Two Decades of Mobbing and Bullying by the scientific community prevented millions of lives and hundreds of millions of dollars from being saved
The author’s technology-independent 3D-Flow invention that breaks the speed barrier in real-time application was recognized valuable and certified formally and officially by a panel of experts from prestigious universities, industries, and important world research centers in a major public scientific review held at Fermi National Laboratory on December 14, 1993 .
The panel recognized that Crosetto’s 3D-Flow architecture can satisfy the requirement of several Level-1 Triggers of several experiments and that “given this feature experimenters would probably think clever uses not now possible”.
This statement that Crosetto’s invention would make new applications possible was confirmed by several scientists in subsequent letters (e.g. FERMILAB Head of Computing Division, stating that Crosetto’s invention “…would benefit not only to the High Energy Physics community, but to several other application areas.” CERN ECP Division leader stated “Crosetto’s proposal improves on previous PET techniques in three areas… …in short, the proposed system will drastically reduce the radiation to the patient, shorten the scanning time and produce an image of improved resolution”.
The committee assigned $150,000 during the closeout of the Superconducting Super Collider “…to complete the current development and leave the project in a state where it could be continued”.
Subsequently, Crosetto received approximately $1 million, to continue the development. He developed the simulator for a 3D-Flow system with thousands of processors, the assembler, the editor, test vectors and the software proving the feasibility in three FPGAs (Altera, Xilinx and Lucent Technologies) to execute complex algorithms on input data set for a time longer than the interval between two consecutive input data sets.
He then paid Synopsys, one of the leading industries creating tools to design Integrated Circuits and ASICs, to design the 3D-Flow ASIC with four 3D-Flow processors at 61 MHz in CMOS, 350 nanometer technology. Synopsys generated the “tapeout” data file to be sent to the silicon foundry for production.
The feasibility of the invention was further recognized valuable by peer-review of a scientific journal in a 45-page article in 1999 . The proof of concept of the 3D-Flow was tested in FPGA hardware and presented at 2001 and 2003  IEEE-NSS-MIC conferen-ces [4,5,6,7,8,9,12]. In 2016, the 3D-Flow OPRA  was proven feasible and cost-effective by 59 quotes from reputable industries.
Starting from 1999, some influential people of the scientific community have been mobbing (excluding, isolating) and bullying (use of a superior power or influence to intimidate or prevail on someone) the inventor preventing humanity from receiving the benefits of his invention.
The money to fabricate in silicon the 1998 Synopsys’ design of the 3D-Flow ASIC was never provided.
Instead, hundreds of millions of dollars went to alternative approaches that did not work and were trashed in 2016 because they did not go through an extensive public review, similar to the one Crosetto had at Fermilab in 1993  which proved analytically that it has the capability to execute complex, programmable level-1 Trigger algorithms at the LHC bunch crossing speed and data rate.
Wesley Smith’s Level-1 Trigger for CERN-CMS experiment was one such alternative approach. He alone received $50 million, increasing to over $100 million by funding agencies of his collaborators. He and other colleagues prevented Crosetto from presenting his 3D-Flow invention at the 1999 Snowmass, Colorado, workshop of the electronics for LHC experiments.
In fact all the papers Crosetto submitted to the IEEE Conferences and journals in the field were rejected without cause with the exception of when Ralph James was Chairman of the IEEE conference in 2003 and 2013.
In the year 2000, IEEE senior scientist Aaron Brill appointed respected reviewers to review Crosetto’s paper that had been rejected by anonymous reviewers of Transaction in Nuclear Science (TNS) journal in 1999. Three named reviewers approved Crosetto’s paper for publication, however, two anonymous reviewers rejected it, claiming the 3D-Flow architecture was “flawed” and the TNS Editor never published Crosetto’s article.
Even though Crosetto had proved that the 3D-Flow architecture was functional and feasible with simulation and by testing it in hardware, and that it was providing a powerful tool to scientists at a fraction of the cost of alternative approaches, his papers continued to be rejected in 2002, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017.
