Ah, Bill, what brings you out of your dog pound? You are working overtime today. I wonder why? Is it possible that you are getting nervous about an upcoming news release from GumTech?
<I was just wondering how you feel about the fact that GUMM's 10-K basically admits there is no scientific evidence to back up Zicam's fraudulent claims and that anyone can make a nasal spray with Zinc in suspension (in fact someone else already has).>
There is no such "fact" in the 10K and you have again misrepresented what is said. You didn't provide a citation in your post, so I can only assume that you are referring to the risk disclosure in the 10K dated 3/31/99. There, it says:
Under FDA and FTC rules, Gum Tech is required to obtain scientific data to support any health claims it makes concerning its products. Gum Tech believes it has obtained appropriate scientific data for all of its products and gathered and organized the scientific data when required. Gum Tech has not yet provided nor been requested to provide any scientific data to the FDA. The marketing of certain of Gum Tech's products involves claims that such products assist in weight loss, promote dental hygiene and reduce the duration of the common cold. There can be no assurance that the scientific data obtained in support of these claims will be deemed acceptable by the FDA or FTC, should either agency request any such data in the future. If scientific data is not deemed acceptable, Gum Tech would be forced to obtain acceptable supporting data for its claims or cease marketing the product based on those claims. In particular, the claim that Zicam significantly reduces the duration and severity of the common cold is based on an initial internal study and has not yet been independently verified by a clinical study.
First, the company is proceeding with an independent clinical study, the results of which should be completed by October. That's only a few weeks away. Second, the New England Journal of Medicine is reviewing the first clinical study that is referenced in the risk statement. If they accept the study for publication, that risk statement will mean even less than it does now. Third, risk statements are in every company's 10K to keep the lawyers happy. They serve no other useful purpose, although scam artists such as yourself will try to scare people into thinking that they are more important than they really are.
Regarding your comment about competition: There's no doubt that competitors might try to take market share from Zicam. I assume that you are referring to Hi-Tech Pharmacal's Nasal Eeze. If so, that company has not conducted any clinical studies for their product and can't make any claims with regard to its efficacy. In addition, Gel Tech has a patent pending on Zicam. If Hi-Tech Pharmacal infringed on it, rest assured that GumTech will take swift legal action. I find it ironic that in one breath you forecast "zero retail sales" for Zicam, and in another breath you toot about competition. Tell me, Bill, why would a competitor enter a market if the leader has zero sales??
Nobody outside your dog pound believes your allegations of fraud. Woof! woof!! I hear a couple of dogs barking for their master at the dog pound. You better hurry back there and feed them. Hey, I didn't know that dogs eat bullsh*t. |
