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 : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jibacoa who wrote (3239)	3/29/2001 11:59:16 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

OT ****** Bernard, Such questions really belong on the hepatitis thread, but with Peter's continued indulgence this last time . . . Hep B is considered more or less licked in terms of treatment options and vaccination. The problem is that it's still around, particularly in Asia, and not everyone has been treated/vaccinated. So it is still a problem from an epidemiological standpoint. Questions of side effects from immunoprophylaxis have been raised, but studies never found a connection. Your question is a little contradictory: "acute, prolonged"? Interferon alpha is effective in both acute and chronic Hep B in most cases. I gather there is a small per centage of folks that have to get liver transplants. I believe these would be the folks who were not diagnosed in time, and couldn't hold it off by virtue of their own immune system, and had their livers fail. It also depends on how acute, I guess. One sentence in the following links says that Interferon alpha may do more harm than good for really sick patients. It is unclear to me if they fall into the category I just described. Check out: cpmcnet.columbia.edu Also: hepnet.com Particularly: hepnet.com That ought to get you up to speed. Cheers, Tuck