Are we talking single digit, double digit , or triple digit cost per test [ once the method is in volume use }

What the cost is will determine whether it is only useful for annual physicals[ high cost ] , or routine emergency room use [ medium cost] or third world countries [low cost ]

I agree with Dude1 up there.

I thinj that this is very interesting by same that other sistems to analyze the blood is indispensable the eye or a bacteriologist to analyzate de results because some times the machines bad throw results

Adding molecules derived from the human system of protien is very informative. It will show, providing the tech is there, that all protiens are not created equally. I think you are missing the point. Your argument of c02 is baseless and so is your serum reactivity. I think you should take a second look at this tech before you suggest that this is not worthy of further deployment. To me it sounds if that you have closed all doors on open thought. Perhaps one should try to understand that regardless of your schooling or background, until you make the breakthrough of protienchemical arrays, you are at a loss. Best of luck to them all.

Blood Does Stuff Chemically. SMA is: Serum Multi Anaylsis & number of items analyized is 100, up from 24 in 1960s' & thats up from 4 in early bllod testing. all use tubes of blood.

Adding protien isn't that informative, its protiens ability to react chemically as blood thats important. yet what blood is composed of is important.

measuring everything from CO2 content, O2 content, to how able serum is to maintain its self or its reactiveity to disease & strength of that reactiveity are all tested, these days. 
articles chips sounds like expensive extra test that will aid litttle excepting to create data base that can be compared to standard chemical testing. People have died over being told they have protien in blood. 
This could also aid kitchen help plungier blood from Bum whom once it flowed.
Canibals Everyone, I Say. Give Em Test & Put Em on Menu.
STeWie Drashek