GUMM - Eliminate the Common Cold 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 : GUMM - Eliminate the Common Cold

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: DanZ who wrote (3903)	8/6/2001 11:18:56 AM
From: Hank	Read Replies (1) of 5582

"However, if they say something derogatory and don't have ample proof, they would be open to liability." So what are you suggesting Danny Boy? That perhaps CNS did plan on including Ziscam as a reference point but decided not to because GUMM's lawyers threatened to sue them if they didn't come up with a "positive" result? Isn't it grand that the competition has to prove the scientific validity of their studies beyond a shadow of a doubt but one pathetic study published in an even more pathetic journal is enough for you idiots to declare you have absolute proof of efficacy! If they really wanted to test a possible product then Ziscam would have been the obvious positive control. The fact that they didn't include it, regardless of the reason, is highly suspicious. The only joke is that you're still a free man and not behind bars where all P&D'ers belong.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next