Some senior scientists attempted to implement a public scientific review (in 2008) and to organize a meeting with those who oppose Crosetto’s inventions but they were not successful. In 2016, Crosetto discussed these rejections individually with all Chairpersons of the IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTDS Conference. They could not support the rejection claims of Crosetto’s abstracts/summaries by the IEEE reviewers, and could not invalidate the feasibility of his 3D-Flow system described in one figure for HEP application  and in one Figure for the 3D-CBS application , both supported by 59 quotes from reputable industries.
Rejection claims from reviewers could also not be supported by the 2016 and newly elected 2017 IEEE-NPSS Presidents  during an almost two-hour discussion on November 5, 2016, in Strasbourg, France. Newly elected 2017 IEEE-NPSS President Stefan Ritt made himself available to be a member of the panel for a public scientific review of Crosetto’s invention at CERN which was requested on February 7, 2017 by CERN Director General who appointed three scientists to organize one; however, a review was never organized.
Mobbing and bullying by the scientific community is further proven by the fact that colleagues never cited in their articles related to Level-1 Trigger the report by the official, formal, major scientific review held at Fermilab in 1993, which had representative from academia, universities, research centers, including a representative from CERN, and never cited Crosetto’s peer-review 45-page article published by Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research in February 1999 .
Currently the 3D-Flow invention has evolved to the 3D-Flow OPRA (Object Pattern real-time Recognition Algorithm) and improved over the years by using state-of-the-art technologies and processes, maintaining its competitiveness in higher efficiency and lower cost compared to alternative approaches at any given time since 1993.
The 3D-Flow OPRA system can replace hundreds of crates of electronics of the CERN-CMS level-1 Trigger containing 4,000 electronic boards , with one crate containing 9 of Crosetto’s 3D-Flow OPRA boards , providing higher performance at one thousandth the cost.
Fifty-nine quotes from reputable industries prove the feasibility of building a 3D-Flow OPRA system with over 10,000 channels in one 36 cm cube of electronics. This system would be capable of sustaining several terabytes/sec of input data and execute complex real-time Object Pattern Recognition Algorithms (OPRA) at a production cost of approximately $100,000.
A detailed proposal  for $13.5 million for five years can build the first 3D-Flow system for experiments in High Energy Physics (CERN) and the electronics for the first two 3D-CBS units.
Delivery of both systems can be expected two years after funding. A more aggressive plan could reduce the delivery time.
The author’s 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) invention that makes use of the 3D-Flow architecture is hundreds of times more efficient and more cost-effective than the existing over 10,000 PET devices, and more efficient, at one tenth the cost [1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12] of the current implemented Explorer project [13, 14, 15].
It was first presented by the author at the 2000 IEEE-MIC Conference in Lyon, France, in two articles [2, 3] and one technical-scientific book , distributed free of charge in 200 copies to the leaders in the field.
Its feasibility and functionality providing advantages in higher efficiency at a lower cost was proven superior to alternative approaches at any time during the past 18 years. For example:
- In 2002, Crosetto’s discussed his book  at a meeting with leaders from Siemens Nuclear Medicine (President, Director of PET, Director of Advanced Research and Director of the Electronic group) which lasted one day. They denied there was the possibility to significantly improve PET efficiency by improving the electronics (because they had built 31 prototypes and did not see a way to improve significantly PET efficiency by improving the electronics), but had to recant their statements before their own evidence published on their website five years later that claimed they had improved PET efficiency by 70% by improving the electronics. (Crosetto’s 3D-CBS would improve PET efficiency by 40,000%)
- In 2003, it was certified feasible and functional in FPGA hardware (in two modular boards, each with 68 x 3D-Flow processors), proving the feasibility and functionality to build electronic systems for detectors of any size . It was also certified by the public scientific reviews of the 3D-CBS innovative technology, held in Dallas, Texas (broadcasted live in English on the web). The review panel included the inventor of the pocket calculator, Jerry Merryman.
