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 (13739)	6/1/2000 5:52:00 PM
From: Cacaito	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17367

""statistical significance is not 95% confidence level""... Do you like 90%? Do you like 85%? Do you like 80%? still is good, problem is you need the appropriate number of subjects, and a significant response (decrease of 50% mortality vs 5% ggg? I am not sure of this. But, the FACT that the trial was stratified, and the FACT numbers were reasonable to give good information, even after adjusting for the FACT of two glasgow score levels, with the FACT of different severity and mortality among the two Glasgow scores, and the FACT that xoma stopped the trial on their own, despite the FACT that cacaito asked them to continue recruitment till 600 to 800 (which is a fact in post # something in this thread) and the FACT that their behavior was different to the suggested one, and the FACT that FDA did not gag them unto not publishing data, and the FACT that it does not matter the prestige of the journal Which is now the alleged and purported suppoused reason not to pr as in public relations until PR as in peer review is completed, despite the FACT that for even a late fall publication the paper must have been in the hands of reviewers several months ago, but taken into account the FACT that for even a failure they will get a quite decent publication to accept the paper (see trauma pII published in FACT in a prestigious Journal of Trauma, despite utmost failure, pIII pending somewhere in limbo) and the FACT that xoma got $50M plus or something like that in the last few months despite the FACT of no data, which some here called a "conspiracy" but is in FACT and I repeat again: NORMAL! behavior for a ceoperson trying to save a company (and I honestly believe as per GW is a brilliant thing, but not for my money, and I could say this after emotions are gone,same as my money)I conclude that, except for the purposes of further depressing the inflated value of the shares of this company, I under oath, sincerely expect the data to come as late as possible so I can have some FACT (cash) to buy next november at $0.5, and sell at $4 in 2/2001 with some news on DNA psoriasis drug. Conclusion: Gw is true, who cares about the data, and the lack of confidence interval, or the lack of confidence at all.