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 : VVUS: VIVUS INC. (NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BigKNY3 who wrote (4428)	1/9/1998 4:09:00 AM
From: Jim	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

To All VVUS anounced a 4% price increase effective 1/12/98. Our clinic was advised on 1/5/98.

To: BigKNY3 who wrote (4428)	1/9/1998 8:30:00 AM
From: Edderd	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23519

BigKNY3 I am urged by whatever reason to respond to the statement that ED is 80% physical disease. If it is then I have the most distorted group of patients in Urology. I beleive that fact has been propagated mostly by the fact that insurance companies would only pay for treatment of "organic impotence". If you go back you will see a temporal relationship to suddenly finding out that ED is organic. Most of my ED patients have no significant organic relationship to their failure to have an erection ssatisfactory for intercourse. There are few significant testing mechanisms that will prove organic disease as a cause and rarely specifically. "vascular disease" Localized in the Penis? Every diabetic (oral meds, no neuropathy, no PVD) thinks his ED is organic because he read it in a magazine. Lots of smoke out there in the ED world. Gingseng Anyone. Ed

To: BigKNY3 who wrote (4428)	1/9/1998 10:46:00 AM
From: Tunica Albuginea	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

BigKny 3 since you insist here is my take: -I agree the FDA is Th greatest regulatory body in the world. -Is it perfect? Absolutely not. Read: Redux; Rezulin;Seldane. All approved, but subsequent more data showed they killed too many people, and there were other alternative therapies so they got yanked off the market. -Should we demand that physicians have full disclosure of their pharm co stock holdings or other ties? Absolutely yes. That demand has been made several times in the Editorials of The New Eng J. Med by editors Jerome Kassirer and previously by Ingelhard ( or ?Ingelfinger ). We ask the Presidential candidates to give us their W2s. Bush /Reagan did. Billy did and lo and behold we found out the "he forgot" ( yeah right ) to pay his mum's $35000 tax bill gg ;he did not disclose the Whitewater deal fully, IMHO GG; if he had I doubt he would have been elected). If people's lives with drugs are at stake, we should demand the highest standards. -"What was missing from the Toronto study was an analysis of the payments made to the calcium channel blocker critics by competitive antihypertensive companies" MOST studies CRITICAL of ANY drug have NOT been funded by competitors. I am not aware of a single report to that effect over several years.Do you? Certainly if there are anY they pale versus the nimber of independently funded studies.Trust me Ed. Not everybody used to in the past at least Pad-My-Pocket. I believe this is a more recent development, as moneys are leaving Univesities via managed care constraints. What competitors will do is fund their own drug research, which is fine. - The pharmaceutical industry supports the leaders in the field and investigators who agree with their point of view". This is patently wrong Ed. I'll spell it out : DRUG RESEARCH is N O T about OPINIONS or POINT OF VIEWS. Drug research has to do ONLY with S C I E N C E . A drug either causes ventricular tachycardia or not.It either knocks your bone marrow 20% of time and repeatedly or not.Etc etc. This is how you find the % incidence of side effects. If a drug kills X% of time , and the trestment is worse than the disease, you dump it . There is NO POINT of VIEW. What drug companies have conveniently done in the past is UNDEREPORT sideffects to have their baby approved This is what is going to get Amer Home Prod apparently with Redux. I am not sure what your nest question is but I will attempt to answer: -ED patients stay home because THERE WAS (up to now) NO satisfactory therapy.Word of mouth over several years gets around fast!! -I AM VERY interested in ED. It's just that until recently patients shunned therapies. -ED is NOT a serious disorder in terms that IT WILL NOT KILL YOU. Like back pain, gag. People with Diabetes and a heart condition with ED DON'T DIE OF ED: THEY DIE OF THEIR HEART CONDITION. Thus all efforts go to fixing that first. And if a drug is developed ( such as Virgo ) that improves ED but guess what, kills the heart , I can GUARANTEE YOU GOOD BYE Viagra. -"I find it particularly strange that a physician who invests in the ED market has such a low regard for ED patients" This is a low blow Ed and I don't know were you got it from. -I AM VERY interested in ED. It's just that until recently patients shunned therapies AND, THERE WAS NOTHING I COULD DO ABOUT IT.!!!! Thank goodness now we got mUSE.It's a start. -"TheMassahusetts Male Aging Study found no correlation between ED and obesity" I am not familiar with this study.But I can guarantee you you ask Zebra ( or any other MD in this thread), and they will tell you that - obesity is the #1 killer in USA via cholesterol and arteriosclerosis and worsening &causing Diabetes. Arteriosclerosis and Diabetes and their drug therapies are the LEADING ED causes.Ergo obesity, OVER A 30 YEAR PERIOD IS GREATLY CONTRIBUTING /CAUSING THIS. (Add to it the sedentary life style that goes with obesity.Excercise with weight loss definitely improves your sexual performance, all other things being equal. I believe this answers most of your questions Ed TA