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 : momo-T/FIF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (11113)	5/8/2017 3:06:38 PM
From: atticus4paws	Respond to of 12215

IIRC wasn't that a technical call? I usually ignore those. If not, then I completely misunderstood.

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (11113)	5/8/2017 3:44:21 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12215

No, but most of the damage had been done before he piped up, anyway. I just went back a month in the CARA twitter stream. There's no there there, even from Alfredo. Have you seen if has he ever said anything more pointed than his comment about high risk readouts, do your own DD? I get that he's a respectable source, but he's not backing up his his warning with anything. BJ has been much more helpful. It would be interesting to see those two engage on this subject. Edit: I'll keep going back in his twitter stream. I found this: " $CARA +ve efficacy, downside: no dose response; upside (unexpected): lowest dose is effective! Maybe read through into pain trials?" And it seems to ignore the receptor occupancy theme we've discussed here. Cheers, Tuck