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 : Lidak Pharm. [LDAKA] -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Red Dragon who wrote (801)	1/5/1998 6:10:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1115

Red Dragon, To save time I am including a link for a post I addressed to you back in September on the subject of the placebo Message 2182057 And a link to your response to me Message 2182191 So to summarize, at the FDA's request they tried to come with a placebo that appeared to the senses to be Lidakol while not being Lidakol. To do this they tried to take the Lidak formulation and deactivate it. They failed and that is why the placebo was active. It was not a case of mixing up 'vaseline and oil'. It was basically Lidakol. BTW technical point, neither Lidakol, the placebo or any other formulation cure herpes. They just reflief the suffering. Your statement It's much more likely that the reason that Lidak and placebo show the same time to healing is that Lidak is ineffective. does not make sense. If Lidakol showed the same healing time as no treatment THAT would mean that Lidakol was ineffective. If Lidakol shows the same healing time as the placebo and both showed several days improvement over no treatment THAT would mean both ointments were effective. Comparing 4-5 days of healing within the trial to 8-10 days that "untreated" lesions is not setting up a smoke screen. It is part of the normal analysis. Your comment that the 8-10 days "untreated" lesions take to heal could include immunocompromised patients (with HIV, etc.), among other confounding variables. is pure speculation and groundless. To suggest this was done is to suggest fraud. Your suggestion that if Lidakol showed 4-5 days to heal and the placebo took roughly the same time that IF they had created a third arm of untreated lesions, this group would also show roughly 5 days to heal in this particular patient group. does not hold up. It is has been established by other researchers that untreated oral herpes lesions take 8-10 days to heal. Henry

To: Red Dragon who wrote (801)	1/9/1998 12:52:00 AM
From: Charles Holewinski	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1115

Hi Red, Saw your post in which you mentioned that your were introduced to LIDAK via BI Research. I also learned of LIDAK through BI. That was several years ago and many ups and downs in LIDAK. I am still holding several thousand shares just hoping that all will work out for the best and perhaps the stock will go to 10. This whole ordeal with LIDAK has been one of waiting for test results only to be disappointed time after time. One thing I have notices about LIDAK management, they don't seem to be very public about key info like specific test result numbers and now the specific reason why BMY pulled out of the agreement with LIDAK. The key reason why I am still holding on to my shares was that BMY, a drug company with a great reputation, had and agreement with LIDAK. It always apeared that BMY was given access to data, which mere investors like us couldn't see and which revealed a great future for LIDAKOL. If Katz saw fit to tell us that the cancelling by BMY had nothing to do over the effectiveness of LIDAKOL, it seems to me he could have told us the whole story. Katz is in for some real trouble if the effectiveness of LIDAKOL had anything to do with BMY leaving, like a law suit. I don't like them since no one wins. About BI Research! Do you still get this letter? I do and lately it has come up with a string of losers. Several years ago this news letter was one of the best in the country with maybe one in five or six recommendations winding up out of the money. Now it is a rear event when one stays in the money. Charlie