- In 2008, it was certified by the public scientific review (broadcasted live with simultaneous translation Italian/English) of the 3D-CBS technology, held in Rome, Italy, from the Association Ordine dei Medici.
- In 2011, it was certified by five hours of public scientific discussion (broadcasted live with simultaneous translation Italian/English) in a fierce competition for the “Leonardo da Vinci Prize for the most efficient solution in particle detection for early cancer diagnosis”, held at the University of Pavia, Italy. The 3D-CBS won the prize.
- In 2013, it was certified by the presentation of the article and the poster  and the discussion with colleagues who could not refute the superiority in efficiency and low cost of the 3D-Flow and 3D-CBS systems compared to alternative approaches presented at the 2013 IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD conference in Seoul, South Korea.
- In 2015, it was certified to be feasible by 59 quotes from reputable industries in the proposal to the U.S. Department of Energy to build the 3D-Flow OPRA and the electronics for the 3D-CBS. 
- In 2016, it was certified by a discussion with the authors of the Explorer confirming that the values relative to the Explorer reported in the Table 1 were correct and they could not refute the lower efficiency and higher cost (about ten times higher) of the Explorer compared to the 3D-CBS.
- In 2017, it was certified by a discussion with participants and leaders in the field at the 2017-IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD Conference after Crosetto distributed 1,300 copies of an article  reporting the advantages of his inventions with references to the technical details and comparisons with alternative approaches.
- In 2018, a seminar of Crosetto’s inventions followed by a discussion was presented to the PET experts at Tsinghua University, one of the most prestigious universities in China. No one could refute or invalidate Crosetto’s claims with scientific arguments, and when Crosetto asked questions on slide 6 regarding what they consider to be most important when designing a PET device, they could not deny the advantages or invalidate Crosetto’s choice which is different and in most cases opposite to alternative approaches used by other PET manufacturers.
Beginning in 2000, some influential people of the scientific community have been mobbing (excluding, isolating) and bullying (use of a superior power or influence to intimidate or prevail on someone) the inventor preventing humanity from receiving the benefits of his inventions which would save millions of lives and reduce healthcare costs.
After studying and analyzing the history of PET since its invention in 1952, Crosetto realized fifty years later that it was not a very useful tool for healthcare providers because of the high radiation requirement for patients, the low efficiency and that it was not contributing significantly to reduce cancer deaths because the new market of 16 cm FOV PET created by Michael Phelps was going in the wrong direction by focusing on improving spatial resolution to the detriment of sensitivity.
When Crosetto submitted for nine years ten requests for funding his inventions (goo.gl/VHbacz) focused on enormously improving sensitivity, also by extending the length (FOV) of the PET detector to over 1 m to the National Institutes of Health and additional requests for funding to several other government agencies such as Department of Energy, National Science Foundation, etc., all proposals were rejected because the reviewers were always the same people, those influential in the field of medical imaging around the world. Reviewers rejected Cosetto’s claims by stating that a FOV longer than 16 cm was unnecessary because the largest organ in the body is approximately 15 cm and radiation is not important because the patient receives higher radiation during radiotherapy. Funding agencies wanted Crosetto to submit a proposal for an economical device (a short FOV) but Crosetto argued one should focus on a low examination cost by increasing the throughput of the patient with a longer FOV requiring shorter examination time. Reviewers requested Crosetto develop block detectors focusing on increasing spatial resolution and not sensitivity. Following are a few rejection claims by the reviewers of Crosetto’s proposals:
- 1996-NIH-1R43RRLM11544-010A reviewer claims intensive computation is needed at the back-end of the PET and not at the front-end.
- 2001-NIH-1R43CA93103-01, reviewer claims that electronics is not a problem, focus should be placed on spatial resolution and reviewer does not see the reason to increase sensitivity and reduce radiation dosage.
- 2002-NIH-1R01EB000900-01, reviewer claims “that there is no reason to expect that improving detection electronics will lead to any significant improvement in efficiency”.
