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 : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tonyt who wrote (22426)	6/17/1998 9:36:00 PM
From: Proton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

Re: Tsk, Tsk [Glancing Blow on Topic] Here's what WSJ Interactive had to say Obstinence in sin... not good! It's interesting to note that the characterization of "rejection" fell out of the report. Nonetheless, this is not positive news, in spite of: 1. The suck-up remarks made by SRGN management ("You were most perceptive, officer, and may I say that you look marvelous!") and 2. The fact that this does delay some of the dilution/burn related to the SRGN acquisition. Pý

To: tonyt who wrote (22426)	6/17/1998 10:06:00 PM
From: Torben Noerup Nielsen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

>As reported June 2, an FDA expert advisory panel endorsed Ontak When was the last time a drug with a 14-0 vote by the advisory panel did not get approved by the FDA? Yes, I know that there was also a 14-2 vote on the issue of leaving the dosage up to the prescribing physician. This whole thing could be just a matter of clarifying the dosage and the labelling. Does anyone see any real problem here? I can't see what it would be. Frankly, I'm far more excited by the 94% response rate in the cancer study. Yes, those were rodents, but rodents are mammals and even if the carryover to humans drops it to 70% or so, it is still exceptional. Cheers, Torben