Difference between revisions of "Team:BIT/nb"
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
| − | <p><span class="label-warning"> <font size=3>March </font>:</span><br> | + | <p><span class="label-warning"> <font size=3><font color=black>March </font></font>:</span><br> |
<span class="lead"> | <span class="lead"> | ||
Revision as of 19:18, 31 October 2017
Journal
March :
i. Strength:
  1. Convenience.
2. Adaptability.
3. High Cost/Performance Ratio.
4. Inelastic to change in test conditions.
ii. Weakness:
1. Technology Barrier.
2. Branding Barrier.
3. Strict Market Admittance Criteria.
4. Distribution Barrier.
iii. Opportunity:
1. Favorable national economic condition.
2. Positive national policies.
3. Uprising Health-consciousness.
iv. Threats:
1. Well-established industries control the high-end markets with related products.
2. Industrial chain is currently complete
3. Technological applications are matured
b. Comments:
Comparing to technology equipped by clinics and hospitals, The use of adjustable aptamer and genetic modified microbes made JACOB more economical, adaptable, and stable. The integration of automated proceeding made JACOB more user-friendly and portable. JACOB does not need professional physicians reading results, behaving like glucose meter but less risky. In China it is likely to be deployed in units of household or local communities. Similarly, for United States the Food and Drug Administration classified the core mechanism of JACOB as Class I medical device (if designed to not detecting cancer biomarkers), means no premarketing control is required. It is worth noting though, Chinese in vitro diagnostic market is relatively new and have few competitors. Those few players can no longer support the concrete increasing demand for medical cares. Chinese government had ratified a great number of acts as well as guidelines and simplified documents examining and approval process to encourage innovation in the field of medical devices, which offers our team a great market environment.
Wireframe Connects the Underlying Conceptual Structure
In market analysis we had solved many issues regarding our project background, but also generated more questions about operability. To obtain a better answer, we had visited 北京永翰星港生物技术有限公司和博奥生物芯片公司.
We asked 蓝晶 mainly on how to construct a viable procedure to industrialize JACOB. Our plan for JACOB after the iGEM jamboree is divided into developments, commercialization, and resource transformation. For development we currently divided it into small, medium, large scale trial. Based on our current knowledge, small and medium trial is planned as below
Louie Jie MahusayCEO, Founder
Far far away, behind the word mountains, far from the countries Vokalia and Consonantia, there live the blind texts far from the countries Vokalia and Consonantia, there live the blind texts.
Far far away, behind the word mountains, far from the countries Vokalia and Consonantia, there live the blind texts far from the countries Vokalia and Consonantia, there live the blind texts.
1. Small Scale Trial
a. Duration: About half year
b. We will choose the production method for JACOB, e.g. as we learned from 永翰星港, the "filtration" of aptamers are still expensive, but aptamers synthesis is more economical. Nine sets of known aptamer (90np, 15 microliter, 100nmol/L) costs only about $135, and every set is sufficient for 250 microfluidic chips.
c. During this phase we also need to rule out unknown influences on the device caused by switching to new assembly conditions, such as switching to fermentation flask instead of tightly controlled experiment chamber.
d. During this phase preserving microbes will greatly affect the cost of production, and affordability is one of the most important characteristics of JACOB.
2. Medium Scale Trial
a. Duration: 4-5 months
b. When the production of microfluidic chip is resolved, how to prepare it for using will be on the agenda. Currently the chip we used for final packaging needs to be soaked in ethyl alcohol and acetone for about one hour, which pose a question for mass production.
We asked 博奥 mainly on how to control the cost of microfluidic chip production¬. From their experience we found that chips cost much more in the early development, but its cost diminishes quickly in later stages when mass production is reached, ranging from $0.1 to few dollars. However, there exist a conflict of material. In the iGEM version we picked optical cement instead of PMDS for its advantages of adequate solidification speed, feasibility, bio-inertia, and precision of altitude. However, PMDS production industries are much more matured. There is currently no companies offering mass production of optical cement microfluidic chips. Thus, we must decide the better material.
Hire Us!
Facilis ipsum reprehenderit nemo molestias. Aut cum mollitia reprehenderit. Eos cumque dicta adipisci architecto culpa amet.
