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 : Agouron Pharmaceuticals (AGPH) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tommysdad who wrote (3796)	2/10/1998 3:14:00 PM
From: Zirdu	Respond to of 6136

Thanks for the clarification on the molecular weights. I was under the impression that Viracept was of slightly smaller molecular weight than Crix and the others. As far as what part of the molecule is "extraneous" of course I don't know. As you surmise, these comments of mine are indeed speculation. That is why I prefaced my remarks by "maybe". If you are saying that my speculation is scientifically impossible, I don't have enough knowledge to dispute you. I was just throwing out some speculation for comment by others on this board that might be more knowledgeable. I certainly do agree with you, that the relative differences between the PI's in causing fat deposit side effects will have to be determined clinically. I guess all I was saying, was that since each PI molecule is different, that possibly these slight differences in molecular weight, shape, etc. would make for a different side effect profile. Obviously the differences in side effects now seen clinically between the different PI's have to be caused by something, and if it isn't the slight differences in molecular weight, size, shape, etc, then what would it be? RR