- 2002-NIH-1R43EB00959-01, reviewer states: “The whole body imager envisaged by the proponent is optimized for efficiency but not for optimal spatial resolution”. (This is not true because the 3D-CBS maximizes all measurements: energy, spatial and time resolution and provides high signal-to-noise ratio).
In addition to rejecting all Crosetto’s requests for funding his inventions, his papers and presentations at conferences were also rejected.
For example, after Joel Karp, General Chairman of the 2002 IEEE-MIC conference rejected all Crosetto’s papers on the 3D-CBS with a long FOV in 2002, he applied for a grant with his colleagues to NIH and received $15.5 million for the Explorer project for a long FOV, making many of the same claims that he had rejected in Crosetto’s application. Rejection of Crosetto’s papers continued in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018. In 2008, the General Chairman of the IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD conference attempted to receive a scientific reason to support rejection claims with calculations or scientific evidence but reviewers did not provide them. He also attempted to organize a public forum with the scientists who were opposing Crosetto’s inventions but they refused.
Unfortunately, leaders in the field who developed the Explorer [13, 14, 15], although recognizing the value of Crosetto’s invention and admitting in slides and presentations of their Explorer that it was not a new idea, citing Crosetto’s work [21, 24], did not mention these facts in their articles, thus are not searchable in scientific journals. Papers that Crosetto submitted at conferences and journals were rejected for non-scientific reasons , his answers to their rejection claims, questions, and doubts were not considered. The ethics of a scientist require a scientific reason be provided to reject 59 quotes from industries and the IEEE rejections in 2016 , and the recent rejection from the Conference “Total Body PET – From Mice to Men” on June 30 – July 2, 2018 in Ghent, Belgium cannot be justified in the scientific world.
Mobbing and bullying by the scientific community is also proven by the fact that colleagues never cited in their articles Crosetto’s two 2000 articles [2, 3], the 2003 article , the 2013 article  and the 2000 technical-scientific book , which is the most detailed study of a cost-effective PET with long FOV, clearly an invention that creates a paradigm change in biomedical imaging that the other work of 1990 cited in Simon Cherry’s presentation slide cannot claim.
Currently, Crosetto’s 3D-CBS invention has evolved and improved over the years by using state-of-the-art technologies and processes, maintaining its competitiveness in higher efficiency and lower cost compared to alternative approaches at any given time since 2000.
The 3D-CBS is the best and most cost-effective tool to advance healthcare, opening new applications of the current PET as it can provide simultaneous accurate data captured from all over the body at the minimal cost and with very low radiation, allowing the detection and correlation of information related to biological processes in different organs of the body. Now the doctor is given the opportunity for the first time to see the function of the body as a whole and not limited to symptoms of individual organs. For example, the relation of symptoms from Amyloidosis affecting the heart, kidneys, liver, spleen, nervous system and digestive tract can be understood by verifying abnormalities in the Amyloid protein if this protein can be tagged with a radioisotope. Or the relation of symptoms from Parkinson’s disease such as pain, depression/anxiety, and behavioral changes in the brain can be understood by verifying a possible dysbiosis in the Gastrointestinal (GI) system (GI disturbances, GI motility, Constipation, Pain) that are connected to the brain through the vagus nerve, etc.
No one in academia or industry has been able to refute scientifically the superiority in higher efficiency and lower cost of Crosetto’s 3D-CBS technology compared to any alternative approach at any given time since the year 2000 when Crosetto wrote his first technical-scientific book .
As in the year 1998 when Michael Phelps created a market that could not provide a safe and powerful tool for health professionals and did not have the capability to significantly reduce cancer deaths and healthcare costs, now industries are on the verge of making a similar mistake in creating a PET market which does not address the ESSENCE of building a safe and powerful device to help healthcare professionals significantly reduce cancer deaths and healthcare costs.
Michael Phelps created a market of a 16 cm FOV PET device focusing on spatial resolution, now industries are on the verge of creating a PET market with a long FOV using more than 500,000 crystals made of rare material. In both cases they missed the answer to the questions: What does it reduce cancer death? Which results will I get when I will test it on a sample population?
