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: Cacaito who wrote (13990)	7/5/2000 12:19:19 PM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

Cacaito, shame on you. My posting the article on bias was not related to anyspecific company and certainly not LLY. They have not published any results on Protein C trials. I thought the article was of real interest and I posted it the day I saw it in an e-mail from I think the British Medical Journal. When I do a search, I post several of the results I have found on a specific topic. Or items of interest from current e-mails.

To: Cacaito who wrote (13990)	7/5/2000 12:32:53 PM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

Cacaito, I have never hidden my dislike of certain actions at XOMA. I complain openly about certain things. One of them has been the failure of XOMA to confirm this "50% reduction of incidents from P II" I now am complaining about XOMA's lack of haste in letting us know how it monitors those who license its' technology, and if LLY used it or not for the production of Protein C. And of course I have complained about the lack of more details on the BAX agreement. Yet anyone reading your post would think that I too believe that a XOMA drug would be approved even if the standard of care were cheaper and better in all respects. <g> To say that one believes any prospective product would have trouble being approved under these conditions is considered anti XOMA by the blind loyalist. I am loyal but not yet blind!