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 : HMSC- A simple breast cancer screening device -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FCC who wrote (70)	3/3/1998 9:12:00 PM
From: Tom Hua	Respond to of 246

FCC, very good post! You made some realistic points too. I look forward to watching Ms. Eikenberry on Good Morning America. Vivus was a one-billion dollar company soon after MUSE hit the market. HMSC's current market cap is $100 million. If BA is effective, HMSC could go up many folds. But that's a big if. Regards, Tom

To: FCC who wrote (70)	3/4/1998 12:01:00 AM
From: Tom Hua	Respond to of 246

The product cost only $40. Very inexpensive as compared to other tests. The doctors are charged $25 and make a small profit. FCC, Assume that BA is effective and will become popular with physicians. And assume that 30 million women in North America will be administered with BA twice a year. At $25 a pop, that's $1.5 billion annual revenue. Assume a valuation of 5 times sales, we're talking about a $7.5 B company. Let's see, that works out to be $1,000/share. Last I checked, stock is at $12 1/2. Ain't that nice? OK, it's late so I got a little wild <G> Regards, Tom

To: FCC who wrote (70)	3/4/1998 4:51:00 AM
From: (no name provided)	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 246

Dear FCC, A couple of your points are wrong. "1. The reason that the product is not reimbursed at this time is because it had come to the market first. A OB-GYN friend of mine told me this fact. By the way Traveller's insurance comp. owns a stake in HMSC." The product is not reimbursed because it was decided by HCFA back in the mid-1980s that breast thermography was worthless and it withdrew reimbursement at that time. "2.This product was never meant to replace mammograms, but to supplement them. This technology is more sensitive than mammos, and palpation of the breast by the doctor. This product is meant to be the earliest detection device for breast cancer, is they find a developing tumor the pt has a greater chance for survival." This is simply untrue. The BreastAlert device has undergone several clinical trials according to HMSC prospectus. It is less sensitive than mammography of the early 1980s. In addition, it has higher false positive rate. "3. The product cost only $40. Very inexpensive as compared to other tests. The doctors are charged $25 and make a small profit." I'll give you this one. "4. Any doctor who doesnt offer this test,even if it doesn't work for all patients will one day get a letter from the lawyers office wondering why their client was not given the opportunity to possibly catch the malignancy at an earlier reversible stage." There is absolutely no data to support that BreastAlert can detect malignancy at an earlier stage than palpation or mammography. "5. Patient has nothing to lose, to try a painless, radiation less, inexpensive, speedy test. The time that the women must wait to here results from mammos seems like an eternity." The patient does have something to lose (other than money). Due to the high false positive rate, there will uncertainty in a large number of users. "6. No one knows how well this product works, that's why they are doing the clinical trials. They have made changes in the product before shipping. The reason for the delay was that the product gave a false reading if it was shipped to very warm climate. That has all been rectified." Clinical trials have been done. Read the prospectus.