Chuckle.
For all the AGPH supporters, just keep repeating this question to yourself........... "why did AGPH license Viracept to a competitor in europe?" Chuck, when you get closer to data, you'll understand that crixivan is just plain old going to lose market share........... complementary activities and resistance patterns, allowing effective use at lower doses, versus kidney stones, a very inconvenient lifestyle, and myriad anecdotal reports of side effects that make the stones look like child's play.
In the WSJ article, a Merck spokesman, Michael Seggev, indicated that Agouron's data ''seems to indicate their drug is not as potent''. I counter with my own observations........ (1) what have you been smoking, Mr. Seggev?, and (2) Merck should start explaining the misinformation campaign that they have waged throughout this battle with AGPH, Roche et al., beginning with the observations in the manuscript "In vivo emergence of HIV-1 variants resistant to multiple protease inhibitors", Nature 374, 569-571. Merck should correct and acknowledge past mistakes before moving on to new ones.
Furthermore, Merck should not try to foist off a deficient drug in the face of combination therapy (saquinavir/viracept) that they know damn well is looking better than crix.
Molowa? He's a VRTX freak. He's taken a beating thus far, but, since he's usually pretty good, he'll probably catch up soon. He might consider that penetration with VX-478 is going to be tough. Again, the fact is that Vertex/Glaxo fell behind; catching up will be a chore, given the insight that Johnson, Roche et al. have shown of late.
When you're done repeating the "two PI" mantra, try this one........ AG3340, AG3340, AG3340..............
We just need to shake off the Merck and Molowa poison, and that takes time.
Cheers! Rick |
