James, good idea! I like it! Very clever, there may more there than
you realize. I recommend naming the drug placebocol (touting the
accidential nature of the discovery--Lidak, I demand a 50,000/yr
royality for my idea
Actually, I was counting on a doubter. I would have been
disappointed if there hadn't been one. Sometimes I feel like you do
about this company, but Lisa is probably better looking than you.
I give this company a 50% chance of being somewhat successful
and a 10% chance of being really good. These are the odds I give
a company that I think is a good speculation or even a no brainer.
I find that the winners when they happen make up very well for the
losers.
Assuming that Lidakol proves itself (and it probably will), the next
giant pitfall is the marketting. I still have not found a way of
predicting if a company will be able to sell a winning product. Startups
seem to blow it unless they have a competent partner that realizes
the potential of a drug. That's why I give the company only a 50%
chance of profitable success, even though I think Lidakol works.
Stop listening to hearsay and look at the data. Patient before and
after the study report outbreaks of 7-10 days. On Lidakol, the duration
was 3-4 days, Placebo 3-4 days. Testing on the placebo shows
activity at the dose given to the patients, but not the lower dose
initially tested.
I don't know if I'm being fooled, but I've found other biotechs to
be crooked by giving out misleading data that is not apples to apples.
I haven't caught Lidak doing that yet. So I tend to believe them
more than I would otherwise. I await your primitive grunting. |
