That's why I objected to the "harsh" tone. It is an application of PC thinking.
The article, however, explains how the actual proposed means of operation is based on measuring actual symptoms of the illness — observable changes to the red blood cells — which is at least somewhat compatible with the mechanics of a pulse oximeter, and, therefore, not entirely unreasonable.
The tone was harsh not because of the cynicism, but because said cynicism was based on a concern that wouldn't even have been there if the OP had RTFA.
This is far from getting funded, it's a technical concept and we have absolutely no ability or relevant information upon which to call it a fraud.
You are the only one trying to make this about "PC thinking".