The following page analyzes this aspect and provides the choice that the scientific community and PET manufacturers must face to hit the target and avoid making the same mistake of creating a new market for the PET with a long FOV not useful for defeating the most deadly and costly calamity, cancer.
The Explorer and the uExplorer based on the use of a detector with Lutetium which is rare in nature, cut in over 500,000 small pieces is undoubtedly costing more to purchase and to assemble compared to a detector made of fewer than 3,000 large crystals without Lutetium or other rare material. This development is again going in the wrong direction.
Seize the Essence to reduce cancer deaths and cost and provide a safe diagnostic tool to doctors
The 3D-CBS: the first true paradigm change in biomedical imaging
Level-1 translation of the above statement in technical terms for devices based on radiation
“Accurately extract from radiation and measure all possible valuable signals related to the tumor marker at a lower cost per valid signal captured compared to alternative approaches”
Level-2 translation in technical terms for PET devices
- a) Efficiently capture all possible 511 keV photons and accurately measure at the lowest possible cost:
- b) Photon’s total energy
- c) Photon’s arrival time
- d) Coordinates “x” and “y” of the incident photon
- e) Coordinate “z” (DOI) of the incident photon
- f) Efficiently filter out all background radiation
WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT?
- High Spatial Resolution
- Ultra-High Sensitivity
- a) List mode DAQ or b) Front-End DSP processing DAQ
- Ideal crystal, expensive and rare in nature
- Non-ideal crystal, inexpensive, and abundant in nature
- a) > 500,000 small crystals or b) < 3,000 large crystals
- FOV 16 cm, 25 cm, 1 m, 1,5 m, or 2 m
- Low cost components
Choose the Essence to reduce cancer deaths and cost
HOW DO YOU VERIFY THAT YOU HAVE CHOSEN THE ESSENCE?
“The proof will be to test your device on a sample population and compare the cost with other approaches.
For example, test your device every year on 10,000 people, ages 55-74, taken from a location where the mortality rate has been constant for the past 20 years.
A difference or no difference in the mortality rate will quantify the success or failure of the choices you have made in building your device.”
THE ESSENCE HAS BEEN MISSED FOR THE PAST 70 YEARS BECAUSE A DEVICE WHICH WOULD SHOW A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN CANCER DEATHS ON A SAMPLE POPULATION WAS NOT FUNDED
The new Explorer by Simon Cherry et al. and the uExplorer by United Imaging are going in the wrong direction. It can be proven analytically that the Explorer cannot compete on price or efficiency and it is based on crystals with Lutetium which has limited availability in nature. In essence, they have chosen: 1. High Spatial Resolution to the detriment of sensitivity, 4a. List mode DAQ; 5. Ideal crystals, expensive and rare in nature; 7a More than 500,000 small crystals; 8. FOV 2 m, wasting unnecessary detector components covering more than the organs of the body.
The patent pending (last filed on June 29, 2018) 3D-CBS is the first true paradigm change in biomedical imaging and the most competitive technology that can defeat cancer because it offers three advantages no other device can offer simultaneously a) an effective detection, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of diseases; b) a radiation dose that is 1% of current PET; c) a very low examination cost. This is achieved by the author’s design that makes use of the following components and techniques used in synergy to maximize the benefits for the highest efficiency at the lowest possible cost. The following priority choices have been made: 2. Ultra-High Sensitivity, 4b. Front-End DSP processing DAQ using the 3D-Flow invention, 6. Non-ideal crystals, inexpensive and easily available on the market; 7b. Less than 3,000 large crystals; 8. FOV approximately 1.5 m, covering all organs of the body; 9. Low cost components; 3. TOF only if it shows advantages in reducing the cancer death rate on a sample population.
