IMDS nasdaq bulletin board 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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : IMDS nasdaq bulletin board

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dan O who wrote (3792)	12/5/1999 9:40:00 PM
From: Dan O	of 4122

Please compare the following two quotes - the first from Dick denying that he and his company ever improperly promoted the Lintroscan and the second from the FDA auditor saying that they did: Grable: "The FDA action taken in Wisconsin concerning the LINTRO-SCAN resulted because of the irresponsible action of the individual who owned the LINTRO-SCAN and personally chose to promote it improperly. The individual promoted the LINTRO-SCAN as a REPLACEMENT FOR MAMMOGRAPHY, A CLAIM NEVER MADE BY ME OR ANYONE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY. Mrs. Grable nor I had any control over the device nor how it was promoted or used after it was sold. The posting presents this fact in a totally different manner." Richard Grable email previously posted on this board (capital emphasis mine). FDA: "Ms. Grable stated that the "Rose" brochure was revised sometime in 1988. As previously discussed LILI was incorporated in Florida on or about February 1988. Ms. Grable stated that she personally changed the wording. During the inspection, Richard J. Grable stated that Linda B. Grable had changed the wording, on her own initiative. The new wording reads in part, "*the Lintro-Scan examination is recommended INSTEAD OF MAMMOGRAPHY particularly for:women with very dense breasts where mammography may not provide a good image, Pregnant women.*" (etc.)." FDA report Sept 6-21, page 10 (capital emphasis mine). So, call me short, long or indifferent. Here I have two quotes - one from an FDA report and one from Richard Grable. They APPEAR to be saying oppositte things. I'm willing to entertain contrary evidence, but I've seen none. If you think I am misrepresenting something, go to Skolnicks site and read for yourself. You can see Dicks email back in Aug of 1998 posted on AOL by DrJMF1 and posted on SI on 8/26/98, post 1630, I believe.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next