Most founders build on assumptions they haven’t tested. From turning a master’s project into a product now used by fire departments to navigating a decade-long founder journey across Sweden, San Francisco, and Austin, Omer Haciomeroglu joins us to walk us through what it takes to bring something from concept to reality. This conversation focuses on how early product decisions shape everything that follows, where teams lose time and money, and why feedback, accountability, and the ability to step outside your own perspective become critical as the company grows. 01:29 How the firefighting concept started as a master’s project in Sweden 05:24 Bootstrapping the company and moving through Sweden, San Francisco, and Austin 10:02 Why the founder journey is so isolating, even with co-founders 12:32 What Omer brings to founders through product, fundraising, and leadership experience 17:57 The costly mistakes founders make when they build on untested assumptions 22:54 The real stages of hardware development from MVP to manufacturing 32:54 What first-time founders get wrong about fundraising and why the right people matter 40:07 Why ego, power dynamics, and poor feedback can put a company at risk Who Should Listen Founders, engineers, and operators building products, especially in hardware or deep tech, along with early-stage entrepreneurs trying to validate ideas, raise capital, and avoid costly mistakes. About Omer Haciomeroglu Omer Haciomeroglu is a Turkish-born designer, entrepreneur, and creative technology leader based in Austin, Texas, best known for operating at the intersection of design, engineering, and applied artificial intelligence. As a co-founder and chief design officer, he has led the development of AI-driven computer vision systems focused on real-world, high-stakes applications, including safety, automation, and human-centered decision making. His work spans product design, robotics, and advanced prototyping, grounded in a philosophy that prioritizes clarity, sustainability, and practical impact over speculative futurism. Across startups and innovation ecosystems, he is recognized for translating complex technical systems into coherent products that can move from concept to deployment without losing ethical or human considerations. Connect with Omer 💼 LinkedIn: Omer Haciomeroglu 📲 Instagram: @omerh.co Follow Life of Flow 📲 Instagram: @LifeofFlowPodcast 👍 Facebook: Life of Flow Podcast 💼 LinkedIn: Life of Flow Podcast 🐦 X: @VascularPodcast If this episode changed how you think about validating ideas, building products without over-relying on assumptions, and the role of feedback and accountability in a founder’s journey, share it with someone building something of their own. And if you’re enjoying Life of Flow, a quick review helps more people find conversations like this.

In this episode of Life of Flow, we sit down with Dr. Mario Alejandro Fabiani to explore a question that directly impacts clinical decision-making: what does a “no option” patient mean? From that starting point, Dr. Fabiani leads an international consensus aimed at bringing structure to a definition that currently varies depending on the physician, their experience, and their clinical context. The conversation also highlights how patient profiles have shifted over time, why commonly cited percentages may not reflect today’s reality, and how these assumptions influence decisions such as attempting revascularization or proceeding with amputation. Toward the end, the focus turns to the need to validate and adopt this consensus in real-world practice. 03:32 From critique to action: building evidence 04:00 Forming an international Delphi consensus 05:09 What a Delphi is and how it works 08:51 Why the “no option” definition needs to change 12:23 The debate around the 15% “no option” figure 14:51 How patient profiles have changed over time 17:26 Geographic variation in cases and decision-making 20:22 Presentation of the Delphi consensus 39:53 Real-world amputation outcomes in Latin America Who Should Listen Vascular surgeons, trainees, and clinicians managing complex patients who want to better understand how the definition of “no option” impacts real-world decision-making. About Dr. Mario Alejandro Fabiani Dr. Mario Alejandro Fabiani is a physician trained at the National University of La Plata (Argentina). He completed his residency in General Surgery and served as Chief Resident at CEMIC in Buenos Aires. He then pursued a second specialty in Vascular Surgery and Transplant through a joint program between CEMIC and the Hospital de Clínicas at the University of Buenos Aires. He received scholarships from the Bunge y Born Foundation to attend Yale University and from the Argentine Association of Angiology to train at the Vascular Surgery Service at NYU Medical Center. He later joined the Vascular Surgery and Transplant Service at CEMIC, where he was involved in teaching until 2013. Since then, he has been a full-time professor at Tecnológico de Monterrey. He is Director of the Vascular Medicine Center at Sociedad Académica Temperantia, has participated in hundreds of national and international conferences, pioneered endovascular techniques, and trained dozens of specialists. He is an honorary professor at the University of Valladolid, an honorary member of medical societies in Colombia and Ecuador, and a Level I member of Mexico’s National System of Researchers. With over 25 years of experience, he is one of the most experienced specialists in Mexico in the management of aortic, carotid, and peripheral arterial disease. This episode references the international consensus led by Dr. Fabiani to redefine the “no option” patient. You can access the full document here: academic.oup.com/bjs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/bjs/znag040/8606833 Connect with Dr. Mario Alejandro Fabiani 💼 LinkedIn: Mario Alejandro Fabiani 🔗 Website: drfabiani.com/ Follow Life of Flow 📲 Instagram: @LifeofFlowPodcast 👍 Facebook: Life of Flow Podcast 💼 LinkedIn: Life of Flow Podcast 🐦 X: @VascularPodcast If this conversation changed how you think about what it really means for a patient to be “no option,” the decisions made before recommending amputation, and the importance of questioning long-held assumptions in clinical practice, share it with a colleague who would benefit from it. A quick review also helps more physicians and interventionists discover conversations like this.