Many lives could not be saved this past decade because the over 10,000 current PET devices used in healthcare facilities have low efficiency, require administering high radiation to the patient, have a high examination cost, and because the author’s inventions advancing this field have been suppressed from being discussed openly in a public scientific review similar to the one requested by the Director of the Superconducting Super Collider in 1993 for Crosetto’s previous inventions, and because they have been suppressed from publication in scientific journals and from funding.
This has caused the needless loss of millions of lives because Crosetto’s 3D-CBS invention, made available since the year 2000, has been continuously improved showing advantages at any time during the past 18 years (as reported in the 2016 comparison table between the 3D-CBS and the Explorer and the current comparison with the uExplorer by United Imaging) yet continues to be mobbed and bullied by the scientific community that denies transparency in science and denies a public forum where authors of different devices should defend their claims before other authors.
Such a public forum occurred on 01/20/2016, at the University of Turin, Italy (in Italian) before the Director and colleagues of the INFN of Turin. The Director has alone published over 750 articles in particle physics in scientific journals. Another public forum occurred on June 19, 2018, at Tsinghua University (in English), one of the most prestigious universities in China, before experts in building PET components and head-PET devices, no one could invalidate Crosetto’s claims. The superiority of his inventions compa-red to alternative approaches emerged clearly from his presentation and discussion that were video recorded in both places. (Links to the slides goo.gl/9nxino and video www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9bpxKOarhc of 01/20/2016 forum in Turin, Italy, and slides goo.gl/7Kefay and video from the 06/19/2018 forum in Beijing, China). Crosetto’s claim that PET efficiency is improved by improving the electronics was also proven correct in 2002 during the meeting with leaders from Siemens Nuclear Medicine who first denied it would be possible but had to recant their statements before their own evidence published on their website five years later.
uExplorer and other PET device manufacturers could lead the market of PET with a long FOV only until another company builds the patented 3D-CBS which has a lower component cost and higher efficiency which will place all these companies in the unsustainable position of having to sell their devices below their production cost in order to keep a slice of their market share.
Submitted to TotalBodyPET2018 Conference, 6/30 – 7/2, 2018, Ghent (Belgium). Rejected without cause so the mobbing can continue.
The 3D-CBS: the first true paradigm change in biomedical imaging held back by the scientific community
Dario B. Crosetto1*
1Crosetto Foundation for the Reduction of Cancer Deaths, DeSoto, Texas, 75115, USA
*email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org
The 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) is the first true paradigm change in biomedical imaging and the most competitive technology that can defeat cancer because it offers three advantages no other device can offer simultaneously: a) an effective detection and diagnosis of diseases such as cancer at a very early and highly curable stage on asymptomatic people, improving prognosis and monitoring of treatment ensuring all cancer cells are removed surgically with radiation or chemotherapy; b) a radiation dose that is 1% of current PET (Positron Emission Tomography); c) a very low examination cost covering all organs of the body in under two minutes that is less expensive than mammogram, PAP-smear, colonoscopy, PSA test, etc., combined.
Experimental results show that early cancer detection combined with surgery, radiation and chemotherapy works. For example, colon cancer caught early has a 91% survival rate versus 11% if caught late, breast cancer 98% vs. 27%.
The 3D-CBS provides the missing device making early detection cost-effective. It is an advanced PET with a 1.5m detector covering all organs of the body, first presented by the author at the 2000 IEEE-NSS-MIC conference in articles and a book [1,2,3] detailing inventions in the 3D-Flow electronics, detector assembly, coupling electronics with detectors, algorithms, etc. and improved with additional inventions in the following years protected with patents to incentivize funding for its development (Figure 1). The proof of concept of the 3D-Flow was tested in hardware and presented at 2001 and 2003 IEEE-NSS-MIC conferences [4,5,6,7,8,9,12].
The 3D-CBS project has been proven technically feasible and cost-effective by 59 quotes from 21 reputable component manufacturers. It shows competitive results not only with all other approaches such as drugs for late detection, Genomic, Immunotherapy, CICD, but also within all diagnostic medical imaging devices including MRI, CT, Ultrasound. It is hundreds of times more efficient and more cost-effective than the existing 10,000+ PET devices, and more efficient, at one tenth the cost [1,6,7,8,9,12] of the current implemented Explorer project (Table 1) [13,14,15].
