This test was conducted by Nelson Laboratory and was not done in Niznick's basement.
Could the best proof that a big thing is going one here that there is NOWHERE a discussion about the actual results of the tests? There is NOWHERE an official denial that the the vials are leaking. NOBODY has ever shown ANYWHERE that the vials are not leaking.
We all know that Nobel is monitoring this site and so are investors.
Nobel can easily duplicate the test and refute the results. Is it not possible or even very likely that in fact Nobel has duplicated the test or any other test checking for leakage and is not reporting the results?
Would it not be logical for Nobel to put counter studies in all reps' hands refuting Niznick's study to show to the clinicians how wrong he is? Obviously Nobel felt that they had to react because Mosher wrote that letter that Niznick has posted but is that does not even address the leaks. Niznick posted the results of his own vials. This letter clearly shows that there is an issue that needed to be addressed and the evasive fashion how it was written could be seen as further admission that there may be leakage. Does that not sound how politicians often evade an issue: "Trust me, there is no problem because I have your best interest in mind."?
Someone can now choose to address these questions or discuss who is and who is not an Iranian or Swedish terrorist, who drank what and who gambled where and slept with who in what casino but any such deflection only deepens the suspicion that bigger things are bound to happen and probably nobody even knows the extent of it.
For all of us who are going to be in Toronto tomorrow, I am sure we will find out more.
Nobel's "Precautions and Warnings" provided with each implant states:
"Sterility: All implants, and various abutments (see labels) are shipped sterile, and are for single use only prior to the labeled expiration date. Do not use impants if the packaging has been damaged or previously opened."
If the "sterile vial" lacks seal integrity, this is no different than the vial being "previously opened" or the "expiration date" being exceeded. You can bet that the FDA and Health Canada can not ignore the fact that by Nobel's own "Precautions and Warnings", the implants should not be used if the seal on the vial fails. If Nobel had any ethics, it would do a voluntary recall of its products like Implant Direct did for the few implants that had micro-cracks in the vials, even though those vials did not present a clinical risk because they were proven to still maintain seal integrity. Nobel has spent 25 years trying to label Niznick as being unethical, but it was Nobel that was suspended by the FDA from importing its products from Sweden in the early 1990's and it was Nobel that was found guilty of patent fraud and anti-trust violations in its suit against 3i. It was Nobel that a year ago had to issue a change in its information for use of the NobelPerfect and NobelDirect implants after studies showed excessive bone loss and the Swedish Regulatory authorities banned marketing of these products.
Ethics of sales and marketing:
Marketing, which goes beyond the mere provision of information about (and access to) a product, may seek to manipulate our values and behavior.
So who do you think this applies to more, Niznick or Nobel Biocare. Nobel is selling the NobelActive Implant and cover screw for over $450 in the US while selling almost the same implant in Israel for $70. They need to do a lot of manipulating of dentists' values and behaviors to justify the $380 price difference. Niznick does not need to manipulate dentists into believing that his products offer a good value, especially when his RePlant, in a recent side-by-side comparitive study, showed a significantly higher success rate in the maxilla, compared to Nobel Replace.