Dr. Svelte: It's understood that some posters are works in progress. In my view, without the data, that's soft. It's not useless for some purposes and in fact can be valuable for some purposes, but it's not the same as having replicable data that is fully discussed.
But what did you think of Zonagen's poster? If you think it's convincing, are you switching from a short to a long position? Obviously, I think it's soft, since the data is not defined or substantiated. Science to me, when it comes to reporting studies, includes the definitions of the variables. This poster had no such information, so it is soft, in my opinion.
Rather than haggle over that, why not tell me what you think of this study? If it's a hard scientific presentation as your notes suggest, what conclusions have you drawn from it about the efficacy of Vasomax and are you taking a long position as a result of the convincing hard evidence you see in the poster?
I'll be glad to listen and learn from your thoughts on this subject. I'm not being sarcastic. If you think there's hard science in the Vasomax study, I'd like to understand your view.
Let's see if we can narrow it down to discuss this ONE poster. Obviously there'd be a wide range of competency if we're going to discuss posters in general. But since we're all interested in this stock and this poster, let's see how hard a scientific a presentation this is? Can you discuss that?
Thanks.
Linda |