The 3D-CBS passed several public scientific reviews, won the Leonardo da Vinci Prize, and when discussed with leaders at Siemens they were able to improve the efficiency of their PET by 70%. (See slides 17-22 of reference xx).
Holding back the author’s invention by the scientific community for eighteen years needs to be addressed and corrected because it has damaged to the advancement in science and humanity in the needless loss of lives and taxpayers’ money [10,11].
Table 1. 3D-CBS features compared to the Explorer by Simon Cherry at al. Data for the Explorer reported in the table are derived from publications, slides  presentations and several press releases made by the authors of the Explorer [14,15] and from calculations based on the data reported in the articles. Data and feasibility of the 3D-CBS [1,6,7,8,12] is proven by the 3D-Flow innovative basic concept [4,5] proven feasible and functional in hardware in two modular boards , each with 68 x 3D-Flow processors and recently the 3D-Flow OPRA  proven feasible and cost-effective by 59 quotes from reputable industries.
|Crystal Type||Expensive LYSO 491,520 crystals||Economical BGO <3,000 crystals|
|Number of electronic channels||1,920||2,304|
|Number of Channels per Board||16||256|
|Number of Detector Boards||120||9|
|Number of Crates housing the Detector Boards (the 3D-CBS crate is also housing the computer to process valid data and provide results)||12||1|
|Capability to acquire and process data daily||40 TB||>40,000 TB|
|Daily hard drives size requirement||40 TB||1 GB|
|Number of racks containing computers to process acquired data||4 to 6||0|
|Power Consumption||40 to 60 kW||3 to 4 kW|
|Efficiency (number true divided by total gen.)||Less than the 3D-CBS||Ultra-Sensitive|
|Cost of the Device||30 to 50 times current PET||2 to 3 times current PET|
(what matters to the patient)
|Higher than current cost because the throughput cannot be 30 to 50 times current PET||Lower than current cost because the throughput can be higher than 2 to 3 times current PET|
|Potential to save millions of lives
(what should matter to humanity:
|Cannot prove to save lives on a sample population because each day it cannot process 40,000 TB data from tumor markers||Can prove on a sample population to save many lives because each day it can process cost-effectively over 40,000 TB data from tumor markers|
|Potential to reduce healthcare costs
(what should matter to politicians to solve the world’s most costly calamity)
|Increases healthcare cost because of its exorbitant cost; losing many lives lowers productivity||The lower examination cost saves many lives; those who live instead of dying return to be productive and are removed from healthcare bill|
Figure 1. Logical layout of the 3D-CBS system.
- Crosetto D. Technical-scientific book “400+ times improved PET efficiency for lower-dose radiation, lower-cost cancer screening” 3D-Computing, 2000, ISBN 0-9702897-0-7. Library of U.S. Congress Data Card Number: 00-191510 (Available at www.amazon.com). Short URL goo.gl/ggGGwF. Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5WVFVWnJteENqMWc/view?usp=sharing
- Crosetto D. “A modular VME or IBM PC based data acquisition system for multi-modality PET/CT scanners of different sizes and detector types”. Conf. Rec. IEEE-NSS-MIC, Lyon, France, IEEE-2000-563.
- Crosetto D. “Real-time, programmable, digital signal-processing electronics for extracting the information from a detector module for multi-modality PET/SPECT/CT scanners”. Conf. Rec. IEEE-NSS-MIC, Lyon, France, 2000, IEEE-2000-567.
