Mad2,
<If it were going to be published Hensley would know it, thus i take the lack of exuberance on the subject to mean the article was rejected.>
What makes you think that Dr. Hensley doesn't know the status of the paper? You would be wrong if you assumed that the NEJM submission was rejected. Furthermore, you would be wrong if you assumed that the study won't be published in any medical journal soon. You obviously ignored most of the details in the last paragraph of Message 11493352
<If one or the other of the new studies gets submitted it will still take some 6 months for a review and publication. In other words the hope for free publicity out of NEJM is pretty much gone for this cold season. >
The results of the studies must be made available to shareholders as soon as the company has them. This is material information and the SEC prohibits companies from withholding material information. We will have the results prior to publication. The results can also be presented at medical conferences before publication. If you are assuming that the media won't report the conclusions of the studies before they are published, you would be wrong. If the results of the studies are conclusively positive, the media will report them immediately.
<Additionally it sounds like GUMM is still trying to establish (scientifically) that their stuff reduces the duration of the common cold and the facts will come from these studies that are pending.
I'm not sure what the point of this comment is. It demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about what is happening. The study already completed and published in abstract form did not prove the mechanism of action for Zicam. It did, according to the abstract, provide very compelling evidence that Zicam reduces the duration of the common cold by 85%.
The study that is nearing completion will prove if the mechanism of action works because it is being conducted in an entirely different manner than the first study. They are infecting subjects with a known serotype of rhinovirus so they will know that they have a cold. The subjects are then given either Zicam or a placebo. The study is modeled after the Tremacamra study, and if the results are conclusive, confirming the first study, the mechanism of action will be scientifically proven, and Zicam will be scientifically proven to reduce the duration of the common cold.
As I have said before, and you apparently missed, they are also investigating whether Zicam prevents the cold. They are doing this, I presume, by giving subjects a placebo or Zicam, and then infecting them with a known strain of rhinovirus. The results will be tallied and we will either have scientific proof that Zicam prevents the cold caused by rhinoviruses, or we will know that it doesn't.
<If ZICAM were there i don't know what would make it move off the shelf.......too many other known brands or methods and ZICAM would be lost.>
Formal advertising, word of mouth, PR, news programs, publication, etc., will move it off the shelf. Do you really think that a product which has been clinically proven to reduce the duration of the common cold by 85% or prevents the common cold, won't fly off the shelf as well as Tylenol Cold which garnered more than $200 million in sales last year, or even Theraflu which had over $70 million in sales? Obviously this is dependent on the results of the second round of clinical studies, however.
<Apart from shareholders and friends who read the threads on YAHOO, SI and perhaps Raging Bull who else is going to buy the stuff in any quanity.>
This comment shows your gross inability to understand (or accept) what will happen if the second round of clinical studies are conclusive and to a lesser extent, if the first study is published. The first study is becoming less important even though I expect it to be published soon. That study will be overshadowed by the soon to be released second round of clinical studies.
To JDN: The answer to your question about why GUMM is discussed on this thread more than the GUMM thread is because this is where most of the conversations are initiated. This may sound facetious, but this is what happens when you press the reply button.
One final question to Mad2: What do you think about the risk to reward of holding a short position in GUMM? 3 to 5 points of profit potential versus God knows how much loss potential if the studies are positive. This sounds like a really good trade, doesn't it? Do you GUMM short touts and shills understand the concept of risk to reward? |
