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: Ron Harvey who wrote (2570)	6/9/1998 6:44:00 PM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5736

>>>She shouldn't rebut an intemperate and clearly self-aggrandizing attack.<<< Surely it's better to keep quiet and let the world think it true. My bet is that you'll see a release in the morning BTB. Barb

To: Ron Harvey who wrote (2570)	6/9/1998 7:49:00 PM
From: Robin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5736

Ron, I myself have not yet lumped CCSI with the likes of BICO and Futrex. Time will do that as the story unfolds. I have only implied that if Asensio is correct in their assessment, they will most surely be linked and Asensio is only accelerating the time in which this realization will be made. I am just cautioning those out there who are still invested what can and most likely will happen should Asensio be correct. Researching BICO and Futrex is an excellent model to see where situations like this have gone in the past (by this I mean products and/or markets that are trumped up to be more than they are). And yes, both BICO and Futrex did not have FDA approval in the past. The instruments they were trying to develop (to non-invasively measure blood sugar levels in diabetics, for those of who who do not know) were much more complex and the measurement they were trying to make was more abstract and difficult to measure. No one to date has gotten FDA approval on that type of product, but several are trying. My point is there was significant hype propelling those stocks (and some fraud) created by the shareholders as well as management, which I find eeriely similar here. The investors in both issues have been left holding relatively worthless certificates. As far not responding to Asensio's accusations, why not? Certainly there is nothing that would keep them from responding to this if it is not true. Of course, if the accusation's are true, well then, it may be best to remain silent. You do say that CCSI can get out and make a positive case for themselves. Yes, but these statements would be contradictory to what Asensio has stated. Asensio has refuted the entire CCSI story and has essentially called CCSI a liar, simple and straight. I read it. They have said that CCSI has grotesquely overestimated the size of this market among other things. The one thing that stood out to me most in the Asensio story though is that the FDA approval measured the accuracy of the Colormate against a doctor's visual judgment. If this is true, then I believe that this instrument would be used to validate the doctor's judgment, but not to replace the standard heel prick. The FDA clinical trial should have measured the performance of the Colormate against the heel prick in order to be approved to replace the heel prick. Can anyone provide some clarification here to prove whether Asensio's claim is correct or not (by this, I mean posts to FDA, clinical studies, etc., not to someone's opinion posted on SI or Yahoo). This will give us some insight as to whether Asensio is bluffing or not! Thanks! Rockin' Robin