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 (14582)	9/16/2000 10:19:30 AM
From: Robert K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

If I can save just ONE life, I will.......... >I think the best course of action is if you believe that bpi will save lives and limbs, that we need to get the word out at this moment. The lancet article gets "published" monday. This is the opportunity. Many in the "news" business may not fully understand that hundreds of lives may hang in the balance depending on the fda's actions /inactions. I think that we, the foundation, the company, all need to get behind Girior, and push to make this treatment a option for doctors. To that end we should ALL contact our local media, and dateline, etc....Tell them the story, let them research it. And then see what happens. I have been very silent and reluctant to suggest this since we had no offical data. Now we do. I say let the media run with the story. If the FDA is right to withhold this drug, then they have no worries. If the FDA is wrong to withhold this drug, then they better reconsider FAST. Again, lives hang in the balance IMHO. I will act. If you believe lives will be saved I suggest you do the same. FYI-yes I am a stockholder, that has nothing to do with this action I am taking or suggesting. Lets rally behind Girior. Standard Disclaimers

To: aknahow who wrote (14582)	9/16/2000 2:05:49 PM
From: Cacaito	Respond to of 17367

Gw, you are inaccurate "And yet, for whatever reason uses the fact that 80% of the subjects were high risk Glasgo 8-11(12) to imply management skewed the trial for low mortality!" Never mentioned "skewing" I am saying that the low mortality in 80% of the patients was EXPECTED by xoma and the scientists and even in the old FAQ clearly stated as a probable source of need to expand recruitment AND THEY DID, did you remember back in 1998 when they suddenly shifted from the original to 200 and then to 400? ask your dear pr about xoma recent history.