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: Biomaven who wrote (13243)	9/30/2004 2:42:33 PM
From: nigel bates	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

I guess John Edwards could do a lot with 10% in front of a suitable jury. Please tell me you're not assuming he's going to be looking for work come November ?? This ought to be good for biotech, though. After all, why buy a blue-chip pharma if you can still lose 25% in a morning ? More munches, too ?

To: Biomaven who wrote (13243)	9/30/2004 3:28:52 PM
From: NeuroInvestment	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

<<Clear causation>> While I have tried to forget the whole ugly affair, my recollection is that no abnormalities were found in patients that had not combined either fenfluramine or dexfenfluramine with phentermine. Yet phentermine was given a pass, and Wyeth took all the body blows. My point is only that--you don't even have to be John Edwards to see this as a potential gold mine, causality be damned. Harry NeuroInvestment

To: Biomaven who wrote (13243)	9/30/2004 3:52:38 PM
From: bio_kruncher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

Not sure what the increase is, but I'd be surprised if it's as much as 10% Risk was doubled at 3 year point. 15/1000 for Vioxx 7.5/1000 for Placebo