- FermiLab. Project Review Report on: “Digital Programmable Level-1 Trigger with 3D-Flow Assembly” Held at FERMILAB on December 14, 1993. Short URL goo.gl/zP76Tc. Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5amx4ZlN2OTJqMmM/view?usp=sharing
- Crosetto D. “LHCb base-line level-0 trigger 3D-Flow implementation”. NIM-Sec. A, vol. 436, (1999) pp.341-385. Short URL goo.gl/bqhD4R
- Crosetto D. “The 3-D Complete Body Screening (3D-CBS) Features and Implementation” Conf. Rec. IEEE-NSS-MIC, Portland, Oregon, IEEE 2003-M7-129. Short URL goo.gl/RiIn0B . Full URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5RDQ2UURPeHBIYnc/view?usp=sharing
- Crosetto D. “Breaking the Speed Barrier in Real-Time Applications to Make Advances in Particle Detection, Medical Imaging and Astrophysics” Conf. Rec. IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD, Seoul, South Korea, IEEE-2013, 32-page article, Short URL “goo.gl/qpnNxd , Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5YXU0MW1QM1IzUW8/view?usp=sharing . Poster Short URL goo.gl/VbvY5c.
- Crosetto D. “3D-CBS: Breakthrough Invention Based on the 3D-FLOW System, Capable of Extracting ALL Valuable Information from Radiation with the Potential to Save Millions of Lives and Reduce Healthcare Costs”. Abstract submitted to 2016 IEEE-MIC conference, Strasbourg. Short URL goo.gl/6DS5oy Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5Z0VOTVJqZ21WamM/view?usp=sharing
- Crosetto D. Proposal detailing the 3D-Flow OPRA and the 3D-CBS projects: “Breakthrough Invention: 3D-Flow OPRA a revolutionary electronic instrument for multiple applications: advancing science, saving lives, fighting terrorism, …” Short URL goo.gl/w3XlZ1. Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5MlpkbUpjbEIybUk/view?usp=sharing
- Crosetto D. Response to 2016 and 2017 Presidents IEEE-NPSS Short URL goo.gl/XPNHh7 Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5eWZabVlQSkk3dDg/view?usp=sharing
- Crosetto D. Response to CMS Spokesperson Joel Butler March 10, 2017 Short URL goo.gl/EU9qGQ, Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5c25sYmh1SnJTa00/view?usp=sharing . Published in FDN, on 8/9/17 goo.gl/k46ea6
- Johnson J, Crosetto D. “Scientist Dario Crosetto Battles For Transparency In Science”. Focus Daily News, October 22, 2017. Distributed 1,300 copies at the 2017 IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD Conf. Short URL goo.gl/EJD9yU Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5U2pwTGdheDU3dVU/view?usp=sharing
- Cherry S. et al. “Explorer: An Ultra-Sensitive Total Body PET Scanner for Biomedical Research” Slides presented at the 2013 IEEE-MIC Conf. Seoul, S. Korea. Slide 5 title “Not a New Idea!” and is citing Crosetto’s article . It also details parameters reported in Table 1. Short URL goo.gl/BpqjAj Full URL https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5NVJyQWxOeFBKT2s/view?usp=sharing
- UC Davis & Berkeley. “UC Davis Granted $15.5 Million to Build World’s First Total-Body PET Scanner” Published on UC Davis website, details parameters reported in Table 1. Full URL http://research.ucdavis.edu/about-us/news-center/news-stories/total-body-pet-scanner/ . Short URL goo.gl/NpNNNr
- UC Davis “Building the World’s First Total-Body PET Scanner” Published on UC Davis website, details parameters reported in Table 1 about 40TB and 60Kw. Full URL https://bme.ucdavis.edu/blog/building-the-worlds-first-total-body-pet-scanner/. See also Short URL goo.gl/W6cZ9Y.
- References to facts and data proving mobbing and bullying the 3D-Flow and the 3D-CBS inventions for two decades in 2000, 2002, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, excluding them from presentations to conferences, publications and from funding by influential decision makers who did not follow scientific procedures and did not provide calculations and scientific evidence supporting their rejection claims (goo.gl/VHbacz). Some senior scientists attempted to implement a public scientific review (in 2008) and to organize a meeting with those who oppose Crosetto’s inventions but they were not successful.