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 : Lidak Pharm. [LDAKA] -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Zwiener who wrote (1028)	4/19/1998 1:16:00 PM
From: luis a. garcia	Respond to of 1115

John if the SEC is attracted and I think it should be for the sheer color and fun of it all.... will it be public knowledge or just the next blow for Lidak's stock.... That is the type of rumor you can drop in or ahead of a rally. Say if FDA approves then butkus again for us traders another dry year.... this is just like a bad wrestling match and I am seriously questioning the time I spend trying to get ahead using the market...as good long term investor. I might as well bet on crooked sports.... same sort of frustration. regards luis

To: John Zwiener who wrote (1028)	4/19/1998 3:41:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Respond to of 1115

Henry, if what Katz says doesn't have the ring of truth, then does what HealthMed says true? What is the truth here? I said I still had lots of questions about HealthMed. HealthMed reminds me of exactly what Stein is, a lawyer. It is very tough to figure out what they are up to because they don't say anything. You can infer motive but they haven't given us enough rope to hang them with. If you'll pardon a political reference, it's like the Clinton administration; lots of smoking guns and implications but very little hard evidence than can be used to figure out what has really happened. Katz says he is warning investors about HealthMed. Does he have good intentions? Katz may very well be telling the truth. I didn't say in my original analysis that Katz was lying. What I said was that if his allegations in this suit are in fact true then he is too naive to be CEO of a corporation. What I said in my second post was it is my opinion that Katz is not naive and that this is a tactic to break the voting trust. I have seen legal actions of this type in the past and lawyers have a wonderful way with words that is designed to put as dire a light as possible on their target. I am pretty sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The trick will be in determining where. BTW I fervently hope the SEC does not gets involved. Everyone will lose in this, particularly the shareholders. It's like siblings fighting, if they keep it up until Dad gets fed up enough to intervene it's a good bet everyone will get spanked regardless of who is at fault. Henry

To: John Zwiener who wrote (1028)	4/20/1998 12:39:00 AM
From: luis a. garcia	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1115

HERE IS A STINKING STUDY.... Abstracts - February 1998 A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Comparison of Oral Valacyclovir and Acyclovir in Immunocompetent Patients With Recurrent Genital Herpes Infections Stephen K. Tyring, MD, PhD; John M. Douglas, Jr, MD; Lawrence Corey, MD; Spotswood L. Spruance, MD; Jorgen Esmann, MD; for the Valaciclovir International Study Group Objective: To compare valacyclovir hydrochloride with acyclovir in the treatment of recurrent genital herpes infection. Design: A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-design study. Setting: University clinics (dermatology, gynecology, and infectious diseases) and private practices. Patients: One thousand two hundred patients with recurrent genital herpes simplex infections. Interventions: Patients self-initiated oral therapy with 1000 mg of valacyclovir hydrochloride twice daily, 200 mg of acyclovir 5 times daily, or placebo for 5 days. Main Outcome Measures: Resolution of all signs and symptoms of recurrent genital herpes infection. Results: Both drugs were significantly more effective than placebo in speeding resolution of herpetic episodes (median duration, 4.8, 4.8, and 5.9 days, respectively); the hazards ratios for valacyclovir and acyclovir vs placebo were 1.66 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-2.01) and 1.71 (95% CI, 1.41-2.06) (both P<.001). Similarly, valacyclovir and acyclovir significantly hastened lesion healing (hazards ratios vs placebo were 1.88 [95% CI, 1.53-2.32] and 1.90 [95% CI, 1.55-2.34], respectively; P<.001). Pain duration was shorter in valacyclovir- and acyclovir-treated patients (median, 2 vs 3 days). Viral shedding stopped 2.55 times faster in patients treated with valacyclovir and 2.24 times faster in patients treated with acyclovir than in patients treated with placebo. Aborted episodes, in which lesions did not progress beyond the macule or papule stage, tended to occur in more patients treated with valacyclovir (25.9%) or acyclovir (24.8%) than in patients treated with placebo (19.8%). Valacyclovir and acyclovir did not differ significantly with regard to their respective effects on any of the above efficacy parameters. The nature, severity, and frequency of adverse events did not differ among the 3 treatment groups. Conclusions: Twice-daily valacyclovir was as effective and well tolerated in the treatment of recurrent genital herpes simplex virus infection as 5-times-daily acyclovir. Therefore, valacyclovir could prove a useful alternative to acyclovir when convenience of dosing or compliance issues are the prime considerations in treatment. Arch Dermatol. 1998;134:185-191 Continue abstracts Table of Contents JOHN you tell us if we are hosed??? luis