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 : Zonagen (zona) - good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dr. Voodoo who wrote (1874)	1/20/1998 11:24:00 PM
From: poodle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7041

1. First patent you mention is really interesting. 2. I am not sure why second is important. Isn't it about mixture, not phentolamine alone? This is about paragraph I mentioned: patent.womplex.ibm.com Left, first paragraph: "Phentolamine, which has been shown to have the potencial to induce erection when injected intracavernosally, has also been the subject of oral administration to test its effects in man having non-specific erectile insufficiency (Gwimp, Ann. Int. Md. 15 Jul. 1988, pp.162-163). In that study16 patients injested either a placebo or 50 mg orally administrated dose of phentolamine. " This is a part of introduction. Introduction should provide relevant facts from history of the subject. For EACH fact you should provide REFERENCE, unless it is "common knowledge". Look at this text. It has two parts. "Phentolamine, which has been shown to have the potencial to induce erection when injected intracavernosally," is about injection. ..." has also been the subject of oral administration to test its effects in man having non-specific erectile insufficiency". That's about oral phentolamine. For oral phentolamine there is reference: Gwimp. We will discuss it sometime later. Where are the reference for the first part? The question is: if there is no literature about phentolamine injection, how do you know it's working? If literature does exist, why not to put it into the text? Contrargument could be: it is not important for this patent so we do not include it. Wrong. There is literature about papaverine injection and even textbooks. You know the reason why paper cited by Asensio was not included. Still it was published 8 years before this patent filling and available in any med. database. Also, that's not the only paper. Regards.