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 : Chromatics Color Sciences International. Inc; CCSI -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wlheatmoon who wrote (2194)	5/17/1998 1:18:00 AM
From: GrandPohba	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5736

All Rise......... The GrandPohba has arrived!! Why is everyone so hung-up on the medical applications of this device?????? There are many other uses for this technology outside of medicine. Any business that deals with color variables in their product will automatically deem this a "must have" device.This is space-age tech. Just relax and let the story play itself out. Time is your ally. GP

To: wlheatmoon who wrote (2194)	5/17/1998 6:13:00 PM
From: M. Frank Greiffenstein	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5736

Switzerland? LOL... Judging by the way the Swiss abused the Jews, maybe Chile is a better example. I appreciate the compliments, but let me be brief. I paid for this microphone. The TOS of SI indicate that the purpose of these boards is "Discussion" I see absolutely nothing that forbids me to discuss stocks or concpets that I am not invested in. Some people have the belief that you have to be short or long a stock to talk about it. I am sorry they misunderstand. Tough. Tell you what, why don't you come over to the Bierstube and discuss a stock you like. And you don't even have to be invested in it <g> DocStone

To: wlheatmoon who wrote (2194)	5/18/1998 12:01:00 AM
From: Keliven Wong	Respond to of 5736

Dr. Chen, I see that you drag Judah Folkman into your defense of this company. I hardly think that any such analogy is appropriate. Folkman's development of his ideas on angiogenesis has been long and distinguished. NO ONE made fun of Folkman, ever. His seminal NEJM article was clear, concise, and well-reasoned. That it has been percolating 20-30 years is no matter. If no cancer is ever contained by blocking agents, the paradigm has been useful in wound healing and a hundred other places. The term "Chromogenic diseases" is a Wall Street sound byte. There is no deep conceptual meaning. It is simply a way for this company to shill its product. If it is commercially helpful, great. Otherwise it's stupid. As far as Maisel goes, I can list dozens of companies with Nobel Prize winners on their scientific advisory panels. It is no predictor of financial success. Turns out that people will do funny things for money. Suggest you use standard financial sleuthing to construct a prediction of commercial success. Leave the bogus pseudo-science jargon to the Star and the Enquirer. KW