>Recent story out about Watson (who first figured out DNA) and his take on the war on cancer:
"The biggest obstacle" to a true war against cancer, Watson wrote, may be "the inherently conservative nature of today's cancer research establishments." As long as that's so, "curing cancer will always be 10 or 20 years away."<
It only seems so because it has been so for so long. Importantly affecting the timeline for cancer “cures”, it takes a long time before a patient is described as cured. This usually means the patient has been cancer-free for at least five years. Some of the re-occurrences are due to missed cancer cells that slowly re-establish a serious tumor. The missed cancer cells can be released due to surgery disturbance, missed by ionizing radiation “bullets”, or those few cells surviving drugs. I believe the fact is that heating tumors to lethal levels is much less likely to leave live cancer cells. Cancer-cell death by excessive heat is highly certain, and the process is not likely to cause loose, live cancer cells.
>Two sides to every story, but one might say that the conservative medical establishment may be slow to accept BSDM type treatments for cancer.<
It has in fact been very slow. But, BSD M has received full FDA approval for 3 products (the BSD-500, the Thermatrx-100, and the MTX-180). Also, the BSD-2000 has received an HDE (Humane Device Exemption) for the U.S., and is fully approved in many foreign countries. Full approval for the BSD-2000 in the U.S. is nearing, as the only hold-up left is in getting sufficient Phase III trial data (much of which has already come in – with excellent results). So, why are they not yet profitable? That’s the pertinent question, of course. And, the answer has mainly to do with the present markets addressed.
The market-size/acceptance issue is why the company places so much emphasis on the MTX-180. It addresses a quite–sizable, already established, and rapidly growing market (Interventional Oncology) with a fully FDA approved and outstandingly effective product. Early pioneers (see both Dupuy and Dodd, for key examples) have praised it highly, relative to the present IO-market leading product – and have presented their data at medical symposia, and such. And, BSD M’s booths displaying the MTX-180 at these meetings have been heavily attended.
Even with all the above, the conservative medical establishment has not widely accepted the MTX product, yet. While this is expectable, rapidly increasing use is also to be expected, and happening! An outstanding jump in effectiveness and ease of use will not “long” be denied. That said, “long” has been much longer than usual, due to the ongoing heavy recession. Medical pioneering is heavily slowed when hospitals freeze their capital spending!
I think the recent “FPU” program for the MTX-180 is overcoming the spending freeze (no capital funds needed!), and BSD M has been blaring that such success is happening. Also, there are several new marketing contracts in several countries for various BSD M products; in particular, a renewed contract for China. The new/renewed contracts tend to have specified minimum purchases. For China, for important example, the minimums are for about 3 times more than prior -- or about 6 to 9 large systems per year. The times when some Q’s, such as the last Q, showed zero large-system sales are evidently over (except, perhaps, as a rare occurrence).
Does not all of the above indicate the company is “on a cusp”? Is not the potential-reward/potential-risk ratio very high? I think so, but each investor must make up his own mind. |
