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 : Biotime-Nasdaq's best kept secret? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stephen How who wrote (941)	5/15/1998 10:27:00 AM
From: Jim Roof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1432

<<I'm saything the data does not allow for the conclusion that Hextendr is better than hetastarch.>> The data shows across the board superiority for Hextend! Less whole blood, platelets and Ca were needed by the Hextend patients than the generic hetastarch patients. The hetastarch patients had an increase in serious fluid related complications that was 300% HIGHER than the Hextend group. The only way you can say that Hextend cannot be shown as superior is to say that the data is incomplete and not broad enough. Ie., if the sampling were among 10,000 patients and the data said the EXACT same thing that it did with the small phase III trials then Hextend would be a rousing success. The only argument you can really hang your hat on is that the data is not sufficient to draw ANY conclusion. To say that a negative conclusion can be drawn from positive data or that it is impossible to draw a positive conclusion from positive data is ludicrous. I really do not understand your thinking here at all. It seems that you are like an evolutionist. You have a theory in search of evidence and any hog jaw will do to support your predetermined conclusion. I am not saying that the data says anything statistically other than Hextend works and is safe BUT from what I see every skew of the data favors Hextend. What are the chances of that if we are simply talking sampling error? Jim