Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aknahow who wrote (10614)	7/4/1999 8:31:00 PM
From: opalapril	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17367

OT <<It is logical though that if the whole world know, no peer review journal will have any interest in running the story. So the "journal" must get some kind of exclusive access to the information, to have an incentive to run the story.>> Not exactly the way professional journals would describe the balance of incentives, George. Conventionally, scientists frown on going public about "advances" or "discoveries" before peers have had a chance to review and test the same results. It's considered coarse and unprofessional to hunt for glory in the popular press before subjecting one's science to the rigors of widespread professional peer review. Remember cold fusion? I dunno about coarse but it sure seems unprofessional to me, stockholder though I am, to release the results to shareholders before sharing it with colleagues whom you know to be working in the same or related areas. One might argue the FDA's rigors substitute for peer review, so what's the beef if you pass P-3? Ah, but remember Thalidomide and Phen-Phen, both of which were first discredited by peer studies not the FDA.