and experimental measurements at the focus are used to understand how the Dual-Beam technique can mitigate these problems. The high peak laser intensity is only formed at the aberration-free tightly localised focal spot, simultaneously, suppressing unwanted nonlinear side effects for any intensity or processing depth. Therefore, we believe this simple and innovative technique makes the fs laser capable of much more at even higher intensities than previously possible, allowing applications in multi-photon processing, bio-medical imaging, laser surgery of cells, tissue and in ophthalmology, along with laser writing of waveguides.

I remember she did a talk at the Long Now Foundation a while back. My take away - which could be completely wrong - was that they saw the potential to read and write memories.

The question is, how long is that power needed.

Edit: "Ultrashort pulses" so likely not much. Because indeed, you cannot burn the human. So the energy consumption likely won't be a problem. Except that it might make the machine expensive to build.

Bulk ordered, that is probably a ~$50k laser. Not nothing, but on the scale of medical device costs, not terrible.

I think this is just one "slice" of a full scan. The one in blue has a lot more detail, and less noise.

The blue one is pretty significantly less noisy, and the animation showing the two 3D reconstructions is much clearer. The noise reduction probably has a lot to do with that.

It allows you to study things in-situ that are just under the skin without opening things up. Useful!

Radiologists spend 12 years studying to be able to interpret imaging - as a lay person who has spent half that duration looking at scans most days, I still can’t really form any sort of accurate picture of what’s going on.

Yeah this isn't replacing MRI anytime soon.

Sorry meant 1200nm*