<<Howard what are you saying? If QGLY claimes it and if QGLY advertizes it then I accept it.>>
Very good then. You can now be on the board of the Annals of Internal Medicine and retrospectively reject the Quigley paper. Are you now baitng/switching me back?
***
<< Secondly I don't question the studies having been cited by you and Dan and other GUMM supporters. Your suggestion that my answer is a bs question indicates that you would like to reduce the issues to some technical discussion about studies and reports.>>
You told me the data were essentially the same for Quigley and for Zicam. I said they were not. I asked you to back this up. I see a significant difference. What more can I do than ask you to support what you have claimed and that with which I disagree?
****
<< Do you really belive that GUMM's sucess in the market will hinge on these issues. GUMM and their stock price won't be determined by these studies. >>
No, of course not. Not in the long run, but I do think in the short run that some people are lying and obfuscating, in the name of "fraud exposure" issues about a low float small company that whose stock they are trying to manipulate while shorting. Will any of you feel in the least bit bad if Zicam is a big success, both studies are printed and the medical community accepts Zicam? Will you feel at all bad about treating well-respected USC researchers and decent executives like Mr. Kehoe trying to pick up a formerly-mismanaged company and turn it around?
Especially if you make money doing it you should feel bad. If someone could really prove this did not work, I - personally - would feel bad. Your thread partners (they even brag about past shorts, saying "you know the drill") have one person obfuscating details and others obfuscating the big picture and the main person either just lying or so dense it is almost unbelievable. Says the issue here is "homeopathy" despite the clearly labelled amount of Zinc Gluconate in the study and on the bottle.
***
<<It will be determined by the by the same issues that sell other consumer products. Consumer friendliness, efficacy and marketing. As with Cold Ease I assume ZICAM is effective in reducing the duration of the common cold.....As does cold ease by the way which has been my experience.>>>
Gee, then I guess you really do not believe a lot of your compatriot's posts to the contrary; how refreshing. My point that I thought we were debating was that Zicam could reduce the duration of the cold by 85% If that's indeed what you believe, great; it IS significantly different than placebo and significantly different than Quigley.
****
<< Thus will GUMM's marketing be better? Does it rate as a friendlier consumer product. To the first I don't know, but its likely to be costly. To the second the answer is no. >>
The marketing company is new for GUMM and has a good record, to say the least. I think will do a very good, possibly stellar, job. Regarding nasal spray vs. oral medication and potential public disdain, it seems to me that people use nasal sprays for allergies now in public with impunity. Most people are only outright attacked for being Jewish, black, female, gay or otherwise different. I do not think putting a Zicam spray up one's nose will elicit disgust any more than blowing one's nose. Once every several hours, a person can find a bit of privacy if they need to. Say you are at the symphony. People on both sides of you have colds. The person on one side spends 30 seconds eery 20 minutes unwrapping noisily a Quigley's. The person next to you on the other side opens a Zicam duirng intermission. Who are you going to dislike more?
<<Your showing your true colors Howard. Wither that or you not as smart as I assume you are.>> You do not need to make any assumptions about my intelligence. People will judge our actions and what we say, not our opinions of ourselves. That has actually been Dan's point about himself, but that, too, has been twisted by many shorts.
***
The shorts pretend to uncover scandals and frauds, but cannot prove it in this case. Some of them, supposedly respected people, defend Wexler by asking US to prove that these people are not perpetrating a fraud. We do that, even though most sane people, like the people who wrote laws regarding libel per se would require the accuser to prove a crime. Wexler calls me a piece of crap because we answer him point by point and ask him to name names. He can't and gets pissed. You start a mock thread. Wexler compares Dan to a Nazi.
All the time, we try and answer all this stuff with germane and sane arguments. Everyone claims boredom.
**
Truth is, I think GUMM will be a success. I think they will produce nicotine gum for a large company by the end of the year and it will start internationally, free from SKB meddling. I think Zicam will be a huge success. I think you all may get a point of two bad mouthing good people and their company that they are working diligently to build. And I think you will all look silly in a year.
If all this is not true, I will stop posting a year from now here. Will you, Wexler and your other shortsellers make the same promise if Zicam does not fail and becomes accepted by physicians and if GUMM makes enough nicotine gum to trade over 40 next year (and I am being very conservative here)?
So where are your true colors? |
