jnk... wrote: ↑Wed Jun 27, 2018 2:31 pm
palerider wrote: ↑Wed Jun 27, 2018 2:23 pm
jnk... wrote: ↑Wed Jun 27, 2018 11:23 am
Just my take based partly on guesses.
The quick scan I gave the patent (hard to do it justice on a phone) agrees with your summary. The potential issue I see is the same thing that makes provent worthless... Even if you have adequate pressure to splint open the airway between breaths, as soon as an inhalation starts, there's a pressure drop, a relative negative pressure, and there goes the splint. That's when you need the high flow, to
maintain pressure during inhalation. Now, if the valve is clever enough to eliminate the need for the 20-50 lpm vent flow... That'd mean machines could get by with maybe 90lpm (for strong inhalation), and that'd be... lower... flow, but not what I'd call 'low' flow.
Thanks, PR. I'd be further interested in your take if you later get a chance to glance further into that somewhat early patent. Who knows what they are actually planning, but I assume that patent is at least a glimpse behind the curtain. Do you think there's any chance that thinner tubing could offer some advantage that could make the thing more responsive (quicker) or better able to assess events, down the road?
Well... one dead tree later, my main comment about this patent application is that the USPTO will issue a patent about just about any kind of nonsense, (there are a number of flying saucer patents, for instance) as long as it's perceived to be unique.... (even though they routinely issue patents for things that aren't) and there's no actual requirement that something actually
works...
That said.. paragraph 109, (figure 5) "as the user inhales, ... both ambient room air 80 and pressurized blower air 90 enter the cavity 65" ... no, they won't.. if there's pressurized air coming in, it'll slam 45a,b shut, and no room air can come in, or if 45a,b aren't shut, then the pressurized air will just go whooshing out. Do the people that filed this know ANYTHING about fluid dynamics?
Paragraph 113 alleges that when a patient experiences an apnea, then the valves above would close, and the blower air would pressurize the cavity "allowing the users to return back to breathing"... however, anybody with any experience
AT ALL knows that current machines don't raise pressures during an apnea, because more pressure won't resolve an obstructive. in some cases, more pressure just forces the throat structure more closed...
Paragraph 115... they point out figure 11, which shows that the mask works *backwards* from what is needed... providing almost no pressure during inhalation, but lots of pressure during exhalation. *scratching head* I don't know about the 'inventors' of this thing, but most people
here need pressure while inhaling, less pressure exhaling, and then splint pressure during the pause before another inhalation.
Paragraph 116 "conventional CPAP ... nor do they achieve a low pressure state during inhalation" <- well, DUH, of course they don't, because a low pressure state during inhalation is
contraindicated for sleep apnea! *shaking head*
para 117-118, indications that they don't think people with sleep apnea need pressure.
para 119-135 filler about sleep stages.
before 109 and after 135 seem to be just filler twaddle.
My best impression of this is that Fresca medical inc took a look at the Provent(tm) and decided
"WE CAN MAKE THIS A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE!!!" without any more understanding of the mechanics of sleep apnea than the Provent(tm) people have.
Get OSCAR
Accounts to put on the foe list: dataq1, clownbell, gearchange, lynninnj, mper!?, DreamDiver, Geer1, almostadoctor, sleepgeek, ajack, stom, mogy, D.H., They often post misleading, timewasting stuff.
