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 Stock Picking for Charity - 2005 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (288)	1/5/2006 8:00:28 PM
From: scaram(o)uche	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 322

Cary: "tapping into" Looks fine to me. It's important to know that Coley and Dynavax were launched without all of that circuitry.... they had the phenom, re. CpG, but none of the underlying mechanism had been described. This is science that sounds more elegant than it's been. :-) I feel that evidence relating to innate IRs is stronger than that for induced (specific) responses. I've seen strong data for induced responses, but I'm not entirely comfortable believing it. Maybe PGS knows something about the newer research? If Pseudo Biologist was around, he'd have a good feel. But applications for "innate" would command big bucks. "next generation" Almost pure wishing and hoping, bet on someone else. Rick