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 : Neuroscience -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scott_jiminez who wrote (17)	8/12/2000 2:24:41 PM
From: tuck	Respond to of 278

Hey, Scott, Many thanks for starting this thread. I thought about starting an AD/PD thread myself, but had only just started. You're far more qualified, anyhow. I'm glad one of my posts set up your "framework." Don't mind looking a little foolish in a good cause. Your points concerning hype versus the reality that the brain is too poorly understood for these early compounds to work are well taken and appreciated. However, perhaps there is one area of early promise. Presumably, the spinal cord is a bit simpler. To my untrained eyes, the results of Nerve Growth Factors in repairing spinal cord injuries seem more likely to hold up than results in diseases of the brain. For example, BLSI's Inosine study: bostonlifesciences.com I believe a couple of other folks are attempting similar things, but I forget which companies. In any case, wondering if drugs targeted at the spinal cord have more near term (years as opposed to decades) promise. Since BLSI targets a number of CNS indications, it could be considered for the portfolio as well as any of the rest. But per your own statements, it almost sounds like the portfolio isn't worth doing for a decade or so. <g> That said, I no longer have a position in it, since the current investor focus is on the more dubious near term candidates for CNS diagnosis. Cheers, Tuck

To: scott_jiminez who wrote (17)	8/18/2000 4:36:50 AM
From: nigel bates	Respond to of 278

Don't know if you saw this. Can't imagine why a neuro company would want to merge with Xenova. Too much competition in the cancer arena IMO - LONDON, Aug 16 (Reuters) - Shares in British biotechnology company Xenova Plc closed over 16 percent up on Wednesday as speculation mounted it was in merger talks with another biotech firm, CeNes Pharmaceuticals (LSE: CEN.L - news) . Industry sources told Reuters that both companies, which have in past explored the possibility of coming together, have resumed talks but they were at a very early stage. A merger would combine Xenova's platform of cancer products with the central nervous system product base of CeNes. Neither Xenova nor CeNes was willing to comment on the talks but one source said the deal is likely to be formally announced after CeNes completes all formalities regarding its purchase of Cambridge Neuroscience Inc , a Nasdaq-listed company which it was buying for $44 million..."