The reason we couldn't make money is that it is published and is in the public domain.

The non-profit is a pediatric research hospital. Traditional dialysis doesn't work well on small children, so they were interested.

Sorry to rain on that thought, but it was a capitalist company that spent $250k doing research that from day 1 they weren't sure would make money. Then when they decided it wasn't a good fit, donated the research and some money to a non-profit institution. Trying to snatch victory form the jaws of defeat.

As far as I can tell, the government supported non-profit took the money and never did anything at all. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of government funded organizations.

Sorry, there are no links. Take a look at the response to another guy for a description.

As for why we couldn't make money, the work was based on research 70 years old. Patents would have been nearly impossible. And the supplies were commodity already. As in Home Depot and supermarket commodity. And about as hard to make as baking a cake (probably easier).

The final straw was that it was in a market that was too different. It would have been like Apple deciding to sell oatmeal.

Sorry, but we never published. The original work was 70 years old, so a bit hard to find online. But I can describe it.

We called it intestinal dialysis. In the early 20th century, there was research on 3 kinds of dialysis: hemo, peritoneal, and intestinal. Hemo made the first breakthrough. The others were forgotten until peritoneal was reexamined in the 80's.

If you google intestinal dialysis, you'll find something distantly related to the old research and what we worked with. But very different. We found in animal studies that you could isolate a section of small intestine to turn it into an "artificial kidney". Intestine has good blood flow and a huge surface area designed for gently moving fluids and compounds into the blood stream. We use an osmotic gradient to reverse how the intestine works.

In other words, we created precise diarrhea.

The only supplies required were tap water, a bucket, baby laxative, and a hose. Adding salts made it more precise. A touch of sugar is important (to feed the intestine). Our test system was computerized, but was essentially still just a bucket up on a shelf and a hose for siphoning.

The procedure was a bit like hemodialysis, but done non-sterile. The big difference is not removing blood from a patient. The dialysis unit is the patient's own section of intestine. Robust, self repairing, able to repel bacteria, etc.

But it was too different from our main business. It would be like Apple deciding to sell breakfast cereal. So we gave it away.

It will be a lot more expensive than that. Harvesting from a donor means using a "free" kidney. Free in that no one had to be paid to make it. Here are some prices of dissimilar items:

I work with several biomedical companies. A simple metal part can cost $10k. And that's not gouging. Getting that metal part to clinical trials took millions of dollars and 15 years. The amount of testing and paperwork are outrageous. But easier to make than a kidney.

An artificial leg for above the knee amputation can cost $50k and up. Those guys are gouging. But easier to make than a kidney.

I would expect a lab grown kidney to go for $50k-$100k, not including implantation costs. And that's IF they figure out a cheap way to make them.

And ironically, your wife would probably be denied insurance coverage for it. Because she already has a kidney.

(On a related side note, I worked on a non-sterile dialysis system that was so cheap, we couldn't figure out how to make money from it. A few hundred bucks a year, could be done at home, 0% risk of infection. We donated the research and $100k to a research hospital.)

Per the European Edgar DB, Figure 2.4, American per capita in 2012, was 16.4. In Germany, it was just under 10. That is a factor of 1.5, and no where NEAR 3x.

in 2012, China's per capita was at ~7.2, while Europe's was at ~7.3. That was two years ago.
Since that time, Chinas CO2 emissions have risen more than 20%. China now accounts for more than 1/3 of the global emissions, with less than 1/6 of the world population.
And all of that is based on numbers that Chinese gov. has given up. OCO2 is about to shock the world and liars like yourself.

Per edgar, EU27 was at 4.12 in 1992. In 2012, you were at 3.74. That is a 10% drop.
Now, in the same time span, we increased heavily due to W (from 5->5.91), and then due to our cheap nat gas, we dropped BELOW 5, though, edgar shows America at 5.19 in 2012. However, other groups show that 2013 was a major drop for America, pretty much a fixed level for Europe (esp. due to Germany's killing of their nukes and their massive build-out of coal plants), and a REAL MASSIVE increase for China's emissions.

Several things wrong with that BS.
1) China has NEVER been transparent with their budget.
2) much of what is considered military in America and the west, goes under civilian budget, but military control, in china.
3) China is not a TRUE capitalism. As such, all those that work on the military side, are paid a fraction of what they are paid elsewhere. As such, building an AK-47 in China is a REAL fraction of what it would costs to build in America.

Far more important, is the speed with which China is growing their military, combined with the large number of military secrets that China has stolen from the west (esp. America).

I like the quote: "If you're not paying for it, you're not the customer. Your the product."

and yet, Germany is the large per capita CO2 emitter in Europe at 9.7. In addition, with more coal plants coming on-line, again, Germany will jump up again.

As in years ago.
http://www.linuxinsider.com/st...

No, Europe's really is about economics, but China and Russia join america's military focus on this.

Zero chance. America helped China before and what was found is that solutions were put into military before civilians. Basically, China values military use over civilian use of space.

where life us going to get interesting is when american private space lands on the moon in 2020-2022 and starts a base.

No such luck. The tablets have replaced the black and white printouts of player positioning and play development. Turns out those pictures were provided by the league itself to both teams - it's not something teams do on their own.

So if Belichick doesn't want the tablets to view those photos, he won't have any photos to see.

Did you by any chance use the same unique string of random crap at some third-party site where you used your email address as a verification email?

Or look at Bob Noyce (physicist) and Gordon Moore (chemist).