Biotech Valuation Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation

CRSP 56.68

-2.4%

Dec 12 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: scott_jiminez who wrote (5500)	1/21/2002 9:23:42 AM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (1) of 52153

Scott, MZ's disdain could equally be directed at my non medical supposition that the reported facts could support Erbitux being a sham from the onset. One doesn't need to be a cancer specialist to understand that the Waksals have not communicated fully or accurately (or all the recent news reports are wrong); that they have profited handsomely at least in part from that inaccurate communication; and that a House Panel investigation is highly unusual -- not something that can be lightly dismissed. As a layman I find it extraordinarily difficult to understand how a responsible biotech management team could ignore the FDA's direction re its Ph III trial; continue to obfuscate the nature of those communications even after the RTF; and then mislead investors about the status / date of a followup FDA meeting. First they told us that they'd report after their January FDA meeting. Now they're saying that they'll talk to the FDA during January about scheduling a meeting at some point in time. There are other promising Cancer stories out there which are free and clear from the Waksals. In my non medical opinion, that makes them more attractive. FWIW, Ian

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next