To: DanZ who wrote (1893 ) 7/11/1999 3:19:00 PM From: Land Shark Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10293
All smoke and mirrors, my friend. You haven't shown me the money, yet. Which major California University are we talking about? Can you refer me to a paper publishing the results? What are the odds that the New England Journal of Medicine will accept the paper? Can you site any results that have been published from a reputable truly 3rd party clinic? You can't provide me with that information? It's all most likely snake-oil, then. Indeed, the company itself admits it can't back up its claims with scientific proof, note from their most recent S-3 filing: OUR INABILITY TO PROVIDE SCIENTIFIC PROOF FOR PRODUCT CLAIMS MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR SALES This indicates to me there's absolutely nothing in their claims. Interesting that you're trying to deflect the issue to financial analysis. I've not mentioned anything about financials to this point, but, come to think of it, financials are VERY IMPORTANT. It tells WHERE they are getting financing from, how money they are spending (called cash burn rate) and HOW they are spending money. If they are getting bank financing, then I'd suspect they might have something to their story. Instead, they have to issue dilutive convertible issues, which are sure money for the recipients and do nothing but shaft the shareholders. I'm not pissing on you or anyone, else, I'm just portraying the facts as I see them. I enjoy a debate and this forces myself to find out more about this issue and the company. The more I find out the more I feel comfortable about taking on a short position. Disclaimer: All this is an expression of soley my opinion and is not to be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell shares.