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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Anything graphite based, CCB, Zen and hopefully much more. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: the Chief who wrote (2510)	9/3/2021 11:22:36 AM
From: the Chief	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2618

Further to this post I am replying too tturner lets suppose a family is wearing a Blue mask that is coated with ZENGUARD. The packaging says 99.9% effective against COVID. A family wears the mask and 4out of 5 of the family get COVID and 1 dies. They sue ZEN and state they were faithfully wearing the blue mask everytime they went out. It is then investigated because it is a lawsuit. They find the following(some assumptions made): 1) Tests on ZENGuard was done on Albany GO 2) The GO sprayed on the mask was NOT Albany GO 3) The advertising stated 99.9% effective 4) The Company (ZEN) knew that spraying on a 10% efficient mask reduced their 99.9% effectiveness to 10% but said nothing 5) HC approval was done based on the testing and the testing was done on the Albany GO not the Company X GO Do you think the family would win the lawsuit? Now put yourself in the position of HC and assuming ZEN is being upfront with them, they know all this? Do you think you get a speedy approval? Hence the reasons I am short, if the assumptions are wrong, then I am wrong.