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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Marconi who wrote (2893)	8/6/1999 6:37:00 PM
From: Jim Roof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

m, Thanks for your post. I am very well aware of Hextend's properties and indications for use. I remain confident that Hextend will garner a large share of the market for a couple of reasons but the main one is the article in ASA published some weeks back in which it was determined that in the Phase III trials there was a statistically significant difference in the amount of whole blood/blood products required when comparing Hextend to Hespan. The amount was .5 liters and was in favor of Hextend. On an aside, and somewhat anecdotal... the large shorts have long trumpeted the fact that Hextend is not a true blood substitute and have insinuated that Biotime Inc. was fraudulently promoting it as such. This is laughable. Anyone who researched Hextend for 15 seconds would immediately become aware of what hextend is all about. True, the company did use a poor choice of words back in their prospectus (which was published before talk of true blood substitutes had even really begun) but I know of no individual save the shorts who take issue with this. I say this because I got your post and one from Dale Russell and the tone of each was kind and informative yet the substance seemed to assume that I did not know what this product is or what it does. The 'blood substitute' issue was raised by Ascensio & Co. for the express purpose of creating a hook upon which he could hang his spurious claims of fraud. it was an argument designed to attract retail shorts upon whom the large players could find their exit. IMHO. Jim